Kurt Schrader among 37 House Democrats Voting with the GOP to Poison Your Water

More shameful nonsense from a former Oregonian who has gone native in DC,
Land of Lobbyists Lavishing Lucre on Lacklusters Like Him.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/28/1317419/-Which-37-House-Democrats-Voted-with-the-GOP-to-Poison-Your-Water?detail=email#


"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

Mark your Calendar for Sept. 23, Loucks Auditorium: "On Paper Wings"

On Paper Wings ~ documentary screening

Tuesday, September 23, 7:00 pm       
SALEM PUBLIC LIBRARY LOUCKS AUDITORIUM
FREE: Sponsored by the Salem Public Library Foundation. 

On Paper Wings is the story of four Japanese women who worked on World War II balloon bombs, the civilians affected on the Oregon coast, and the project to fold a thousand paper cranes as an act of reconciliation between the women who made the balloon bomb paper and the loved ones of the family killed that day.

Ilana Sol is a filmmaker and archival researcher living in Portland, Oregon.  When her hobby of historical research led her to find out about the Japanese balloon bombs, she soon found herself spending hundreds of hours researching these bizarre weapons, and traveling thousands of miles to meet with those affected by them.

The group of Japanese women visit Bly, Oregon in 1996.

On Paper Wings ~ documentary screening

More on downtown parking: constructive feedback beats punitive fines

The problems with meter-paid parking adopted in isolation deserve a much longer look, which requires more time which is, alas, fleeting.

But we can say one thing for sure off the top:

Regardless of how parking overstays are identified and sanctions administered, the parking ticket is a terrible, destructive, counterproductive thing.

Parking tickets are uniquely terrible because they are negative random sanction applied only AFTER the undesired behavior and they have the net effect of giving the downtown visitor -- the people we spend lots of time and money to lure downtown -- a smelly turd with which to commemorate their visit.

Because they're a punitive sanction, they implicate due process rights, which means they're inflexible -- the person who overstays because their counselor made a real breakthrough and spent extra time with them gets the same parking ticket as the person who just ignored the whole limited time thing. The person who overstays because getting measured and fitted for a suit took longer than expected gets the same ticket as the kid who just got distracted by the other kids at the park.

Further, if there is a "victim" in people parking too long downtown, the victims are the downtown businesses who want customers, not the city. But who gets the fine today? The city.

Sanctions are most effective when the victim of the violation gets some restitution for the harm they felt, not when a distant third party gets paid. With parking tickets, a third party, the city, gets the restitution (the fine). People see this as creating a financial incentive to issue tickets. Which has a grain of truth, because parking enforcement is crazy expensive -- a costly force of municipal employees whose job it is to go around and drop smelly turds on the windshields of the people who might just be the very people we've been trying to bring downtown for ages.

In a two-party relationship -- a married couple, or customers and businesses -- there is a feedback loop in which each side "negotiates" with the other by adjusting their behavior to accommodate their differing preferences optimally.

We know that drivers want, among other things, infinite free parking, all located right in front of wherever they want to be that instant; businesses want to be located in a busy downtown that attracts customers, which necessarily means limited parking availability. They eventually reach equilibrium, with both parties trying to optimize the relationship so that each one gets as much as possible of what they want while the relationship continues.

But when you add an inflexible third party -- the city -- into the relationship, it works terribly in terms of allowing for flexibility and feedback. By its nature, legal/judicial punishment systems can't be very flexible -- unless people are generally treated the same, it makes people furious and litigious. People faced with this system opt out, because the third party won't make any accommodations to their various needs and preferences. In the context of downtown, opt out is exactly what we don't want folks to do.

So it's a pretty horrible system all around. It pisses off and frustrates the people you are trying to attract. Its administered by bureaucratic fiat that then requires a very expensive quasi-police system to enforce, backed up by an even more expensive legal/judicial bureaucracy. And the net effect harms the businesses who we're supposedly helping.

There's a lot more to say, but in the meantime, if parking time limits are going to be used in just downtown, at least try to limit the damage by addressing these issues. How?

Easy: adjust the "parking ticket" so that most parking tickets that most people get are mainly feedback (more instructive) and only a very, very mild sanction (less punitive). And you do that by, as much as possible, getting the city out of the picture in most cases.

How?

Again, simple: make the downtown parking ticket a into a gentle reminder that produces more of what everyone wants: people doing business downtown. You do that by setting up a system where the first few parking tickets a person gets can either be paid (as now) OR be forgiven if the driver does what we want: spends money with downtown businesses.

