Texas Democratic state rep candidate Byran Boyko is big fan of PR / and gets into why he backs RCV as part of the case for RCV

http://www.boykotx.org/great-as-the-enemy-of-good/

Great as the "enemy" of good?

I wanted to address something quickly to Clay Shentrup and William Waugh on Twitter, specifically, who said that "FairVote errs in failing to promote Approval Voting for U.S. Presidency, U.S. Senate, and State Governorships"

I said (being limited to 140 characters and all) that all systems have pros and cons.

Clay Shentrup then posted that "I'd be curious to hear what you think the cons are." and linked me to this page: ScoreVoting.net/BayRegsFig.html - a link at "The Center for Range Voting."

Clay, William: You're not wrong.

Approval voting, Range voting, and other voting systems produce better, more accurate results.  I would have no problem if we voted using Range or Approval voting for elections where there can only be one winner – executive elections, like the Governorship or the Presidency.

But none of the voting methods analyzed on the ScoreVoting.net site have any sort ofproportional representation component.

This is the key.

We have to go back and look at why electoral reform is necessary.  To tell the truth, range and approval voting systems are mathematically superior to other systems.  And you're right – range voting is the best of all single-winner election methods.

But the problem is that range voting only produces a single winner. No matter who wins in Range Voting, there's going to be a significant number of people who feel they aren't represented at all.

You suggest that range voting would end two-party domination, but let's be honest, the vast majority of people in America are either center-left or center-right.  In order for a third-party to be elected in any sort of single-winner system, they'd at least need to be approved by 51% of the population (even if they were not approved as a first choice.)  That's just not going to happen, in just about any district in America.

Range voting does allow you to vote for a Libertarian or Green candidate, give them your full support, without hurting your "second choice."  It eliminates the spoiler effect.  But it still doesn't make third parties viable.  Third parties will still be unrepresented or at best, underrepresented in legislative elections. Indeed, I doubt that the actual results of any range-voting election would be any different from the results you would have gotten under plurality.

Quite simply, proportional representation systems address several things that range voting doesn't.

• Proportional representation systems allow for significant ideological minorities – Libertarians, Greens, etc. to be represented in proportion to their actual support among the populace.  
• Proportional representation systems provide viable alternatives to the two major parties which allows voters to better hold politicians accountable.
• Proportional representation systems tend to produce better representation of socioeconomic minorities and women. (We can see this in Australia, which uses single-winner for the House, and proportional representation for the Senate. The Australian House is 25% women, the Australian Senate is 40% women, and yet, these are the same voters.)
• Proportional representation systems eliminate (or at least, greatly diminish) the impact of gerrymandering.  Voters get to choose their representatives – not the other way around, which is what we have now.

At the core of everything I'm working for, the main thing I am trying to do is to empower voters.Quite frankly, I think proportional representation systems do the most to empower voters, compared to any single-winner system.

But you're arguing that FairVote, by throwing it's support to IRV instead of Range Voting, is not endorsing the best system for single-winner elections that must be single-winner by definition – Presidency and Gubernatorial elections.

I think FairVote is actually being extremely clever to support IRV instead of Range Voting, and here's my reasoning:

Changing electoral systems is possible, but difficult.  Only one country in the world has ever changed electoral systems without significant upheaval (war or crisis) prompting the change.  That country is New Zealand.  They moved from plurality to MMP.

So, if we do manage to change the electoral system, we might get one shot to do so within our lifetimes.

FairVote is pushing for Single Transferable Vote in the United States for legislative elections.  It's the system I support, and the one I think has the best shot of America adopting. It provides proportional results without using party lists. People still vote for a name.  Voting is simple (you rank candidates first, second, third, and so on) and easily understood.

What's interesting, however, is that a Single Transferable Vote ballot looks more or less identical to an Instant Runoff Voting ballot to the voter.  Both rank candidates in order of preference.  Both are "choice voting" systems.

IRV may not be the best system for single-winner executive elections, but in all likelihood, STV is the best system for legislative elections. Because of the ballot similarity, pushing for STV and IRV at the same time is a much more achievable option.

