politics

The basic concept that no one would want for housing or food despite being unable to find a job that pays enough on which to survive is a worthy one.

Not a Novel Idea

As a concept, I’ve been supportive of Universal Basic Income (UBI), which Presidential hopeful Andrew Yang refers to as the “Freedom Dividend,” for a long time.

There are multiple proposals and approaches to UBI, but if you’re unfamiliar with the concept, it’s pretty straight forward. UBI is a guaranteed minimum income for everyone in the United States or every citizen. The amount may vary from proposal to proposal. As might a maximum income requirement (millionaires and billionaires might not receive UBI in some proposals).

UBI might sound like a unique idea, but it isn’t really. With the wealth disparity in this country growing beyond Depression-era levels. With the increasing threat of automation. The basic concept that no one would want for housing or food despite being unable to find a job or a job that pays enough on which to survive is a worthy one.

Though maybe not exactly a “universal basic income,” the idea of Social Security in the U.S. relies on a lot of the same arguments and it got its start way back in the 20s.

Is UBI an Entitlement for “Lazy People”?

Ultimately, my answer to this is simply “no”. However, given my experience in the last week or so, I’ve been giving this question some thought.

Neoliberals and conservatives in general all oppose UBI because they say that, among other things, it’s a handout to people who don’t otherwise want to work. The same has been said about welfare programs for years.

Are they right? Sure. There are always going to be people who want to try to game the system, want something for nothing. And if given the opportunity they’ll collect a government “hand out” rather than work for a living. But a plethora of data suggests those UBI and welfare opponents simply hate poor people, rather than have a substantive point. Yes, there are outliers, though they are the exception rather than the rule.

Mississippi Complainers

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve been working in Moss Point, MS on GOTV efforts for this year’s election. Though my job has been primarily one of facilitation and training, I’ve been interacting daily with our paid canvassers.

“My” team has been tasked with canvassing all, or a major chunk, of Jefferson County, which is largely rural. While the Minimum Wage here is set at the federal $7.25, we’re paying our canvassers $15 an hour. Obviously a coveted wage out here, we’ve had folks from all over knocking down our door for an opportunity to do a little work and make good money.

And the vast majority of my canvassers are fantastic. Really good, hard-working people with good hearts who are just trying to get by. A few, though, would complain. “I don’t want to go out that far.”

“I don’t need to do the role-playing.” Or, “I don’t need anyone checking up on me.” Or, “I’m driving my own car.” And on and on. They’d give me grief over arguably stupid stuff.

In my life, I’ve never had a job where I’d basically refuse to do what my boss asked of me. I showed up, I did the job and at the end of the day, if I was frustrated, I’d complain out loud to myself (or to those willing to listen). Then I’d go back the next day.

So, I wondered to myself (and my teammate) whether that attitude displayed by those few was the reason they couldn’t hold down a job. But I shook my head, grumbled to myself again, then went back to work.

The Welfare Trap

I’ve also been perplexed by and frustrated for a few who said they couldn’t do the work because the relatively high wage would put their welfare and/or section 8 housing in jeopardy. This is the result of income limits on federal poverty programs. Rise above the ceiling just a bit and floating up a smelly creek without a paddle.

The folks in that situation I dealt with here genuinely wanted to work, but were so fearful of losing benefits they counted on to survive, they opted out.

Congress, so bogged down in privileged ignorance and petty political infighting, has utterly and completely failed to address income limits for their poverty programs and the reality of the growing wage gap in the U.S. While these same dynamics make it unlikely we’ll see a Universal Basic Income anytime soon, my experience here in Mississippi have only served to emphasize its urgent necessity.

Read more

FDR for President - socialist government programs

The word “progressive” carries a lot of baggage. On the right, conservatives bandy about the term as an insult, a term of derision meant to signal an opposition to “traditional values,” military weakness or cowardice, or an “Un-American” approach to economics. For many conservatives, “progressives” are really anyone to their left on the political spectrum, which isn’t hard to do these days.

Among Democrats, it is an identity many elected officials and candidates covet. During the primaries, it seems every Democrat is a “progressive.” Whether they really are or not is open to debate. As a self-described progressive myself, I certainly have my own ideas about what the word means and when the title is appropriately employed. But for our immediate purposes here, I will attempt to lay out an objective working definition.

