Lobbying in Harrisburg

A group of five Carbon County residents drove to Harrisburg today to lobby our county’s legislators, urging them to impose a severance tax on the natural gas extracted from Marcellus Shale.  They met with Rep. Heffley and Senator Argall and a representative from Sen. Yudichak’s office.  

This does not mean that tomorrow a severance tax will be passed, but it is an example of what ordinary citizens can and should do.  You don’t have to be a professional or a campaign contributor to “lobby.”   Every time you send a state or federal representative a letter or an email or visit the office or make a phone call you are lobbying.  

I worked as a field representative for California state SenatorJerry Smith in the 1980s. Smith represented a portion of Santa Clara County.  I can guarantee you that either the Senator or a staff member read every piece of mail and answered every phone call.  That was before email, but I am certain legislative offices read email as well.

Here’s a few quick pointers.  

• Know your subject.  The Carbon County lobbying group had done their homework on the effects of drilling in Pennsylvania.  
• Be polite.  I believe all five of the lobbyists were liberal Democrats and environmentalists, but they were respectful when they spoke to Rep. Heffley.  
• Lobby your own representatives.  You are much more effective when you are a constituent.
• Don’t threaten to withhold your vote at the next election.  Threats don’t work with legislators anymore than with other people.

In case you are curious, I was not one of the five.  I stayed home to make rhubarb-strawberry jam.  I’ll be the first to admit that my priorities are totally screwed up, and I am sorry I was not in Harrisburg today where I belonged.

Double Standard

I read somewhere--probably in The Nation--that a long-time African-American Democratic activist from Houston was invited to the Clinton White House for a function shortly after the Monica Lewinsky affair became public.   She was in the line to shake the President’s hand.  When he got to her, she looked him in the eye and said, “You dumb son-of-a-bitch.”  

Some of the topics I’ve considered for tonight’s post were the jobs issue, Syria, Bosnia, the immigration law in Alabama, the renewed efforts to restrict voting, or China’s growing concern with the environment, and here I am, writing about Representative Weiner, that dumb son-of-a-bitch.

It hurts when I read about a labor leader taking kickbacks, or a professor harassing a student, or a U.S. soldier mistreating a civilian.  I expect more of certain people and hold them to a higher standard.  I don’t care what others do--my side should be honest and kind and clean and intelligent.

Anthony Weiner was able to articulate the left position with passion and clarity.  Now he will be forever branded as a liar, a boor, and a cad.  It hurts.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian

Dr. Kevorkian died on Friday.  I’m sure jokes were made about whether or not his death was “assisted,” but let me say that if you ever had a relative who died a lingering and painful death, Dr. Kevorkian was a man you respected and admired.

He spent eight years in prison for the crime of helping terminally ill people die more quickly.  I’ve often thought about how we treat our animals better than our relatives.  When we deal with our animals, we “put them down.”  We “put them to sleep.”  We “end their suffering.”  And yet people we love and cherish are made to experience agonies that we would never inflict on a horse or a cat or a dog.

In Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal, far more people request information on the program than actually use it.  What the law gives them is peace of mind.  They are secure in the knowledge that if they do need help in dying, it is available to them.

While Dr. Kevorkian may not have completely succeeded in his efforts, he did help to make the medical profession aware of the problems of the terminally ill.  Hospice care has improved, and living wills that specify what efforts shall be made are more common.    We owe him.

Preventing slave revolts

I’ve been listening to a Teaching Company course entitled “History of the British Empire.”   In the lecture on early British Jamaica, the professor explained that one of the ways planters kept the slaves divided was by ensuring that their slaves came from different African tribes.  Because the slaves were divided by language and culture, they had a difficult time organizing meaningful resistance.

I thought about that when I read Mr. Wargo’s recent column in the Times News.  Don’t bother to look it up--the whole column was a screed against Mexican immigrants and how they are a threat to the American way of life.

Think about this.  If you had to assign responsibility for the current economic crisis in the U.S., how would you apportion the blame?  What percent do you think was caused by Mexican immigrants, and what percent was caused by Wall Street cowboys, mortgage companies, stock traders, insurance firms, bankers, financiers, white guys in suits and ties?  