All systems have pros and cons, as I said.  The cons for range voting, for me, is that it won't produce proportional results in our legislature, something we desperately need.  And we're likely only going to have one shot at electoral reform.

Now, if we already had some form of proportional representation for our legislature, then I'd say the move to range voting would be a priority for our executive, single-winner, elections.  But we don't.  And that's the bigger problem.

Instant Runoff Voting isn't perfect.  But it's good enough for the single-winner election systems.  And in this case, knocking FairVote for supporting IRV instead of range voting is a case of "great being the enemy of good."  The problem is, compared to any proportional representation system, range voting doesn't even rank.  FairVote is supporting IRV because it is seen as a compliment to STV – to proportional representation. 

To me, that just makes sense..

__,_._,___

Rare pictures

Friend of mine sent these rare pictures of this albino hummer.  Isn't that a gorgeous bird.

Fifteen-year-old photographer Marlin Shank was fortunate enough to capture several images of a rare albino ruby-throated hummingbird while in a park in Staunton, VA.

 

Very high quality photographs for such a fleeting subject...

 

Pass this on so others may enjoy this rare and beautiful sight!

November Best Bet - "A Fierce Green Fire" - Salem Progressive Film Series, Nov. 14 7 p.m.

Thursday, November 14, 2013   7 p.m.   Grand Theatre

A FIERCE GREEN FIRE: The Battle for a Living Planet is the first big-picture exploration of the environmental movement – grassroots and global activism spanning fifty years from conservation to climate change. 

Directed and written by Mark Kitchell, Academy Award-nominated director of Berkeley in the Sixties, and narrated by Robert Redford, Ashley Judd, Van Jones, Isabel Allende and Meryl Streep, the film premiered at Sundance Film Festival 2012, has won acclaim at festivals around the world, and in 2013 begins theatrical release as well as educational distribution and use by environmental groups and grassroots activists.

Inspired by the book of the same name by Philip Shabecoff and informed by advisors like Edward O. Wilson, A FIERCE GREEN FIRE chronicles the largest movement of the 20th century and one of the keys to the 21st. It brings together all the major parts of environmentalism and connects them. It focuses on activism, people fighting to save their homes, their lives, the future – and succeeding against all odds.
The film unfolds in five acts, each with a central story and character:

1. David Brower and the Sierra Club’s battle to halt dams in the Grand Canyon
   
2. Lois Gibbs and Love Canal residents’ struggle against 20,000 tons of toxic chemicals
   
3. Paul Watson and Greenpeace’s campaigns to save whales and baby harp seals
   
4. Chico Mendes and Brazilian rubbertappers’ fight to save the Amazon rainforest
   
5. Bill McKibben and the 25-year effort to address the impossible issue – climate change

Surrounding these main stories are strands like environmental justice, going back to the land, and movements of the global south such as Chipko in India and Wangari Maathai in Kenya. Vivid archival film brings it all back and insightful interviews shed light on the events and what they mean. The film offers a deeper view of environmentalism as civilizational change, bringing our industrial society into sustainable balance with nature.
• Website

Speakers
	Mark Kitchell | Producer, Writer, Director Mark Kitchell is best known for Berkeley in the Sixties, which won the Sundance Audience Award in 1990, was nominated for an Academy Award, and won other top honors. It has become a well-loved classic, one of the defining documentaries about the protest movements of the 1960s. Kitchell went to NYU film school, where he made The Godfather Comes to Sixth St., a cinema verite look at his neighbors caught up in filming The Godfather II - for which he received another (student) Academy Award nomination.
	Laura Stevens | Organizing Representative for the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign Laura Stevens, Organizing Representative for the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign in Oregon and Southwest Washington, works with concerned citizens to stop coal export projects and towards a coal-free northwest. Laura, a native Oregonian, obtained her B.A. from DePauw University, and has spent the past six years organizing for a number of environmental, human rights, and labor groups. After Laura launched and led the Sierra Club Campuses Beyond Coal campaign at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, UNC made a commitment to move their on- campus coal-fired power plant off of mountain-top removal mined coal immediately, and set a date to move the plant off of coal entirely. For more information on how you can help stop coal exports in Oregon, contact Laura at laura.stevens@sierraclub.org or visit www.coalfreeoregon.org.

