Ok, once again, I woke up this morning with the intent to post, and ended up stepping into a debate somewhere else. So in lieu of posting here, I give you this debate and ask you to share your thoughts.
Doug Halsted, aka Iowa Geek, is running for State Senate, and has offered this position on education, promoting school choice.
Stefanie from Bob A ...er... One of M ...err... Simplicity offered this response, which appears to misrepresent the position a little bit (see the comments) but raises some interesting points on the potential resulting school consolidation and then goes on to tie the rich/poor gap which would be created to the generalized Republican stance on criminal justice. All in all, a good post.
Anyway, in this post, Jody offers all the links I offered above and then asks for thoughts. If you don't want to follow the links, here's my response:
Ok, I'm sure you've been waiting for a lefty to crawl out of the woodwork and take this on, and while it's rather early on Sunday morning, I'll give it a shot.
The obvious draw of school choice is outweighed by the obvious drawbacks of it. Because if the government gave everyone money to send their children to the school of their choice, what would be left?
If we started this today, everyone in Polk County who cared would send their kids to Urbandale and Valley (West DSM), which would as a result become overcrowded, or impossible to get into, or if they really were run like a business, they'd raise their prices. Nevermind the gas and time expenses incurred when parents living across the street from Ankeny decide their kid should go to Valley.
As a result, our worn-out, inner city schools which have been struggling to keep up for a generation would be hit with declining enrollment and further decreased funding. And the students most at risk, children of parents who can't afford to do better, or children of parents who are unaware or don't care about their options, would be trapped in the worst schools.
I agree with some of your points on why schools need to change. The level of administrative expense that goes into schools would never fly in the private sphere and shouldn't fly in our public schools. I think the answer is a combination of solutions, restoring full funding but finding ways to eliminate some of the many administrative costs.
I had the chance last week to read some of the education ideas considered in HeartlandPAC's discussion on education. (I rolled my eyes at the thought too, but I read it and was surprised.) One included making textbooks available online for teachers to pick and choose the chapters they will teach and purchase/print them that way, eliminating the enormous cost of textbooks schools usually buy when teachers will only use half of them anyway. It's not the only solution, but it is one that could save our schools a fair chunk of change annually, and the damage done in the drawbacks would be minimal.
Anyway, I recognize I'm digging a hole here in a room where most/all readers will disagree with me, but I thought I'd throw my two cents in. I'll be at the blogger bash in February, if nothing else maybe we can continue this debate there.
So, check out Doug Halsted and Iowa Geek, follow the debate, and offer your thoughts. It's fantastic to have public political debate that doesn't involve the KKK denying someone's right to exist or the right battling the left on our ability to kill prisoners for a change.
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Monday, January 09, 2006
And now, our feature presentation...
On Saturday, Chris Woods posted this, his endorsement of Chet Culver. I admire his honesty, to a point. This is a lot better than the "I haven't picked a candidate yet" bullshit he fed me at the Jefferson Jackson dinner after I bumped into him during the sign-posting circus.
Candidate bickering aside, though, I thought it was only fair that if Chris Woods could use his space to endorse Culver, I'd use mine to tell you why I'm supporting Ed Fallon.
I've been on board Fallon's campaign as a volunteer since April, a staff member since June, and a full time staff member since August. I signed up to volunteer for Fallon after an afternoon of research in April, looking at other candidates. I knew right away that Fallon was the only candidate I could support. Here are the biggest reasons why:
Health care: 329,000 Iowans have no health insurance, that's about 1 in 8. Over 500,000 Iowans are underinsured and even more face rising premiums that threaten push them out of the health care system in the
near future. The only way to reverse this trend is by getting insurance companies and others who benefit from the high cost of health care out of politics. Illinois, Maine, Hawaii and others have already taken steps towards ensuring full coverage for all of their citizens, we need to follow suit.
Environment: Ed has served on the House Environmental Committee for much of his 13 years in the state house, but has spent much of that time protecting the environment from legislation which would slash environmental protection standards to benefit businesses, hog confineries and other massive polluters. After 13 years of working as a stop-gap for ecological disaster, Ed would like an opportunity to lead Iowa in the other direction, with tougher restrictions on factory farms and more production and use of renewable energy. And while I hear lots of bantering about ethanol, which may or may not actually be a better solution, Ed's the only candidate I hear talking about wind, solar and biomass.
