Responsibility: a real-life story
Calvin Walsh grew up in Portland, went away from college and has returned recently to his hometown. He's been volunteering with the Multnomah County Democrats, and recently has been working with the Bus Project on voter registration for the upcoming January election. He is someone I think highly of. The following incident speaks a lot about Calvin's character; I cannot say it would have shown the courage and, to use an old term, moral fortitude he did. I think we each hope we would, but Calvin did. In his own words....
For the last few weeks I have taken a job registering people to vote in the hopes that there will be a large turnout for the January 26th special statewide Oregon election. At 1:45 pm I was at the Blue line MAX stop at 102nd street in East Portland. I had spoken with the 12 people waiting for the next train about getting registered to vote. After light but pleasant conversations with each person individually I was waiting for the train to arrive and bring me back into downtown Portland. Two black males in there 20's were hitting on a woman of about the same age who was not interested in their advances. I heard her say that she was on her way to work and would like them to leave her alone, one of the guys began to get really aggressive, it was when he touched her that I moved in between the two of them and told the young man that she was not appreciating the attention.
He began to shout at me, and while he began to push me and continue to threaten me his friend pulled out a knife and moved to my flank. This was the third time that I have had a knife pulled out on me, however this time was particularly concerning because the aggressor did not brandish his weapon as to intimidate me but rather kept it at his side and moved to my back. I have no doubt that these two had the intention of stabbing me. I moved the young lady who was hysterical at this point and myself against the train tracks so we could not be surrounded. I looked to see if anyone was coming to our aid as it was very clear that that people were deliberately looking the other way as if they did not hear the hoodlums yelling that they were going to kill us. To our fortune the MAX train pulled up just at that moment and we backed into the open doors with our assailants still shouting threats but reluctant to enter the crowded train.
There are and always will be bad people in the world that choose to act with aggressive violent behavior, what shocked me the most was the reaction of the rest of the individuals that were waiting on the train platform. I had spoken with each of them, they knew that I was friendly and nice, why then would they let some strangers potentially attack the woman that I was with and myself? Were they really prepared to allow a stabbing occur right before their eyes without speaking out or calling the police? Was this nothing more than cowardly action (or inaction), or were these people ignoring the event out of fear for themselves? This type of behavior seemed all to familiar and I was reminded of Kitty Genovese.
Kitty Genovese was stabbed, raped and robbed in an event that took place over 30 minutes on the nights of March 13th 1964, her neighbors heard and saw the crime but did nothing to prevent it from continuing. After some quick investigating this I found that researchers have seen this phenomenon again and again. It has been labeled as the bystander effect or the diffusion of responsibility.
Diffusion of responsibility is a social phenomenon which tends to occur in groups of people above a certain critical size when responsibility is not explicitly assigned. This phenomenon rarely ever occurs in small groups. In tests performed these researchers found that in groups of three or fewer everyone will take action, however in groups of over ten in almost every case, no one takes action.
Think about this the next time you see something occurring and be sure to take action, collectively we can prevent these types of things from occurring. It is the responsibility of each of us to make the conciseness decision that we are going to be a positive influence on our immediate neighborhood and community, sometimes it does not take much more that simple letting others know that you see what is happening around you and you are not ok with it.
|
November 21, 2009 |
T.A. Barnhart | Comments (22 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Senate leaders agree to Wyden health care amendment
Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Max Baucus (D-MT) have agreed to support a version of Senator Ron Wyden's Free Choice Act as an amendment to the health care bill moving through the Senate.
Wyden has long argued that the key to health reform is allowing millions of Americans the right to opt out of their employer-based health care and use their employers' health-care contribution in the health exchange (which would include both high-quality private options and the public option.) The amendment that Baucus and Reid agreed to would allow a substantial number of Americans to do exactly that.
Brian Beutler at Talking Points Memo explains:
If this amendment passes, it could dramatically change--and most experts would say improve--the Senate health care reform bill. ... If it can attract 60 votes, it would give low- and middle-class Americans with employer-provided insurance the option of purchasing subsidized insurance in the exchanges.
