Social
security and medical insurance reform depend on the tax and payroll system.
This does not make it more difficult but actually easier. It does require a
paradigm shift. The basic issue is to promote savings and investments, to
help and require people buy insurance for life's risk, health, retirement,
disability, unemployment, and big one time expenditures such as education, home
buying or other needs. People should be encouraged to have reserves and build
wealth.
Since
there are transfer payments from those with more to those with less the
benefits should compensate those better off through the tax system. Tax credits
and having payments into health and retirement plans be pre-tax (come off
adjusted gross income) is very important for political as well as economic
reasons. There has to be a meaningful income tax rate or 20% or so. Most of the
money to pay benefits to those who contribute less than their true cost has to
come from a VAT or sales tax. Since the less well off pay a higher rate of
sales taxes (higher proportion of their income goes into consumption) it then
becomes more fair that they receive more subsidies to pay for those benefits.
The
paradigm shift is to see payroll deductions as partly paid by the individual
(includes the employer contribution) and partly subsided for low income or
supported by credits for better income people. For higher incomes there are tax
advantages for low incomes direct payments from entitlement funds. All accounts
are private accounts but managed by licensed providers. For retirement and
health funds there is a minimum contribution (about 15% of total wages) if this
is is still less than required for the basic plans an addition amount is paid
in by earned income tax credits or negative income tax. Those that have more
can buy better plans and pay for it with pre tax income.
There is no large
bureaucracy but freedom of choice. All health, retirement, disability
insurance, unemployment, and retirement, educational, home buying, savings are
pre tax and their returns are tax free. Plan are approved and supervised but
private such as on the federal employees system. People under 40 have
their current value in social security available for transfer to personal
accounts at the choice of the individual. People just entering the labor force
only have personal accounts. Medicaid can't be included but Medicare could with
a credit of several thousand dollars into private plans to be replaced over
time by saving in the health plans of younger workers. Additional benefits
require additional costs. One can hope that real competition can increase
efficiency. American medical delivery system need long term reform to become a
healthily systems of network providers working on a per capita basis rather
than the more services the more fees paid by a third party that can't control
the purchases or prices.
Investment
vs. consumption:
As
people and households we know the difference between investments and
consumption. Most business knows the difference but World Com charges expenses
as capital to fudge the books. In the public sector there are investments that
have a return
a ROI a return on investments. Infrastructure (transportation, communications,
institution building, education, public health, science and technology) make
the economy more efficient and raise incomes and welfare. Consumption of
military equipment,money used by
beneficiates to consume, subsidies that are likely negative (making distortion
in the effective allocation of resources) tax breaks that encourage less than
optional investment decisions do not add to future welfare but do gather votes
and political money. When we spend billions producing .70 cents cotton, or
peanuts, or sugar when the world market is less than ½ that consumers have less
real income in buying goods at higher prices so able to buy less than otherwise.
Entitlements
are income transfers. Workers pay FICA taxes (larger than they know because
employer contributions are hidden) that goes into checks for beneficiary
recipients. Workers can buy less while people getting checks can buy more. The
economic effects have a small effect in discoursing work and saving increasing
debt and consumption. The fundamentals of government economic policy should be
to encourage work and saving. VAT or sales taxes encourage investment over
consumption if saving are tax advantaged while consumer prices are higher.
The
19th and 20th century economic problem was the business
cycle. Free market economies suffer from irrational exuberance based on greed during
booms and virtuous cycles, and excessive fear during the following busts
preventing investments and creating an evil cycle of lay off, disinvestment and
hopelessness. We have more to fear than fear itself. So, first of all, let
me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning,
unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into
advance.http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057/read the whole speech.
Marx
called this the surplus
product
not in the sense we are too rich but only that the market produces more than
can be consumed by effective demand. By producing income and consumption by
paying people to produce goods that do not enter the market or income transfer
sucks up the surplus. War generates a lot of income but no goods on the market.
Benefits create buyers that dont
produce anything. It is not clear that a global service economy has quite the
same level of over production, boom and bust.
Real
reserves would provide pump
priming
without the hangover of debt. A revenue and fiscal system based on investment
and limiting the damage done by income transfers (from the productive to the
retired and unproductive) would solve the business cycle issue. The Federal
Reserve and treasury could increase demand in down times (beyond interest rate
effects) by increasing investments (using reserves to build roads, schools, new
technologies, utilities and labor intensive projects in parks, public works,
low interest bonds to rebuild the electric grid, more efficient power plants
etc.) In booms increasing consumption taxes and collecting on construction bonds,
replace reserves and cool over heating.
By
making payroll (and other income) taxes go mainly into transfers which are a
form of insurance. Health insurance, retirement is saving, education saving,
house buying, are subsided for the bottom half and paid for by the top
half.
Really
powerful "capitalist" understand the need to "rationalize"
the market. From Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan with GE and US steel, Dupont and
Slone with GM, Bill Gates to OPEC and
the seven sisters create a system of
cartels to control prices and supplies so that "cut throat" price
competition drive profits down to a low average return. (in cotton, beer,
cigarettes, peanuts, sugar etc.) Global economics makes this more difficult so
capital formation is slowed unless public managed investments pick up some of
the slack as in Japan and China.
Solving
the social security problem:
And
the health insurance and taxing issues a set of simple solutions to complex
problems. If the population changes and there are fewer workers and more people
drawing retirement and health benefits the percentage of GDP going to transfer
payments will have to increase
there are fewer paying in and more taking out. Transfer payments have to
include some element of redistribution some pay more than they get out and
some get more out than they contribute. There is no way out of these hard facts. God so loved the poor he made a lot of them and giving benefits to
the rich is a bit distasteful.
The
issue is to increase freedom and choice, to run the system with efficiency and
fairness, and to maintain a large majority support for social security The Social Security
Act, SSA includes retirement, Medicare, Medicaid, disability, survivor
protection, unemployment, welfare, with the idea of a social safety net first
set up by Bismarck in the 1890s
to cut off the growing socialist, in American by the new deal, England after
WWII with the NHS,and now in all modern
nations.
There
are five elements in a system for the 21st century.
1.)The payroll deduction
system
2.)Choice of extra tax
advantaged saving, insurance, education, health plans
3.)Income and VAT taxes
4.)Redistribution credits
5.)Individual plans and
management systems
The
federal pay stub shows all the deductions as do many state and private pay
systems. The FICA shows only the employee contribution which is just a slide of
hand to hide the true cost. The employer contribution is just as much part of
the cost of labor as cash. Health and retirement plays do not reflect in
taxable income or part of the total employment compensation package and is
income in every sense.
Fairness in wages would require (over time)
that everything going in and coming out is regularly reported.
1.)Then the employee or
individual can add to parts of their plan more and better retirement, savings,
health, educational savings, etc. The more they pay the more they get. The
choices are on a menu for the buyer not the employer.
2.)The state and federal
government provide a basic set of benefits retirement and health plans. Beyond
these basics it subsidies add on a diminishing scale.Low income people are encouraged to have
saving with incentives, credits, and subsidies.
The
income tax is reduced and made very simple. People below the 50th
percentiles (median) do not pay income taxes but have means tested earned
income benefits to pay part of health care and private retirement accounts.
3.)If the top rate of
Income Tax is 20% for the 99% percentile (top 1% of all incomes) it is reduced
by ½% by each group until the 50% goes to 0. By setting the tax as percentile
it adjusts for inflation and by setting the top rate and the revenue required the
math is quite simple.It is like setting
local property rates to balance revenue and expenses.
4.)The broad base of
needed revenue has to be raised by a VAT sales tax so the whole system floats
for ever.The tax credits and benefits
for health and savings equalizes the issue of low income people paying more of
their income in VAT so the net effect is positive for low income and does
require a fair contribution from those better off.
5.)
The management of the individual accounts would be by contracts in social security the
current system becomes a basic plan with subsidies for the poor especially for
health insurance and tax advantages for the rich who pay more and get more.
More can be added into a variety of retirement options and saving plans.
Financial
Times Current projections over future years is 44.2 trillion debt in
current dollars if current benefits are to be paid to the next generation
(unfunded liabilities) - interest costs alone would be greater than
current total budget of 2 trillion - clearly a banana republic - clearly forces
high interest rates - but the scheme is to "starve the beast" forcing big cuts in benefits - see
An administration official
said the study was designed as a thought-piece for internal discussion - one
among many left every year on the cutting-room floor - and noted the budget's
extensive discussion of projected, 75-year Social Security and Medicare
shortfalls.
The study's analysis of
future deficits dwarfs previous estimates of the financial challenge facing
Washington. It is roughly equivalent to 10 times the publicly held national
debt, four years of US economic output or more than 94 per cent of all US
household assets. Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman, last week bemoaned
what he called Washington's "deafening" silence about the future
crunch.
The Bush administration has
shelved a report commissioned by the Treasury that shows the US currently faces
a future of chronic federal budget deficits totaling at least $44,200bn (that's
44.2 trillion) in current US dollars.
The study asserts that sharp
tax increases, massive spending cuts or a painful mix of both are unavoidable
if the US is to meet benefit promises to future generations. It estimates that
closing the gap would require the equivalent of an immediate and permanent 66
per cent across-the-board income tax increase.
The study was being
circulated as an independent working paper among Washington think-tanks as
President George W. Bush on Wednesday signed into law a 10-year, $350bn
tax-cut package he welcomed as a victory for hard-working Americans and the
economy.
The analysis was spearheaded
by Kent Smetters, then-Treasury deputy assistant secretary for economic policy,
and Jagdessh Gokhale, then a consultant to the Treasury. Mr. Gokhale, now an
economist for the Cleveland Federal Reserve, said: "When we were
conducting the study, my impression was that it was slated to appear [in the
Budget]. At some point, the momentum builds and you think everything is a go,
and then the decision came down that we weren't part of the prospective
budget."
Mr. O'Neill, who was fired
last December, refused to comment.
The study's analysis of
future deficits dwarfs previous estimates of the financial challenge facing
Washington. It is roughly equivalent to 10 times the publicly held national
debt, four years of US economic output or more than 94 per cent of all US
household assets. Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman, last week bemoaned
what he called Washington's "deafening" silence about the future
crunch.
A budget deficit in no way reduces
the portion of the national pie that goes to Americans. As long as other
countries and their citizens have no net ownership of the U.S., 100% of our countrys output belongs to our citizens
under any budget scenario, even one involving a huge deficit.
As a rich family awash in goods, Americans will argue
through their legislators as to how government should redistribute the national
output that is who pays taxes and who receives governmental benefits.
If entitlement promises from an earlier day have to
be reexamined, family members will angrily debate among themselves
as to who feels the pain. Maybe taxes will go up; maybe promises will be
modified; maybe more internal debt will be issued. But when the fight is
finished, all of the familys huge pie remains available for its members, however it
is divided. No slice must be sent abroad.
Large and persisting current account deficits
produce an entirely different result. As time passes, and as claims against us
grow, we own less and less of what we produce. In effect, the rest of the world
enjoys an ever-growing royalty on American output. Here, we are like a family
that consistently overspends its income. As time passes, the family finds that
it is working more and more for the finance company and less for itself.
Should we continue to run current
account deficits comparable to those now prevailing, the net ownership of the U.S.by other countries and their citizens a decade from now
will amount to roughly $11 trillion. And, if foreign investors were to earn
only 5% on that net holding, we would need to send a net of $.55 trillion of
goods and services abroad every year merely to service the U.S.investments then held by foreigners. At that date, a
decade out, our GDP would probably total about $18 trillion (assuming low
inflation, which is far from a sure thing). Therefore, our U.S.family would then be delivering 3% of its annual output to the
rest of the world simply as tribute for the overindulgences of the past. In
this case, unlike that involving budget deficits, the sons would truly pay for
the sins of their fathers.
This annual royalty paid the world which would not disappear unless the
U.S.massively
underconsumed and began to run consistent and large trade surpluses would undoubtedly produce
significant political unrest in the U.S. Americans would still be living very
well, indeed better than now because of the growth in our economy. But they
would chafe at the idea of perpetually paying tribute to their creditors and
owners abroad. A country that is now aspiring to an Ownership Society will not find happiness in and Ill use hyperbole here for emphasis a Sharecroppers Society. But thats precisely where our trade policies,
supported by Republicans and Democrats alike, are taking us.
Many prominent U.S.financial figures, both in and out of government, have
stated that our current-account deficits cannot persist. For instance, the
minutes of the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee of June 29-30, 2004 say: The staff noted that outsized
external deficits could not be sustained indefinitely. But, despite the constant
handwringing by luminaries, they offer no substantive suggestions to tame the
burgeoning imbalance.
