A Father's Thoughts

Celebrate everyone's radical uniqueness

This is my article published in the Spectrum on April 17, 2012

Marilynne Robinson, novelist and essayist won the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction for her second novel Gilead. Her most recent book, When I Was a Child I Read Books, is a collection of essays to which she brings her life experience, her intelligence, and her profound religious understanding and faith. Much of her language resonated with me as I responded to her eloquent articulation and clarification of ideas.

Robinson grabbed my attention in the preface quoting Walt Whitman honoring the “radical uniqueness” of each individual; a uniqueness and complexity that we obscure by assigning ideologically based labels that simplify or categorize ourselves and others, e.g., conservative/liberal, Republican/Democrat, rich/poor and so forth. This reductionism threatens the core of our democracy as what passes for public discourse loses “the character of generosity, and the largeness of spirit that has created and supported the best of our institutions”.

At the center of this collection is her essay, When I Was a Child, in which she writes very personally of growing up in the West. Robinson learned of an individualism, devoid of ideological self-interest, that empowers each person to contribute to the diversity and wholeness of the community, a community that validates and honors its members.

In the first essay, Freedom of Thought, she encourages us to push against the limitations and constraints too often found in our religions, our education, and our economically driven society and to expand our thinking while exploring the mysteries of the sacred, the opportunities we have to love, and the beauty in our world.

Robinson cites multiple passages from the Bible unambiguously admonishing us to care for the poor with a spirit of generosity and gratitude. How do we view the poor among us? She notes that today we hear harsh judgments of the plight of poor and a growing resistance to providing help that is consistent with the message of Jesus.

Robinson writes of the essential nature of gratitude. It is “more stabilizing, more gratifying in every way, especially in dark times” and in spite of our contemporary challenges, she argues that we have much to be grateful for living in a nation blessed by God.

As I write I am aware that I may be guilty of that which Robinson argues against by simplifying the beautiful and the wondrous complexity of her work.

She writes of the importance of “imaginative love” for those other than our family in a healthy community, the role of ideology in capitalism and austerity, the fate of ideas, the understanding of human nature, the complexity of the human brain, and much more.

The scope of her essays extends well beyond what I can address in this short column. These few ideas may provide a taste or sip of the richness within this artful book.

Some books amply reward the time and thought spent reading and pondering. This is one.

George Stoddard is an Ivins resident and a member of The Spectrum & Daily News Writers Group. His email is gstoddard1@me.com

 

 

Candidates not really tackling the debt issue

This is my column that was published in The Spectrum on March 20, 2012.

Here we go again. On April 16, 2001 President Bush stated, “Tax relief will create new jobs, tax relief will generate new wealth, and tax relief will open new opportunities.” Many economists, including members of his administration challenged that view. The supply-siders argued that the critics were wrong because of the power of “dynamic scoring” of tax policy by which reduced taxes would stimulate economic growth. Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 tested that theory.

How did it work out? President Bush inherited a budget surplus of $230 billion from the Clinton administration. At the end of the Bush term, including 5 years with his tax structure fully in effect, the annual deficit was $1.3 trillion. During the fourth quarter of 2008 the Gross Domestic Product decreased 8.9% and in January 2009 780,000 jobs were being lost each month.

Given the continuing annual deficit of more that a trillion dollars projected for the foreseeable future, where do we go from here?

According to The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities President Obama’s budget achieves the goal of “stabilizing the debt so that it no longer rises faster than the economy.” The administration budget achieves this goal by a combination of tax increases and spending cuts and the ratio is close to the Bowles-Simpson plan that reduces spending two dollars for every one in tax increases.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has evaluated the proposals of four of the Republican presidential candidates and found that contrary to the campaign rhetoric, reduction of the debt is not a priority in their plans. With the exception of Ron Paul, tax cuts are the priority.

The budgets of the administration and Ron Paul would increase ratio of public debt to Gross Domestic Product from the present 70% to 76% in 2021 with Paul’s plan including significantly more, but as yet unspecified, spending cuts. On the other hand planned tax cuts by Romney, Santorum and Gingrich increase the ratio of public debt to GDP to 86%, 104% and 114% respectively.

The Tax Policy Center reports the Obama budget increases the revenue from the top 1% of tax payers in 2015 by $154 billion while Romney decreases revenue from the same group by $180 billion. Gingrich proposes a revenue loss of $850 billion in that one year because to his tax cuts.

