The World Around You

My weekly column was published this week in the Wednesday and Saturday editions of the Prattville Progress:
I’ve written a great deal about the problems Alabama faces and the day-to-day political developments that often frustrate all of us. Yet, as I read the introduction to Dr. Wayne Flynt’s new book Alabama in the 20th Century, I was reminded that there is an undercurrent to my opinions that I may not have fully fleshed out for you.

Dr. Flynt brought to the front of my mind a conversation I recently had with a friend and colleague. We were discussing the upcoming gubernatorial election and the difficulties the different candidates might face in getting their message across to the voters. We were talking about the root issues that are continuing to hold Alabama back and we ended up discussing the fact that we both lived much of our lives outside the state. There is no doubt that those of us who have lived outside of Alabama are often more frustrated than those who have lived here their whole lives, because we know it can be different.

As we got to this point in the discussion I expressed a thought that I probably don’t express enough. Yes, many Alabamians choose to leave the state because of a perceived lack of adequate opportunity, but there are also a large number of us who have chosen to come here and adopt Alabama as our home. Dr. Flynt stated one reason well in his book and his statement resonated in the conversation I had with my colleague, “Some will say I spend too much time on the negative and not enough on the positive, that my historical glass seems perpetually half-empty rather than half-full. To me, the fullness or emptiness is of less interest than the halfness. Why does a state with so much human and natural potential settle so often for mediocrity? Why are Alabamians’ expectations so low when excellence is so often in their grasp?”

The key to achieving more and being more is reaching for excellence. I work with people in social services in this state and they are the most hardworking and dedicated individuals I have ever met. Yet, the more excellence I see exhibited every day all over this state the more I wonder why there seems to be a tacit acceptance of the way things are. Alabamians are not mediocre, so why do we settle for mediocrity when it comes to our educational system, our political system, our health care system, our social service delivery system and so many other public and private structures?

The answer lies in a belief that something different and better is possible. As I said, those who have lived in other parts of the country know its possible, but we often struggle with transferring that belief to our fellow Alabamians. The unknown seems to be scarier to people than the deficient known. Sure, we could make things better, but we could also make them worse, so why change? As long as this defeatist attitude reigns the massive potential Alabamians possess will never be fully realized.

My weekly column ran in today’s Wednesday (Prattville) Progress:

You may have seen or heard about an Academy Award-nominated film called “Super Size Me”. Filmmaker Morgan Spurlock ate only McDonald’s menu items for 30 days with rapid negative effects on his health. The film re-surfaced in a particular segment of the media this week because of the pending release of a film billed as a counter-”Super Size Me”. Most of the talk show hosts interested in this film never saw Spurlock’s film, but they don’t let that stop them from denigrating it.

The anti-”Super Size Me” involves a woman named Soso Whaley who ate McDonald’s food for sixty days straight and lost weight. In her appearances Soso is being billed as a simple “animal trainer”, but that is not the whole truth. Soso was given a fellowship by the Competitive Enterprise Institute to give her the ability to complete her film. This is important because CEI is a think tank that, among other things, favors repeal of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (created in response to the Enron and Worldcom debacles and that allowed for the prosecution of Richard Scrushy) and opposes almost any effort to regulate industry to reduce global warming (including the McCain-Lieberman amendment that came before the Senate last week). So, we can McDonald’s had every expectation of favorable treatment, given CEI’s pro-corporate agenda. In fact, she was touting her weight loss before she even started! Morgan Spurlock made no contentions about what would happen during the course of his 30-day experiment.

Can you eat healthy at McDonald’s? Of course you can. Is it easy to do? No. Is it obvious from the menu what the healthy options are? No. For example, Soso had to take special precautions to stay below her daily calorie limits by using half of the salad dressing provided by McDonald’s, for example. Because, if she had used all of it, she would have gone over the limit. And, even with her extensive research, she was unable to find the nutrition facts for a number of the things she ate. What chance do the rest of us have?