Under this system, imagine you get a $15 parking ticket. instead of being furious or stressed (and for a lot of working folks, a $15 unplanned fine is a huge stressor), you see on the envelope a list of all the downtown businesses in the "Welcome Downtown" district and you notice that if you spend $100 with any of the businesses on that list in the next 7 days, you can staple the receipts to the ticket and turn it in at any of the businesses and it is forgiven.

It's still a sanction -- but it's a pretty mild one, and it can leave both the driver and downtown businesses better off directly. The driver gets a gentle reminder rather than a slap in the face, and businesses enjoy the prospect of customers looking to spend enough money on goods and services downtown to get the ticket forgiven.

There are other layers to address for repeat offenders, etc. but the general idea is so much better than what we do now (and what has helped empty other downtowns) that it would be really nice if the various downtown factions could unite around the idea of designing a less punitive, less bureaucratic, more positive system for regulating downtown parking.

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

Even the Washington Post gets it -- why not Salem City Council?

The Washington Post has long since stopped deserving to live off the acclaim earned during  Watergate. It is now a fount of clichéd, conventional wisdom, always happy to be calling for more bombing of the wogs in some distant land, pro-corporate in its bones, and greatly corrupted by its close ties to the Pentagon and the rarely intelligent Intelligence hydra of three-letter agencies.

And yet, even the Post gets that if we don't arrest our headlong rush into climate chaos, it's game over for civilized humanity -- and with that goes freedom and democracy.  Neither of which are going to have much of a chance once the bodies of people really start piling up from disasters caused by a destabilized climate.  We are already seeing entire families of other species at the base of the food web being wiped out or threatened with extinction.  And History shows that, when the hairless ape tribes feel existential threats, out goes the veneer of civilization and the rule of law, and in comes the rule of force.  

If you want a preview of what life under climate chaos will be like in the former USA, just think about the worst parts of Africa since colonialism-- a constant parade of murderous thugs fighting over spoils in a general environment of suffering and viciousness.

Yet our so-called city leaders -- the folks on the Salem City Council -- refuse to even acknowledge the problem or put Salem on the list with thousands of other cities . . . and EVERY OTHER CITY OF ANY SIZE IN OREGON . . . to commit themselves to taking action to reverse the terrifying trend that leads to a very different, much less hospitable planetary ecosystem. 

On Sunday, September 21, citizens from all over the world will demonstrate in New York City to demand that global leaders respond to the threat. 

And there will be a local action too, at the Eco-Ball at Riverfront Park, there will be a Rally for Climate Justice for the Future, a call for the Salem City Council to wake up to their moral duty to help preserve a livable climate for all future generations, starting with the children of today.  

Stay tuned for more details.

----
A climate for change: A solution conservatives could accept
http://read.feedly.com/html?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fopinions%2Fa-climate-for-change-a-solution-conservatives-could-accept%2F2014%2F08%2F27%2F782cba4e-2a01-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html%3Fwprss%3Drss_homepage&theme=white&size=medium
----
Shared via my feedly reader

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

WORD: Cops who lie, the erosion of trust, and despair

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/26/1324819/-Cops-who-lie-the-erosion-of-trust-and-despair?detail=email


"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

Sound the General Alarm: Latest ice loss data

If you have kids or grand kids -- indeed, basically, if you give a damn about anyone but yourself -- this should terrify you and galvanize you into demanding a serious response to the impending climate chaos on the same scale as the threat, which makes all others seem trivial.

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/24/incredible-polar-ice-loss-cryosat-antarctica-greenland
>
> Doubling time for ice loss rate on the order of 3-5 years?! No wonder I recently heard of a climate change expert saying his biggest worry was not methane burps, but gulf stream conveyor belt slowdown/stoppage.

Of the few competitive races for Oregon State House, this one takes the cake for showing what a terribly screwed up election system we have, where gerrymandering can make the lightest lightweight of the favored party a real threat to beat a far more accomplished and far worthier candidate.

 If, like me, you live in one of the many districts in Oregon that are completely uncompetitive thanks to the nature of single member districts and gerrymandering, please support Paul Evans for House District 20.  

Paul faces an uphill battle registration-wise, but he is such a superior candidate that this is a very winnable race. Except for the partisan label, his opponent wouldn't even be able to credibly run against Paul on accomplishments; but, as it is, she has a built-in base that threatens to allow her to win this seat that is an open seat for the first time in a long time.

Even though this is not my district, I gave big (as micro donors go) to help elect Paul Evans, and I hope you will too.

All Oregon will all be better off for it.