Education: Every politician will tell you they're for education, but many will prioritize it behind entities like the Iowa Values Fund or special interest tax cuts. In 2002, a budget shortfall forced Governor Vilsack to cut spending 2.5% across the board, including education, which had received no allowable growth for the year already. Earlier in the year, the state had received $100 million in federal aid to use against an expected budget shortfall. The state instead chose to use that $100 million to fund the Iowa Values Fund. Ed was one of the few legislators to oppose that decision. Later, he proposed an amendment that would have given almost $50 million of that money back to schools, at the expense of the Values Fund. Again, the Legislature shot it down.
Clean elections: This is the issue that ties it all together. As long as insurance companies are allowed to funnel millions of dollars into campaigns, we can't expect health care problems to be fixed. As long as factory farmers and MidAmerican Energy are buying support for their issues, we can't expect cleaner water or more renewable energy. And when special interests are investing in politicians and receiving tax breaks in return, it should come as no surprise when we don't have enough money to properly fund our education system.
Those are the four most common reasons to support Ed Fallon, and they're the biggest four reasons why I'm supporting him. But if those reasons aren't compelling to you, here's 80 more. They come from Democrats, Independents and Republicans. They come from men and women, urban and rural, gay and straight. They come from Iowans in all walks of life. All of them have found a reason to support Ed Fallon. Check them out and see if you can find a reason to support Ed Fallon too.
Candidate bickering aside, though, I thought it was only fair that if Chris Woods could use his space to endorse Culver, I'd use mine to tell you why I'm supporting Ed Fallon.
I've been on board Fallon's campaign as a volunteer since April, a staff member since June, and a full time staff member since August. I signed up to volunteer for Fallon after an afternoon of research in April, looking at other candidates. I knew right away that Fallon was the only candidate I could support. Here are the biggest reasons why:
Health care: 329,000 Iowans have no health insurance, that's about 1 in 8. Over 500,000 Iowans are underinsured and even more face rising premiums that threaten push them out of the health care system in the
near future. The only way to reverse this trend is by getting insurance companies and others who benefit from the high cost of health care out of politics. Illinois, Maine, Hawaii and others have already taken steps towards ensuring full coverage for all of their citizens, we need to follow suit.
Environment: Ed has served on the House Environmental Committee for much of his 13 years in the state house, but has spent much of that time protecting the environment from legislation which would slash environmental protection standards to benefit businesses, hog confineries and other massive polluters. After 13 years of working as a stop-gap for ecological disaster, Ed would like an opportunity to lead Iowa in the other direction, with tougher restrictions on factory farms and more production and use of renewable energy. And while I hear lots of bantering about ethanol, which may or may not actually be a better solution, Ed's the only candidate I hear talking about wind, solar and biomass.
Education: Every politician will tell you they're for education, but many will prioritize it behind entities like the Iowa Values Fund or special interest tax cuts. In 2002, a budget shortfall forced Governor Vilsack to cut spending 2.5% across the board, including education, which had received no allowable growth for the year already. Earlier in the year, the state had received $100 million in federal aid to use against an expected budget shortfall. The state instead chose to use that $100 million to fund the Iowa Values Fund. Ed was one of the few legislators to oppose that decision. Later, he proposed an amendment that would have given almost $50 million of that money back to schools, at the expense of the Values Fund. Again, the Legislature shot it down.
Clean elections: This is the issue that ties it all together. As long as insurance companies are allowed to funnel millions of dollars into campaigns, we can't expect health care problems to be fixed. As long as factory farmers and MidAmerican Energy are buying support for their issues, we can't expect cleaner water or more renewable energy. And when special interests are investing in politicians and receiving tax breaks in return, it should come as no surprise when we don't have enough money to properly fund our education system.
Those are the four most common reasons to support Ed Fallon, and they're the biggest four reasons why I'm supporting him. But if those reasons aren't compelling to you, here's 80 more. They come from Democrats, Independents and Republicans. They come from men and women, urban and rural, gay and straight. They come from Iowans in all walks of life. All of them have found a reason to support Ed Fallon. Check them out and see if you can find a reason to support Ed Fallon too.
Before I get to the main event...
A quick announcement.
Barring some distracting craziness, I'm planning on attending the February blogger bash, and tenatively planning on borrowing a laptop to liveblog the event. Although, I think I'd have more fun if I was free to wander and mingle and drink with people...maybe I'll just do that. Stay tuned for details. Also, check out Side Notes for details and the Tax Update Blog to RSVP.