Those who talk so loudly about reducing spending need to provide details about where the cuts will be made. Instead the latest dodge is the Cut, Cap, and Balance slogan that enables candidates to continue talking while delaying the needed hard decisions that only become more painful with the passage of time.  

In our media drenched politispeak world evidence seldom emerges; slogans and ambiguities rule the day. The advocates of “dynamic scoring” of tax policy once again are assuring the voters that tax cuts will stimulate the economy and increase revenues. Sure!!

George Stoddard is an Ivins resident and a member of The Spectrum & Daily News Writers Group. His email is gstoddard1@me.com

 

 

Helping kids today pays dividends in the future

This is a column that appeared in my local newspaper The Spectrum on February 21.

In my last column I wrote about the vulnerability of the poor in these difficult economic times. Poverty rates have been increasing and today one in four children live at or below the poverty line in our country.

Debbie Justice, Executive Director of The Learning Center for Families (www.tlc4families.org/), responded to my article and invited me to tour the St. George facility of her organization. She frames her programs as workforce development programs to help the children “grow up to be productive and engaged citizens.”

I share with David Brooks, author and New York Times columnist, a passionate interest in human development and neuroscience. I am concerned about the seeming disconnect between what we understand about the pre and postnatal needs of infants and young children and the resources available to address those needs. Recently Brooks cited how early childhood education and development or lack thereof hugely effects later years in life. He bemoans the fact that nationally nobody seems to want to do anything about it. There is no debate on this issue during our perpetual political campaigns. He notes that the lobbying guns in Washington and the prestige is focused on K-12 and higher education.

Because of my previous work as a psychotherapist and in my role as a father and grandfather, I am profoundly aware of the criticality of adequate nutrition and active human and social interaction to healthy brain development. The American Academy of Pediatricians recently reported on the evidence of the link between childhood toxic stress and other deficiencies in the family and social environment during early life and lifelong impairments in learning, behavior, and both physical and mental health.

Because of the dedicated work of The Learning Center for Families and the support it receives from government and community resources, many young children conceived and born in challenging circumstances will have the opportunity to experience an enriching and healthy support system.

Family services can begin before and during pregnancy and continue for the first three years of life. The Center’s most recent annual report cites The Early Intervention Program that identities children who are “showing any kind of early developmental delay such as Down Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy or extreme prematurity.” The early intervention team of professionals and other staff members work with each family individually, structuring a program to meet that family’s specific needs.

The Early Head Start Program “is a comprehensive family development program that promotes the physical, cognitive, social and emotional growth of infants and toddlers while assisting their parents in achieving greater degrees of self sufficiency.”

I ended my tour heartened by the obvious commitment of so many focusing on the needs of young children and their families, but as with other social support programs, there is a bulging wait list of those needing these services.

As Frederick Douglas wrote in the 19^th century “It is easier to build strong children than repair broken men.”

 

 

Can we believe in helping the poor

This was my column for the writers' group in the Spectrum on January 24, 2012   

Last week I attended a ceremony at the St. George Tabernacle celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. Day helping me to reflect again on the life of Reverend King and the impact he had during the nation’s struggle to expand civil rights to the African-American community and the effort he was beginning, shortly before his tragic assassination, to bring attention to the plight of the poor.

More than forty years ago, along with the Southern Christian Leadership Convention, Dr. King was planning to dramatize the needs of the poor and bring national attention to jobs, income, and housing. He recognized the negative impact that long-term poverty has on the human soul. At the time, he felt that Congress was showing “hostility to the poor.”

Are we hearing voices of hostility to the poor today in this election year as attacks on “entitlements” are made by the same politicians who are intent on protecting the inordinate financial gains of the “job creators” from even the smallest of tax increases?

A recent study by Indiana University’s School of Public and Environmental Affairs titled At Risk: America’s Poor During and After the Great Recession focuses on the impact of the Great Recession on poverty in America. The full report can be found at: http://www.indiana.edu/~spea/pubs/white_paper_at_risk.pdf

Briefly the researchers found: “The Great Recession has left behind the largest number of long-term unemployed people since the records were first kept in 1948.” “Large numbers of Americans are already poor.” In 2010 about 46.2 million Americans or about 15.1% were living in poverty, the number having increased 27% between 2006 and 2010.

