The Current Debt Crisis--What a Statesman Would Do

I don’t claim to be an expert on the current debt ceiling debate raging in the beltway and now being felt around the world. It is not unlike a hurricane that is brewing off shore with the possibility that a last minute change may spell disaster or relief, depending on several factors, including the unpredictability of chaos. What I do know is that the debt storm brewing, unlike a real hurricane, was man made. It therefore can be unmade. If it had a beginning, it will have an end. One can argue all day about who created it, when it was created, how to change it, or it’s final impact. All those questions, although interesting, won’t change the fact that the winds are starting to pick up outside and those winds are just the precursor of what might be a great storm that devastates many.

The discussions of some in Congress with the weight of rhetoric and ideology are not methods or tools of change, they are the gravitational centers of a polemic mass. They are not helpful as tools of compromise, but are the flags of politicians looking for the votes of the populous or the chance to make a foe look bad regardless of consequence. Populism is great if it is educated. An educated populous should, however, embrace change and the notion that stress and crisis are necessary for growth. You can paint yourself into a corner very quickly with the brush of ideology. When you are drawing lines, you ought look at what’s behind you.

Good decisions are not made for the masses when extreme polarity is at play. This is especially true when the environment is ever changing. When trying to solve an issue, you need to have as many options available as possible so you are not limited lest you cause the brewing storm to cause more damage.

When 9/11 occurred it was unexpected. There were perhaps signs, but the manner and way it occurred was unexpected. It caused overwhelming pain and destruction. Families and individuals were ripped apart in ways that will never completely heal. It also initially caused financial upheaval. The turmoil was unplanned, unnecessary and unwanted by rational human beings. One of the goals of the terrorists who planned and carried out the plot was to hurt us at our financial center or core. They failed. The economy was strong enough to take the impact and a taller building is rising. Though that storm was unplanned, we survived and rebuilt.

Now, ten years later, a financial storm of perhaps greater proportion may soon befall us if elected men and women do not step forward as statesmen, put aside politics and forego the stale and corrupt immovability of polemic ideology. Is it not ironic that this storm is our own creation? No one else caused this but ourselves. We will be responsible for the damage. Did we not elect the officials that are making the decisions? We apparently like the reality we created. We elect and we watch. It’s like Rome in a coliseum. The problem is, however, we will be the ones that get hurt. We are both the gladiator and the slave.

The other fascinating point is that we have been here before. Debt as a percentage of GDP has been higher in the United States. World War II saw higher debt when compared with GDP. However, the stakes now feel higher. For over a 140 years the United States has been the world’s biggest economy and has made the rules for the rest of the world when it comes to commerce. The rest of the world knows this. China knows this. Maybe we are tired of being number one. Being number one has advantages but so does being number two. Perhaps it is less stressful. Perhaps we want to draft off others in the future as they have done. That debate will inevitably arise more focused as China’s economy gains momentum and influence, and possibly overtakes the US in about 20 years. For now, we have a storm to attend to in D.C.

What is needed are people brave enough to see the future as one of possibility and growth. The keys or tools to solve the problem are also the keys of opportunity. These tools to work solutions are relatively simple but it will take calm and self disciplined people to either change course or prepare for the impact. I hope they start soon if they have not already. It may even storm for a while so remaining calm is even more necessary.

Here are some ideas: Place the leaders of the various factions into small groups. Put opposites in the same room. Bring in facilitators, mediators or peacemakers if necessary. Allow these many smaller groups to handle just one of the issues each. Allow them to hear each others positions informally and to actively listen i.e. “What I hear you saying is you don’t want to have to pay for something unless you can afford it.” “What you want is for people to have a job at a company that is not over taxed so it can hire.” etc. These small groups will hopefully build new personal relationships. Let them come up with creative solutions. People are real when they are one on one. They are not when they are 60 vs 225 vs 210 vs 100.

Next idea: Sometimes you have to sacrifice to finish a deal. Sometimes you have to make concessions to make a deal work. It is not perfect, but at least it allows for there to be momentum. If one side gives a little then perhaps the other side will as well. What’s the alternative? Civil discord or perhaps worse. Politics is by it’s nature a short term project. It yields little long term gain. It is thunder without the rain. Statesmanship, on the other hand, is long term and forward thinking. It knows, for the good of others, tough decisions are made for the future. It does not seek to gain another majority in a few months or to create more argument to justify itself. A fool speaks without meaning. A statesman speaks with authenticity and heart. In the next election perhaps we ought to elect statesmen, not fools. One of our best thinkers, Benjamin Franklin, offered this advise to his fellow statesmen on compromise: Be willing to sacrifice, not your principals, but your overwhelming urge to be right. It’s a republic if we can keep it.

Trust, open options, future looking, and the ability to concede when necessary to continue are the keys to the dilemma we face. The deal will not be done by having separate press conferences or by signing a pledge. It’s “We the People.” Just because you can tie yourself up, should you? What if you need those hands because an unexpected fire starts and you need to pour water on it? The deal will be done by true gentlemen and gentlewomen of intellect and heart placed in small groups across small tables. They will needs their hands in order to shake the hands of each other when the deal is finally done.

By the way, I have a new website at: www.intermountainmediationcenter.com
where you can view additional information about what I currently do.