To her credit, Soso posted her receipts on the CEI website. However, they reveal that she was not eating the way most people do. Here are some typical meals: dinner on April 2nd: a fish sandwich and a shake; dinner on the 4th consisted of a small fry and a McFlurry; dinner on the 5th was 3 cookies and a milk. I mean, is she serious? If that’s not dieting I don’t know what is and it certainly isn’t typical of the way most people eat.

People who have bothered to actually see “Super Size Me” know that it is about a lot more than Morgan’s experiment. He investigates school lunch programs, exercise habits, where fast food originates and how it is processed and the unavailability of nutrition information for fast food. Spurlock left no doubt that personal responsibility plays a role in the obesity epidemic in this country, but there is also no doubt there is a corporate element too.

Corporate responsibility to me means full disclosure. Why can’t we have the nutrition information for our food right next to the price? A capitalist democracy only functions when there is full disclosure. We have a long way to go in receiving full disclosure regarding what we eat and drink. When we get there, then I will listen to those who say we should leave the corporations alone.

I received my five day warning from my domain provider today…and I must admit I am beginning to rethink shutting the site down. I have taken a couple of months off and am starting to miss it. I likely will hang around a bit longer and you may even see posts pick up around here in the near future.

As you may have noticed. I picked up my first blog ad, starting today. So, that also has made me reconsider. Stay tuned…

Just a brief reminder that this site will be going down in a few days. It’s been fun while it lasted. You can still catch my writing at Polstate.com.

My weekly column was published in the May 4th edition of the Wednesday (Prattville) Progress:

I have been all over rural Alabama in the last few weeks, traveling with my job. One thing that was clearly demonstrated to me is that people give directions differently. It isn’t so much that some people give good directions and some give bad, although that is certainly true, there are just different ways to do it. Some people just give landmarks and no street names. Those directions go something like this, take a right turn at the Wal-Mart, you’ll see the Dairy Queen on your right, turn at the first street past the DQ and turn into the fifth driveway on the left. These directions can be fine, as long as you don’t miss the landmarks and they haven’t changed since the last time the person giving the directions visited the area.

Others give you no landmarks and only streets. Come into town and take a right on Finch Avenue. Follow that to Oakwood Lane, take a right then a left onto Bergman Lane. Even if by chance you can find all of those streets you have no idea how far it is between them so it’s impossible to know if you’ve missed them or just haven’t gotten to them yet.

Then you get the most ominous words anyone can read in a set of directions, turn off the paved road. Because once you turn off the paved road you know you’re venturing into the unknown. Also, once you turn off the paved road you can only rely on landmarks to get you where you need to go, because there likely won’t be any street signs.

After some interesting adventures with directions, I went in search of some tips to offer people when they are giving directions. Here are some tips from Ehow.com that I believe are valuable. First, name permanent landmarks, such as stoplights, bridges and railroad tracks. Second, be redundant, give street names in addition to landmarks. Third, add warnings to your directions. Name places that will be seen if one goes too far, and mention confusing intersections. Also, consider giving distances in miles between streets and landmarks. Provide your phone number with the directions in case the person gets lost, despite your best efforts to guide him. Finally, bad directions are worse than no directions. If you don’t know how to direct someone to the place they’re going, don’t try.

Credibility is extremely important when giving directions, just ask Reverend Billy Graham. One day early in his career, Reverend Graham arrived in a small town to preach a sermon. Hoping to run some errands first, he approached a young boy on the street and asked him where he might mail a letter. After the boy had directed him to the local post office, Graham thanked him and invited him to attend the sermon. “If you’ll come to the Baptist church this evening,” he said, “you can hear me telling everyone how to get to heaven.” “I don’t think I’ll be there,” the youngster replied. “You don’t even know your way to the post office!”

Maybe all of our direction-giving skills could use a little improvement. There’s nothing quite like the appreciation that comes from someone who was able to get where they needed to go because of good directions.