Other data show that the devastating impact of the financial decline has not been spread evenly throughout the economy. The net worth of white households has decreased by 16% while African-American and Latino household net worth dropped 53% and 66% respectively. The unemployment statistics show similar disparities with the official unemployment in Black communities approaching 20%.

The executive summary of the University’s report concludes: “Promoting sustained economic growth, while at the same time protecting the well-being of the poor, the near poor, and the new poor, is the central challenge for leaders of the United States.”

It takes no great economic wisdom to realize that the way out of our current fiscal morass has to include reductions in expenditures along with increases in revenues. Both entitlements and taxes need to be reformed. As we delay the hard decisions the pain being felt by the poor and near poor in the richest country in the world is real.

Inscribed on a stone panel at the King memorial in Washington are the following words of Dr. King: “I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits.”

Can we believe?

Preventative war is not the answer

This was my writers' group column for the Spectrum on December 28, 2011

The official end of the war in Iraq is cause for reflection. I vividly recall the rhetoric emanating from the Washington officials and the media in 2003. Visions of weapons of mass destruction and mushroom clouds filled the air feeding our fears and insecurities. Calls to patriotism drowned out voices urging caution and deliberation. The emotional war drums sounded and 72% of the public supported the decision to invade Iraq.

That was then. This is now. The Pew Research Center recently reported that as the war wore on, public interest and awareness steadily declined. In December 2010 just 19% of those polled acknowledged following events in Iraq closely. Although public awareness waned, our all-volunteer service members fought on for eight long years. Multiple tours of duty took their human toll and 44% of returning veterans “have had difficulty readjusting to civilian life, compared with 25% of pre-9/11 veterans.”

What have we learned from this conflict that counted more than 5000 dead and tens of thousands wounded American and coalition troops, more that 100,000 Iraqi deaths and more than a trillion dollars borrowed from future generations?

Was the war worth the cost and was the invasion the right decision? While the nation seems nearly evenly divided on the issue overall, our partisan divide is clear. Seventy two percent of Republicans support the decision to invade compared to 44% of independents and 37% of Democrats.

Will military conquests decide the international power struggles of the 21^st century? Or is it just possible that our continuing focus on military power will weaken us further and cause us to lose ground in an increasingly competitive and vibrant world economic environment?

In a recent NY Times opinion piece, “War Really is Going out of Style” Joshua S. Goldstein and Steven Pinker argue persuasively that war no longer pays and that war is in decline. In the 21^st century national power and wealth will be dependent on trade and commerce both of which fare poorly during war.

Then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated unequivocally “any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should have his head examined.”

But, once again we hear increasing talk of war, echoing 2003, only this time Iran, strengthened by the Iraq war, is the target.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham recently stated that we have to destroy their military and get the people of the country to overthrow the regime if Iran develops a nuclear weapon. Am I alone in thinking this is insane? The fires of nationalism ignited by an attack on Iran by Israel or the United States will not dim for years.

Our recent experience and history confirm that preventive war is not an answer.

Book looks at story of economics

This was my writers' group column in the Spectrum on November 2, 2011

F. S. Michaels in her thought provoking book The Monoculture: How One Story is Changing Everything examines the influence that a predominant story or narrative has on a culture. She traces different periods in history in which for example there was a religious, scientific, machine, or mathematics monoculture.

She presents evidence showing that we are currently living the “economic story” and that story whether we are aware of it or not determines to a large extent our societal worldview. In the economic story spending and the accumulation of “stuff” becomes our priority. Michaels probes more deeply the reasons that the economic story distracts us from living in a way that satisfies our deeper human needs.

The author describes how six areas of our lives are changing because of the rise of the economic story. “How you think about your work, your relationships with others and the natural world, your community, your physical and spiritual health, your education, and your creativity are being shaped by economic values and assumptions,”

For example it is evident that the economic story influences our relationships with others and the world. Recently Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Adviser to President Carter, while discussing the complexity of the challenges we face in Iraq, Iran, and the Middle East observed that we have become so preoccupied with greed, financial success, with having to make a living, with just surviving that we are unaware of the painful consequences of what we are doing in the world.