Definitions

Starting with the basics, the Oxford English Dictionary defines progressive in a number of contexts, but for our purposes here’s a couple that are relevant:

(Of a person or idea) favoring social reform ‘a relatively progressive Minister of Education’. Or favouring change or innovation.

Beyond this technical definition which may or may not be applied to current national political dynamics, I went in search of more satisfying definitions that might better inform the underlying point of this post; what does it mean to be “progressive” in today’s political climate.

I came across an article in The New Republic aptly titled, “Are You Progressive?”. The author ultimately provides two definitions that contradict one another:

In a recent issue of the journal Democracy, the historian Sean Wilentz addressed it head-on: Liberals, he argues, recognize the flaws of capitalism, are dedicated to remedying them, and have great achievements to their credit in that regard, notably those of the New Deal, the New Frontier, and the Great Society. Progressives are meanwhile “emphatically anti-liberal”—because they are hostile to capitalism and, “deep down, harbor the hope that one day, perhaps through some catastrophic event, American capitalism will indeed be replaced by socialism.”

He goes on:

In practice, however, Wilentz’s theory doesn’t really apply: Progressive and liberal are precisely synonyms in American political life—and have been since the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan succeeded in making liberals feel ashamed of the word and fearful of associating with it, and they started calling themselves progressives instead. This wasn’t the introduction of a new politics; it was the rebranding of an existing one.

While I tend to agree with the conclusion drawn by McCormack in the New Republic article, I don’t intend to debate here the difference between “liberal” and “progressive,” rather provide some context. Feeling that I’ve done that, I’m moving on.

Recent Uses

I’ve seen articles recently, more than one in fact, that claim the “progressive” agenda isn’t so much “progressive,” but rather a reclaiming of New Deal policies and a “realigning” of the Democratic Party.

As we can begin to see above, this approach does more to muddy the definitional waters than to clarify them. Without delving into the political connections and relationships of these journalists, I believe this is little more than an ongoing and continuous effort by the Democratic Party establishment and its supporters to appropriate the term for their own purposes. As so many Democratic elected officials, both here in the islands and across the country, aim to do.

Yes, I would imagine that most true progressives (I’ll come to my own definition a bit later) support the policies of the New Deal, but its agenda I think falls short of what we should today call “progressive.” For starters, during the era of Roosevelt there was little consciousness or understanding of the impacts human society has on the environment around us. And any “progressive” agenda today should include a strong environmental protection stance.

In addition to a strong stance on environmental protections, defense and support of strong labor organizing components, and social justice as opposition to treating immigrants, people of color, or women as anything less than equal should be at the core of “progressive” values.

Organized Labor

Anyone considering themselves “progressive” should be a staunch and vocal supporter of labor unions and the unfettered right of workers to collectively organize.

During the last 40 years or so, Democratic and Republican politicians alike have worked, actively or otherwise, to chip away at union membership and the influence of organized labor on our political and economic systems. Sure, Republicans have largely led the charge, but sadly far too many Democratic politicians have been complicit.

Organized labor, history shows us, has had substantial impacts on our society and economy by fighting for fairness. Again, not equality, but fairness. Only as the strength and influence of labor unions has wained over the last few decades have wages stagnated, have corporate profits and influence exploded, and the quality of life of the average worker suffered.

Social Justice

In the age of Black Lives Matter and the #MeToo movements, any examination of what it means to be progressive must include some consideration of social justice.

Indigenous rights, here in Hawaii, might be the most pronounced example of what I mean. Court rulings and protest movements have shown us that Native Hawaiian rights are given consideration only when it serves the purposes of political politeness, or tourist industry pandering. Government mechanisms constitutionally mandated to benefit Native Hawaiian communities are paid little more than lip service.

Even today, we need look no farther than the stand-off over the TMT on Mauna Kea, or the underfunding of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) or Department of Hawaiian Homelands (DHHL).

Beyond the shores of Hawaii, groups are under assault across the country, from immigrants forced into illegal camps reminiscent of Nazi concentration camps or the Japanese interment camps in the U.S. to a growing violence toward anyone non-white and/or non-American.

For any self-described “progressive,” these developments should enrage and terrify you.