In the article I wrote for Fortune 16
months ago, I warned that a gently declining dollar would not provide the answer. And so far it hasnt. Yet policymakers continue to hope
for a soft landing, meanwhile counseling other countries
to stimulate (read inflate) their economies and Americans to save more. In my view
these admonitions miss the mark: There are deep-rooted structural problems that
will cause Americato continue to run a huge current-account deficit unless
trade policies either change materially or the dollar declines by a degree that
could prove unsettling to financial markets.
Proponents of the trade status quo
are fond of quoting Adam Smith: What is prudence in the conduct of every family can
scarce be folly in that of a great kingdom. If a foreign country can supply us
with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them
with some part of the produce of our own industry, employed in a way in which we
have some advantage.
I agree. Note, however, that Mr.
Smiths statement refers to trade of product for product, not
of wealth for product as our country is doing to the tune of $.6 trillion
annually. Moreover, I am sure that he would never have suggested that prudence consisted of his family selling off part of its farm every
day
Choice about Price
and quality in Health care:
A simple principle
to rule a complex system:
Consumer choice in
a free market works through competition works a lot better than regulation or
publicly provided services. Current health insurance programs are
anything but clear on consumer choice - doctors select services for
patients paid for by third parties.
A set of choices
for insurance, tax advantaged saving, retirement could be offered to
individuals and families such as they are to federal employees - efficient
network services would provide more for less and be competitive relative to
fee-for-practice systems. Low income people would require subsidies, higher
income tax advantages. In order to pay for tax credits and income subsidies
there needs to be tax reform - which is an economic good it itself.
The total cost of
health care would go down while the quality will go up under free market
conditions. Everyone could be covered for basic services within the 1.4
trillion health budget. There is 25% paperwork waste and 25% unnecessary over
treatment so a improvement of 50% of 50% is a lot.
The core idea of a
free market is a set of accounts kept for individuals and families by financial
institutions. Payroll deductions, employer contributions and subsidies would be
reported in each account for each person's Social Security, Health Insurance,
retirement funds, educational and other tax advantaged or supported activities.
People can spend these funds from these accounts on the purposes intended with
any approved provider. If they want more they can pay for more. If they
just want basic coverage they have choices of fee-for-service bill paying
insurance or provider networks paid on a per capita basis. They see where the
money comes from and where it goes.
GSO (government
sponsored organizations such as fanny mae) would help finance some medical
networks but they would be run under contract by professionals. I would see a
few dozen or less national General Health organizations with economies of
scale competing for quality services at a fair price. Each market should have
more than three - not quite an HMO, not quite a Mayo Clinic, but creative
providers of complex care with many sub-contracts and services under a single
management information system. Expensive In-patient care and emergency room
care could become a minor part of the system and hospital space greatly reduced
even with an aging population and increased types of care.
General Health
Inc, American Health Corp., National Health Services, Inc., Continual Health etc.
would be formed under the National Health Services delivery act as an amendment to the Public Health legislations.States or groups of states would form Health
Delivery Boards with are like public service commissions to promote free
markets.
What prevents a
open market in health care?
Providers must
negotiate with employers; unions rather than sell to individuals and get paid
from a complex set of funds. If individuals can select from a handful of
National Organizations the whole playing field would change over time. Big
buyers would be a counter force to big providers.
As treatment advances divert
large numbers of patients from the inpatient hospital setting, and
as life-support and maintenance
technologies enable patients to carry on their lives away from
hospitals and nursing homes,
the hospitalized population will shrink to perhaps half its current
size by the early part of
the next century, despite an aging population. Even though hospital costs
have continued to increase,
per capita inpatient hospital use in the United States peaked in 1975,
and has since declined by
almost 25%2. Some metropolitan areas such as San
Diego and Portland,
Ore (despite large elderly
populations), have inpatient use rates almost a third lower than the
1985 US average, and are
continuing to decline in per capita use3.
These communities present
compelling evidence of
further potential for contraction of inpatient use nationally.
The hospital of the future
will be transformed into the critical care hub of a dispersed network
of smaller clinical
facilities, physician offices, and remote care sites that may stretch out as
far as
200 miles (320 km) from the
core facility, connected by air and ground critical care transport and
integrated by clinical
information and patient monitoring systems.
Health and Taxes:
The political rhetoric and practical
programs dont meet up.The
big goals of universal health care must involve tax reform. The two are
connected in ways that cannot be separated and both face a demographic crisis
of retirement income.Neither the health
delivery system nor the social security system can be fixed without fundamental
tax reform based on a VAT.
Be brave it can be done first some simple principles:
FIRST: Health care has to be a market
(not state provided) and public benefits should not replace private insurance
shifting private programs to public programs. Politicians should not be setting
benefits or fees for reason that are all too obvious.
The issue is the quality of the
market. Let the market get the delivery system right not by regulation but by being more
efficient. The market doesnt work now because people dont know what is paid and what they
get. The consumer is the doctor while the patient is the material to be worked
on but have few or no choices. Disclosure is critical to free markets. There is
up to 40% waste in the system paperwork and over treatment so really efficient
providers should really be able to compete. The market can work the model used is the public
employee benefit plans. Everyone cannot have everything there is no Santa Claus.
SECOND: The package of benefits insurance, health care,
unemployment, disability, savings, retirement should be provided as a regular
report to the individual or family with the payments from wages, employers, and
public accounts along with expenditures on or into savings accounts, (IRA,
401K) paying for health insurance, and payments into social security. The
consumer needs to know what is paid and what is received. That people dont know what they pay, what is an
employment benefit, and how expensive the whole package is makes them poor consumers. The
person needs to select what policy they want (not the government or the
company).
Third the responsibility of the state for
low-income people is limited to basic packages people who have more pay more and
get more. Grow up thats the way it is, has been and always will be.It is the only way markets work.
OK if we accept market principles and
individual informed choice and differences based on interest and ability to
pay.
Now the federal program have to pay
subsidies to low income people and get taxes from high-income people it is called income transfer but
only for basic safety nets. Now how to put together a package were there are
lots more winners and few losers. Here is where the VAT comes in
With a VAT (about 15% federal plus 5%
state) is a hard sell - but if the top income tax could be 25% or so, corporate
taxes 10% low capital gains, (very good economics is to limit the amount of
unnecessary messing with markets by tax policy or regulation) most people end
up not paying income taxes at all (no loopholes) and the budget in balance. (The
idea of real reserves to use in bad times and add to in good times has made
sense since ancient Egypt) BUT sales taxes are regressive so the benefit
subsidy pays back low-income people for sales taxes they must pay and justifies
basic health care services for all (And low income tax credits) GET it!
http://www.wiredbrain.net/
How to
get out of this mess?
In a series of telephone
interviews yesterday, White House Office of Management and Budget Director
Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. said the deficits for 2003 and 2004 would approach 3
percent of the economy, or more than $300 billion a year. That would surpass
the 1992 record deficit of $290 billion, even before the cost of a possible war
with Iraq is factored in. It would also be nearly triple the $109 billion
deficit for 2003 that was forecast by the White House six months ago.
The republicans want lower
taxes, smaller more effective government, and more freedom and open markets. So
should everyone in his or her right mind. But the strategy of starving the
central government with debt is plain stupid and harmful. There is another way decentralization.
The OMB under Nixon
developed federal regional councils and passed program approval powers to local
commissioners appointed by the white house. They bypassed the liberal control
of the Washington establishment bureaucracy and committee chairmen
so they hated it. The reason for the abuse of power in Washington is
excessive power in Washington no one gives up power without a
fight. Leaders in congress can grant favors and gain rewards and cash to be
reelected. The iron triangle of special interests (for example insurance
companies) the congressional leadership and the
Federal Agency (HHS) prevents any meaningful reform.
In some of the proposed
regions they could come up with lower cost, higher quality health delivery
systems without much trouble. The idea is simple you have to get away from fee for
service and toward a per capital (HMO) system. You can do this my letting the
market work not by politicians or regulators or insurance companies make
decisions on who gets what and who pays what. Everyone should be able to open a
page as see his or her health options just like federal employees and get what
they are willing and able to pay for.
The employer, the Medicare,
the Medicaid, unemployment insurance whatever contributes so many dollars
and for that they can buy plans from the A list at low cost (or in the case of
Medicare or Medicaid no cost). Plans on the B list cost more per person per month and so up the scale. All plans are
paid per person so fee for service plans will
cost a lot more under a really competitive free market (quantity and quality
determined by the market and evidence based IT not by regulation) so if people want to go to any
doctor, not pay for any service, have free (to them) drugs, glasses, teeth,
have any test any doctor wants, undergo any treatment or service, it will cost
a lot more. If they take the free or low cost plan they have to accept they
will go to company doctors, share hospital rooms, get those services that the
doctors believe to be necessary and cost effective, so be very limited in
benefits
Low cost medicine is just
as good in outcomes in fact better than expensive medicine less medicine is good medicine the risk of over, unnecessary
treatments are far greater than the risk of under or no treatment, is not what
people believe or want but trueA strange idea is that (after a
mimimum point) you get less heath when you pay for more medicine.Miami spends 10 times what low cost areas
spend and has poorer results.The amount
of treatment is a result of the amount of doctors not the health of the
population. Doctors buy health services patients are just the media upon which
the services are performed.
The American
governmental plan that was framed in the Constitution was a federal idea where
there would be a "weak" central authority limited to maintaining a
common market, assure domestic security from rebellions, and keep independence
from Foreign intervention. We needed a Navy, customs, treasury, foreign affairs
(State Dept) and a framework for interstate arrangements negotiated by the
states represented by the Senate (then appointed by the state legislatures) the
people, more equably represented in the house and a chief executive reflecting
a national interest.
In
the written constitutional structure most public activity was to take
place in the states - health, education, welfare, transportation, law
enforcement and public order would be maintained with the local militia, which
has become the National Guard and reserves. This was the concept but the first
Government but has been overwhelmed by the second, third and fourth
governments.
The
second government is the standing military something the
founding fathers tried to avoid. The framework broke down over the issue
of slavery. The grand army of the republic was necessary to preserve the
union. Internal taxes are required to pay for a huge military. The
military industrial complex has become a large and powerful global second
government. With bases in most countries around the world, diplomatic
relationships, connections with industry, labor than reach into every part of
the country.
The
Third federal government: regulation
The framework was
not designed for a continual nation of fifty states and 300 million people.
Modern economics required a railroad building program, Colleges of Agriculture
and Mechanical arts, (A&M land grant colleges) labor laws, food and drug
administration, federal reserve, Securities and Exchange Commission and dozens
of regulations making a third government of semi-independent agencies.
The fourth
federal government: the money and lobby power
In World War I and
II central planning required a high level of industrial structure - energy,
transportation, material resources, production that make trade
associations the foundation of a "fourth" government of interest
group representatives - 1000's of trade groups, lobbyists, and political
finance. The fourth estates - or media - are entangled into the special
interest politics and campaign management.
The
reform agenda must try to reorganize federal government with the
original intent but structured for the 21st century. Smaller,
faster, smarter - doing only what must be done from the center - modern
management ideology is decentralized, task orientated, and held to high quality
and performance standards enforced by active and powerful competition.
How?
Regional governments
Divide the nation
into ten regional governments of about 30 million people. (Something like the existing
federal regional councils) the Regional republic of California Texas, New York, Denver, Atlanta, Chicago, New England,
Mid-south mid-west and decentralize everything that can be decentralized. The
senators and congress-people would meet as regional chambers with the Governors
and state legislative members.The OMB
would nominate regional commissioners for federal agencies Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Environmental, Health
Education and Social services, labor, homeland defense, FBI and other law
enforcement, and the dozens of agencies and programs. Only programs that must
be national are left in Washington D.C. and the authority to develop budgets, rules and authorize
expenditures is passed to the regional authorities.
They can develop
local taxes and become more independent of the center. The regional plans would
still have to pass congress but there could be an agreement that if the regional
councils pass something the federal congress should go along with the will of
the people on the ground. The budgets would be required to be balanced.
http://www.wiredbrain.net/reserves.htm
Only a national
constitutional convention could change basic structure to create strong
intermediate structures between the states and the federal government. Fifty states
are too many and most are too small while one big central government is not working.
In other modern
industrial countries they have universal health care, (at half the cost)
quality education through university, good public transportation, better land
use planning and environmental protections, in short a more civilized organized
society. Most of these services are provided locally with general rules set at
the center or by multilateral organizations such as the European Union. Our
government is a mess because it is over centralized, and because the second
government (military) is so powerful, the third government (regulation) so
influenced by the fourth government of special interests. Ten regional
governments would be more focused on results and less subject to these forces.