Our preoccupation with the economic story enables us to engage in two costly wars content with allowing the burden of those wars to be carried by less than one percent of our population. How many of us ever come in contact with those whose lives are forever changed because of the sacrifices they make on the battlefield and the impact of those sacrifices on their families?

In the economic story American health care has experienced a transformation “from compassionate relief of suffering to a profit-orientated business.” During this transformation, given the growing emphasis on the business of health care, our costs exceed those of other developed nations while outcomes rank us no better that thirty- seventh among those nations.

Is the growing awareness of this “economic story” and the increasing inequalities in our nation driving the actions of the Tea Party movement and now the Occupy Wall Street protests? Perhaps the public is beginning to confront the inability of our political system to deal with the pain and challenges being experienced by so many.

Michaels invites us to become more introspective and thoughtful about the possibility of making different and more meaningful choices in our lives as we realize that our focus on money and economics saps our ability to appreciate and live by values such as “nurturing human dignity regardless of someone’s economic situation.”

DOCUTAH provides diverse, entertaining opportunities

This was my Writers Group Column in the Spectrum on October 5, 2011

Wow!! DOCUTAH was a wonderful treat this year.  Southern Utah’s International Documentary Film Festival was well organized and presented a broad range of films that showcased the talents and skills of those involved in the creation and production of 100 professional screenings and 30 student films.

After viewing more than twenty of the offerings I was left with feelings of gratitude for those who had the vision to bring this event to this area and for the efforts of the many volunteers who shared that vision and devoted untold hours to selecting films and manning the multiple venues making this experience possible.

The films evoked a spectrum of emotions from intense joy and laughter to great pain and sadness. Some films (a term that seems a bit archaic to me since film is seldom used today) were entertaining while being informative. In The Baton the director communicated the complexity of the process by which someone achieves success as a symphony orchestra conductor by creatively blending graphics and cartoon figures with images of conductors and musicians at work creating wonderful music. One question that stayed with me is “Can you hold sounds in your hands?”

Other films showed the challenges faced by so many less fortunate than us. Some of the images from Generation Kunduz are seared into my memory particularly those of young children with the same aspirations as my own grandchildren but who were born into circumstances where their future is severely limited by war, violence, and lack of freedom. I recall the image of the face and bright eyes of a young 10 to 12 year old boy in Afghanistan spending his days shining shoes for a pittance hoping to get an education and become a productive adult.

Images from Fambul Tok (Family Talk) show villagers in Sierra Leone gathered around a bonfire in the years after the end of the civil war. Family values and a foundation of genuine community concern for others are at the heart of the culture. The rebels literally attacked the culture inflicting unspeakable atrocities and brutalities upon other members of the same village and sometimes even other family members. After the war these resilient people gather around the ritual bonfire, victims and perpetrators facing each other seeking understanding, redemption, forgiveness, and healing.

In addition to the movies, there were opportunities to engage in seminars and meet some of the filmmakers and other artists who created this body of work.

Director Gina Belafonte was at the Coyote Gulch Art Village in Kayenta to present and answer questions about Sing Your Song, a tribute to the work of her father Harry Belafonte with Dr. Martin Luther King and other leaders in the struggle for justice and civil rights. Mr. Belafonte remains involved in humanitarian causes today focusing on the need to reform our prison system.

My experience during the second annual DOCUTAH Festival gave me a much greater appreciation of the value of documentary films and a resolve to join the volunteers next year hopefully screening films and helping in whatever other capacity needed.

Bravo!

Marine can teach lesson to Congress

This was my Writers Group Column in the Spectrum on December 1, 2011

I wonder if those loudly proclaiming the idea of American Exceptionalism are reflecting upon the failure of the Congressional “super committee” to reach a bipartisan agreement addressing our growing fiscal crisis. The members of the committee have assumed the Washington default position of blaming the other side for the failure. In what today appears to be an understatement, Tom Friedman once noted that our governing bodies are incapable of producing anything better than sub-optimal solutions to our problems.

Washington’s ineffectiveness and ineptitude increases our vulnerability if the fiscal problems in Europe worsen or the financial markets decide we are incapable of governing.

Lately I have been rereading the history of the beginnings of our nation from the “shot heard round the world” in 1775 through the adoption of the Constitution in 1787. The Founding Fathers, miraculously by today’s standards, managed to compromise over very contentious issues leading to the formation of our nation. Today many of our legislators are mired in ideological inflexibility. Compromise is a dirty word.