Barring some distracting craziness, I'm planning on attending the February blogger bash, and tenatively planning on borrowing a laptop to liveblog the event. Although, I think I'd have more fun if I was free to wander and mingle and drink with people...maybe I'll just do that. Stay tuned for details. Also, check out Side Notes for details and the Tax Update Blog to RSVP.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
An end-of-week quiz
Sorry, but I really can't justify spending my whole day off blogging. But since I failed to do a mid-week quiz, here's an end-of-week one:
KL
| Pure Geek 30 % Nerd, 56% Geek, 30% Dork |
| For The Record: A Nerd is someone who is passionate about learning/being smart/academia. A Geek is someone who is passionate about some particular area or subject, often an obscure or difficult one. A Dork is someone who has difficulty with common social expectations/interactions. You scored better than half in Geek, earning you the title of: Pure Geek. It's not that you're a school junkie, like the nerd, and you don't really stand out in a crowd, like the dork, you just have some interests that aren't quite mainstream. Perhaps it's anime, perhaps it's computers, perhaps it's bottlecaps, perhaps it's all of those and more. Your interests take you to events and gatherings that are filled with people you find unusual and beyond-the-pale, but you don't quite consider yourself "of that crowd." Instead, you consider yourself to be fairly normal. Which, you are. Congratulations! You're the one on the RIGHT! Also, you might want to check out some of my other tests if you're interested in any of the following: Buffy the Vampire Slayer Professional Wrestling Love & Sexuality America/Politics Thanks Again! -- THE NERD? GEEK? OR DORK? TEST |
 |
My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
|
| Link: The Nerd? Geek? or Dork? Test written by donathos on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test |
KL
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
I was going to blog today...
I'm not feeling well today, so I'm home, and I was going to try to blog a bit this afternoon.
Instead, however, I've decided to engage in a debate with Chris Woods over candidate preference groups at caucuses. Go check it out.
Instead, however, I've decided to engage in a debate with Chris Woods over candidate preference groups at caucuses. Go check it out.
Friday, December 30, 2005
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Let me step into someone else's shoes for a moment...
Ok, so blasting the Register is a game other people usually play and I try to ignore, but this one is just too good:
Take a look at this article, titled "Postal workers want powdery substance tested."
The first paragraph:
"A powdery substance found at the Valley Junction post office in West Des Moines will be tested to alleviate fears of a handful of employees who think the dust is floating asbestos, a cancer-causing substance, said a U.S. Postal Service safety official."
That paragraph is a terrible lead. If you're going to be that dramatically one-sided, you might as well just say:
"Whiny bitches in Valley Junction think they're being exposed to asbestos, but they're not. They're just whiny, and bitches."
Then, as the story goes along, it turns out that...
a) The back room flooring is flaking apart and is made of asbestos.
b) The floors are safe if kept sealed, which stopped happening months ago.
c) The post office won't say why it stopped.
But unless you read the whole story, you'd never know that the first paragraph's "handful of employees" who need their "fears alleviated" are probably right.
KL
Take a look at this article, titled "Postal workers want powdery substance tested."
The first paragraph:
"A powdery substance found at the Valley Junction post office in West Des Moines will be tested to alleviate fears of a handful of employees who think the dust is floating asbestos, a cancer-causing substance, said a U.S. Postal Service safety official."
That paragraph is a terrible lead. If you're going to be that dramatically one-sided, you might as well just say:
"Whiny bitches in Valley Junction think they're being exposed to asbestos, but they're not. They're just whiny, and bitches."
Then, as the story goes along, it turns out that...
a) The back room flooring is flaking apart and is made of asbestos.
b) The floors are safe if kept sealed, which stopped happening months ago.
c) The post office won't say why it stopped.
But unless you read the whole story, you'd never know that the first paragraph's "handful of employees" who need their "fears alleviated" are probably right.
KL
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
A mid-week quiz, some procrastination, and an anniversary :
Hat tip to Thoughts from the Oasis Amidst the Corn, who also debuts at #10 in the rankings on your right.
You taste like baked alaska. Your sweetness is
only matched by your smooth and creamy texture.
You are sure to set fire to anyone's taste
buds.
How do you taste?
brought to you by Quizilla
As an aside, ranking 13 blogs is starting to strain my urge to procrastinate...after a day at work, I look at that list and think "I'll re-shuffle it some other time."