My weekly column was published in this week’s Wednesday edition of the Prattville Progress and News Record:

According to the latest US Census statistics, Alabama may be facing losing one of its seven seats in the U.S. House of Representatives during the next reapportionment in 2010. It wouldn’t be anything new. Alabama’s delegation has dropped from nine representatives after the 1930 census, to eight in 1960 and the current seven in 1970. There is no doubt that Alabama is gradually becoming marginalized as a portion of the nation at large.

The same report from the census bureau indicates big growth in the south, with Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee and South Carolina all projected to be in the top twenty growth states over the next 20 years. Meanwhile the report indicates that Alabama’s population will grow at a mere 9.6%.

The projections are based on mathematical models that assume fertility, mortality, and internal as well as international migration continue at the current rate. My concern with these projections is not as much about losing the congressional seat as it is being left behind by our neighboring states and the nation at large. Their continued growth will allow those states to prosper while Alabama stagnates.

Some say that more people doesn’t automatically equal prosperity and they would certainly be right, but if you fall behind the growth rate of other states in the region it is an indicator for a number of other issues. It could indicate that immigrants, from out-of-state and out of the country, are choosing those neighboring states over yours either because they offer better job opportunities, education opportunities, or other reasons. It could also indicate that your state has a higher mortality rate than others in the region, certainly not a positive attribute for the state. It could also indicate that families are not as large in your state because of their inability to sustain them. Any or all of these properties would be unfortunate circumstances for Alabama and would be harbingers for other negative developments in the future.

I don’t want to make too much out of one report, but there is no doubt the underlying issues that contribute to growth must be addressed. They are the same issues that have been recognized but left unaddressed for decades; inadequate healthcare and education systems, a repressive tax structure, poor economic infrastructure and lack of political leadership.

We want Alabama to compete. We want Alabama citizens to be the best they can be. None of these public structures can make an individual take action, but they do provide the mechanisms and systems that offer people the opportunity to succeed. Until we recognize that those systems are not working to their full potential in our state and do something about it we will continue to be marginalized in the nation as a whole and will find it difficult to attract anyone to live in this great state, nor to stay here. Other states will offer more and better opportunities and Alabama will continue to be left behind. The process is beginning to happen already and the only way to reverse the trend is to recognize reports like these as opportunities for change and take action.

My weekly column was published in the Wednesday Edition of the Prattville Progress and News Record:

It looks like the Alabama legislature will once again fail to do its job and pass budgets for the General Fund and the Educational Trust Fund in the regular legislative session. Not only that, but as of the start of this week only two bills have passed into law this session.

The main blockade is occurring in the Senate, which has a history of passing a flood of bills at the last minute. However, there is an impediment that could prevent the traditional last minute catch-up. Under the rules of the Senate any bill passing in the final six days of the session must be unanimous. So, if any one Senator objects to a bill it will not pass.

Some will say, so we have another special session what else is new? Those who say this are correct, but they may not realize that a special session will cost around $500,000, and with the tight circumstances in the General Fund budget that money equates to the salary and benefits for a number of employees that wouldn’t have to be terminated or made up somewhere else in the budget if the legislature would do its job.

Senator Lowell Barron indicated in an article over the weekend that he believed there was a 50-50 chance of a special session. That is one of the more optimistic predictions I have heard. Most people who spend time in the legislature think there is very little chance of avoiding bringing the legislators back to Montgomery to complete the budget writing process. What’s frightening is how easily the words “special session” trip off legislators tongues. Many act as if it is something they would prefer to avoid, yet we continue to have them year after year. There are many explanations that will be offered, but the simple reality is that these elected officials have thirty days to complete a job and they didn’t do it.

Will there be consequences? Some would hope so, but most know that there won’t be. Everyone will go on about their business, a budget will eventually be passed and we’ll move on to the next legislative session, with the added interest of campaigns starting up for statewide offices to be contested next year. That is the way it will remain until constituents let legislators know that not passing a budget in the regular session is unacceptable.