In a story titled "Sen. Wyden wins big healthcare concession", The Hill's Jeffrey Young offers a bit more detail:
[I]t would open up the health insurance exchanges to considerably more people than the bill as currently written. Under Reid's version of the Senate bill and under the House-passed bill, the vast majority of people who receive health benefits from their jobs would be ineligible to shop for insurance on the exchanges, which instead would primarily be accessed by individuals and workers at small businesses.The agreement between Wyden, Reid and Baucus would change that."The agreed to amendment will make it possible for these individuals to convert their tax-free employer health subsidies into vouchers that they can use to choose a health insurance plan in the new health insurance exchanges. The Congressional Budget Office estimates a previous version of this provision will expand coverage to more than a million Americans," according to a statement from Wyden's office.
In addition to opening the health exchange (and the public option) to over a million more Americans, it also creates the mechanism by which Americans could shift from employer-based health care to the health exchange. In the future, it will be much easier to expand access by simply adjusting the eligibility rules - rather than a conceptual overhaul of health care. As Senator Wyden noted in his statement:
"As I have long said, empowering Americans to choose the health insurance that works best for them and their family is the single best way to hold health insurance companies accountable ... While this is just one step in the direction of guaranteeing choices for all Americans, it is a major step because – for the first time – it introduces the concept of individual choice to a marketplace where it has long been foreign. This is a significant step toward real reform."
In his statement, the majority leader said he was "pleased to have [Wyden's] support for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."
|
November 20, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (51 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Is Public Higher Ed Broken?
A couple of days ago, Dave Frohnmayer made front-page news with a report he submitted to the State Board of Higher Education. In it, he suggested that Oregon's three largest public universities should adopt the OHSU model of autonomy. The state contributes a diminishing amount to universities--down 44% in 15 years--even while it encumbers this money with a huge number of regulatory restrictions. (I saw this first-hand as a member of the bargaining team for PSU's faculty union. We accepted pay cuts similar to other state employees--even though the actual cut to PSU was just a fraction compared to state agencies.) Frohnmayer believes that the OHSU model will give universities the control they need to thrive. But will it?
Everyone recognizes the value of higher ed in the abstract. The value to an individual amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars over her lifetime. Higher ed prepares students as workers, attracting business, and those who have a college degree go on to reward the state. The University of Virginia recently released a study showing that for every dollar spent on higher ed, $1.39 came back to state coffers. But when it comes time to budget tight state resources, we place our priorities elsewhere. While commitment to universities plummeted over the past 15 years, the state poured money into prisons--and that was before Measure 57. No matter how valuable higher ed is, it seems like for the foreseeable future, it will receive less and less support from the state.
So, if you attended PSU in the late 90s, you had a far greater chance of having a tenured professor teach your course.
These trend lines are disturbing. Students are paying more for education, but the professors are getting spread thinner and thinner. (Professors have also seen their salaries stagnate--but that's another post.) Over the past two decades, universities have tried to delay the inevitable by raising tuition and hiring adjuncts. But at what point does the system collapse? California announced a stunning 32% increase in tuition for UC schools yesterday. Frohnmayer's proposal looks to a model that has made OHSU the most expensive public med school in the country. Adopting it may make the universities solvent--but would they be "public" anymore?
Over the coming weeks, I'm going to delve more into the issue of higher education. We have too long neglected making hard decisions about how to fund and maintain higher education. The United States became world leader it is in part by having the best-educated population on the planet. Ignoring the crisis in higher ed means accepting a future of mediocrity.
|
November 20, 2009 |
Jeff Alworth | Comments (53 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Kurt Schrader: Big win on the Molalla River
By Erik Fernandez of Portland, Oregon. Erik is the wilderness coordinator for Oregon Wild.
Congressman Kurt Schrader showed he knows how to get the job done in Washington DC by moving legislation at warp speed through the US House of Representatives.
Yesterday, the House passed legislation to protect the Molalla River as a Wild and Scenic River by a vote of 292-133. [Oregonian story here.] Schrader was able to rally 40 Republicans to make it a bipartisan victory, including all five members of Oregon's delegation (yes, that includes Rep. Greg Walden who should get a bit of credit here).