Finally, just to add a third point to a strangely politics free post, I think I may be going soft. I made reservations today for Laura and I for our two-year anniversary. We're going here, and staying in The Dollroom.
Comments about how tasty/romantic I am just may raise your blog ranking.
KL
You taste like baked alaska. Your sweetness is
only matched by your smooth and creamy texture.
You are sure to set fire to anyone's taste
buds.
How do you taste?
brought to you by Quizilla
As an aside, ranking 13 blogs is starting to strain my urge to procrastinate...after a day at work, I look at that list and think "I'll re-shuffle it some other time."
Finally, just to add a third point to a strangely politics free post, I think I may be going soft. I made reservations today for Laura and I for our two-year anniversary. We're going here, and staying in The Dollroom.
Comments about how tasty/romantic I am just may raise your blog ranking.
KL
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
State 29 responds, then I do too
State 29 took the time to respond to this post, which also drew an unsigned, anonymous response with the same concerns. I found that intriguing. I couldn't reply directly to State's post (they don't allow comments), so I sent them this e-mail:
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my concerns. Seeing as you don't allow comments on your blog, I hope you'll understand that I'm sending you this e-mail and then posting the content in my blog.
Admittedly, in my post, I didn't explain why your views are wrong, and I don't need to, cause that's not my point. If it was purely a matter of truth vs fiction or your opinion vs mine I wouldn't care, because differences of opinion are part of what makes the blogosphere interesting. I think the paragraph you must've missed is this one:
"State 29's rabid hyperpartisanship, on the other hand, is just focused on disallowing those of us in the blogosphere from having informed discussion without being called a Jew-hater, race pimp, or in this case, all in one post, socialist assholes, economic morons and a bitter, angry, and unhinged Bush-hater who plays the class envy card because he's too much of a loser to get a job that pays more than $30,000 a year."
Admittedly, hyperpartisanship may have been the wrong word. But the point I made in the rest of that paragraph is what I think you missed. I don't care who you disagree with, but when you bash them personally instead of refuting their ideas, it's just an angry weak argument.
Take, for example, your post about Sharpton from today.
"Via Instapundit and via Ed Cone (nice job citing here) we discover that Al Sharpton, the race-baiter (slam 1), Jew-hater (slam 2), liar (slam 3), hoaxer (slam 4), and former candidate for the Democratic nomination for President (fact, with an implied slam) has been doing TV commercials for LoanMax.
LoanMax, run by the perfectly-named Rod Aycox (slam 5) (who also runs LoanSmart), owns the entire car-title loan industry in Iowa. This is the same car-title loan industry that charges up to 360% APR, something that Republicans Willard Jenkins of Waterloo and Christopher Rants of Hell find perfectly OK. (another fact with a slam buried in it)"
I hate car title loans and will continue to work against them. That's not the point. The point is that when you can't finish two paragraphs without 5 outright slams and two more implied ones, it's not informed political debate anymore. It's just a whole bunch of ranty crap.
Anyway, there's my concern. Thanks again for responding to it, the link is always good for hits.
KL
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my concerns. Seeing as you don't allow comments on your blog, I hope you'll understand that I'm sending you this e-mail and then posting the content in my blog.
Admittedly, in my post, I didn't explain why your views are wrong, and I don't need to, cause that's not my point. If it was purely a matter of truth vs fiction or your opinion vs mine I wouldn't care, because differences of opinion are part of what makes the blogosphere interesting. I think the paragraph you must've missed is this one:
"State 29's rabid hyperpartisanship, on the other hand, is just focused on disallowing those of us in the blogosphere from having informed discussion without being called a Jew-hater, race pimp, or in this case, all in one post, socialist assholes, economic morons and a bitter, angry, and unhinged Bush-hater who plays the class envy card because he's too much of a loser to get a job that pays more than $30,000 a year."
Admittedly, hyperpartisanship may have been the wrong word. But the point I made in the rest of that paragraph is what I think you missed. I don't care who you disagree with, but when you bash them personally instead of refuting their ideas, it's just an angry weak argument.
Take, for example, your post about Sharpton from today.
"Via Instapundit and via Ed Cone (nice job citing here) we discover that Al Sharpton, the race-baiter (slam 1), Jew-hater (slam 2), liar (slam 3), hoaxer (slam 4), and former candidate for the Democratic nomination for President (fact, with an implied slam) has been doing TV commercials for LoanMax.