Paul Evans for House District 20 Dear John -- With your help, we've been able to overcome many challenges; however, the closer we get to Election Day, the more hurdles we face. The race for our district is one of the most competitive races in Oregon this year. We need your help, now more than ever. There's a lot at stake this election, John - can I count on you to chip in $10? All my best, Paul Evans http://www.paulevans.org/ Announcements On Saturday we had over 35 individuals, including Representative Rob Nosse from Portland, join us for door-knocking in Salem. In total, we were able to knock on over 700 doors - wow! Help us continue building momentum for this grassroots movement by signing up to volunteer! In addition, Stand for Children, the National Association of Social Workers, and the End Violence Against Women PAC have recently chosen to endorse my campaign and join 25 others who have done the same! I also completed the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge! You can watch the video here! Upcoming Events September 17: Mental Heath Forum September 22: Legislative Hot Topics Forum with Sherry Stock and Co. October 6: Working Women's Issues Forum In the News Letter: Paul Evans an Ideal Candidate for House District 20 Letter: Candidate Paul Evans is a champion for women's rights Paul Evans for House District 20 · United States You can also keep up with Paul Evans on Twitter or Facebook. Created with NationBuilder, the essential toolkit for leaders.

WHITE DEATH: Robert Lustig: the man who believes sugar is poison

Meanwhile, how much sugar being peddled to kids in S-K Schools?

See also the new movie FED UP.  

Another important feature seen in Salem thanks to Salem Progressive Film Series.

http://fedupmovie.com/#/page/home

Robert Lustig: the man who believes sugar is poison | Life and style | The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/24/robert-lustig-sugar-poison
----
Shared via my feedly reader

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

The end of brick and mortar retail?

The parking meters in downtown question MUST NOT be addressed in isolation from other forces at work in Salem.

For example, take Salem's new-ish Peak Sports on State St., a terrific addition to downtown and to Salem. Peak's lease rate, like all rents downtown, was negotiated and set without meter paid parking on the horizon. Add metered parking to the mix while the rents stay fixed under the leases and you have a great recipe for even more empty storefronts in Salem, which is already precariously close to tipping into a vicious cycle of decline.

Peak now faces REI in the hideous sprawl plex called Keizer Station, in an environment where all retail stores, including both Peak and REI, are struggling to adapt to the cut-throat competition of Amazon. Amazon's whole business model is exploiting the tax advantage it gains by not paying any, while it enjoys the use of the roads everywhere but pays nothing to maintain them.

Now add parking meters in downtown Salem only to that equation.

In a dynamic environment characterized by intense competition, very small factors that make one business less fit relative to competitors can have outsized consequences because our economic system is increasingly winner-take-all.

http://jonathanturley.org/2014/08/24/the-end-of-brick-and-mortar-retail/

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."

DRAFT-- some tentative thoughts on parking meters and transport in Salem generally

I have been working sporadically for many months to come up with an approach to dealing with the nasty, sniping fight that has flared up over parking on Salem. I  wanted to have a more polished presentation ready before unveiling it but like all good intentions . . . Overtaken by events.

Anyway, here's a first draft of thoughts, dictated (so excuse typos), definitely subject to revision:

Q: why do you oppose parking meters in downtown Salem?

A: several reasons.

First, parking meters or a permanent and costly solution to a temporary problem, which will likely solve itself as continued high gas prices and increasing unaffordability of driving makes alternative approaches better equipped to succeed, without the nasty investment and then perpetual payback for meter infrastructure and upkeep.

Second, and this is related, is that solving the systemic problem in only one area simply disadvantages that area relative to the rest.

Third, there is the equity problem. In a city without a functioning transit system, There is a real equity problem in imposing parking meters that are not tied to ability to pay. The poor already spend a hugely disproportionate share of their income by having to have a car. Allowing free parking ramps, but making prime parking spaces on the street available for a price, continues the privatization of the public space, where those with wealth get to purchase the best of the public has provided for everyone and those without resources or shunted further and further away out of sight.

This is not to say that pricing is not a solution Salems parking problems. Only that it is important that the system must be treated first as the system and not as unrelated isolated problem. Parking is only a small part of the system problem.

Q: okay, then what is the solution?

A: I think the most productive path to a suite of positive approaches – what I am carefully trying not to call the solution — is to recognize that the paved roadway system is a network utility, like the electricity, Internet, telephones, water, natural gas, and sewer.

As many people have noted, the way we pay for transportation – the burden we place on the public system, and the imposition we inflict on those around us by our use of the network – is terribly illogically priced. 