The military needs
to be reduced to just a navy (with Marines and Airpower) which is about ½ of
the current structure. The bulk of Army land forces (not special forces that
could be merged with the Marines and Seals) traditional heavy units should be
returned to the reserves and National Guard in the unlikely case we need a
large land army with tanks and cannon. (Repositioned stocks around the world)
The Navy and
marines are closer to being an integrated strike force under the idea of
advanced Warfighting capacities. (Transformation to IT command and control of
smart weapons used by flexible and smart people on the spot, observe, analyze,
and target in one real time motion, with the right resources, training and
structure: being faster, more mobile, more deadly and more creative than the other
side thereby messing up his mind and plans, just like football) we could save a bunch of money for tax cuts real tax cuts from real reductions in the size and real
improvements in the performance of government.
While the third
government of regulation must remain a common market function the
implementation could be more local and sensitive to local conditions.
The special interests
and money politics would be weaken by not controlled by decentralization.
Democratic reforms of initiative and even proportional representation might
help.
which are not limited in content therefore is nonlinear and not
fixed in time or space - Synergy Group can signin to 100's of web sites using
"wiredbrain" password "synergy" pflaumpflaumpflaumpflaump@cfl.rr.comtive group members.
Search
The Webfor
Click on
Synergy Logo for default.htm our
current working page - today's comments on the synergy
Journal
www.multicrawl.com for synergy site: use wiredbrain and
"any topic"
States are suffering from a real "double
whammy" in the current economic slowdown, which has reduced revenues
sharply (especially in the many states that depend mainly on retail-sensitive
sales tax collections), while boosting demands on state programs aimed at
helping people who are unemployed or living in or near poverty -- particularly
the Medicaid program, the top expenditure category in nearly every state. A
majority of states, moreover, have constitutional or statutory prohibitions on
deficit spending, so shortfalls much be closed quickly. The new
responsibilities states are already beginning to face for homeland security and
increased law enforcement generally will not help the fiscal picture at all.
Since recessions follow booms as winter follows summer maybe we
should expect down turns and make plans. This is called counter cycle activity
- the most natural approach is to have reserves, saving which can be called
into play when needed - such as some states, countries, firms and individual
have a rainy day funds because it will rain. Now it is harder to fix the roof
when it is raining but it still needs to be fixed.
Since states and local government (utilities, communications and
other firms) make the problem worse by cutting back during recessions -
the federal reserves should help hold up their expenditures up - http://www.wiredbrain.net/salestax.htm
thereby demand, income and reelection.
Since increasing federal debt raises interests rates and
creates long term problems for social security - a off budget debt and
payback scheme will help better than traditional deficits - the states and
local governments pay back the loans with a federal sales tax on the internet -
states and local governments give up their claims and a flat national rate is
added to interstate sales - In good times the money is used to build up
reserves (actual investments in CD's, state and local bonds, foreign bonds,
index funds, as well as treasuries) in down turns it is used to prime the
old pump. The same could be done with SS trust funds, highway TRUST funds,
water and waste management, airports, utilities, communications, pipelines,
grids, et al) The NRA (National Reserves Administration) could have trillions
ready to pump into a sagging economy without increasing long term debt and
actually could be making money on investments.
If you want more of something you
support it, if you want less you tax it. We tax work, income and investments -
we support debt with equity loan credits. We should support work, savings and
investments and tax consumption and be neutral on debt. Sales taxes are
regressive so they have to include redistribution programs. If everyone over
the middle (median) income paid taxes at .5 of each percentage over the middle
50 % - from 1% to a high of 25 % - the 75th percentile would pay 12.5 % then
each income could be adjusted for sales taxes with credits. To encourage
savings and retirement those below 50% would get supports those over 50 % get
credits - the same for health insurance, and other payroll protections,
unemployment, disability, and old age insurance.
If the person in the middle (50
percentile) pays 15 % in payroll taxes - then those over would pay more and
those under would pay less. The benefits for the poor would be supported from
sales taxes - the richer would get credits on their income tax for having more
saving, better retirement, and health care - as they do now with IRA and other
tax free saving and health insurance, the poor would have matching funds - save
two dollar we match it with one - scaled by percentile income group - those at
the bottom get 100% benefit - those in the middle none. (benefits reduce 2 X
each percentile) - at 25th percentile benefits are down 50 % - get it?
This IRA would help the retirement and
health care crisis with private accounts, insurance and savings - Real reserve
funds will keep us out of recessions, promote growth, government revenues and
save the nation. Any questions?
The Educational Reform Act of 2001:
The several states and territories are hereby entitled to
reimbursement for the same proportion of the salaries and benefits of qualified
classroom teachers for those professional engaged in basic instruction, the
federal government will contribute that same share of these employment costs as
the teachers students are eligible for the free school lunch program.
The states and territories will be reimbursed based on approved
plans and estimates of the numbers and costs with the U.S. Secretary of
Education, who may approve definitions of basic instruction, classroom
teachers, teacher qualifications, salary programs, and any incentive pay upon
which the secretary may authorize quarterly advances and adjustments.
The states may include teachers from charter schools, schools
being run by a contractor and non-public schools within an improved plan only
in so far as these serve the eligible population.About $15,000 for a million
teachers - some with a small amount some at 100 % = 15 billion - not much more
than title I and within range - even if twice that - If the feds pay teachers
resources are free for other critical needs.
Then we can move toward a realistic salary - working conditions -
qualifications - promotion and specialization system - professionals are the
critical in education - then with this base things can really be improved.
The American Public and both parties say that education is their
top priority but school reform has become so complex that no one understands
what is going on - or is the story reported. Incremental is natural but has a
PR problem when there is the complete lack of focus.
The bills them-self are endless - there needs to be a clear focus
- something beyond testing because tests do not create solutions only let us
know what we already know - a lot of children are not up to grade level.
The only meaningful answer is competition - charter schools if not
vouchers - the charter provisions in the current bill are grants and
information to state education agencies - or the fox gets the grants for the
chickens or http://www.wiredbrain.net/public-policy.htm for a restructured with
the feds taking a major responsibility for instruction. ( State and local build
building, transportation, overhead and administration ) All this sound and fury
will not do much - but then something is better than nothing.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.1.PCS original bill
to extend programs and activities under the
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act or S.1 H.R.1
No Child Left Behind Act of
2001S.303
Three R's Act Better Education
for Students and Teachers Act
Better Education for Students
and Teachers Act
Alaska Native Educational
Equity, Support, and Assistance Act
Native Hawaiian Education Act
Access to High Standards Act
Rural Education Achievement
Program
Education Flexibility
Partnership Act of 2001
Pro-Children Act of 2001
Bilingual Education Act
Teacher Mobility Act
Dropout Prevention Act
21st Century Community Learning
Centers Act
Helping Children Succeed by
Fully Funding the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
(Introduced in the Senate)[S.466.IS]
Public School Repair and
Renovation Act of 2001 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.471.IS]
Educational
Excellence for All Learners Act
of 2001 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.7.IS]
Under a tentative
agreement between Democrats and the White House, the Senate bill would require
mandatory student testing, help children learn to read by the third grade and
give states more leeway in spending federal education funds -- signature issues
for Bush during the presidential campaign.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010426/pl/congress_education_dc_11.html
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0423.htm Using language
similar to that for social services in the SS Act.. From the sums appropriated
( or by entitlement as it used to be ) and the allotment under this subpart,
subject to the conditions set forth in this section, the Secretary ( DOE )
shall from time to time pay to each State that has a plan developed in
accordance with regulations an amount equal to 75 per centime of the total sum
expended under the plan in meeting the costs of State, district, county, or
other local basic educational instructional services.
The federal government will pay 75 % of teachers salaries and
benefits ( involved in direct instruction = about 2.5 million teachers @ $
30,000 = 75 billion ) and left to the states and local school boards, all the
other costs - administration, football, transportation, construction,
utilities, then: We could become a modern civilized society with a world class
school system, social justice, economic growth, and political democracy.
There could be substantial tax relief on property taxes -
standards set for teacher certification - much better salaries for some low
paid teachers and salary grades for high performing teachers tied to the GS
federal scales:http://www.seemyad.com/gov/salary.htm
The big problems in American Public education are:
There is no career stream for classroom teachers - pay is only
based on seniority and there is not much difference if you stay in instruction
from start to finish.
Basic Education as a federal responsibility
:
The national interest and general welfare require a large federal
role in public compulsory education. This was not as true in the last centuries
but is clearly one of the most important if not the most important federal
function. "A 2000 PricewaterhouseCoopers report found that intellectual
assets now account for 78 percent of the total value of American S&P 500
companies."
"According to a 2000 OECD [Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development] report, since 1985, the expansion of
knowledge-based industries has outpaced gross domestic product (GDP) growth in
the developed countries. Knowledge-based industries now account for more than
half of OECD-wide GDP." Welcome, to the Knowledge Age.BUT since we are a
federal system and have a long history of local school boards we can not just
start from scratch.Each state with consultations with local school system
should come up with a plan to provide basic education - reading ( the nation
reads ) writing ( the nation writes ) algebra and other math ( the nation
reasons and calculates ) students knows geography, history, government,
humanities, the sciences and the scientific methods - all standards and
evaluations set by the states.
Then there is a calculation of what the direct provision of these
educational services cost.
Then the application for expected expenditures for the next
quarter of 75 % of the costs as a entitlement - with adjustments for over and
under payments from the last payment.
The states should report how much would be used for property tax
relief - how much for salaries ( and if there would be a state wide pay scales
with steps - grades like the GS system ).
These costs should not include support, administration,
transportation, athletics, construction, maintenance, bureaucracy, etc.
Because these costs remain state and local responsibility and are
too much a can of worms.
The national estimated cost per student for instruction could be
fairly clear at about $ 2,500 for elementary and $ 4,500 for secondary ( half
the total cost ) x 50 million students ( 1 million x $ 1000 = 1 billion ) so 50
million x $ 3,500 = $ 175 Billion x 75 % = $ 132 billion.
There has been a vast growth in administrative overhead from 15 %
in the 1960's to 50 % today so increases in resources are absorbed by overhead.
In the last decade there has been a vast underhanded growth in ESE ( special
education ) from 5 % of population to 25 % and a jungle of paperwork without
functional outcomes.
The labeling of students make standards even harder - ESE students
are not counted or counted differently - so if someone doesn't learn they are
learning disabled and labeled - given more resources - and excluded from the
testing of school outcomes.
There has been for decades weak support for standards - support in
general but backing off when the tire hits the road and students actually FLUNK
and are held back! Standards means that teachers have to teach content -
multiplication tables, spelling, parts of speech, geography, algebra - not
always fun and often hard - and student have to do their homework.Teachers can
be tied to the GS 4 to GS 12 depending on performance - and the DOD ( Military
base schools ) teacher pay scales as a base with districts able to do add ons.
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0423.htm Using language
similar to that for social services in the SS Act..
Basic Education as a federal responsibility
:
The national interest and general welfare require a large federal
role in public compulsory education. This was not as true in the last centuries
but is clearly one of the most important if not the most important federal
function. "A 2000 PricewaterhouseCoopers report found that intellectual
assets now account for 78 percent of the total value of American S&P 500
companies." "According to a 2000 OECD [Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development] report, since 1985, the expansion of
knowledge-based industries has outpaced gross domestic product (GDP) growth in
the developed countries. Knowledge-based industries now account for more than
half of OECD-wide GDP." Welcome, to the Knowledge Age.BUT since we are a
federal system and have a long history of local school boards we can not just
start from scratch.Each state with consultations with local school system
should come up with a plan to provide basic education - reading ( the nation
reads ) writing ( the nation writes ) algebra and other math ( the nation
reasons and calculates ) students knows geography, history, government,
humanities, the sciences and the scientific methods - all standards and
evaluations set by the states.
Then there is a calculation of what the direct provision of these
educational services cost.
Then the application for expected expenditures for the next
quarter of 75 % of the costs as a entitlement - with adjustments for over and
under payments from the last payment.
The states should report how much would be used for property tax
relief - how much for salaries ( and if there would be a state wide pay scales
with steps - grades like the GS system ).
These costs should not include support, administration,
transportation, athletics, construction, maintenance, bureaucracy, etc. Because
these costs remain state and local responsibility and are too much a can of worms.
The national estimated cost per student for instruction could be
fairly clear at about $ 2,500 for elementary and $ 4,500 for secondary ( half
the total cost ) x 50 million students ( 1 million x $ 1000 = 1 billion ) so 50
million x $ 3,500 = $ 175 Billion x 75 % = $ 132 billion. From the sums
appropriated ( or by entitlement as it used to be ) and the allotment under
this subpart, subject to the conditions set forth in this section, the
Secretary ( DOE ) shall from time to time pay to each State that has a plan
developed in accordance with regulations an amount equal to 75 per centime of
the total sum expended under the plan in meeting the costs of State, district,
county, or other local basic educational instructional services.