LoanMax, run by the perfectly-named Rod Aycox (slam 5) (who also runs LoanSmart), owns the entire car-title loan industry in Iowa. This is the same car-title loan industry that charges up to 360% APR, something that Republicans Willard Jenkins of Waterloo and Christopher Rants of Hell find perfectly OK. (another fact with a slam buried in it)"
I hate car title loans and will continue to work against them. That's not the point. The point is that when you can't finish two paragraphs without 5 outright slams and two more implied ones, it's not informed political debate anymore. It's just a whole bunch of ranty crap.
Anyway, there's my concern. Thanks again for responding to it, the link is always good for hits.
KL
Monday, December 26, 2005
I'm finally using titles, and State 29 has jumped the shark.
There's a fine line between being snarky and just being a straight-out asshole, and State 29 is across it. Let's take a look at some recent quotes:
Kwanzaa is a "holiday" for black criminals, Marxists, racists, and liars.
Surely we'll see the results of the 2005 poll in the next week or so, but we have a question or two for the far-lefties who claim to "support the troops" but then endlessly complain about how !!!!BUSH LIED!!!! about the war.
We still think the ultimate point of this exercise, besides selling books and making political hay, is to find a reason for far-lefty Democrats to go forward with impeachment charges (or at least the appearance of an impeachable charge) against President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Rumsfeld, and every other slightly Republican sympathizer on the planet.
Meanwhile, some people are too obsessed with impeaching Bush over something - anything. Their rabid hyperpartisanship extends all the way to disallowing our country to defend itself from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
State 29's rabid hyperpartisanship, on the other hand, is just focused on disallowing those of us in the blogosphere from having informed discussion without being called a Jew-hater, race pimp, or in this case, all in one post, socialist assholes, economic morons and a bitter, angry, and unhinged Bush-hater who plays the class envy card because he's too much of a loser to get a job that pays more than $30,000 a year.
State 29 still hasn't responded to my last effort to get their attention, and probably won't. But I'm starting to be embarassed by the fact that their tripe appears next to a Fallon digital yard sign.
KL
Kwanzaa is a "holiday" for black criminals, Marxists, racists, and liars.
Surely we'll see the results of the 2005 poll in the next week or so, but we have a question or two for the far-lefties who claim to "support the troops" but then endlessly complain about how !!!!BUSH LIED!!!! about the war.
We still think the ultimate point of this exercise, besides selling books and making political hay, is to find a reason for far-lefty Democrats to go forward with impeachment charges (or at least the appearance of an impeachable charge) against President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Rumsfeld, and every other slightly Republican sympathizer on the planet.
Meanwhile, some people are too obsessed with impeaching Bush over something - anything. Their rabid hyperpartisanship extends all the way to disallowing our country to defend itself from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
State 29's rabid hyperpartisanship, on the other hand, is just focused on disallowing those of us in the blogosphere from having informed discussion without being called a Jew-hater, race pimp, or in this case, all in one post, socialist assholes, economic morons and a bitter, angry, and unhinged Bush-hater who plays the class envy card because he's too much of a loser to get a job that pays more than $30,000 a year.
State 29 still hasn't responded to my last effort to get their attention, and probably won't. But I'm starting to be embarassed by the fact that their tripe appears next to a Fallon digital yard sign.
KL
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
It feels like about every third post lately is an apology for how I haven't posted in a while, and this one is no exception. This week I've been neglecting my blogger duties because I'm spending the holidays in frozen hell. Monday I visited my high school, saw some teachers, handed out some business cards (really, this is the first time I've ever returned home with some actual direction in my life), did some laundry and had a friend cancel on me for dinner. Tuesday I didn't leave the house until 10 at night, to go have a ... make that several ... drinks with an ex, and today I spent the whole day in my room playing March Madness. The more things change, the more Minocqua stays EXACTLY THE SAME.
But that's not why you're here. At least, I don't think that's why you're here. Come to think of it, why are you here?
Tonight, as I take part in my first internet in five days, I feel somewhat compelled to throw my thoughts out there on a few things that floated around the blogosphere during my absence:
First, the fun stuff. I went into this one thinking I could only hope to be half as sexy/funny as the red hot and hilarious Kris from Side Notes and Detours:
As it turns out, I'm hot too:
I'm not quite as funny:
Next, State 29 loves to bash people who go to college and generate debt for careers which won't generate much money. This week Chris from Political Forecast stepped into the line of fire on that one. Then State 29 backed off and congratulated Chris on having a goal in mind.