What is a “Progressive” to Me?

What I think drives my progressive-ness more than anything else is a strong sense of fairness. I want to be clear here. Fairness in my mind is not the same as equality, or equality of access.

For example, our criminal justice system is built on the notion of “equal protection” under the law, but that does not mean the system is fair. There are any number of laws and mechanisms within our criminal justice system that are simply unfair. From mandatory minimums that disproportionately impact minority and poor populations, to the ability to hire an experienced attorney, the system is far from fair.

More broadly, the American notion of “pulling yourself up by your boot-straps” is also based on the idea of equal access, but not of fairness. Countless studies have shown us that it matters far less how smart or hard working you are. If your family has money you’re more likely to succeed than those who don’t.

Systems and policies built on fairness, rather than equality of access, are what I’m interested in. If you’re making $500 million a year, you should be required to pay a very high tax rate. Providing public schools (and public school teachers) with virtually unlimited funds to ensure our schools are providing children with anything and everything they need to succeed should be the standard. Not vouchers. And no tax breaks for those who send their kids to private schools (I’m not sure this is a thing now, but it certainly shouldn’t be).

Citizens United has guaranteed those with money have louder voices than those without. A political system driven by the notion that “money is speech” might be perceived to be equal, but it is by no reasonable standard fair. Progressives should support publicly funded elections, stringent reporting laws, and strict spending limits.

Ultimately for me fairness should be the standard applied and not “equal access.”

In terms of environmental justice, fairness might be harder to quantify. And as someone who is not very well versed in the wide range of environmental issues facing humanity, it is trickier for me to cobble together a definition that distinguishes “fairness” from “equality of access.”

In the broadest terms, I’d say it comes down to this: we all have one world. Environmental protections and regulatory mechanisms should, first and foremost, seek to protect our natural environment and the health and safety of humanity. Concerns about impacts on “industry” or economy should rank a distant second.

True Believers & Practical Progressives

Further, I breakdown “progressives” into two groups: True Believers and Practical Progressives.

The first group I call the “true believer progressives.” Young and old, “progressives” in this group are, as the name suggests, those who believe right is right and anything else than that is to compromise their principles. They occupy the high ground and may be inclined to toss overboard anyone who is willing to settle for less rather than get nothing at all.

For these folks, to accept anything less than a truly living wage, for example, rather than any increase to the Minimum Wage is to sell-out to moderates and corporatists. Or those who were unwilling to settle for Civil Unions rather than full Marriage Equality for same-sex couples. Pick any issue of importance facing our country (or the world) today and you’ll find the “true believers” occupying the far-left flank prepared to hurl barbs at those who are willing to compromise to move the needle even a little bit.

This brings me to the second group, which I would call “practical progressives.” I consider myself falling into this group. There was a time, when I was younger, that I was undeniably a “true believer.” But having worked in politics as either an activist or professional operative for more than a decade, I’ve developed an understanding that politics is as much about compromise as it is holding firm to your principles.

Should minimum wage workers who haven’t received a raise in years and years be forced to wait longer while we battle for a living wage? Or should we work to get the biggest raise we can and then keep fighting to push that wage up? Should we have waited for politicians to be “ready” for full Marriage Equality while families needed protections and benefits provided under a Civil Union legal structure?

While “practical progressives” and “true believers” may be, at times, at odds with each other, I believe a necessary partnership exists between these two groups. “True believers” give strength and sense of purpose to us “practical” folks. Conversely, “practical progressives” can lend legitimacy and forward momentum to positions coveted by the “true believers.” In either case, I believe one does not much succeed without the other.

While I hope this has been an interesting and educational read, I expect there will be some who are critical of my analysis and definitions as I’ve laid them out here. That’s ok. A conversation about what it means to be “progressive” could be a useful one.

Some Interesting Reading

While researching this post, I came across a number of interesting articles from various sources which I thought were worth sharing….