So why do people attack those who have little?  Because they are different.  Because they speak a different language.  Because it is easier to kiss the butt of those above and give the boot to those below.

How amazing is this?

In an earlier posting I noted that people who hadn’t read any Kafka instinctively understood the term “Kafkaesque.”  

Here’s an example.  After 9/11 the feds registered thousands of Muslim men to uncover links to terrorism.  Of the 85,000 registered, 11 were found to have possible links to terrorists.  The program was not ended until last month.

Among the people who registered was Mohammed G. Azam, who immigrated to the U.S. with his parents when he was nine.  The parents overstayed their visa, and he was here illegally.  His father applied for permanent residency in 2001 when Mr. Azam was 16.  The father paid the applicable $1000 fine in a program to clear visa violations for the entire family, including his wife, son, and daughter.  Unfortunately for Mr. Azam, the application wasn’t finally approved until 2007 because of backlog.  By that time Mr. Azam was 22, no longer a minor, and therefore no longer eligible.  Immigration authorities are now trying to deport him. 

An immigration judge ruled that a law passed in 2002 designed to keep families together should overrule the deportation.  Immigration authorities are attempting to overturn that ruling.

Mr. Azam graduated from Monroe College and manages a Haagen Dazs store.

You can read the full article in the on-line archives of the New York Times dated May 31. The author is Sam Dolnick.

Patriot Act extension

Earlier this week the “Patriot Act” extension passed the House 250-153 and the Senate 72-23.  President Obama signed it from France using an autopen.  Senators Mark Udall and Ron Wyden said the powers of the Patriot Act are being used in ways that would stun most Americans, but they can’t disclose what they know because the information is classified.

Udall and Wyden voted against the extension.  Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky also voted no, but it passed overwhelmingly.  Why did Republicans who say they fear big government vote for this bill?  Why did Democrats who say they worry about the erosion of civil liberties vote for this bill?  Why did a President who taught a course in constitutional law and ought to know better sign it? 

Here is the kind of country we live in now.  Will this post be recorded somewhere?  Am I now considered a potential subversive or supporter of terrorism?  What do Udall and Wyden know that they can’t share?  How did we get here?

Theories of Representation

Earlier this evening a township supervisor told me, “I really don’t care about the next election--I vote the way my gut feeling tells me is right.”  This morning I received a letter, at taxpayers’ expense, from Congressman Lou Barletta explaining why he really wasn’t gutting Medicare, although that is what he voted to do when he supported the Ryan budget proposal.

Time for a political science lesson.  Sit down and learn this.  It will be on the quiz.  

Most of American democracy is representative democracy.  We don’t govern ourselves directly; we elect people to carry on the work of government.  How those representatives should behave is subject to interpretation.

The delegate theory of representation says an elected official should do what his or her constituents want him or her to do.  If 60% of the constituents oppose the war in Afghanistan, the representative should also oppose the war in Afghanistan.  Some problems do arise.  A minority may favor the war with great intensity while the majority may favor it, but not with much passion.  On many issues the majority of voters won’t have an informed opinion, or the constituents may be split down the middle.  Nevertheless, a delegate tries to do what constituents desire.

The trustee theory was first enunciated by Edmund Burke in the late 1700s.  A member of the British parliament, Burke voted against his constituents’ wishes and wrote a letter to them explaining why.  He told them they elected him to use his best judgment, that he was their “trustee,” and that he would vote the way he believed was right.  The township supervisor I spoke to earlier was obviously a follower of Burke.

A more recent role for representatives is that of politico.  The politico does whatever he or she needs to do get reelected.  If the oil industry will give large campaign donations for a vote to continue tax breaks and subsidies, vote with the oil industry even if you think it is wrong and even if your constituents oppose it.  Politicos are often noted for “bringing home the bacon,” i.e., getting grants for bridges, community centers, and other projects in the home district.  They are not great leaders.  I’ll bet you can think of an example.

We need another category, and that is the hack.  This is the representative who does not think for himself or herself, does not care about the constituents, and does not have the clout to bring home the bacon, but does owe his or her election to the party.  This representative is usually not very bright but will do whatever the legislative leadership demands.  You can probably think of one or two of these as well.