The federal government will pay 75 % of teachers salaries and
benefits ( involved in direct instruction = about 2.5 million teachers @ $
30,000 = 75 billion ) and left to the states and local school boards, all the
other costs - administration, football, transportation, construction,
utilities, then: We could become a modern civilized society with a world class
school system, social justice, economic growth, and political democracy.
There could be substantial tax relief on property taxes -
standards set for teacher certification - much better salaries for some low
paid teachers and salary grades for high performing teachers tied to the GS
federal scales:http://www.seemyad.com/gov/salary.htm
The big problems in American Public education are:
There is no career stream for classroom teachers - pay is only
based on seniority and there is not much difference if you stay in instruction
from start to finish.
There has been a vast growth in administrative overhead from 15 %
in the 1960's to 50 % today so increases in resources are absorbed by overhead.
In the last decade there has been a vast underhanded growth in ESE ( special
education ) from 5 % of population to 25 % and a jungle of paperwork without
functional outcomes.
The labeling of students make standards even harder - ESE students
are not counted or counted differently - so if someone doesn't learn they are
learning disabled and labeled - given more resources - and excluded from the
testing of school outcomes.
There has been for decades weak support for standards - support in
general but backing off when the tire hits the road and students actually FLUNK
and are held back! Standards means that teachers have to teach content - mu
We have to adjust to the new political realities - mass marketing
of characters as products.Electoral choice is a weak choice for most people.
People care more about household products such as toothpaste or breakfast
cereal than their congress person.
There are a minority who project on politics their passions and
loves and hates that have little political meaning - Some have been harmed by
change - industrial or cultural - some have guilt, shame or projections -
anti-foreign, protection, abortion, anti-establishment conspiracies - the
Clinton's case ( reverse of the Nixon Case )
The base of politics today is emotion and sediment ( largely
negative ) - as you see every day in the media - commercials are founded on the
"hook" or how to tie the image of a product to a passion - sex,
greed, shame, hope, hype - and the billions spent on commercials must work.
Cars are creating status and exciting for drivers, products make you happy,
sexy and smart, "you get inside it - and it gets inside you". So we
have maybe 10 % interested in issues - real choices based on interests - 20 %
concerned with psycho-dynamics ( how does it feel ? What do I like or hate -
true believer who projects their passions on the open screen ) - 30 % on
transit and superficial reasons - talk shows, appearances and
"character". makes 60 % who even pay attention and the rest don't
care and don't vote at all.
If there was a depression or war or real civil unrest ( such as in
the civil rights, Vietnam case ) maybe people would care and pay attention. We
do not have ideological politics or do people carry little consistent theories
in their heads - they have optioning that are generated by the moment and a
moment latter could be different. That's the way it is - so why blame political
campaigns for doing what they have to do to win ? Our constitution was set up
with the idea that Republican government depends on rational elites - better
educated, better motivated, with an sense of civic virtue, civilly minded,
public-spirited, community-minded - and a model of opinion where the leaders
ideas are passed down. Real issues for real people can not be left to mass
politics.
The problems such as Social Security is too complex - of course
"they" just want more for less or nothing -
The real problem is the decline in the elite caused by economic
change and the rise of the sunbelt and Wild West.
There is a weak media elite, weak academic leadership, weak
economic leadership ( lost in a tangle of special interest )
The reason congress spends more time in ideological showmanship
because the establishment is so fractured. In the old days there would be power
brokers to make them behave. ( Bankers, editors, older politicians, party
leaders - could control wild rhetoric and excessive patrician passions ) Both
Clinton and Newt are outsiders without proper credentials and behavior did not
conform to expected standards.
We have to adjust to the new realities - mass marketing of "
characters " as products. It ends up as their ad agencies vs. our ad
agencies, their commercials vs. our commercials - the selling of the
presidency. Not beautiful, not wise, not true - but that's the way it is and
why money matters- better ads and better coverage -
A landslide:
The central theme in 21st century politics is the way or how
public services are delivered.
The scope of services is important but delivery systems is
critical.
The decline of the EURO and slow growth in Europe is due in large
measure to the drag on the economy of poorly run public services and excessive
drain on saving and investment due to taxes, deficits, and entitlements. As the
population ages the issue becomes even more severe as it reaches critical mass.
In a generation 85 % of public spending and 20 % of all income will go to
support the income and health of the retired if there is no change.
The only way, the third way, the new way is to introduce
competition and free markets into the public sector. It is NOT the old
conservative, less government more freedom ( mainly for the successful and rich
by letting the old starve and die " are there not poor houses enough"
said Mr. Scrooge ) but focused on the individual as the producer of all wealth
and enterprise - without much concern for the environment, the common organic
whole, social justice, racial harmony, liberation, the rights of property over
equity and justice ( torts and restitution ) and the winner takes all
philosophy - or the tax and spend ( tax the rich and spend on the less rich so
there is little return on work and investment and a large dependent welfare
class which bankrupts the society so we could end up like the Russians without
the spirit of enterprise ) the anti-business beliefs of the old liberal -
socialist ideologies without a strategy of growth and prosperity. Wealth can
not be created by the state or state enterprises.
The issue is the right, rational, practical public sector - pro
business - pro growth - limited and rational - not anti-government or
pro-government but the necessary public services well delivered. In this way
George W. is closer to Tony Blair than Gore, and Lieberman and the Progressive
Policy Institute is closer to Republican than the stated program of the
democrats. Of course, what they say and what they do has a very tenuous
connection but... If the issues are joined - social security and Medicare,
education partly privatized and privately run but publicly supported even if
the democrats resist in public - they will change and find a compromise. It is
new and somewhat dangerous grounds - entitlement and educational reform - and
people are not willing to be pioneers. I remember a paper on intranets, and
corporate information systems. Clearly the high cost and limited private
networks with dedicated leased lines, was going to be replaced and/or
supplemented by internet systems with wider access and linkages to clients,
suppliers, et al.
The systems managers with knowledge in Novell and other limited
systems were unhappy about learning and applying a new technology. New systems
are a headache and breakdown and cause a systems manager all kinds of grief.
One said " pioneers get arrows in their backs ". True - maybe you can
wait until the bugs are all worked out. All the is dotted and the ts crossed
or maybe you will be left behind ? It is a very difficult question and the most
important business issue facing everyfirm from the smallest to the largest. Big
firms used to be able to wait - and then buy up what worked without going
through the pain of trying many options and finding the solutions for
themselves. No new system works painlessly - but no pain no gain !Public sector
services become a blend of private and public - health, education, training and
labor , welfare, postal and then military readiness, police, domestic security,
fire, national parks and land, agricultural, international relations and NGO,
non-profits, private global enterprises and government all and all will change
- services will be networks of privatized and subsidized public services,
vouchers, contracted agencies, leased facilities, capitalized public goods,
each analysis for benefit /costs - rationalized - made above politics into
practical modern del
Wiredbrain Future new news and private research service by
GlobalVillages provides research on and the future ???
Don't be blind to what others are doing and what they know about what you are
up to AT FROM: pflaupflaupflaupflaump@cfl.rr.com:p>
Who will keep you informed on the events just around the next
bend. In the past it was OK to let others forge the way. You could wait to see
how it turned out then buy your way in after the bugs had been removed.
Pioneers got arrows in their backs. BUT now we are all on the frontier and
can't wait until the dust settles. For example:
Dr. Pflaum ( for a fee ) will research the events and technologies
that will effect your future and give you reports and advice.
www.multicrawl.com for synergy site: use wiredbrain and
"any topic"
Individual development, organizational change, and In the computer
industry, power comes not from the barrel of a gun but from the interface of a
Protocol:
He who
controls the interface controls the system.
Continued on - please let me know about errors ! Some of these
pages date back up to 10 years ( 1992 ) and have been through many editors and
transfers. News about what's happening and for updates use GlobalVillage Excite
NewsSearch -
The real issues of our times ( again ) is not being talked about
or does the political process clarify the choices about the future. We
desperately need to better understand who we are and where we are going.
The mundane and almost evil issues of greed, benefits, character
narrowly defined, are out of any context as to the purposes, goals, missions,
or tasks of a modern civilized society and changing national global realities.
There are four steps to modern progressive global societies.
Self-government - Personal responsibilities and initiative - the idea of self
government both as a personal and political system and with economic open
markets. Competition produces both prosperity and inequality, the rich get
richer but the poor need not get poorer if the second condition is enlivened -
limits on personal or family greed - electoral reform is a minor reflection of
a much greater issue of freedom, democracy when power and money is widely
unequal.Responsibility, because of inequality and the danger of corruption by
concentrations of power of money and military, there is a clear need for social
dependability of individual and corporations who have developed civic duties
and responsibilities beyond themselves - including supporting the rule of law
and public goods purchased through government to create and maintain a
civilized public culture.
The moral or family issues is a thin reflection of the great
issues of duty and responsibility. Social consciousness comes from the third
condition - Trust - building confidence over time and space between groups,
races, societies, companies requires an open and honest methods of resolving
disputes. Trust is required to do business beyond a few friends and family and
does not come easily.
The religion, race and class divides are a weak reflection of the
great issues of faith and trust in neighborhoods, communities, cities, states,
nations, and beyond our borders.
The third condition sums it all up - Humanism - Ecology - Environment
- Expanding intellectual, spiritual, and technical capacities of the
individuals in a global society including developing institution as linkages
between peoples, companies, non-profits, foundations ( NGO s ) governments,
associations, panels, conferences, professional groups, media companies,
educational institutions, the United Nations, IMF, World Bank, Churches, womens
groups, environmental groups, and the other of thousands of connections.
GreenPeace, Doctors without Borders, need to be matched by alliances concerned
about the great majority of people who suffer, mainly women and children. A
Global Agenda:Expand the institutions of democracy - on a local basis by public
finance and regulation of elections, and global support for the civic culture -
the media, education, small business, internet access, rather than military
intervention which should only be the last resort.Expand international law on
corruption, massive civic crime, human rights abuse, and on a local basis
getting over the learning gap - black 17 year olds performing as white 13 year
olds - by what even means necessary - smaller, better, more competitive
schools. Restoring Faith in institutions, public and private by serious reforms
-
The model is integration of labor, management, and the public as
official members of community.
The various European models of joint committees and structures
should be useful. This is what was called industrial democracy.Re thinking
welfare and social programs with a focus on women and children using new public
private non-profit models.
There are only three or four issues that have dominated Western
then Global Politics for the last few centuries.
The desire for liberty ( freedom from excessive state control )
led to the need for self government. Since we dont want kings, priest and
tribal chiefs to tell us what to do and how to think and behave we have to do
more thinking on our own and make more complex value judgments. This is the
first modern political issue - now taking the form of the corruption by money
of politics, the talk about big corporations, media and money having excessive
control over our lives.
The second issue is due to the fact that God so loved the poor he
made a lot of them. Equity is an ancient issue that arose in the first popular
government in Greece and repeats itself in many forms.
The poor majorities under the leadership of a demigod or tyrant
will pander to the mob to redistribute the wealth, forgive debts ( or inflate
the currency to make debts payable in cheap money ) and pander to the passions,
the desire for bread and circuses, and foster other popular superstitions. Now
this is called class warfare or the needs of the needy vs. the greed of the
greedy. Benefits paid for by the rich for the benefit of the poor, public
welfare bribes are offered to buy votes.
Therefore, the third issue is how to protect and expand freedom
from the dangers of Democratic systems - positive freedom is the ability to
make WISE choices unlike a passive liberty which is the negative freedom from
coercion and the right to be wrong.
There is no positive freedom in ignorance, superstition,
prejudice, and in short in being stupid.
Therefore a civic state depends on education and a civic culture.
Otherwise it become popular tyranny either of the right or left. This issue now
takes the form of education and mobility. If we can really teach poor children
to gain skills we can also teach them to behave and act like other middle class
responsible people.
The last issue is the global vs. national views - the role of
humanity and transcendental values over day to day benefits and who gets what,
when and how. Now this issue comes out as having goals greater than ourselves,
the uses of riches, the nature of the environment, social responsibility,
family values, and the proper respect for the opinions of mankind and the moral
standards of a community of nations.
Real Reform.com
American Association for Constitutional Reform
The issue of structural reform does not appear as an issue any
where I can find - even in third parties. As I see the issue is the 18th
century electoral structure can not cope with a system of mass marketing and
the money required to win in a big country.
The reform that is needed is to change the structure of the
elections - a change from independent single member districts (
The Senate can not be changed in the current constitution ) to a
system with clear party responsibility.
The parties need to be clearly a national franchise - with duties
and responsibilities OVER their candidates and office holders. Being a
Republican or Democrat has to mean something. If you run on a ticket there
should be some implied contract. Many candidates do not even mention their
party at all.
The national parties are now a committee of the states - equal
representative by states so 15 % of the population has a majority.
There are many alternatives to achieve a responsible party system
- some commitment to the platform and some disciple by members elected as
members of a party.