Weird calendar, but many great offerings anyway

One of the saddest things in Salem is that we have shrinking, underfunded library services, with far too few hours, and no service at all on Mondays.  Which is reflected on the calendar below.

Still, the library does great things with the scant resources they're given, many of which show up on this calendar.  Just be sure not to overlook the bizarre, Monday-less calendar and go on the wrong day.

Of special note in the upcoming weeks:

THURSDAY, NOV 7. - 
Ursula K. Le Guin @ Hudson Hall on the Willamette U. campus  This is a special benefit put on by the Salem Public Library Foundation, bringing one of the best writers in America (and native Oregonian) to Salem.

WEDNESDAY, NOV 13 -

7:00 pm – 8:30 pm
Salem Public Library’s Loucks Hall

Lecture Series
Cascade Summer:  Following the Ghost of John Waldo on Oregon’s Pacific Crest Trail with Bob Welch

Learn about Oregonians helped lead efforts to preserve the natural wonder in Oregon, despite being much less wealthy than we are today.

FRIDAY, NOV 15 (weirdly mis-classified and hidden away as a children's event):

Family Festival of the ArtsCelloBop with Gideon Freudmann
7:00 pm  - Loucks Auditorium

Gideon plays the Electric Cello and moves effortlessly from one style to another: folk, rock, classical, and funny songs. Everyone in the family will be asking for more! Doors will open at 6:45 p.m. and seating will be on a first-come, first-seated basis.  All shows are free and open to the public thanks to the support of the Friends of the Salem Public Library. 

Friends of Library Book Sale rescheduled to Nov. 7-10

Friends of the Salem Public Library has rescheduled its Monster Book Sale to Nov. 7-10 at the Cherry City Shopping Center, 4655 Commercial St. SE.

The sale had been planned for Oct. 17-20, but it was postponed when a last-minute problem arose with the contract for the space.

The sale has been held for many years in the library's Anderson rooms. However, the library purged about 15,000 little-used books this summer to free up space. Those books, plus the usual donations to the sale, meant that the Friends group needed a far larger site for the sale.

Friends of the Library members can shop from 4 to 8:30 p.m. Nov. 7 (new members can sign up at the door). 

Public sale hours are 10 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Nov. 8 and 9, and noon to 5 p.m. Nov. 10.

Paperbacks cost 75 cents; hardbacks, $1.25; rare and collectible books sell for marked prices. On Sunday, a bag of books sells for $4.

Information: salemfriends.org

Rescheduled Friends of Salem Public Library Monster Book Sale

Click for Map

The Friends of Salem Public Library 

Monster Book Sale

 Has been rescheduled, and will now take place:

• Thursday, November 7 (Members Only)
  4:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
  Memberships offered at the door

• Friday, November 8
  10:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. 

• Saturday, November 9
  10:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
• Sunday, November 10
  12:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
  ($4 per bag day)

Sale will be held at:

4655 SE Commercial Street (next to Big 5)

A huge selection of materials, including rare and collectible books will be available.  And parking is free!

Nick Kristof on the early intervention opportunity

Congress is often compared to pre-K, which seems defamatory of small children. But the similarities also offer hope, because an initiative that should be on the top of the national agenda has less to do with the sequester than with the A.B.C.'s and Big Bird.

Growing mountains of research suggest that the best way to address American economic inequality, poverty and crime is — you guessed it! — early education programs, including coaching of parents who want help. It's not a magic wand, but it's the best tool we have to break cycles of poverty.

President Obama called in his State of the Union address for such a national initiative, but it hasn't gained traction. Obama himself hasn't campaigned enough for it, yet there's still a reed of hope.

One reason is that this is one of those rare initiatives that polls well across the spectrum, with support from 84 percent of Democrats and 60 percent of Republicans in a recent national survey. And even if the program stalls in Washington, states and localities are moving ahead — from San Antonio to Michigan. Colorado voters will decide next month on a much-watched ballot measure to bolster education spending, including in preschool, and a ballot measure in Memphis would expand preschool as well.