There is little debate around the Education budget, the main point of difference is the size of a raise for teachers. It would seem that a reasonable compromise is very possible. The General Fund budget is trickier, but not impossible.

My weekly column was published in today’s edition of the Wednesday (Prattville) Progress and News Record:

I am always encouraged when people feel the need to respond to something I have written, whether that is to agree or disagree. So, I read with interest the response to my column on the “Academic Freedom Act” by Robert Burton, published in last Saturday’s Progress. I believe Mr. Burton missed my point, because I took great pains to enter the debate about origins. However, since Mr. Burton obviously wants to engage in that debate I will be happy to respond.

Mr. Burton refers to 300 scientists who have signed on to a statement questioning only one aspect of evolutionary theory. This statement was circulated by the Discovery Institute, from whom Mr. Burton also borrows one entire paragraph of his column. What is the Discovery Institute? It is a think tank based in Seattle that according to the Washington Post spends over $1 million a year for research, polls and media pieces supporting “intelligent design”, the latest name for creationism. It is a political organization, not a scientific one.

I would offer this response by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS is a private, non-profit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars mandated by Congress to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters) to the question, “Don’t many famous scientists reject evolution? No. The scientific consensus around evolution is overwhelming.”

Mr. Burton cites polling data that Americans believe in creationism. I never said they didn’t, and I certainly don’t challenge that belief. What I challenge is the statement that the process of evolution has not been documented. Mr. Burton claims I was wrong when I stated evolution happens, but then goes on in a parenthetical to contradict that very point, admitting that evolution can occur within a species. So, I feel no need to respond further to that point.

Finally, my biggest concern with Mr. Burton’s argument is his thought that somehow “historical science” is less valid than “process science”. There are whole fields of science that are based almost exclusively on “historical science”. Astronomy, geology, and archaeology are all fields that theorize about events that have taken place in the past. Mr. Burton says that if you are not dealing in process science then, “No tests can be performed, much less repeated, to ever prove a particular view on origins because no human being was there when the universe was formed.” He is both right and wrong.

We will never know definitively how everything began because none of us were there. In fact, I said this at the end of my original piece. So, we are in complete agreement. However, it is false to say that you can perform no tests to support evolution. I return to the NAS, “Hypotheses can be made about such phenomena, and these hypotheses can be tested and can lead to solid conclusions. Furthermore, many key mechanisms of evolution occur over relatively short periods and can be observed directly–such as the evolution of bacteria resistant to antibiotics.”

I didn’t start a debate on origins. My original point is still salient, the bill that Senator Mitchell put forward and Mr. Burton urges you to support does not specifically discuss the teaching of creationism for a very good reason. Because that would violate established federal law. The bill is much broader and would allow any teacher or student to replace what science tells us with whatever their own beliefs are in any area, not simply in this ongoing debate. The “full discussions” that Mr. Burton indicates he desires are already allowed, within the bounds of established law, the bill as proposed is unnecessary and dangerous.

My weekly column was published today in the Wednesday (Prattville) Progress

Seeing as it will cost upwards of $300,000 to fix the hole in Cobbs Ford Road that developed during last week’s rainstorms, I have some suggestions for alternatives to repairing the roadway. A hole is just a hole, but there are plenty of moneymaking propositions that would bring out the true potential of this unfortunate circumstance.

First, we must make the whole more than just a hole. The void could be put to many uses. We could obviously fill it with water and make it a new public swimming facility, but that lacks a certain flair. Though if we dumped some fish in it could provide another location for the Bassmasters tournament in a pinch.

We could turn it into an underground lair for our own superhero. Now there’s an idea with some punch. We might have problems with recruiting for the post though. It’s a dangerous job and not many people have the necessary qualifications or the wardrobe anymore.