The amazing piece of this story is that a collection of obstructionist Republicans led by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) decided they wanted to make a national stand by objecting to this legislation. It took three hours of heated debate before the final vote.
The most curious part of this is that this collection of out-of-state Republicans, who have never been to the Molalla River, chose this issue to take a pro-logging stand on. There is virtually universal support for this bill from the city of Molalla to Clackamas County to the congressional delegation and just about everyone in-between. It's no surprise: the river provides clean drinking water to Canby and Molalla, and it's an undiscovered gorgeous river with some important salmon runs. By protecting the undiscovered river, locals hope that this will also help put their community on the tourist map and thus generate more local jobs.
Thank you to Congressman Schrader and the rest of the Oregon delegation for bringing this victory home today. Nice work.
|
November 20, 2009 |
guest column | Comments (11 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Quote of the Week
I don't know how I missed this earlier, but Congressman Kurt Schrader had an insightful (and funny) comment at the Oregonian editorial board - as reported by the O's Jeff Mapes:
"I think Republicans offered up 100-some odd amendments and 25 of them made it into the health care bill... You know I'm a pay-to-play guy and I'm kind of shocked that you let them do that and they all vote no anyway. It doesn't seem fair. Why put their stuff in the bill if they're going to vote no? Maybe I'm just a hard-ass, but I was a little shocked at that."
Now that the Senate is about to take up the health care bill, that's some good advice from the other chamber. If folks are going to amend the bill, they should be prepared to vote for it.
|
November 20, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (12 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
The point is they laugh at what you say.....
(H/T to Daniel Powter)
Well, you need a blue sky holiday
The point is they laugh at what you say
And I don't need no carryin' on
You had a bad day
You're taking one down
You sing a sad song just to turn it around
You say you don't know
You tell me don't lie
You work at a smile and you go for a ride
You had a bad day
The camera don't lie
You're coming back down and you really don't mind
You had a bad day
Recent days have not been kind to the conservative/Republican folks hoping to move things their way.
On November 13, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled to essentially uphold the ballot titles for Measure 66 and 67 despite a serious whinefest from the anti-tax fairness cabal. Just four days later, a Marion County judge judge rejected a legal challenge to the ballot title process that drafted the language.
The kids at the Oregon version of Freedomworks tried to sell the idea that Measures 66 and 67 "target the middle class". But only their true believers are buying. Jeff Mapes did a little fact-checking, and that Freedomworks claim only flies if you're playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon. In other words, it's a lie.
Finally, the Oregon Senate Republicans were forced to eat a plate full of crow this week when they sent out a press released with wild-ass claims on state employee pay. It turns out that they were wrong..and gave a stupid excuse to Mapes. In addition, the GOP talking point that state workers are doing better than private sector workers is bad and therefore we should hack back state worker pay just slays me. Is this the how the GOP makes life better for Oregonians..playing to the least common denominator?
Update: 7:20PM: Oops..forgot one. On Monday, State Senator Jason Atkinson (R-Central Point), issued a press release with the BRILLIANT idea of having the first $2,400 of unemployment payments be tax exempt. The idea is SO good in fact, that it's already IN Measure 66! Perhaps the "Vote Yes!" campaign should hire Atkinson to be a spokesperson. Somehow I doubt the GOP would like that very much.
Hear that sound, Oregon GOP/conservatives? We're laughing AT you, not with you. There's only so many times you can be asked (begging, pleading) to clean up your act before it just seems too futile to try.
|
November 19, 2009 |
Carla Axtman | Comments (42 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
OR-GOV: Al Gore endorses Bill Bradbury
In what may become known as a key turning point for the Bill Bradbury's gubernatorial campaign, Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore announced his endorsement of Bradbury at this morning's sold out fundraiser at the Left Bank. While it was no secret Gore was supportive of Bradbury's campaign, this morning's unequivocal endorsement was icing on the cake and thrilling to those of us in the energized audience. From Gore:
I’m
proud to endorse Bill Bradbury as the next Governor of this state. Let
me just say you won’t hear a negative word of any kind about John
Kitzhaber, a distinguished former Governor who served honorably in the
past in this state.