Time To Revisit COOL Or Is It Too Hot?

First adopted on the Senate floor in late 2001, mandatory Country of Origin labeling (COOL) was to be in place on September 30, 2004, but language in the FY2004 consolidated appropriations act (P.L. 108-199) delayed implementation for meats, produce and peanuts, but not seafood, for two years, until September 30, 2006. Debate over COOL carried into the 109th Congress, which (in USDA’s FY2006 appropriation, P.L. 109-97) postponed implementation for an additional two years — until September 30, 2008 (a provision in H.R. 2744). Other measures in the 109th Congress would have made COOL voluntary for meats (including H.R. 2068, S.1300, and S. 1333). Still others (e.g., S. 135, S. 1331) would have expanded COOL requirements and/or accelerated its current implementation date.

The contrasting intents of these bills reflected the continuing divergence of opinion among lawmakers over whether a federally-mandated labeling program is needed. Some contend that mandatory COOL will provide U.S. products with a competitive advantage over foreign products because U.S. consumers, if offered a clear choice, prefer fresh foods of domestic origin, thereby strengthening demand and prices for them. Moreover, proponents argue that U.S. consumers have a right to know the origin of their food, particularly at a time when U.S. food imports are increasing, and whenever particular health and safety problems arise. Supporters of the COOL law argue that it is unfair to exempt meats and produce from the longstanding country labeling already required of almost all other imported consumer products, from automobiles to most other foods. They also note that many foreign countries already impose their own country-of-origin labeling.

Opponents of mandatory COOL counter that studies do not provide evidence that consumers want such labeling. They believe COOL is a thinly disguised trade barrier intended to increase importers’ costs and to foster the unfounded perception that imports may be inherently less safe (or of lower quality) than U.S. products. Food safety problems can as likely originate in domestic supplies as in imports, as evidenced by the more than 30 recalls of U.S. meat and poultry products announced by USDA in 2006 alone, these opponents point out. Opponents argue that all food imports already must meet equivalent U.S. safety standards, which are enforced by U.S. officials at the border and overseas; scientific principles, not geography, must be the arbiter of safety. Industry implementation and record-keeping costs, estimated by USDA to be as high as $3.9 billion in the first year and $458 million per year after that, would far outweigh any economic benefits, critics add. (COOL proponents assert that these cost estimates were grossly exaggerated while some in industry claim they were too low).

In the all becoming too common current food illness crises, one should ask where are these tomatoes coming from? Why does it take so long for the FDA to figure out where they are coming from? Are there funds available? Wouldn't a quicker response to the origin of the crop save lives? Clearly, a label would help this process. In the meantime, farmers with good, clean crops suffer irreparable financial damage. Congress is now on year seven of this debate. I suspect BLT is off the menu at the congressional cafeteria.

Write Congress and Tell Them You Don't Care About Roger Clemens' Injections in His Backside!

How much did we as taxpayers pay today to watch Roger Clemens and his former physical therapist talk before a committee of Congress to discuss whether the PT injected him with steroids and human growth hormone? Based on my experience, it was well into the seven figures. Here's a thought: Why doesn't Congress focus on what "we the people" sent them to do? Enact legislation and pass bills that help the economy, build bridges, roads, dams, schools, healthcare, pollution, global warming, poverty, etc, etc, etc.

Here's something you can do: The FDA recently published a report on the need to partner with Congress to make the changes necessary to transform the safety of the nation's food supply. They call it the Food Safety Plan. The Plan recommends legislative changes to strengthen the FDA's ability to continue to protect Americans from foodborne illnesses. In part, the plan will:

Authorize FDA to Accredit Highly Qualified Third Parties for Voluntary Food Inspections.
Require New Reinspection Fee From Facilities That Fail to Meet current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs)
Authorize FDA to Require Electronic Import Certificates for Shipments of Designated High-Risk Products
Require New Food and Animal Feed Export Certification Fee to Improve the Ability of U.S. Firms to Export Their Products
Provide Parity Between Domestic and Imported Foods if FDA Inspection Access is Delayed, Limited, or Denied
RESPOND Rapidly to Minimize Harm.
Empower FDA to Issue a Mandatory Recall of Food Products When Voluntary Recalls Are Not Effective
Give FDA Enhanced Access to Food Records During Emergencies

See the full Plan here: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/advance/food.html

Although this Plan is by no means perfect, it does put focus on a too common problem in the United States--food poisoning. The CDC estimates that 76 million foodborne illness, or food poisoning, cases occur in the United States every year, which means that one in four Americans contract a foodborne illness annually after eating foods contaminated with such pathogens as E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella, Hepatitis A, Campylobacter, Shigella, Norovirus, and Listeria. Approximately 325,000 people are hospitalized with a diagnosis of food poisoning, and 5,000 die. The estimated costs in terms of medical expenses and lost wages or productivity are between $6.5 and $34.9 billion (Buzby and Roberts, 1997; Mead, et al., 1999).

Now ask yourself, why do "we the people" care about Roger Clemens and his injections? Write your member of Congress and tell them how you feel about it and, why you're at it, tell them you want a few things to change or you will vote them out. Then they will have plenty of time for America's favorite past-time--just make sure the hot dog is cooked and hot when you get it.