State 29 and Drew Miller have also gone toe to toe this week on supply-side economics as they apply to student basketball tickets at Iowa. I love economics at times, and this is an excellent real-world application of theories, but as I've said before, when it comes to people whining about sports policies at the U of I, I don't give a flying fuck.
Here's my point, though. State 29 has taken after two liberals this week, Chris and Drew, and I'm wondering if I'm next. So I'm going to give him ammunition, through his debate with Chris.
I started at Drake in 2001 as an open-journalism major. I figured I'd work in either radio or newspaper (with a starting salary under $20k, either way). By State's standards, I'd fall under the heading of "stupid," as I was spending more annually on college than I would make annually afterwards.
In college, I changed majors twice, from open to newspaper to radio, all within my first year and a half. My senior year I looked into changing my major, both to philosophy and economics, because I felt like my career in journalism was already over. I decided not to do that, and just get done and see what happened. I graduated in 2005 with a degree in Radio/TV production and an area of concentration in philosophy...probably the textbook definition of a useless degree.
After graduation, I decided to start volunteering in politics while I was looking for work. Four weeks later I was on salary and I've been in politics ever since.
State, if you read this, and I hope you will, lay off these people. Not everyone needs money to be happy, not everyone who gets a worthless degree ends up with a worthless career, and furthermore, someone as snarky as you probably isn't qualified to evaluate happiness.
Lastly, this one isn't directly Iowa related, but in this poll, Virginia governor Mark Warner and my candidate for president, Brian Schweitzer, rank far higher in approval rating than Vilsack. It may have something to do with this picture.
KL
But that's not why you're here. At least, I don't think that's why you're here. Come to think of it, why are you here?
Tonight, as I take part in my first internet in five days, I feel somewhat compelled to throw my thoughts out there on a few things that floated around the blogosphere during my absence:
First, the fun stuff. I went into this one thinking I could only hope to be half as sexy/funny as the red hot and hilarious Kris from Side Notes and Detours:
As it turns out, I'm hot too:
I'm not quite as funny:
Next, State 29 loves to bash people who go to college and generate debt for careers which won't generate much money. This week Chris from Political Forecast stepped into the line of fire on that one. Then State 29 backed off and congratulated Chris on having a goal in mind.
State 29 and Drew Miller have also gone toe to toe this week on supply-side economics as they apply to student basketball tickets at Iowa. I love economics at times, and this is an excellent real-world application of theories, but as I've said before, when it comes to people whining about sports policies at the U of I, I don't give a flying fuck.
Here's my point, though. State 29 has taken after two liberals this week, Chris and Drew, and I'm wondering if I'm next. So I'm going to give him ammunition, through his debate with Chris.
I started at Drake in 2001 as an open-journalism major. I figured I'd work in either radio or newspaper (with a starting salary under $20k, either way). By State's standards, I'd fall under the heading of "stupid," as I was spending more annually on college than I would make annually afterwards.
In college, I changed majors twice, from open to newspaper to radio, all within my first year and a half. My senior year I looked into changing my major, both to philosophy and economics, because I felt like my career in journalism was already over. I decided not to do that, and just get done and see what happened. I graduated in 2005 with a degree in Radio/TV production and an area of concentration in philosophy...probably the textbook definition of a useless degree.
After graduation, I decided to start volunteering in politics while I was looking for work. Four weeks later I was on salary and I've been in politics ever since.
State, if you read this, and I hope you will, lay off these people. Not everyone needs money to be happy, not everyone who gets a worthless degree ends up with a worthless career, and furthermore, someone as snarky as you probably isn't qualified to evaluate happiness.
Lastly, this one isn't directly Iowa related, but in this poll, Virginia governor Mark Warner and my candidate for president, Brian Schweitzer, rank far higher in approval rating than Vilsack. It may have something to do with this picture.
KL
Sunday, December 11, 2005
There's an interesting debate getting started on the ethics of ghostwriting, and I wanted to weigh in on it. As it turns out, the ethical question centers around Ryan Doll's Ames City Council campaign and Drew Miller.
It all started with this post on Drew's blog, where Drew provided a list of letters he had ghost-written for others to the Ames Trib and ISU Daily. He initially posted them with the name of the "sender" attached.