Then there could be some control over money and have shorter and
cleaner campaigns as in the rest of the civilized world.
The congress has become 535 independent small business people
without much discipline or policy. All this talk about issues is hollow because
the talk does not relate to what happens. In England for example the parties
have a "manifesto" or platform that will predict how they will
govern. We don't. So it's mostly verbiage and marketing. Promises her anything
but what will be done after she is seduced ? People know that elections don't
connect to policy - that policy is made by the iron triangle - Interest groups
- the money that funds congressional reelection - and the agencies the congress
funds and regulate. If you follow the money trail it goes to congress and then
congress funds programs and give benefits - regulation, tax and subsidies - to
those who fund their election.
The single ballot ( President and congress on the same check mark
) so there is some connection between executive and congressional authority is
one suggestion. An amendment to make clear the federal power to regulate
federal elections or just a statue taking control over federal office holders.
The only way to get to structural reform is via a convention
called by the states since congress will not reform itself.
Real Reform: Restore confidence and pride in the Institutions of
democracy:
Article II - electors and electoral college - is a time bomb - and
needs to be replaced by new simple language - and a national orderly rational
process of federal elections. Federal elections need to be federal - not a
scramble of state rules, antique dysfunctional regulations and court decisions
along with the changing results of infighting within fractional political
parties.
The right to control federal elections by federal law should not
be in doubt - this does now effect the bill of rights - but only the structure
of he process of running elections.
In the electronic age we dont need a horse and buggy system - it
can be much fairer, faster, representative, and honest. Elections are the core
of democracy - they can never be perfect but a dysfunctional system undermines
the foundations of freedom and representative government.
Federal Elections in the Constitution:
In order to assure democracy and the faith of the people in their
elected representatives; federal elections shall be conducted in a brief,
honest, open, and equal manner that assure impartiality to both incumbents and
their opposition and limit the undue influence of money. Congress shall
prescribe by law for the election of all federal officials by the majority
votes of federally qualified citizens of the congressional districts for the
House of Representatives, the separate states for the Senate, and of the
Citizens of United States for President and Vice-president.
The certification of results, the qualifications of voters and
candidates, the times and dates of primaries and elections, the certification
of recognized Political parties and their candidates and the conduct of
campaigns financed by publicly regulated expenditures shall be prescribed by
law to assure freedom of political speech, competition, and the free expression
of the will of the people in the selection of their Government. Where no
candidate has a majority a run off shall be quickly conducted.
Upon enactment, This amendment become the supreme law of the land,
not withstanding any prior constitutional or other legal decisions and past
circumstances.
( replaces: Article I section 2 on the House section 3 and
Amendment 17 on the Senate, Article II and Amendment 12 on the President and
Vice-president )
Federal Laws and Constitutional Amendments:
Congress shall prescribe the terms and conditions for citizen initiative,
or congressional referendum to be placed on the ballots of federal elections,
as proposals for amendments under Article V, sent to the states, or laws to be
enacted or as advisory to the states, the people and to congress.
This leaves to congress to control federal elections. I would like
an election on the second Tuesday in November with a run off if necessary in
the middle of November - with campaigns to start on labor day including the
nomination process that could be done in 4 to 6 weeks.
The primaries could be done nationally in early September with a
run off in the last week of September with conventions ( not really necessary )
during October (Enough is enough ) Federal campaigns would be publicly financed
and limited in their expenditures.
Chairman of the Board:
Imagine you are the Chairman of the Board of the Party. Your
business is in winning elections. Victory means increased market share, higher
earning, more respect and power i.e. success.
The market is shared by the other party.
They compete for many of the same customers and almost all the
markets.
The market is essentially a dialogue or biopoly like Coke and
Pepsi. You both have an interest in the total market size and conditions but it
still is a zero sum game - they win you lose - you win they lose.
What are your assets - what is your ability to sell product for
money thereby raising the cash necessary to make more investments which have a
good rate of return, overall growth, and better future prospects ?
The communications bill, the banking, insurance, financial markets
bill, the tax bills, farm supports, import export bank and supports, military
procurements, are some of the best sources of money. If you have the committee
Chairs that can help or hurt these great centers of wealth, both by legislation
and in control of the agencies they fund, the cash will flow in, you will be
able to hire the best marketing people, target the audience, develop the
strategies, find their hot buttons, find the weakness of the other side, pay
for the ads, and win.
What is your strategy ? First be sure there are enough big buck
issues out there ? Second be sure you can deliver. Since you take money from
all sides be sure both sides get some of what they want - bankers and brokers,
pharmacies and drug companies, doctors and lawyers, remember an honest bribe is
where the person stays bought - also there is little difference between a shake
down and a bribe if value is exchanged for money.
The rest is just marketing. If people want to be really involved
in the process they must do so with groups and cash - power brokers - Older Americans
via NARP, teachers with NEA or AFT, or the 1000s of industry or company PACs.
Since 1 % of the actual voters pay for political access they dont count.
They are courted and flattered, they are manipulated and induced,
but the promises, the rhetoric is hollow - meaningless - because there is no
commitment to actually deliver. Promise them anything - a free lunch,
retirement, health care, safety, family values, God and Country - wave the flag
- it doesnt matter it is just commercials.
There is no requirement for truth in advertising - you are
completely protected by the first amendment.
There have been only four critical issues in the History of the
American Republic -
Self rule -
The heavy handed use of force by the British - based on their
colonial experience in Ireland - help drive the colonies into rebellion and to
form a union.
The current form of this issue is the great power of money in
politics because of the high cost of mass marketing.
Since there are more debtors than creditors the protection of
property requires a balance of power, protection of minorities, and the complex
federal system that keeps majorities of the working classes and poor and their
political leaders from taxing the rich for more benefits for populist programs.
A effective mass party of the workers and farmers was prevented by regional,
ethnic and racial divisions.
The current form of the issue of electoral reform is the control
by big money in the mass marketing of politics. Neither party is strong on
reform, even the reform party. Reform requires restructuring of the political parties
and federal election so there would be more common interest rather than 535
independent representatives and senators. Federal financing, a federal party
charter and regulation by an independent commission ( not a bi-party lobby )
could require some sort of order and discipline in the political process.
Race - and the Civil War - keeps coming back to renew itself but
slowly recedes. Regional and Class conflict is made more complex because of
race, ethnic and religious divisions. Since the protection of property (
liberty and justice ) depended on a divided government, concurrent majorities
are hard to come by - only the traumatic events such as the great depression or
the civil rights movement can create a clean mandate and overwhelming majority
that could act in a timely and decisive manner. Otherwise political action is
slow, stumbling, fragmented, and frustrating.
The current issue of race is beginning to disappear as a
difference between parties.
Equality - more Liberty for the rich ( absence or constraints on
Governmental control ) does not mean more freedom for the poor ( ability to
make choices and have control over your own life ) since liberty produces great
inequality in power. Liberty allows the rich and powerful to become more rich and
powerful - after all they have advantages they can pass on to their children
and corporations have great long term influence over state authority.
The growth of private power reduces the freedom of those with
little or no power because it changes who pays and who benefits from public
action. Poor kids go to poor schools because poor people have less power as
well as less money. Rich people live in rich neighborhoods with better schools
and more influence on school policy. Liberation of the slaves did not give them
freedom in most ways.
The plantation share cropping system kept them in economic
bondage. Freedom comes from opportunity to learn and grow and gain insights and
not be oppressed by false belief, superstition, manipulation, debts and
obligations, that can turn into a virtual serfdom. Labor unions and third
parties have been a response to inequalities of wealth and control. Gore is
trying to maintain the idea that Republicans are the party of Big Business and
wealth and Bush is trying to avoid that issue.
The tax cut is the only real issue that divides the parties
because the democrats argue that it will prevent new benefits and rewards the
rich ( who pay most of the taxes ) at the cost of the benefits of the elderly,
middle class and poor.
World order -
The American myth includes a special role as a secular Zion "
A City on the Hill" - and all the problems of Zionism - nationalism,
national consciousness, race consciousness, chauvinism, jingoism, expansionism,
imperialism, colonialism play a role with prejudice against foreigners,
immigrants, and use of military power. This was played out in Vietnam - neither
party has a clear idea of the role of the last super power or is there a big
difference in the confusion over that role of maintaining a world order good
for business, economic stability, and common standards of conduct.
A current history:
When Lyndon Johnson pushed the Civil Rights Act in 1960s he knew
he was giving the South to the other side. It was an act of courage and statesmanship.
Over the rest of the 60s and 70s and finally in the 80s the Republican
Southern Strategy worked to take over the Solid South and the angry white male
vote and make a working majority.
The war in Vietnam and the anti-war movement were also moral
crusades, while a Democratic War, became a Republican issue with Nixon.
McGovern worked to clean the party of its moral responsibility for the war but
lost the crusade for a more limited role of the American enterprise.
Political realities put the conservatives in a morally
questionable position on the use of military power and race. All the `moral
majority` talk could not overcome their deficiencies on the great civic issues
of the century, race and the use military power to promote business interests. Bill
Clintons solid emotional commitment to civil rights is real, long term and
important. His use of force has been more difficult in Haiti, Somalia, Iran and
the Balkans. Bush is trying to correct the parties moral position without
giving up all the traditional racist and militarist imperialist vote. Pat can
some of it but not all !
The Cold War with anti-Communist was the issue that tied together
racism, anti immigrant, militarism, big business, southern strategy, Christian
fundamentalism and made the republican majority.
The Reagan triad was to cut taxes for the rich, build the military
for industry, and defend the social order against the anti-war
"radicals", integrationist, hippies and womens liberation all under
the slogan of social issues, right to life and school prayer, for the unwashed
masses. Liberals were labeled as anti God, soft on Communist, environmental
extremist, women libbers, affirmative action ( integrationist ), pro foreigners
and immigrants, big government, big spenders, and the negatives worked for awhile.
Clintons sexual problems is a stand in for these social issues. Rush Limbaugh,
Newt Gingrish, a majority of house Republicans and Pat Buchanan all agreed on
the negative attacks and tax, military and social issues.
They only disagreed on trade issues and the level of rhetorical
extremism.
Clinton and the new democrats, DLC, democratic leadership
conference, took over the great center and pushed the other side to appear
extreme thanks to Pat and his crew. Baby boomers are not moved by the older
racist, militarist, social conservative rhetoric. One can hope that racism has
declined in the South and elsewhere but it is not gone by any means - only
politically incorrect.
Bush can not clear the Republicans of their historic positions so
quickly and easily.
The tax, defense and social issues will haunt the election. Gore
only has to take the high ground - there are four stages in any election
campaign -
First name recognition ( Gore had it sort of also Bush because of
his father ) and second to strike positive connections with popular issues -
against crime, for peace, prosperity and security, social security, good
government, clean air and water, and other positive issues.
The third stage is to raise doubts about the other side - they
threaten peace and security, are in favor of pollution, are immoral and weak
and dishonest.
The last stage in a return to the positive - the vision thing -
the hero on a white horse and leave the other side left in the dropping.
The agenda: the victory of moderation
Just below the smoke and mirrors, under the cloud of media
hysteria, talking heads and fashion shows there is a common global agenda.
There is no right wing or left wing policy only policy that work.
There is no cold war, there are no ideology or inimitable
principals only practical policies.
The argument that History is no longer a struggle for domination,
empire, conquest and ideology is mirrored in the end of "politics" as
class warfare, the cold war, the search for ideological purity, utopian schemes
and totalitarian solutions by the extreme left or right. Moderation through
political compromise is a virtue, Extremism in the defense or attacks on
religion, ideology, civil rights, foreigners, and social liberation are all
vices. At Delphi Oracle the first gate held the words "Know thyself",
the second " Moderation in all things".
At the G8 the industrial nations have a common agenda.
The growth of the welfare state since the great depression and the
war had created a central state that began to sap the energy of the economy.
Excessive public activity due to real crisiss in the past, began to squeeze
private saving, investment therefore productivity, raising interest rates
creating stagflation, inflation and low growth. Aging populations and a flood
of new expensive medical technology has threaten to bankrupt many health and
retirement schemes. Europe and Japan still have a lot of work on growth and
currency issues but agree with the theme of free markets, privatization,
expanded trade, less regulation and more open systems leading to higher
productivity, greater competition and growth.
The domination of New Democrats,
The Democratic Leadership Conference, New Labour, New Social
Democrats, called the Third Way is now global.
The central theme is to change the policy and image of tax and
spend liberals, with socialist leaning, to practical, PRUDENT and moderate
programs that works.
The policy involved cutting expenses and raising taxes. No one in
America wanted to face the 900 pound guerrilla of debt and deficits except Ross
Parot. A campaign of raising taxes and cutting benefits looked too tough to
sell but that was the agenda nevertheless and it worked.