I am here to speak for Bill Bradbury and tell you what I know about
this man. And to tell you what I know about this man has meant to me
personally as a friend of extremely strong character, commitment and
leadership.
There is more on the endorsement on Bradbury's Kos Diary.
Update: Here is video:
|
November 19, 2009 |
Jesse Cornett | Comments (21 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
OR-GOV: Steve Shields bows out
Despite my damn fine profile on him posted yesterday here at the big Blue O, Democratic candidate for Oregon Governor Steve Shields is dropping out.
I spoke briefly with Betsy Henning, Shields' campaign manager. Hennings said that they discovered during the process that Shields' skill set wasn't a good match for what needed to be done to mount a competitive gubernatorial campaign.
The campaign also sent out a short press release:
CORVALLIS, ORE. – Oregon gubernatorial candidate Steve Shields today announced he will withdraw from the May 2010 Democratic primary.“Despite our best efforts, we have not been able to reach the aggressive fundraising goals we believed necessary to mount a competitive campaign,” Shields said.
Shields, a newcomer to politics, did not know what kind of welcome to expect from political insiders when he began his exploration more than a year ago. “I was pleased to find that nearly everyone was open to and willing to listen to a new voice,” Shields said.
“In the end, while money is what’s driving our decision today, it’s not the only factor,” according to Shields. “I found that other aspects of campaigning did not play to my personal strengths and that, at this time, my talents would be better suited to other endeavors.”
“I will seek other ways to contribute to our state’s future prosperity. But I have no regrets. Our toughest problems fall to our political leaders to solve. I encourage others to take heart and try what I did. It can be done,” said Shields.
Shields initiated his campaign to address Oregon’s most important challenges: reversing the state’s chronic unemployment and stabilizing education funding. He remains committed to contributing to the solving of these problems.
Shields has an open letter at his website that talks further about his decision.
|
November 19, 2009 |
Carla Axtman | Comments (31 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Oregon's environment is also on the January ballot
Ninety percent of Oregon's budget goes to schools, health care and public safety. But another critical piece -- and one of the reasons the Oregon League of Conservation Voters is strongly behind the campaign for Measures 66 and 67 -- is that the January ballot measures will directly impact Oregon's ability to enforce clean air and water protections.
We can have the strongest environmental protections in the world, but without strong enforcement, those safeguards mean little to Oregon's scenic natural heritage. Potential budget cuts that threaten our ability to hold polluters accountable are another reason to support Measures 66 and 67.
Voting yes on Measures 66 and 67 is a vote for Oregon's clean air, water and renewable energy future.
For the next three months, the Oregon Conservation Network -- a coalition of more than 40 Oregon's leading environmental organizations -- will be working with their 200,000 members on behalf of tax fairness and Oregon's ability to fund our environmental initiatives and priorities.
As part of that effort, later TODAY, NOVEMBER 19th, Oregon League of Conservation Voters Executive Director Jon Isaacs will host a live blog chat over at their Web site for folks to learn more and hear what's at stake. The conversation will run from 4 to 5 p.m.
Get the details over there. And don't forget to send in your questions before 4 p.m. today.
[Disclosure: I serve on OLCV's board and am proud to see their grassroots infrastructure and talent being put to use on behalf of these two critical tax fairness measures.]
|
November 19, 2009 |
Charlie Burr | Comments (4 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Time for a Coal-Free Northwest
By Ivan Maluski of Portland, Oregon. Ivan is the Conservation Program Coordinator for the Oregon Chapter Sierra Club.
Last week, the Sierra Club, the Northwest Energy Coalition, and numerous other Oregon conservation and ratepayer organizations sent an open letter (pdf) to Governor Ted Kulongoski, asking him to work with other regional Governors to push the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NWPCC) to set a plan to phase out burning coal for electricity in the Northwest over the next decade.
Every 5 years, the NWPCC drafts an energy plan with a 20 year outlook for the four Northwest states of Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Idaho. On the positive side, the council’s current draft plan (called the 6th Plan) would meet 85% of new energy use in the Northwest with conservation and energy efficiency, with the rest coming from new renewable energy development. But the draft plan falls short when it comes to actually reducing greenhouse gas pollution from existing sources.