First and foremost, I'm not sure why anyone would ever do that (the posting, not the ghostwriting). I know Drew a little bit, and he doesn't seem like someone who needs the public pat on the back, but this SCREAMS "I wrote this stuff and didn't get credit, give me credit."
In the comments section, one of the "senders" of these letters called Drew out for posting his letter and publicly exposing the fact that it was ghostwritten, which feels like the right thing to do. Debate ensued in the comments, and I was going to let it pass, until...
This post at Drew's blog, which links to this article in the Ames Trib. If you're not going to go read the article, just read this quote from Drew:
"If there are words on the campaign that are not coming out of Ryan's mouth, usually I had something to do with it."
This is a related issue, ghostwriting for a candidate. I'd assume most people know that candidates don't write everything they say, don't proofread every brochure, and don't make every media decision. But when you step out from behind your candidate and say something that starts with "I'm the brains behind...", that's an ego problem and a body blow to your candidate. I won't say I've never ghostwritten a letter or given a candidate something to read, but I can honestly say I'll never come out in the press or this blog and tell you what material was taken from me. It's called being a team player.
KL
It all started with this post on Drew's blog, where Drew provided a list of letters he had ghost-written for others to the Ames Trib and ISU Daily. He initially posted them with the name of the "sender" attached.
First and foremost, I'm not sure why anyone would ever do that (the posting, not the ghostwriting). I know Drew a little bit, and he doesn't seem like someone who needs the public pat on the back, but this SCREAMS "I wrote this stuff and didn't get credit, give me credit."
In the comments section, one of the "senders" of these letters called Drew out for posting his letter and publicly exposing the fact that it was ghostwritten, which feels like the right thing to do. Debate ensued in the comments, and I was going to let it pass, until...
This post at Drew's blog, which links to this article in the Ames Trib. If you're not going to go read the article, just read this quote from Drew:
"If there are words on the campaign that are not coming out of Ryan's mouth, usually I had something to do with it."
This is a related issue, ghostwriting for a candidate. I'd assume most people know that candidates don't write everything they say, don't proofread every brochure, and don't make every media decision. But when you step out from behind your candidate and say something that starts with "I'm the brains behind...", that's an ego problem and a body blow to your candidate. I won't say I've never ghostwritten a letter or given a candidate something to read, but I can honestly say I'll never come out in the press or this blog and tell you what material was taken from me. It's called being a team player.
KL
Friday, December 09, 2005
A quick meta blog, because it's been way too long since I updated the blogroll on your right. There's getting to be too many to go one by one, so I'll walk you through the changes:
John Deeth's content improves steadily day by day. If the blogosphere has a rising star right now, he's it on the left, and MM is on the right.
This is probably going to sound biased, but if you want to hear things from the Blouin or Culver point of view, check out Drew Miller and Chris Woods, respectively. Within the next few days they'll probably tell you to come to me for the Fallon side of things, but my ad makes that somewhat obvious.
Iowa Political Watch is a new find, thanks to MM for pointing it out. They have a very intriguing style which almost seems out of place in the blog world...the depth of their content is unusual. Normally, when I read a blog it's because I've got a few minutes to spare at work, IPW isn't something I can read that way.
I'd been reading Iowa Geek on and off and on level for a while. Good stuff, a fair mix of personal and politics.
Side Notes and Detours is often entertaining. I apolgize for incorrectly comparing it to Random Mentality, which is now defunct.
I don't know what to call this blog anymore, so I guess I'll stick with Bob Again. She's got great insight on issues at times, but this is the third prolonged absence/strange return and rebuild in a few months. I don't know what's going on and won't speculate.
Remember Iowa Ramblings? New addition DemIowa is kind of on that pace. Tremendous content, inconsitent delivery.
That's all for tonight...after this week, I'm going back to my couch, turning off my cell phone, and closing out the world for a while.
KL
John Deeth's content improves steadily day by day. If the blogosphere has a rising star right now, he's it on the left, and MM is on the right.
This is probably going to sound biased, but if you want to hear things from the Blouin or Culver point of view, check out Drew Miller and Chris Woods, respectively. Within the next few days they'll probably tell you to come to me for the Fallon side of things, but my ad makes that somewhat obvious.
Iowa Political Watch is a new find, thanks to MM for pointing it out. They have a very intriguing style which almost seems out of place in the blog world...the depth of their content is unusual. Normally, when I read a blog it's because I've got a few minutes to spare at work, IPW isn't something I can read that way.