The Compassion of the New Conservatives, Tories, Christian
Democrats, is to shed their image of being the party of the rich and powerful
with a cruel or mean streak ( anti foreign, minority, black, women and gay
liberation ) into a populist agenda. One stratagem anti-communism and the use
of religious conservatives by the verbal support of various moral issues that
attracted lower class voters.
The move was toward "absolute truth" and fundamental
principles vs. Amoral or immoral humanist, relativist liberals with loose
morality as reflected in the media.
Therefore the personal vendetta against Mr. Clinton became a
central activity of house republicans and their allies. He should have been
more careful but the personal attacks did not achieve their objective of making
people believe that the Tax and Spend Socialist left now could be blamed on all
the evils of modern society.
Nationalism and militarism also reflect this traditional ideology.
Tax cuts were sold as a issue of "freedom" and liberty of individual
rights vs.
The liberal ( socialist ) leveling state.
They have had problems with an affirmative program but have
depended on attack and negative campaigns which have worked here and there. New
Conservative look to Disraeli, Lincoln, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, and other
progressive elements on the right as model of "popular" conservative
ideologies.
They can move to more or less the same practical politics as the
opposition with less dogmatism and more relativism. Political convergence is a
fact of life. Political parties have to go with what works or enter the trash
can of history. Continual losses while maintaining ideological purity is not an
option. In GB there are the Social Democrats more to the center in America
there is no need ( yet ) for new moderate center parties and all the third
parties are on the fringe.
There is a need for the "greens and the progressive minority
is less reflected in the Democrats - Gore is working hard on "Which side
are you on" theme - trying to make a difference between his own moderate
position and that of his moderate opposition.
There is a need for the right wing " Reform " or
libertarians as the Republicans back off ideological fundamentalism.
Congressional control by either side is going to be very close, with no real
working majority, so they will have to be moderate as well. Thus the victory of
moderation.
Certainly traditional conservatives believe in Prudence and cost
cutting reducing debt, opening private markets, free trade and lower interests
rates to helping produce a remarkable increase in productivity, employment and
living standards.
The "new economy" driven by information science greatly
magnified the effects of practical fiscal and monetary policies.
Maybe the need to pander to the religious right and big money
donors, and the ideological fundamentalist makes it difficult to move
Republicans to the center. It doesnt seem more difficult as the left had with
its traditional labor and socialist wings.
The second part of the New Liberal policy is
"investment" in infrastructure: first and most important human
resources. Growth in productivity in greatly increased by the
"quality" of inputs relative to production. Smarter people create
smarter machines and systems.
There is a large unexplained residual between the growth explained
by more investment and more people is due to this improvement due to
"restricting" and technology. Large companies had become blotted
along with government and needed to cut costs and increase revenues in an
increasing competitive global market. New technologies and smarter, better
educated people are critical in this systems update and setting in motion a
process of continual improvement.
Public investments can make the economy more efficient.
The British are making up for years of neglect and resource limits
in education, health, transportation and communications.
The right wants tax cuts and the left wants new public
expenditures and debt reduction. Investments vs. taxes becomes the center of
this cycle of election with "prudence" and the welfare benefits in an
aging population lurking in the background. http://www.dlcppi.org/ppi/3way/3way.htm
The core principles and ideas of this "Third Way"
movement are set fourth in
The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the
Information Age. http://www.dlcppi.org/texts/pflib/progsum.htm
Americans are ready for the challenge. Most have ceased believing that the
solutions to today's problems are to be found in a larger, stronger central
government--a course still supported by traditional liberals. Nor do they buy
the conservative argument that the federal government is the source of our
problems and that dismantling it will solve them.
America needs a third choice that replaces the left's reflexive
defense of the bureaucratic status quo and counters the right's destructive bid
to simply dismantle government. Such a "new progressive" governing
philosophy sees government as society's servant, not its master--as a catalyst
for a broader civic enterprise controlled by and responsive to the needs of
citizens and the communities where they live and work.
All the Dirt on All the Candidates - Because character DOES matter
You've come to the right place for dirt, attitude and opinionated
character reviews of all the Presidential Candidates.
While I would like to support McCain in the primaries because of
his reform program. I think he would return "power to the people"
but.. what about the rest - he wants to be a financial conservative - again a
major factor is our new found prosperity - but .. maybe if there is real
structural reform then education, ( really a state and local issue ) health and
other national issue could move forward ?
Should I change ( if I can ) my registration from Democrat, a
family and regional tradition, to Republican which whom I dont agree with when
they hang right - from Goldwater to the contract on America.. Otherwise they
are the same middle of the road party as the other one .
http://www.wiredbrain.net/reform.htm
I guess I am a liberal libertarian - a prudent liberal - like Tony
Blair -
The issue was and maybe is a rational budget policy.
The use of entitlements - services and benefits to buy votes and
hold power will bankrupt any state over time. Balanced budgets are a key to
economic health and growth. Since Alan Greenspan and almost everyone knows that
reducing the debt is better than tax breaks - it will be impossible to sell tax
cuts as a central theme of a party platform.
McCain draws from a very wide spectrum -that is the road to
victory !
The establishment hates McCain with a passion - reform would hurt
the Republican Right which believes it needs it's money as the road to power -
actually it will make very little difference - he also call them by name to
account - Some of his behavior in the Senate is quite radical in going into who
took what then did what for whom.
Just as important, Mr. McCain will be able to draw independent voters
towards the Republican Party. This was the key to much of his success in New
Hampshire. Registered independents now account for 15% of Americas electorate.
The Jesse Ventura phenomenon, ( As Ross Parot before him ) whereby
another celebrated anti-politician was elected governor of Minnesota, shows
that they have power. But they are not inevitably opposed to the two main
parties: given a candidate who shows spirit and piques their interest, as Mr.
McCain does, they will vote for him despite his Republican label. http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/current/index_ld5140.html
And win the election in a time when people want CHANGE - but not
much -
He is also a conservative Republican, lest that be forgotten, with
a perfect voting record in the Senate on issues dear to conservatives hearts.
Although voters may not particularly care to notice, Mr. McCain is the
antithesis of Mr. Clinton not just in terms of character, but on issues such as
deregulation (fiercely for it) and abortion (guardedly against it). He differs
markedly on foreign policy, too. Where Mr. Clinton, at least until the past
year or so, had to be prodded to take a reluctant interest in what the outside
world was doing,
I enjoy seeing the Republican establishment come apart as the Bush
people are trying to make McCain into a liberal ? Even Rush Limbaugh is coming
to pieces as he tries to hold on the a party line that doesn't have one except
an old mantra Less Government, More Freedom - lower taxes - social bla-bla
doesn't work anymore and George W. is no Ronald Reagan that can turn almost
nothing into something that sounds good. !
As we all know there is REAL power and money involved.
There is a real threat to the real permeate establishment - well
maybe ?
Message from Bill Bradley-- On to the National Race
As for the Democrats - does it matter ? After a remarkable
turnaround in New Hampshire, where we overcame a 17-point deficit to finish in
the closest Democratic primary in that state's history, my campaign is now
preparing for the critical battle ahead. A staggering 29 states will hold
primaries or caucuses during the week of March 7-14, including California, New
York, Florida, Ohio, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Georgia and Michigan.
Government should be limited to public goods - I favor educational
vouchers ( because it is good for Public Schools to have competition ) - and
private free markets and competition - free trade - capitalism when ever
possible. But in public goods an active and clever state action on common
interests that can not be left to private interests - parks, zoos, museums, and
planning land use growth control, environmental regulation, national health
plan using free market methods. Government is part of the solution not the
enemy.
The reform that is needed is making a firm connection between
elections and policy. I like the British system - you elect a government and
they do what they promised, if you dont like it, elect the other side. In
America we have a strange and screwy system - maybe because we are a strange
and screwy country - or because we are stuck in a history trap.
The American people aren't Stupid.
They know that money matters.
They feel that "special interests" and their paid
lobbyist control what happens or doesn't. This was the core of the Parot reform
party uprising.
The first issue is REFORM - some change in the SYSTEM where the
majority feel they have a fair chance to realistically participate in the
collective decision that effect their lives. For 50 years there has been a
clear desire for national health care - but the outcome was controlled by the
AMA for decades, now the insurance industry. What McCain says is basic reform
in Taxes, Education, ( a state and local issue ) Health cant be done because
of veto groups and their money.
The influence of money is corrupting our ability to address the
problems that directly affect the lives of every American. Without reining in
soft money and reducing the role of money in politics we will never have a
government that works as hard for the average American as it does for the
special interests."
His speeches in the Senate have detailed contributions and the
votes of his
colleagues so they are more than unhappy with him. He has been
very specific on the last tax bill and billion dollar favors grated as quid pro
quo for money paid. (
The bill was designed to go no where but be a fund raiser ) He has
done the same on the Communications bill, the Banking Bill, the Defense
appropriations bill.
"Nothing breaks down trust in our democracy as much as big
money. Money is like a wall between elected leaders and the people, preventing
leaders from hearing voters' hopes and concerns."
The ideas on the table may help - may not - the history of reform
has tended to make things worse. If there is money that wants to go into
politics, and their are politicians that need money the two will get together -
Independent Committees can not be banded under our First Amendment to the
constitution.
The Germany experience is a case in point.
The only way to remove money from politics is party discipline -
the individual members dont have a lot of choices in following the party program
- become back benchers rather than independent businessmen and women and the
pie is removed - simple tax systems, fixed budgeted requirements - remove
members pork and provide free TV with a short campaign season .
The Iron Triangle is made up of committee chairmen in Congress,
the real focus of political power in this country - what Wilson called
"Congressional Government" at the end of the 19th Century.
The other arms of the triangle is the interest groups - over 3000
organized constitutes and business groups that employ a large group of lobbyist
and give money at the fund raising events.
The third arm is the Agencies and Departments which make up Federal,
State and Local governments.
The military industrial complex is only one of these families of
interests.
A traditional model would be the road lobby - the transport
committees and the appropriations subcommittees, the dept. of transportation,
state road boards - concrete, construction equipment, auto and trucking
interests, gas and oil companies and the unions in these industries. A one
point in the last 50s and 60s a fifth of the GNP was involved with gas run
road transportation.
Religion and theology
[1] Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have
not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
Reminds me of the republican "Christian cops" debate.
Religion is one area of human experience, theology is another, Politics
is one part of our lives, Ideology another, we tend to get them confused.
Religion is an experience, theology is an idea; politics is about power,
Ideology about beliefs.
We tend to get experience, feeling, passions confused with ideas,
theories, thoughts and positions. Gestalt is a psychological practice that
works to make the separation clear by the direct experience of feeling. To
understand the difference is very useful in getting control of choices in life,
government, education, health and science.
People and communities cant work hard and progress to a place
they dont understand and have never experienced.
They never have been on the mountain top and dont care. You cant
create a great school if you never experience a great school - all is flat gray
and dull. You cant create a great company if there is no occurrence of
greatness, you cant create a great society without the image, the vision of
greatness.
Politics is one thing, ideology is another.
Thoughts are about power. We use our minds to get ahead, influence
others, get a sense or feeling of control. But without passion, desire, feeling
there is a hollow or emptiness in pure knowledge. Pure passion is wayward or
dangerous and we feel the need to control or feeling with reason. Thus an
internal conflict between what we desire and what we do.
Theology is about power in the church as an institution - Rome or
Henry VIII - by social control of feelings and people and institutions.
Ideology is about control of social power by law and police and
military force.
The God police of the Christian activists would control the
bedrooms and doctors offices,
The green Cops of the Mullahs, Neighbor watch committees of China,
The KGB, CIA, FBI or DEA.
Religion is an experience of the holy ghost. You can have
religious experience. You can know when someone is genuinely spiritual or just
using God talk to get ahead or change the power balance. Commercial are expert
in connecting feeling to product in order to create actions - sell the product.
Commercial give the illusion of ideas but are pure feeling. Politics often does
the same - the illusion of policy designed to connect feeling - positive and
negative to people and parties in order to sell the product which is power,
control, favors, winners and losers.
OUT of the box -
In order for people, institutions, and societies to advance to the
next level - ( Blue, Red, yellow, brown, white, green, black and gold ) the
difference between passion or feeling ( the colors are different levels of
spiritual awareness ) and ideas that gain power, control, progress and win -
they must directly experience the difference - since otherwise its an ideas
about feeling not feeling, or an idea about religion not spiritual, or an idea
about love not love, or an idea about health not health, or an idea about a
more perfect society not an experience of a more perfect union.
People and communities cant work hard and progress to a place
they dont understand and have never experienced.
They never have been on the mountain top and dont care. You cant
create a great school if you never experience a great school - all is flat gray
and dull. You cant create a great company if there is no occurrence of
greatness, you cant create a great society without the image, the vision of
greatness.