McCormack, Win. April 20, 2018. “Are You Progressive?” The New Republic. https://newrepublic.com/article/147825/progressive-vital-term-us-political-life-lost-significance

Wilentz, Sean. Spring 2018. “Fighting Words.” Democracy: A Journal of Ideas. https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/48/fighting-words/

Saval, Nikil. July 5, 2017. “Hated by the Right. Mocked by the Left. Who Wants to be ‘Liberal’ Anymore?” The New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/magazine/hated-by-the-right-mocked-by-the-left-who-wants-to-be-liberal-anymore.html

Wenar, Leif and Hong, Chong-Min. 1996. “On Republicanism and Liberalism.” The Harvard Review of Philosophy. http://www.harvardphilosophy.com/issues/1996/Sandel.pdf

Read more

All Politics is Local

Presidential Politics Wreaks Havoc

The 2020 election cycle is likely to be a dramatic one. Nationally, the GOP will fight to hold on to the White House, maintain their majority control of the U.S. Senate and generally try to stop the bleeding of support they’ve been experiencing since Trump was sworn in. On the other side of the aisle, Democrats, while trying to make gains across the country (not to mention the White House), are facing their own challenges.

Theirs, for better or worse, is mostly internal. Though the Party establishment is hell-bent on excising the orange baboon from the Oval Office, they are almost equally interested in maintaining the current economic and political power structures; those same structures and political dynamics that allowed Trump to defeat the DNC’s dynastic standard-bearer in 2016.

The loss was embarrassing for almost everyone involved: Democrats, Clinton, the GOP, mainstream new media, and voters. Only Trump believed in the inevitability of his assent to the Presidency.

Learning valuable lessons from both the Primary and General Elections, the DNC made changes to their structure and procedures in the Presidential Primary and the National Convention. I leave it to others to decide how dramatic said changes have actually been. And despite these changes, it would seem at least at a cursory glance, that neither the Democratic Party nor Primary voters have learned the lesson. Against Trump, you don’t bring the same tired moderate faces and talking points.

When Joe Biden officially announced his own bid for the Democratic Nomination, he jumped to the top of nearly every single poll that’s since been conducted. With far too many Democrats (in my opinion) trumpeting Biden as the only reasonable choice to defeat Trump, I fear we’re headed for a repeat of 2016.

The Local Scene

While much and increasing attention is being paid to calamitous national politics, we’ve got serious problems right here at home that need attention.

Our elected officials, from County Councils all the way up to the Governor, are not doing nearly enough to address Hawaii’s very serious issues. Climate change, sea level rise, public education, teacher shortages and low pay, highest national cost of living, highest per capita homeless population, stagnate wages, illegal vacation rentals, protection of natural resources. The list goes on and on. And on virtually all of them, our government officials continue to fail.

“Slow and incremental” should be the official motto of the Hawaii State Legislature. Sadly, while big and bold steps are necessary to address a myriad of issues, our Democratic-majority-controlled Legislature does little more than nibble around the edges. Unless, of course, a construction boondoggle or corporate powerhouse is under threat.

People are fed up. It’s long since time for a change and in Hawaii, we should expect progressives to lead the way.

Where to Focus Our Resources

History shows us that national elections, particularly the Presidential, draw a lot of attention, resources, and energy. And while I expect it will be the same between now and Election Day next year, I’m making a plea here for my progressive brothers and sisters not to ignore local elections this year.

Last year progressive individuals and organizations began an effort to work together to support good candidates who challenged entrenched establishment incumbents. And while we had some success, we’re looking to expand those efforts for the 2020 elections.

We intend to send a clear and unambiguous message to our elected officials. You’ve had plenty of opportunities to address the serious issues we face. Your time is up and we’re coming to replace you. Over the course of the next few months, challengers will begin to appear and the landscape of our efforts will begin coming into focus. During this time, it will be important that we begin collectively to build an army of volunteers and donors.

The Early Bird Gets the Worm

I encourage you to get involved in one or more of these local campaigns. Whether it’s with your money, your time, or both. Our effort to continue transforming the Legislature will not succeed without real and substantial commitments from progressives across the state.

I understand it’s a bit early and there isn’t much, if any, campaigning taking place at this stage. But that will change before too long. If you want to stay updated on what’s happening politically, please consider subscribing to my blog; you’ll receive regular updates via email about goings on with elections and more.

If you can, please also consider donating to the Initiative for a Pono Hawaii’s PAC. While we aren’t spending any money quite yet, it’s never too early to begin building a war chest. With your help, we can change the landscape of politics in Hawaii.