I'd been reading Iowa Geek on and off and on level for a while. Good stuff, a fair mix of personal and politics.
Side Notes and Detours is often entertaining. I apolgize for incorrectly comparing it to Random Mentality, which is now defunct.
I don't know what to call this blog anymore, so I guess I'll stick with Bob Again. She's got great insight on issues at times, but this is the third prolonged absence/strange return and rebuild in a few months. I don't know what's going on and won't speculate.
Remember Iowa Ramblings? New addition DemIowa is kind of on that pace. Tremendous content, inconsitent delivery.
That's all for tonight...after this week, I'm going back to my couch, turning off my cell phone, and closing out the world for a while.
KL
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Tuesday is supposed to be quiz day, but my Tuesday was busy. So around here, it's Wednesday.
Thanks to Side Notes and Detours and Iowa Ennui for reminding me.
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty fair.
KL
Thanks to Side Notes and Detours and Iowa Ennui for reminding me.
| You Are Not Scary |
 Everyone loves you. Isn't that sweet? |
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty fair.
KL
Sunday, December 04, 2005
State 29 did a great job on this review of this editorial from the QC Times, almost certainly the best I've ever read on the subject of campaign finance disclosure. Read both of those.
Here's a case in point of the problem. Over the last week, we've been trying to find out specifics on the campaign contributions of Bill Knapp. Here's the website for the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board. Once you get into the actual reports, here's the challenge.
Good luck finding Bill Knapp in part one of this three month Vilsack report from 2002, which is non-sortable, non alphabetical, and 601 pages long.
Part 2 is 395 pages long.
59 more pages from Culver's Sec. of State Campaign. These have an extra element of difficulty: they're handwritten.
38 handwritten pages for State Auditor David Vaudt.
Wondering who was behind Gronstal as he pondered a run for gov? Here's 54 pages to sift through. From 3 months in 2004.
Want to know who bought their way into the mind of State Senator Jack Kibbie? 34 handwritten pages for you.
My State Rep, Jo Oldson, was one of the many who sold out and endorsed the pro-life, pro-big business campaign for governor. Curious about who's bankrolling her? I was. And I bet I'm the first one to scroll through this unreadable crap.
This is a tremendous problem. A member of my campaign spoke to a reporter this week, who had spent almost a full day looking into the donation activities of one person. In one year. In Illinois, that would be a 5 minute task. In Illinois, and many other places, the public has an actual chance to figure this shit out.
Ed told me once that at a Democratic caucus meeting, another State rep asked the room what MidAmerican Energy wanted him to do, because he couldn't afford to lose their support. In an ideal world, we could pass a clean elections law and keep slimy corporate donors from getting into the minds of our politicians at all. But at the very least, the state absolutely must give us a system where, if we're trying to make ourselves vomit, we can go see who's buying off our politicians.
KL
Here's a case in point of the problem. Over the last week, we've been trying to find out specifics on the campaign contributions of Bill Knapp. Here's the website for the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board. Once you get into the actual reports, here's the challenge.
Good luck finding Bill Knapp in part one of this three month Vilsack report from 2002, which is non-sortable, non alphabetical, and 601 pages long.
Part 2 is 395 pages long.
59 more pages from Culver's Sec. of State Campaign. These have an extra element of difficulty: they're handwritten.
38 handwritten pages for State Auditor David Vaudt.
Wondering who was behind Gronstal as he pondered a run for gov? Here's 54 pages to sift through. From 3 months in 2004.
Want to know who bought their way into the mind of State Senator Jack Kibbie? 34 handwritten pages for you.
My State Rep, Jo Oldson, was one of the many who sold out and endorsed the pro-life, pro-big business campaign for governor. Curious about who's bankrolling her? I was. And I bet I'm the first one to scroll through this unreadable crap.
This is a tremendous problem. A member of my campaign spoke to a reporter this week, who had spent almost a full day looking into the donation activities of one person. In one year. In Illinois, that would be a 5 minute task. In Illinois, and many other places, the public has an actual chance to figure this shit out.
Ed told me once that at a Democratic caucus meeting, another State rep asked the room what MidAmerican Energy wanted him to do, because he couldn't afford to lose their support. In an ideal world, we could pass a clean elections law and keep slimy corporate donors from getting into the minds of our politicians at all. But at the very least, the state absolutely must give us a system where, if we're trying to make ourselves vomit, we can go see who's buying off our politicians.
KL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)