1Cor.13
[1] Though I speak
with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as
sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
[2] And though I
have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and
though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I
am nothing.
[3] And though I
bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned,
and have not love, it profiteth me nothing.
[4] Love suffereth
long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed
up,
[5] Doth not
behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh
no evil;
[6] Rejoiceth not
in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
[7] Beareth all
things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
[8] Love never
faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be
tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
[9] For we know in
part, and we prophesy in part.
[10] But when that
which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
[11] When I was a
child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but
when I became a man, I put away childish things.
[12] For now we
see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but
then shall I know even as also I am known.
[13] And now
abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
1Cor.8
[1] Now as
touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge.
Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth.
[2] And if any man
think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
[3] But if any man
love God, the same is known of him.
1Cor.10
[1] Moreover,
brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were
under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
[2] And were all
baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
[3] And did all
eat the same spiritual meat;
[4] And did all
drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that
followed them: and that
Rock was Christ.
(12) [4] Now there
are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
[5] And there are
differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
[6] And there are
diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
[7] But the
manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
[8] For to one is
given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the
same Spirit;
[9] To another
faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
FDR as the man of the centuries:
The end of the 1900s -
The ghost in the Machine - Hiroshima and FDR I have a few
reflections - I get stuck on the idea of management of social affairs. Social
planning, engineering, governance - what I have been into for 40 years - Since
FDR the man of the century because he saw beyond his times - but have seen
little progress on this side of the water since the new deal.
The EU is a beacon of reason in a sea of vaporous passions and
historical ghosts.
The issue of self governance
The issue of the next century is social and technical control of
the process of change. Can human society govern itself ?
The rise of the industrial state and self government
is several centuries old but takes on new urgencies and forms. It
is time to get serious about social management and institutions of political
control. We will be in for big trouble if we continue to use 18th and 19th century
political system to mismanage a 21st century civilization. From Roman times the
population doubled from 500 million, 125 million in the Empire, to a billion
around the turn of this century. When I was born it had grown to 2 billion and
US to 125 million. By the time of my first born it had doubled to 4 billion and
US at 200 million ( 1960s ) and now stands at 6 billion, US at 275 million (
not the 8 it would have if the rate from the 60s had not declined from 2.75 %
to under 2 % annual compounded growth )
Americans simply are not being practical or rational about systems
of governance. Popular culture is full of anti-government sentiment and the
naive belief that individuals and free markets can manage on their own -
without guidance and control from outside - and that government is just in the
way. Nothing could be more wrong and more dangerous - especially to the social
classes where the old ideologies persist. As FDR saved the capitalist from
their own misplaced ideologies, business is most dependent on social order and
stability. Business people have most to loose by social unrest and revolutions.
Social stability can not just be maintained by "law and order" police
tactics. Society must express "synergy" the sharing of benefits of
participation widely.
The natural desire not to pay taxes and have it all your own way
should not obscure real responsibilities to contribute to human progress,
better communities, cultural development and civilization through collective
action.
First, self government was only for white property owning males,
English, French, Dutch, Scandinavian or Swiss.
Then in the 19th century the popular franchise spread across
Europe and the social classes.
In the 20th century the franchise expanded to included women and
non-whites. People now believe in the inevitable spread of popular government,
civil liberty, commercial law and industrial capitalism to all parts of the
globe. But we pay little or no attention to how, in what form, by what means,
and plan for social and political participation. It may not just happen by
itself. Europe and other international organization from the Olympics, the Red
Cross, NATO to the United Nations, are involved in the invention of new forms
of society and social management. This has to be the pattern for the rest of
the world - transitional, experimental, trans-national, rational systems of
governance.
The American system of government is hopelessly inadequate to met
the challenges of the next century. Its terrible structural faults are partly
hidden by a mostly prosperous society that manages despite the system. Our good
luck may not last much longer.
The social costs are adding up in family breakdown, crime,
education, health and welfare - infrastructure - traffic - environmental, and
cultural degradation.
Why do we have more of our population in jail than almost any
other society ? Why in some populations are there more young men in jail than
in school ? OK, donut pay attention - your all right Jack ?
Modern economic and political institutions may now encompass more
than half of the peoples of the planet. Which means that about half live under
older traditional or mixed social economic systems - democracy and capitalism
is not established in much of China, Russia, much of the tropics from South
Asia and the middle east, or in most of Africa; but we assume progress will
come in time.
Popular democracy is assumed to be more rational, peaceful, and
prosperous. We have a lot to learn about popular government and economics. We
have NOT solved the issues of self rule and economic policy. New global
depressions, wars, famines, and other man made ecological or natural disasters
have NOT been removed from the future as they were not absent in the past.
The need for smart, stable and swift collective institutions has
not diminished but increased.
The only way to improve institutions is by invention and
experiments. If we just worship the ancient order we wont create the new order.
NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, Hunt noted an allusion to line 5 of Virgil's ECLOGUE IV,
which read in an eighteenth-century edition : "MAGNUS AB INTEGRO SECLORUM
NASITUR ORDO". Hunt translated this line as "
The great series of ages begins anew" and translated the
motto as "a new order of centuries." More recently, "a new order
of the ages." See below
The century marks are used to organize our ideas of history.
The theme of the 20th century will be seen as the flowering of the
machine age - from steel and steam to electrical and chemical, in a every
faster growing technological society getting more and more out of control as
institutions of leadership cant keep up with the pace of change.
Public heath causes a population explosion without much response
in terms of family planning, advanced technology benefited some but is marked
by the image of Hiroshima.
The automobile increases mobility but also urban sprawl and global
warming, communications - electrify and telephone, radio, television, sparked
vast economic expansions and are the center pieces of our times. But, what is
popular television except a great cultural wasteland, the opium of the masses,
and it was an airplane that delivered the bomb to Japan opening the Atomic age.
The 20th century opened with a great faith in human progress.
The world was controlled by Europeans and the English with a great
colonial empire. Technological superiority translated into military, social and
political power.
The century was marked by two great European Wars. Technology
turned evil, causing terrible crimes among the most advanced cultures. Germany,
a center of culture and technological masterpieces, acted as a barbarian horde
bring the very idea of progress into doubt.
We have just returned to a faith in progress, in history with
direction - not a tale told by an idiot, sound and fury signifying nothing.
The quick summary of the 1900s would have to center on social
morals and advanced technology. We have not been very good at bring either a
rational system of social control to advanced technology or our own behavior.
The methods of the past are in decline ( the thesis ) the new
world order has yet to form ( antithesis ) thus the century is one of
transition - either to new and greater chaos - family and moral deterioration, marginal
religion, loss of ethic and nation identify, crime and social unrest brought on
by population pressure, urban decay, and economic inequalities, Or peace and
freedom in a wealthy and democratic global order, if we choose to get serious
about social management.
If the hope and hype for human progress is going to have meaning
for the global six billion then new experiments and invention in governments
are more important than new technology, of which we all ready have more than we
know how to control.
We started the century with about one billion poor souls on planet
earth.
In 1900 the USA not yet over 100 million in population, with just
over 50 % urban, most people lived in stable clans, ethic, religious and national
families - and with a fairly clear establishment or ruling class. We end the
century with almost 300 million, most quite well off, an amorphous ruling class
of property owners and managers, ruled by technocrats and professional
politicians, the emulsification of cultures from mass media and global
economics, and not all that certain of a new and bright future. http://www.fi.edu/qa98/musing12/musing12.html
People of the Great Seal Franklin Delano Roosevelt
FDR Puts the Great Seal on the One-Dollar Bill in 1935
The story of how President Franklin Delano Roosevelt decided to
put both sides of the Great Seal on the back of the one-dollar bill is recorded
in a letter from then Secretary of Agriculture (and later Vice President) Henry
A Wallace. On February 6, 1951, Wallace wrote: In 1934 when I was Sec. of
Agriculture I was waiting in the outer office of Secretary [of State Cordell]
Hull and as I waited I amused myself by picking up a State Department
publication which was on a stand there entitled, "
The History of the Seal of the United States." Turning to
page 53 I noted the colored reproduction of the reverse side of the Seal.
The Latin phrase Novus Ordo Seclorum impressed me as meaning the
New Deal of the Ages.
Therefore I took the publication to President Roosevelt and
suggested a coin be put out with the obverse and reverse sides of the Seal.
Roosevelt as he looked at the colored reproduction of the Seal was first struck
with the representation of the "All-Seeing Eye," a Masonic representation
of
The Great Architect of the Universe. Next he was impressed with
the idea that the foundation for the new order of the ages had been laid in
1776 but that it would be completed only under the eye of the Great Architect.
Roosevelt like myself was a 32nd degree Mason.
He suggested that the Seal be put on the dollar bill rather than a
coin and took the matter up with the Secretary of the Treasury. When the first
draft came back from the Treasury the obverse side was on the left of the bill
as is heraldic practice.
Roosevelt insisted that the order be reversed so that the phrase
"of the United States" would be under the obverse side of the Seal. I
believe he was also responsible for introducing the word "Great" in
the phrase "
The Great Seal" as it is found under the reverse side of the
Seal on the left of our dollar bills. Roosevelt was a great stickler for
details and loved playing with them, no matter whether it involved the
architecture of a house, a post office or a dollar bill.
In a 1955 letter, Wallace added some further details to the story:
I was struck by the fact that the reverse side of the Great Seal had never been
used. I called it to Roosevelt's attention. He brought it up in Cabinet meeting
and asked James Farley [Postmaster General and a Roman Catholic] if he thought
the Catholics would have any objection to the "All-Seeing Eye" which
he as a Mason looked on as a Masonic symbol of Deity. Farley said "no,
there would be no objection."
According to its official history, the Great Seal was not designed
by Masons. And according to the Masons themselves, the Great Seal is not a
Masonic symbol. Back of the 1934 one-dollar bill Reference:
The Eagle and the Shield, by Richard S. Patterson & Richardson
Dougall, published in 1976 by the Office of the Historian, Department of State.
FDR's annotated dollar proof courtesy of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
a short monodrama commemorating the occasion of FDR's death
The Pyramid on the Great Seal of the United States From THE EAGLE
AND THE SHIELD - A History of the Great Seal of the United States (1976), page
75, we find Charles Thomson's notes on his design - A pyramid unfinished
In the Zenith an Eye in a triangle ...
Over the Eye these words Annuit coeptis ... and underneath [the
pyramid] these words Novus Ordo seclorum."
The pyramid was taken from an earlier design of William Barton
(shown on page 67) that had a different motto DEO FAVENTE (God favoring)
PERENNIS (through the years). This, in turn, was similar to the design of a
Fifty Dollar bill designed by Francis Hopkinson. Thomson wrote the following:
"
The pyramid signifies Strength and Duration:
The Eye over it & Motto allude to the many signal
interposition's of providence in favor of the American cause.
The date underneath is that of the Declaration of Independence and
the words under it signify the beginnings of the New American Era, which
commences from that date." P85.
P89. "
The two mottoes which Thomson suggested, and Congress adapted, for
the reverse ... can be traced more definitely to the poetry of Virgil. Gaillard
Hunt, in the Department of States first publisher on the seal in 1892, took
official notice .... Annuit Coeptis, was described by Hunt as an allusion to
line 625 of book IX of the Aeneid JUPITER OMNIPOTES, AUDACIBUS ANNUE COEPTIS
(All-powerful Jupiter favor [my] daring undertakings).
The last three words appear also in Virgil's GEORGICS, book I,
line 40: DA FACILEM CURSUM, ATQUE AUDACIBUS ANNUE COEPTIS (Give [me] an easy
course, and favor [my] daring undertakings). Thompson changed the imperative
ANNUE to ANNUIT, the third person singular form of the same verb in either the
present tense of the perfect tense.
The the motto ANNUIT COEPTIS the subject of the verb must be
supplied, and the translator must also choose the tense. In his 1892 brochure,
Hunt suggested that the missing subject was in effect the eye at the apex of
the pyramid ... and he translated the motto-in the present tense- as "it
(the Eye of Providence) is favorable to our undertakings." In later publication
the missing subject of the verb ANNUIT was construed to be God, and the motto
has been translated in more recent Department publication- in the perfect
tense- as "He (God) has favored our undertakings".
P90. NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, Hunt noted an allusion to line 5
of Virgil's ECLOGUE IV, which read in an eighteenth-century edition :
"MAGNUS AB INTEGRO SECLORUM NASITUR ORDO". Hunt translated this line
as "
The great series of ages begins anew" and translated the
motto as "a new order of centuries." More recently, "a new order
of the ages." P91. Hunt stated that the words ANNUIT COEPTIS NOVUS ORDO
SECLORUM had "commonly been taken as one motto, meaning 'the new series of
ages is favorable to our undertakings'", but he pointed out that it was
evident from Thomson's comments that the "intention was to have two
mottoes."