Read more

Take any article written by Allison Schaefers with a grain of salt.

While going about my day yesterday, I was contemplating what I should write about this week. With the legislative session receding in our rear view and election season still months away, I wasn’t sure what to do. Then the heavens opened and dropped in my lap this nonsense trying to pass itself off as journalism.

Is it a Paid Ad, or a News Article?

In yesterday’s issue of the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, there was an article entitled “Host uses short-term rental as path to homeownership”, by Allison Schaefers. Curious, I read the article to almost immediately see it for what it is; propaganda advertising meant to support a pro-short-term rental position. The piece tells the story of a woman who bought a house no one else wanted, fixed it up, and began renting it as a short-term rental in order to save enough to buy her own home.

From the outset, it’s clear the “reporter” stakes out a position in support of this illegal activity, but then we come to the fourth paragraph:

Rovito bought the four-bedroom, three-bath, 2,000-square-foot home in 2017 for $1.6 million and invested another $200,000 to make it livable. Then she began renting it on vacation rental sites for anywhere from $400 to $800 a night depending on demand. She also donates the use of the home to student groups and nonprofits with ties to Hawaii.

Did you catch the oddity? This seems to be directly in conflict with the title of the article; short-term rental as a path to homeownership? Umm… well, it would seem she already owns a home, one on which she spent $1.8 million. I know children who could spot this blatant contradiction, but either the intrepid “reporter” who drafted this is either incredibly dim, or she isn’t so much a news journalist, as she is an advertising copy-editor for Airbnb. I’ll let you decide, so let us move on.

It Would Seem Our Subject Has No Trouble Buying a Home

A friend of mine who similarly finds this kind of “reporting” offensive, took the time to dig a little deeper. He looked at the tax records for the property which show it’s owned by a trustee who used to work at Hawaii Pacific University.

My friend also found fault with the article’s claim that this self-starter has lived in Hawaii for 20 years. Proving social media can bite anyone in the ass, online searches seem to indicate she actually lives in Washington, D.C. In addition to being a lawyer, it appears she’s actually an owner of a short-term vacation rental business, with multiple properties in Honolulu, D.C., and Utah.

Because I know some people can be particularly nasty, I won’t post links to her social media here, but she’s named in the Star-Advertiser article. So if you’re inclined to take the time, you can find her on your own.

A Shining Example of the Ailing State of Journalism in Hawaii

Wanting to give our “reporter” the benefit of the doubt and an opportunity to correct her reporting, my friend sent an email to Allison Schaefers pointing out all these… inconsistencies. Flaws? Her response, it should go without saying, leaves more than a little to be desired:

Thanks for your feedback.
Although Brynn Rovito’s name is not on the property tax record, she is purchasing the home through a deal with the owner.
Allison

That’s it. Nothing about her vacation rental business, nor the fact that she might not even live here. Disappointing, to say the least, but it leads me to the only reasonable conclusion; she knew all this when she wrote her article and simply wasn’t interested in portraying her subject honestly.

With so few truly reliable local news sources in Hawaii, that this is what is considered journalism is shameful. We need to expect… no, demand more of our news outlets.

 

If you like reading my blog, consider subscribing to my email list. I promise to only send useful posts.

Read more

Teachers rally for more education funding.

It’s been a long couple of weeks. I sit here on this Thursday morning, sipping my coffee and contemplating the 2019 legislative session. On this last day of session, I thought it would be good if I shared some of my reflections with you.

It’s a bad-news, good-news situation. And while, in my humble opinion, the bad far outweighs the good, there are shiny spots and reasons for hope.

The Bad

On an almost unprecedented scale and in spectacular fashion, our elected officials failed. They failed to move the state forward on critical issues relating to climate change, public education, cost of living, homelessness, or affordable housing.

While childish quibbling and petty fighting is standard fare at the Legislature, our elected “leaders” out-did themselves. Ego-bruising and score-settling seemed to be the primary motivators this year. Well… except for outrageous efforts to further enrich the ruling elite.

House Bill 1586 was clearly a priority and appropriates $350 million for a new stadium on Oahu. But I’ll come back to this in a moment.