"There's this magical opportunity" now to get a national early education program in America, Education Secretary Arne Duncan told me. He says he's optimistic that members of Congress will introduce a bipartisan bill for such a plan this year.

"When you think how you make change for the next 30 years, this is arguably at the top of my list," Duncan said. "It can literally transform the life chances of children, and strengthen families in important ways."

Whether it happens through Congressional action or is locally led, this may be the best chance America has had to broaden early programs since 1971, when Congress approved such a program but President Nixon vetoed it.

The massive evidence base for early education grew a bit more with a major new study from Stanford University noting that achievement gaps begin as early as 18 months. Then at 2 years old, there's a six-month achievement gap. By age 5, it can be a two-year gap. Poor kids start so far behind when school begins that they never catch up — especially because they regress each summer.

One problem is straightforward. Poorer kids are more likely to have a single teenage mom who is stressed out, who was herself raised in an authoritarian style that she mimics, and who, as a result, doesn't chatter much with the child.

Yet help these parents, and they do much better. Some of the most astonishing research in poverty-fighting methods comes from the success of programs to coach at-risk parents — and these, too, are part of Obama's early education program. "Early education" doesn't just mean prekindergarten for 4-year-olds, but embraces a plan covering ages 0 to 5.

The earliest interventions, and maybe the most important, are home visitation programs like Nurse-Family Partnership. It begins working with at-risk moms during pregnancy, with a nurse making regular visits to offer basic support and guidance: don't drink or smoke while pregnant; don't take heroin or cocaine. After birth, the coach offers help with managing stress, breast-feeding and diapers, while encouraging chatting to the child and reading aloud.

These interventions are cheap and end at age 2. Yet, in randomized controlled trials, the gold standard of evaluation, there was a 59 percent reduction in child arrests at age 15 among those who had gone through the program.

Something similar happens with good pre-K programs. Critics have noted that with programs like Head Start, there are early educational gains that then fade by second or third grade. That's true, and that's disappointing.

Yet, in recent years, long-term follow-ups have shown that while the educational advantages of Head Start might fade, there are "life skill" gains that don't. A rigorous study by David Deming of Harvard, for example, found that Head Start graduates were less likely to repeat grades or be diagnosed with a learning disability, and more likely to graduate from high school and attend college.

Look, we'll have to confront the pathologies of poverty at some point. We can deal with them cheaply at the front end, in infancy. Or we can wait and jail a troubled adolescent at the tail end. To some extent, we face a choice between investing in preschools or in prisons.

We just might have a rare chance in the next couple of months to take steps toward such a landmark early education program in America. But children can't vote, and they have no highly paid lobbyists — so it'll happen only if we the public speak up.

STOP THE FAST TRACK TO CURRENCY MANIPULATION: National TPP Team Conference Call Sunday!

From: "Elizabeth Warren, Congress: Dont renew fast track authority Campaign" <noreply@list.moveon.org>
Date: October 26, 2013 at 6:56:14 PM PDT
Subject: STOP THE FAST TRACK TO CURRENCY MANIPULATION: National TPP Team Conference Call Sunday!
Reply-To: "Elizabeth Warren, Congress: Dont renew fast track authority Campaign" <lizwarrenmail@earthlink.net>

The world is buzzing now with trade talk - from D.C. to the Pacific Rim - and the pressure is mounting for Congress to grant the president fast track authority for the TPP. Be sure to join us this week and catch up on what's happening - and what you can do! Our National TPP Team Conference call is tomorrow, Sunday, October 27, at 4:30 p.m. Pacific, 7:30 Eastern.
 
AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS: Following activist updates from coalition partners and reports from organizers in the field, we'll fill everybody in on the status of mobilization plans currently in the works for a rapid response day of action in the event a Fast Track Vote is announced. (This would be a coalition event, with a number of organizations participating for maximum impact.)
 
TPP ISSUE OF THE WEEK: The second half of our call will focus on Currency Manipulation and the TPP.