P529 - Did Freemasonry Influence the Great Seal Design? Because
membership records for the Revolutionary period are scattered and imperfect, it
is not possible to ascertain with certainty which persons among the 14 who
participated in the designing of the Great Seal were Masons and which were not.
Conrad Hahn, Ex Sec of the MSA of the US has furnished the following.
·1. Definitely a Mason: Bro. Ben Franklin.
·2. Definitely not: John Adams and Charles Thomson
·3. No firm evidence of a Masonic connection, although allegations
of
·such a connection have been noted: Jefferson, Lovell, Hopkinson,
·Middleton, Rutledge.
·4. No record at all,
so presumably not Masons: Du Simitiere, Scott, Houston, Lee,
Boudinot, and William Barton (although he has at times been confused with
another William Barton who was a Mason). Although Washington was a Mason, he
played no role in designing the Great Seal. And although Franklin, a Mason, was
a member of the first seal committee, his proposal (P14) had no influence on
the final designs, and he was in France when those designs were drawn up.
The only individual listed who has been said to be a Mason (with
no firm evidence) is Hopkinson, whose pyramid design for the Continental currency's
$50 bill clearly influenced the final reverse of the Great Seal.
The pyramid, the eye, and the radiant triangle have often been
considered to be of Masonic origin. Writers who are Masons have also seen
Masonic symbolism in the eagle, in the number of feathers on the eagle's wings,
etc. It should perhaps be noted that some of the details studied and
interpreted by these writers are those of comparatively recent realizations of
the Great Seal, details which are not stated in the blazon itself and are not
to be found in the Great Seal die of 1782.
Without questioning the fact that element of the Great Seal design
are also to be found as Masonic symbols, one may question whether the designers
of the seal intended it to be given a specifically Masonic interpretation.
Since there is no evidence that either Thomson or Barton was a Mason, and as
they were the two individuals responsible for the final design, the presumption
would be that they did not intend their work to be given a Masonic interpretation.
Were there sources other that FreeMasonry from which
symbols such as the all-seeing eye and the unfinished pyramid could have been
taken?
The answer is yes. Use of the eye in art forms, including
medallion art, as a symbol for an omniscient and ubiquitous Deity was a well
established artistic convention quite apart from Masonic symbolism, and Du
Simitiere, an artist would have been aware of this. As to the Pyramid, there
was widespread interest in Egypt in the 18th century.
There was a detailed work entitled Pyramidographia which would
have been available to both Hopkinson and Barton. This work included a drawing
of the "First Pyramid", which was stepped, did not come to a complete
point, and had an entrance in the center on the ground level- a detail also in
Hopkinson's design.
While these points are not conclusive, it seems likely that the
designers of the Great Seal and the Masons took their symbols from parallel
sources, and unlikely that the seal designers consciously copied Masonic symbols
with the intention of incorporating Masonic
Symbolism into the national Coat of Arms.
Use of the motto "In God We Trust" - P518From the House
Committee on the Judiciary (3/28/1956) This joint resolution establishes
"In God We Trust" as the national motto of the U.S. At present the
U.S. has no national motto. It is most appropriate that "In God We
Trust" be so designated.... Further recognition of this motto was given by
the adoption of the Star-Spangled Banner as our national anthem. One stanza ...
is as follows: "And this be our motto -- 'In God is our trust.'"
Maybe it is just coincidence, but I believe I remember that Francis Scott Key
was a FreeMason.
FDR Puts the Great Seal on the One-Dollar Bill in 1935
The story of how President Franklin Delano Roosevelt decided to
put both sides of the Great Seal on the back of the one-dollar bill is recorded
in a letter from then Secretary of Agriculture (and later Vice President) Henry
A Wallace. On February 6, 1951, Wallace wrote: In 1934 when I was Sec. of
Agriculture I was waiting in the outer office of Secretary [of State Cordell]
Hull and as I waited I amused myself by picking up a State Department
publication which was on a stand there entitled, "
The History of the Seal of the United States." Turning to
page 53 I noted the colored reproduction of the reverse side of the Seal.
The Latin phrase Novus Ordo Seclorum impressed me as meaning the
New Deal of the Ages.
Therefore I took the publication to President Roosevelt and
suggested a coin be put out with the obverse and reverse sides of the Seal.
Roosevelt as he looked at the colored reproduction of the Seal was first struck
with the representation of the "All-Seeing Eye," a Masonic
representation of
The Great Architect of the Universe. Next he was impressed with
the idea that the foundation for the new order of the ages had been laid in
1776 but that it would be completed only under the eye of the Great Architect.
Roosevelt like myself was a 32nd degree Mason.
He suggested that the Seal be put on the dollar bill rather than a
coin and took the matter up with the Secretary of the Treasury. When the first
draft came back from the Treasury the obverse side was on the left of the bill
as is heraldic practice.
Roosevelt insisted that the order be reversed so that the phrase
"of the United States" would be under the obverse side of the Seal. I
believe he was also responsible for introducing the word "Great" in
the phrase "
The Great Seal" as it is found under the reverse side of the
Seal on the left of our dollar bills. Roosevelt was a great stickler for
details and loved playing with them, no matter whether it involved the
architecture of a house, a post office or a dollar bill.
In a 1955 letter, Wallace added some further details to the story:
I was struck by the fact that the reverse side of the Great Seal had never been
used. I called it to Roosevelt's attention. He brought it up in Cabinet meeting
and asked James Farley [Postmaster General and a Roman Catholic] if he thought
the Catholics would have any objection to the "All-Seeing Eye" which
he as a Mason looked on as a Masonic symbol of Deity. Farley said "no,
there would be no objection."
According to its official history, the Great Seal was not designed
by Masons. And according to the Masons themselves, the Great Seal is not a
Masonic symbol. Back of the 1934 one-dollar bill Reference:
The Eagle and the Shield, by Richard S. Patterson & Richardson
Dougall, published in 1976 by the Office of the Historian, Department of State.
FDR's annotated dollar proof courtesy of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
a short monodrama commemorating the occasion of FDR's death
The Pyramid on the Great Seal of the United States From THE EAGLE
AND THE SHIELD - A History of the Great Seal of the United States (1976), page
75, we find Charles Thomson's notes on his design - A pyramid unfinished - In
the Zenith an Eye in a triangle ... Over the Eye these words Annuit coeptis ...
and underneath [the pyramid] these words Novus Ordo seclorum."
The pyramid was taken from an earlier design of William Barton
(shown on page 67) that had a different motto DEO FAVENTE (God favoring)
PERENNIS (through the years). This, in turn, was similar to the design of a
Fifty Dollar bill designed by Francis Hopkinson. Thomson wrote the following:
"
The pyramid signifies Strength and Duration:
The Eye over it & Motto allude to the many signal
interposition's of providence in favor of the American cause.
The date underneath is that of the Declaration of Independence and
the words under it signify the beginnings of the New American Era, which commences
from that date." P85.
P89. "
The two mottoes which Thomson suggested, and Congress adapted, for
the reverse ... can be traced more definitely to the poetry of Virgil. Gaillard
Hunt, in the Department of States first publisher on the seal in 1892, took
official notice .... Annuit Coeptis, was described by Hunt as an allusion to
line 625 of book IX of the Aeneid JUPITER OMNIPOTES, AUDACIBUS ANNUE COEPTIS
(All-powerful Jupiter favor [my] daring undertakings).
The last three words appear also in Virgil's GEORGICS, book I,
line 40: DA FACILEM CURSUM, ATQUE AUDACIBUS ANNUE COEPTIS (Give [me] an easy
course, and favor [my] daring undertakings). Thompson changed the imperative
ANNUE to ANNUIT, the third person singular form of the same verb in either the
present tense of the perfect tense.
The the motto ANNUIT COEPTIS the subject of the verb must be
supplied, and the translator must also choose the tense. In his 1892 brochure,
Hunt suggested that the missing subject was in effect the eye at the apex of
the pyramid ... and he translated the motto-in the present tense- as "it
(the Eye of Providence) is favorable to our undertakings." In later
publication the missing subject of the verb ANNUIT was construed to be God, and
the motto has been translated in more recent Department publication- in the
perfect tense- as "He (God) has favored our undertakings".
P90. NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, Hunt noted an allusion to line 5
of Virgil's ECLOGUE IV, which read in an eighteenth-century edition :
"MAGNUS AB INTEGRO SECLORUM NASITUR ORDO". Hunt translated this line
as "
The great series of ages begins anew" and translated the
motto as "a new order of centuries." More recently, "a new order
of the ages." P91. Hunt stated that the words ANNUIT COEPTIS NOVUS ORDO
SECLORUM had "commonly been taken as one motto, meaning 'the new series of
ages is favorable to our undertakings'", but he pointed out that it was
evident from Thomson's comments that the "intention was to have two
mottoes."
P529 - Did Freemasonry Influence the Great Seal Design? Because
membership records for the Revolutionary period are scattered and imperfect, it
is not possible to ascertain with certainty which persons among the 14 who
participated in the designing of the Great Seal were Masons and which were not.
Conrad Hahn, Ex Sec of the MSA of the US has furnished the following. 1.
Definitely a Mason: Bro. Ben Franklin.
2. Definitely not: John Adams and Charles Thomson
3. No firm evidence of a Masonic connection, although allegations
of such a connection have been noted: Jefferson, Lovell, Hopkinson, Middleton,
Rutledge.
4. No record at all, so presumably not Masons: Du
Simitiere, Scott, Houston, Lee, Boudinot, and William Barton (although he has
at times been confused with another William Barton who was a Mason). Although
Washington was a Mason, he played no role in designing the Great Seal. And
although Franklin, a Mason, was a member of the first seal committee, his
proposal (P14) had no influence on the final designs, and he was in France when
those designs were drawn up.
The only individual listed who has been said to be a Mason (with
no firm evidence) is Hopkinson, whose pyramid design for the Continental
currency's $50 bill clearly influenced the final reverse of the Great Seal.
The pyramid, the eye, and the radiant triangle have often been
considered to be of Masonic origin. Writers who are Masons have also seen
Masonic symbolism in the eagle, in the number of feathers on the eagle's wings,
etc. It should perhaps be noted that some of the details studied and
interpreted by these writers are those of comparatively recent realizations of
the Great Seal, details which are not stated in the blazon itself and are not
to be found in the Great Seal die of 1782. Without questioning the fact that
element of the Great Seal design are also to be found as Masonic symbols, one
may question whether the designers of the seal intended it to be given a
specifically Masonic interpretation. Since there is no evidence that either
Thomson or Barton was a Mason, and as they were the two individuals responsible
for the final design, the presumption would be that they did not intend their
work to be given a Masonic interpretation. Were there sources other that
FreeMasonry from which symbols such as the all-seeing eye and the unfinished
pyramid could have been taken?
The answer is yes. Use of the eye in art forms, including
medallion art, as a symbol for an omniscient and ubiquitous Deity was a well
established artistic convention quite apart from Masonic symbolism, and Du
Simitiere, an artist would have been aware of this. As to the Pyramid, there
was widespread interest in Egypt in the 18th century.
There was a detailed work entitled Pyramidographia which would
have been available to both Hopkinson and Barton. This work included a drawing
of the "First Pyramid", which was stepped, did not come to a complete
point, and had an entrance in the center on the ground level- a detail also in
Hopkinson's design.
While these points are not conclusive, it seems likely that the
designers of the Great Seal and the Masons took their symbols from parallel
sources, and unlikely that the seal designers consciously copied Masonic
symbols with the intention of incorporating Masonic Symbolism into the national
Coat of Arms.
Use of the motto "In God We Trust" - P518 From
the House Committee on the Judiciary (3/28/1956) This joint resolution
establishes "In God We Trust" as the national motto of the U.S. At
present the U.S. has no national motto. It is most appropriate that "In
God We Trust" be so designated.... Further recognition of this motto was
given by the adoption of the Star-Spangled Banner as our national anthem. One
stanza ... is as follows: "And this be our motto -- 'In God is our trust.'"
Maybe it is just coincidence, but I believe I remember that Francis Scott Key
was a FreeMason. -- pflaump@usa.com Dr. Peter E. Pflaum, GlobalVillages
http://www.wiredbrain.net/ pflpflpflpflaump@cfl.rr.comBox 2176 New Smyrna Beach FL.
32170386428 9609 FAX386428 7924
And it's
free
Http copies of SYNERGY
JOURNALS write to pfpfpfpflaump@cfl.rr.comter E. Pflaum Ph.D. , Headmaster
GLOBAL_VILLAGE_SCHOOLHOUSE 225 Robinson Road, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169 (904)
428+7924 HOME PAGEBack to TOP