And as I’ve written about a couple of times (here and here), our elected officials were nearly united in their allegiance to their paymaster Alexander and Baldwin (A&B) to ensure it could continue to steal water at obscene rates and avoid a $62 million contract penalty payout. In the wake of the devastation left by the legislature’s insistence on House Bill 1326 House Draft 2 was nearly every bill tackling sea level rise climate change. So while they paid lip service to their commitment to tackling climate change and its impact in Hawaii, our leaders did little more than pose for photo ops and pat themselves on the back for their edge-nibbling efforts.

I’m also sad (though not really surprised) to say that in a legislature with a Democratic super-majority the Democratic Party of Hawaii’s legislative agenda landed with a deafening thud. Among the Party’s failed priorities was a desperately needed raise for minimum wage workers. Lacking any political will and deferring to business interests, House Bill 1191 died unceremoniously on the last day of conference. I also wrote about that effort….

Finally, in a spectacular display of guilt-tripping and arm twisting, the Senate approved a measure to tax illegal vacation rentals. Let me say that again.

The legislature approved a measure, Senate Bill 1292, which taxes illegal vacation rentals. It doesn’t stop them or in any way regulate them. It simply taxes them. So, in a shameless effort to add $42 million to the state coffers, the legislature ignored pleas from communities infected with short-term rentals and their effect on our affordable housing crisis. They ignored calls for support from county governments for help regulating them and simply grabbed $42 million.

When challenged, those Senators who supported the bill threatened funding for good stuff. Rather than list them here, I encourage you to take a look at the Civil Beat article that shines a light on their mean-spirited efforts. And nowhere, not once, was the new stadium’s $350 million mentioned as an option for closing the gap. We certainly wouldn’t want development interests to take a hit.

The Good

In a cup otherwise brimming with disappointment, there are some bright spots worthy of mention.

Bail reform and cannabis decriminalization both passed this year. Senate Bill 192 “authorizes the court to release a defendant in custody on unsecured bail.” Essentially, if you’re arrested you might be able to sign a promissory note committing you will show up for your court date, or owe the bail amount. This is a big step forward in broader criminal justice reform efforts. Bail reform was a priority for the Democratic Party of Hawaii and while it submitted testimony, I want to applaud and congratulate those who worked hard on this issue.

“Double-bucks” also passed this session. Senate Bill 390 provides “a dollar-for-dollar matching program for beneficiaries of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to purchase Hawaii-grown produce.” This is good for local farmers and good for those families who rely on SNAP for financial assistance.

And finally, the “water theft” bill (HB1326, mentioned above) appears to have gone the way of the Dodo, at least for now. Despite rumors to the contrary, no effort was made during yesterday’s session to revive this terrible and galling measure.

In a rarely seen herculean effort, environmental activists, community organizers, and progressive movement leaders came together to defeat the big bad A&B in a true David-vs-Goliath fashion. Working together to share facts, educate Senators, and push back against one of the most powerful corporations in Hawaii, this collection of individuals did what many thought would have been impossible.

I consider the role I played in this fight as a minor one. But I am proud to have been a part and help as I could. I am so impressed with the passion and commitment the advocates had for this issue. They. We’re. Tireless.

And they won the day.

So, What’s Next?

In a word, elections.

In two words, primary elections.

Sadly and frustratingly, too many of our elected officials have stopped representing the people. In service to their reelections, they chase corporate and development dollars leaving the rest of us to fend for ourselves. Far too often this means fleeing the state for cheaper and easier pastures.

The time has long since passed when we need to stand up and challenge those long-serving Democrats who have forgotten where their allegiances should lie.

Efforts are beginning to develop a strategy for the 2020 primaries. Identifying viable and hard-working candidates who share a vision of Hawaii for its working people, not for those in luxury high-rise ivory towers.

If you want a better Hawaii for you, your family, your children and all the under-represented in our island home, join me. Join us.

Donate to the Initiative for a Pono Hawaii PAC. There is no online donation system yet, but we hope soon to have that remedied. In the meantime, you can send checks to:

Initiative for a Pono Hawaii
P.O. Box 38182
Honolulu, HI 96837

And if you would like to receive updates from me on our collective efforts and other political updates, please subscribe to my email list. And share this widely with your friends and networks.

It’s time to take the fight to them.

Read more