I’ve even heard some talk about turning it into the largest mud bath in Alabama for our brand new full service spa. The potential is really only limited by our imagination.

What about turning it into a tourist attraction? People already seem fond of ÿ having their pictures taken in front of it. Why don’t we expand on that theme and just amp it up a little bit?

We need a catchy name. It’s not a hole, it’s a cave, no a cavern! Yes, that’s it. Welcome to Prattville Caverns (though if you want to get technical there is only one cavern). We’ll need a big sign pointing the way and steps leading down into the caverns and back out. Maybe a winding staircase, to add to the experience. We’ll also need the appropriate lighting, candle-like light fixtures alongside the staircase seem appropriate.

Now we don’t want people to leave Prattville Caverns disappointed, so maybe we could bring some beauty to the experience. How about hiring local artists to paint murals in the caverns that depict the history of our city? There would be depictions of Daniel Pratt and the other forefathers of our city, telling the story of the city’s founding and events since. This would add some artistic value to their visit.

We’d also need a gift shop selling t-shirts and appropriate trinkets. We could make a fortune. Prattville Caverns sweatshirts, jackets, hats, pens, toys and everything else that any good tourist attraction provides. We could even have a cave festival once a year that would bring in additional visitors and allow the community to appreciate our hole in the ground.

It could redefine the city. No longer would be known as the “fountain city” or the “birthplace of industry” in Alabama. We could be “those crazy people who turned a hole in the ground into a cavern”. Now isn’t that something worth investing our time and energies into while we save a few bucks?

My weekly column was published today in the Wednesday (Prattville) Progress:
It’s time for March Madness. I’m from Indiana, so basketball is in my blood. Yet, being from Indiana there is an odd feeling to this year’s tournament. For the first time in my memory not a single one of the big schools in my home state (Indiana University, Notre Dame, and my alma mater Purdue University) will be playing in this year’s NCAA men’s basketball tournament.

My first memories of the tournament are of watching the 1987 championship game between Indiana University and Syracuse University. At that time I was not so much a fan of the Hoosiers as I was of their All-American guard Steve Alford, but I was rooting as hard as anyone in the state that night. I remember sitting in my parents’ living room watching the clock run down as the Hoosiers looked for the final shot that would give them the championship. I stood as Keith Smart fired from the baseline and screamed when the shot went through the net. I was experiencing my first championship as a fan. It was really a great feeling. I have been a true basketball fan ever since.

Once Steve Alford left Indiana University, I quickly switched allegiances to the other state school, Purdue. The Purdue teams of the late 80’s were some of the best in the school’s history. It was a great time to be a Boilermaker (the Purdue mascot). As I got older, the NCAA tournament loomed larger and larger in my annual ritual.

I can’t remember the first time I participated in a tournament pool at school, but I remember organizing one for the first time in my sophomore year of high school. My best friend and I ran the pool and prided ourselves on doing an efficient job of collecting the money and distributing brackets without the teachers getting wise. The teachers also looked the other way as we checked scores on radios in our lockers between classes (this was before the Internet). Some, even facilitated our habit by turning on a TV for a while during tournament week, especially if one of the state schools was involved. We had to be extra careful when we distributed the winnings once the tournament was over, but we got pretty good at that too.

It happened that this friend and I went on to attend Purdue University together and kept up our basketball habit. Neither one of us were gamblers, but we always took the annual pool extremely seriously. We also followed the Boilermakers men’s and women’s teams more closely than most. We were on campus with the other fanatics when the men’s team advanced to the Sweet 16 in 1998, 1999 and 2000. We were there when Purdue’s women’s team advanced to the 1999 Final Four by winning the regional final in Normal, Illinois. We would have been there to see the women’s championship, but a trip to California was a little beyond our means.

March Madness is electric, and now I’ll get to see what it’s like to watch a tournament with no Indiana teams participating in the party. I’m sure I’ll learn to enjoy it in a new way.