GUEST SPEAKER: Jacqui Dunne, an award-winning economic journalist from Ireland, and co-author of  Rethinking Money: How New Currencies Turn Scarcity Into Prosperity, will walk us through the role our present currency plays in the inevitable flow of wealth to the 1%, and how policies buried in trade deals like the TPP will serve to accelerate wealth disparity. (The good news: she offers road tested solutions, beyond merely stopping fast track and the TPP, for fixing the problem.)

Jacqui is a regular contributor to print and online publications worldwide, and has appeared on both NPR and BlogTalk Radio. She is the founder and CEO of Danu Resources, and an emerging leader in helping entrepreneurs develop technologies and initiatives that restore the earth's equilibrium globally. A 15-minute Q & A session will follow.

You will need both a telephone AND a computer to participate fully in this conference call.

Phone in 5 minutes before the call time and then log in as instructed below.  You'll need to have Adobe Flash Player installed to use the online meeting room. (You may also participate in phone-only mode if you wish.)  

                      NATIONAL TPP TEAM CONFERENCE CALL 
        SUNDAY, OCTOBER 27, 4:30 P.M. PDT/ 7:30 EDT  

 CALL IN FIRST from a land or cell phone, before you click on the link to log in to the online meeting room.

 Dial-in Number: (559) 726-1300     Participant Access Code:  536655 #

Be sure to enable cookies, then follow this link to the meeting room and follow the directions to log in:  http://www.anymeeting.com/moveforjustice1   

When the microphone and phone icons pop up, click on the phone icon (on the right.) When the next screen opens, go to the bottom right corner of the page and click on the shaded box that says "CLOSE." That's it.

Looking forward to talking with you on Sunday!

In Solidarity,

Liz :)  
Elizabeth Warren
National TPP Team Coordinator
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-dont-renew-fast?mailing_id=16448&source=s.icn.em.cr&r_by=1545923
MoveOn Regional Organizer
North San Diego County
Land line: 760-305-7010
Cell: 951-203-2260
Email: liz.moveon@earthlink.net
Facebook: Liz Warren (Woyton)
Twitter: LizWarrenWriter
When the people fear the government you have tyranny...when the government fears the people you have liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson

Former Pro-Death Penalty Chief Justice Peterson: Oregon's Death Penalty Unjust

Below is a new Op-Ed piece, just posted this morning on Oregon Live, by retired
Chief Justice Edwin Peterson. 

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/10/oregons_death_penalty_is_unjus.html

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

At long last...

Subject: At long last...

...on this morning's NPR in an interview with a 5th generation Taft - John Taft - an accurate analysis of our current U.S. situation:  We are in an era of zero growth - following decades of 3%/y growth - brought on by resource shortages and environmental degradation; therefore gains anywhere in the economy must come at the expense of everywhere else in the economy.  Taft also translated that to be the cause of fruitless negotiations between Obama and Boehner as heads of the 2 major parties - in the past during growth, compromise meant that both sides could benefit (grow), but now it translates to one side losing if the other gains.  While skeptical of that translation, I suppose it might follow in our age of corporatocracy, with the two sides actually representing different moneyed interests rather than 'dear fellow americans.'

The reason for the interview was a Taft op-ed in the NYT by Taft flaming the current republican party:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/23/opinion/the-cry-of-the-true-republican.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1382635352-C4Vh5pz6wkRJs4+PYhe68A

You can listen to the NPR interview here, and the zero growth analysis is near the end.

http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/genetic-republican-john-g-taft-future-gop/

If Taft is aware of the causes & implications he mentioned concerning a zero-growth economy, he almost surely is also aware of the other major corollary - that the current situation is but a way-point on a trend line that will take us into increasingly negative growth territory - again because of more severe resource shortfalls (peak oil etc.) and environmental degradation (climate change) to come.  

This is the first time I've heard an NPR story related to peak everything, and hearing it from a coherent, 'genetic' republican was stunning.  Who knows, maybe a 'genetic' democrat somewhere will pick up on it?  And, how long before Wall Street muzzles this guy?

cheers,

Tooj