Under the leadership of Governor Kulongoski, the legislature in 2007 adopted scientific targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that are some of the strongest in the nation.
If we are going to be serious about reducing greenhouse gas pollution - we have to stop burning coal. Amazingly, burning coal accounts for 40% of Oregon’s electricity consumption, even as it is responsible for 87% of the Northwest power system’s global warming pollution. This coal is extracted from open-pit strip mines in places like Montana and Idaho Wyoming, and shipped to places like PGE's Boardman power plant, Oregon's largest stationary source or air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
Last month, people across the Northwest demonstrated their interest in including a phase-out of coal in the NWPCC's 6th Plan at public hearings. Oregonians packed hearing rooms in Eugene and Portland and submitted hundreds of comments on the draft plan.
Governor Kulongoski has been a leader in developing renewable energy policies and green jobs for Oregon. Now its time for the Governor to push for the phaseout of outdated and dirty coal-fired power sources, like PGE’s Boardman plant, while working with other regional Governors and the NWPCC to create a coal-free Northwest.
Governor Kulongoski, we can't get there without your help.
|
November 19, 2009 |
guest column | Comments (33 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Cook Report: "Very weak" Oregon GOP has "no enthusiasm" for challenging Wyden
Over at the Cook Political Report, they've done their baseline report on the U.S. Senate race in 2010. Key excerpts:
Oregon is very difficult terrain for Republicans. Democrats hold an 11-point advantage in voter registration, 43 percent to 32 percent, while another 26 percent are unaffiliated. Republicans lost a Senate seat in 2008 when GOP incumbent Gordon Smith was defeated. ...Given Democrats’ strength and a very weak GOP bench, it’s not that surprising that no Republican has stepped forward to challenge Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden. Any Republican with statewide aspirations is more focused on the open gubernatorial contest next year. ...
Wyden has a reputation for both his ability to work across the aisle and for his independence, a rare and difficult position to maintain. And even with that ability, Wyden has managed to maintain a largely Democratic voting record. According to the National Journal vote ratings, Wyden had a liberal composite score of 76.8 in 2008, meaning that his voting record was more liberal than 76.8 percent of the Senate. His liberal composite score was also 76.8 in 2007. It was 86 in 2006 and 80.8 in 2005. ...
The March 9 filing deadline is fast approaching, but Republicans don’t seem to have any enthusiasm for recruiting a first-tier challenger to Wyden. As of September 30, Wyden had raised just over $3.4 million for the cycle and had $2.8 million in the bank.
There hasn’t been any polling to measure Wyden’s job approval ratings, but we strongly suspect that they are very healthy. Don’t expect any action here. Wyden will cruise to a third full term.
Cook is wrong about the lack of job-approval polling. SurveyUSA have been polling Wyden's job approval every month for over four years now. He's down from his January 2009 high (62/25, 37 net), but still has a 55% approval and 33% disapproval, for a 22% net.
A shorter, more concise analysis of Wyden's prospects came from GOP Congressman Greg Walden in March - when he said that the idea of running against Wyden was "totally, patently, absurd".
|
November 19, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (15 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
DeFazio to Obama: Fire "Timmy" Geithner and Larry Summers
In comments made on MSNBC's Ed Schultz Show, Congressman Peter DeFazio wants President Obama to fire his top two economic advisers. At Huffington Post, Sam Stein has the story:
"We think it is time, maybe, that we turn our focus to Main Street -- we reclaim some of the unspent [TARP] funds, we reclaim some of the funds that are being paid back, which will not be paid back in full, and we use it to put people back to work. Rebuilding America's infrastructure is a tried and true way to put people back to work," said DeFazio."Unfortunately, the President has an adviser from Wall Street, Larry Summers, and a Treasury Secretary from Wall Street, Timmy Geithner, who don't like that idea," he added. "They want to keep the TARP money either to continue to bail out Wall Street...or to pay down the deficit. That's absurd." ...
"[Obama] is being failed by his economic team," DeFazio concluded. "We may have to sacrifice just two more jobs to get millions back for Americans."
Neither the White House or the Treasury Department immediately returned a request for comment.
Here's the video:
Discuss.
|
November 19, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (26 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