From my perspective, the Republican unwillingness to consider raising taxes on those who have reaped a disproportionate share of the economic gains in recent decades is unreasonable in the face of polls showing that sixty percent or more of the people support such an action. What is so difficult about compromising between no tax increases and no cuts in entitlement programs? A compromise including some tax increases and some reduction in entitlements seems obvious to those outside of politics.

I know that is a bit simplistic, but that general principle could guide the consideration of the details by focusing negotiations on the recommendations of the Simpson/Bowles and the Rivlin/Domenici committees. Costs of reforms can be spread across many segments of our society.

The public has for too long been seduced by political assurances that we can have all that we want without paying for benefits received. It is past time to bite the bullet and get the country on a sustainable economic path.

I contrast the sacrifices we resist making with those we ask of the members of our military and their families. Marine Corporal Aaron Mankin recently received the 2011 Veteran Leadership Award from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (iava.org). In 2005 an improvised explosive device blew up the military vehicle that Corporal Mankin was riding in killing six of his fellow marines. He escaped the vehicle with life threatening burns that severely scarred his face destroying his ears and nose.

After sixty surgeries, Corporal Mankin continues speaking out in support of Operation Mend (operationmend.ucla.edu) and the dedicated people that helped him recover his life.

His acceptance speech can be found on the IAVA web site. It should be required viewing for all members of Congress.

American exceptionalism radiates from the soul of this Marine hero.

Governor Perry irresponsibility

The recent actions of Governor Rick Perry exposed once again the dysfunction of our political system. He appeared with Jewish leaders at a New York hotel the day before President Obama was to address the General Assembly of the United Nations. Mr. Perry attacked President Obama accusing him of “appeasement” and describing his Mideast policy as “naïve, arrogant, misguided, and dangerous.”

By personally attacking our president at this critical time when he and his foreign policy team are engaged in complex high stakes negotiations between the Palestinians, Israelis, and other interested parties Governor Perry is demonstrating his unawareness of his own naïve, arrogant, misguided, and dangerous actions.

If the Israeli Palestinian conflict was not intractable enough, the entire Middle East region is in a state of transition as the Arab Spring continues to flower. Uncertainties have expanded exponentially as governments fail and people, having captured a vision of freedom and self-rule, engage in the process of reorganizing whole societies.

Now is the time for sober intelligent efforts to promote peace while avoiding irresponsible self serving political rhetoric that risks inflaming already tense international situations.

 

 

DADT repealed but the struggle continues

It has been a difficult political year for our nation. Our dysfunctional politics have validated the concerns of columnist and author Tom Friedman who concluded a while ago that we could only adopt sub-optimal solutions for the many serious challenges we face in the 21^st century. It becomes increasingly difficult to be optimistic about the future.

But this week we observed the official end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the military confirming and bolstering my confidence in the ability of our political system to make constructive policy changes consistent with the core values of equality and freedom in our nation. We will no longer discharge members of our military solely because they are gay.

As Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated, “we are a stronger joint force, a more tolerant joint force, a force of more character and honor.”

This marks another significant step forward in our continuing national civil rights debate, but married same-sex couples are still denied benefits available to heterosexual families including spousal health care, equal financial support if a service member makes the ultimate sacrifice, and more.

The road forward will remain contentious. At the Republican Presidential Debate in Orlando a gay soldier serving in Iraq asked a question by video and was booed by members of the audience and treated with disrespect by Senator Santorum who showed his ignorance and bigotry. Live blogging the debate Andrew Sullivan comments:

10.18 pm. Santorum claims bizarrely that repealing DADT means permission for sexual activity for gays in the military. This is a lie. The same rules of sexual misconduct apply to gays and straights alike. And a gay servicemember is booed by this foul crowd. Santorum keeps saying "sex is not an issue." But that's the current policy! This has nothing to do with sex, as Santorum surely knows. And again, the crowd reveals itself as hateful - even when it comes to those serving their country in uniform. This is one core reason why I cannot be a Republican. So many are bigots - and no one - no one - stands up against them. They're a bunch of bullies congratulating themselves on rooting out the queers.

How does one understand the hateful response of so many self-professed patriots to the words of a soldier serving in a combat zone and risking all for our nation?

 We are a better people than this.