Gasoline is probably the only logically priced part of the system, because gasoline is strictly priced according to use, and use roughly correlates with the weight of the vehicle, which is a proxy for the damage that the vehicle does to the public roadways. This is changing somewhat with the advent of electric and hybrid cars, but for all the publicity they get, they are still a trivial share of the driving we do, and so they do not change the fundamental reality that fuel is the only part of our transportation system that is logically priced according to use.

Q: so how does thinking of the transportation system, or the roadway system, as a network utility help anything?

A: the great thing about thinking of the roadway system as a network utility is that it immediately offers a wealth of alternative and experience from other systems about how other networks manage to sort out conflicting priorities and how to allocate the resource most efficiently and how those network managers deal with equity considerations within a larger price structure that allocate the resources according to ability to pay.

Q: such as?

A: consider how we are now dealing with storm water runoff, which is related to our sewage treatment costs. We used to hit everybody with basic sewer charges and that gigantic house with lots of concrete and impermeable surface pay the same for water stormwater runoff processing contribution as a tiny house with nothing but trees on the lot. Now we've gone to recognizing that different development patterns place different burdens on the stormwater runoff system. Each lot is considered individually, and they are charged a different assessment based on their fraction of impermeable surface – the surface that causes stormwater runoff.

The burdens on the roadway system can be assessed individually easily as well. Every business and residence in Salem places a call on the common resource – the roadway system. But the grandmother who long since stopped driving puts a very low call on the system compared to the busy house with 3 teens and two adults each of whom have a car or truck of their own. Essentially, grannies call on the system is the ability of emergency vehicles to reach her home when necessary. 

By placing the use of emergency vehicles into the general fund, and making public agencies pay for the transportation – whoever is the use of alternative one possible – it's possible to charge ready for her access to the service but she never uses in the same way that we all pay insurance quotes that we never use the insurance.

Q: what are you talking about?

A: i'm talking about paying for roads through a series of charges that are assessed on each address in on each vehicle in order to pay for a complete, functioning transit and roadway system. In other words, we reduce everybody's taxes by cutting their taxes , that is, taking off of their tax bills all the money currently being spent on transit and roadways. And then we change to fund those public goods -- those network services --  through a series of charges that are based on individual assessments rather than on property values.

The individual assessments are quantifiable, objective, fair, charges for the burden that each person at each address places on the network services — transit and roadways.

For residences, the charges start with each vehicle that is registered at each residence. The size and weight of the vehicle is the first consideration. That's pretty elementary, and pretty easy to do. You end up with a table that everyone can consider when shopping for a vehicle, and it really makes the decision to purchase a second vehicle or the first vehicle a big step up in fees— Which is another way to reward people for only having one vehicle or avoiding additional vehicles, and especially big reward for those who have no vehicles and who plays little or no demand on the roadway system through usage.

The second component of the roadway network utility charge for residents this has to do with accessability. Here, there is a reward for people who live in compact spacing and who will provide the density needed for efficient delivery of goods and services and support for transit. People who live in transit third areas will pay more on their network utility charge because of having access to transit. But they will pay less proportionately because of the density factors the excess ability of their home is hard and so many others will share the charges with them.

Contrary to that, is the people living in low-density suburban sprawl, the winding streets and cul-de-sacs that characterize places like West Salem. These are fantastically expensive places to serve with public services, and impossible to serve with transit. With a few residence per network mile, the charges for people living in those places will be much higher per capita. This is offset somewhat by the fact that those places tend to be much more affluent anyway. But, it's not about taxing based on income, but rather charging based on the costs that they impose on the system. Sprawl is simply so inefficient that it's impossible to serve inexpensively, and it has a lot to do with why Salem's budget is so broken.

But density is not the only factor. The location within the network is another factor for each residence. A high density unit on the edge of the city will pay more for the network utility charge than the same high density unit would pay in a more central location. Each address would have a computed accessibility score, which factors in the number of approaches – the number of nodes through which you can reach the point of analysis without duplicating the path — and in this analysis, the centralized network place is better than the place on the branch, because of the first number of paths to the same point suggest that the pressure will be distributed evenly around the residence, rather than building up pressure to expand the arteries on the network.

Thus, the person who lives in a transit served, dense area will pay little or nothing for the network utility charge directly if they choose not to have a car because they place little or no direct demand on the system. Conversely, if they choose not to have a car, but demand that services be delivered to them through a car or a truck, they will pay (through the price of the goods and services delivered to them) the prices that those service providers will pay in paying the network utility charge.

Q: how does billing work?

A: same as water and sewer bills now, only more predictable and efficient.

"Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay."