Andy Ashcraft's Open Salon Blog

Andy’s Presidential Fantasy Game

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:06:09 -0400

Long ago, I promised a post about a recurring fantasy I have in which I am elected to be the President of the United States of America.

Andy’s Presidential Fantasy Game

It’s all about the veto. I would promise during the campaign to Veto absolutely everything that came my way, thus forcing our two parties to work together in order to accomplish anything at all. They would need a veto-proof super-majority to get anything past my red-inked rubber-stamp of negativity (and fiscal prudence). I’ll even Veto the bills I like!

What I would not disclose during the campaign is that there is another layer to this plan. Once I was ensconced in the West Wing, I would let every Senator and Representative know that I was putting into place a system in which they could earn the right to get past my veto.

Here’s how it works:

Each member of the Legislative Branch is provided, at the beginning of my term, and possibly at the beginning of each year thereafter, a number of tokens called “Presidential Seals”. One of my staff would be in charge of keeping track of how many Seals each Senator and Representative has at any given time. That data must remain top-secret, even from me, for this plan to work.

Senators and Representatives - hereafter referred to as “Players” - earn an additional Seal when they vote the way that I wish them to on bills that come to vote. I will clearly and plainly publish my views on any Bills that come to vote so that everyone knows what they stand to gain.

Players can then ‘spend’ Seals to increase the ‘Yea’ votes on any bill. To spend a Seal, the Player simply needs to call my staff and tell them how many Seals are to be spent and on which bill.

When the time comes for me to sign or veto the bill, if the actual ‘Yea’ votes PLUS the Seals spent to increase them are greater than the two-thirds super-majority to overcome the veto, I will sign the bill.

Since absolutely NONE of this is in ANY WAY transparent, the savvy Player will realize he or she can vote one way publicly, and then quietly spend two Seals to effectively reverse his vote in private.

Note that in this schema, I cannot override the will of the Legislative Branch. If they fail to get enough votes to pass a bill, then it never comes to my desk for a possible veto. Alternately, Seals cannot be spent to reduce an actual veto-proof super-majority. That is, this game only affects those bills that pass the Senate and House, but that did NOT get a veto-proof super-majority.

Seals cannot be traded between Players. Their Seals are their own to spend (or not spend) as they like. The best they can do is promise each other that they’ll spend Seals in certain ways. The very idea makes me happy!

So WHY play this game? For me, the President, it removes the horse-trading out of my day-to-day schedule and leaves me with more time to explain why I like or dislike a bill. It gives me time to communicate to the Players and to the American People the direction I want to take the country. It gives me time to lead.

For the Players, they don’t need to play the game at all so long as enough of them agree to work with each other for the good of the country. It gives them another resource-axis with which to negotiate amongst themselves. That’s just good game design!

Cheers!

Andy A

A Defense of the South

Sun, 16 Nov 2008 04:11:29 -0500

This may be the best thing that happened to me on this Open Salon experiment so far: Edgar Alverson wrote a note about my last post (“Racism is the New Black”), and we continued to communicate to each other via direct messages.

Edgar wrote a very eloquent letter to me, pointing out that I had propagated another kind of prejudice, that is, a very prejudiced view of the South as a red-necked, backwards corner of the US that is years behind the rest of us enlightened humans in terms of racial relations. He’s right: I had used that old chestnut of liberal bigotry without even thinking about it. I was flippant, and he called me on it!

Edgar’s letter is so good, I asked if I could publish it as a post of its own. He agreed, so without further ado…

“Andy,

“I think I still take it a bit too personally when people attack the modern south for being racist (not that the attacks don't ring true in some ways). Down here, just like everywhere else in the country, we're taught in public schools from a young age about the terrible stain of slavery, racism and Jim Crow. We learn these lessons in integrated classrooms where some kids' parents still harbor overtly racist sentiments.

“Yet, here in the south, there are integrated classrooms in even the most rural public schools. Blacks make up a significant portion of the population of the south. Most southern states are to this day at least 30-percent black. Nowhere else in this country will you find significant black populations in the small towns, rural areas and the far reaching suburbs. The race and economic lines are not one-in-the-same down here. Especially where I grew up and currently live (the Atlanta area), there are upper, middle, working class and impoverished white and black families. We make friendships across racial lines. We feel ashamed about the south's history. But many communities--like mine--are about half black and half white. Occasionally something comes up, but for the most part everyone gets along. Like your family in Mississippi, we even intermarry and attend some of the same churches.

“When I went off to college in the north, I had classmates asking me, "What was it like to grow up in the racist south?" They, of course, had the same high school textbooks (that always teach about Selma, Little Rock and Tuscaloosa while failing to mention the Boston school riots or the Watts riots or the story of the terrible racism Tommie Smith and John Carlos dealt with at San Jose State).

“The problem was, the racism I saw in Maryland was much worse than anything I had ever witnessed in Georgia. Sure, there were less jumbo-wheeled trucks with confederate decals (not that there are THAT many down here), but in Maryland they had private schools. None of the white kids went to the failing minority-majority public schools. None of the white churches I found had more than one or two black families attending. All of the colleges' janitors and cafeteria workers were minorities (almost all of them black), but barely 7-percent of the students were. You could count the black professors on one hand.

“In my high school we had a roughly 50-50 student split and both black and white janitors, teachers and administrators.

“In Maryland I saw racism that was institutionalized to the point that the white people who lived all around it didn't even notice. Instead they grilled me about the racist south. I was appalled. And I felt betrayed by my own education.

“Your story reminded of that feeling. The south is such a convenient target because of the stereotypes and history. But, I truly believe (after living in Maryland, California and Hawaii and traveling all throughout the lower 48), that the south I grew up in and returned to is much further along when it comes to real racial progress than just about anywhere else that I've seen in this country.

“In your story, you talked about your relatives that have real black friends. They've accepted and love their own black family members. Yet, your big "turn" was that one of your relatives doesn't want poor blacks moving in next door. Your Mississippi family's evolution when it comes to race relations is truly an uplifting story.

“That some racist attitudes might still carry some weight in that branch of your family is not surprising, but I think you could find plenty of examples of the same mentality in your California environs. Maybe you would have had to "read between the lines" a little bit to find them, but they are there. Calling out Mississippi is just too easy.

“It gives those outside the south one more reason to feel free of guilt and above it all.

“Of course, your family is your story. And you can't make up things about them. And I realize that there is much more to your post than just your family's story.

“thanks again for writing.
“-Edgar”

Racism is the New Black

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:11:40 -0500

A few weeks ago, a friend of mine suggested that the Obama presidential bid might usher in a new round of overt racism in our country; that it might once again be popular to hate people because of their skin color. I suggested that Racism might be the New Black! I got the laugh, which is all that’s really important.

But his comment got me to thinking about what racism really is now in this country. I say ‘now’ because it has changed significantly even since I was a kid.

A little background; I’ve been a Californian (northern California and southern California) since I was a very tiny baby. My folks are from the same small town in north-east Mississippi. They left Mississippi before I was born and raised me here. During the summers, though, I spent a great deal of time in Mississippi, visiting both sets of relatives.

My Mom’s family has lived in northeast Mississippi since the end of the Civil War. My great-great(-great?) grandfather was a poor Irish farmer who got off a boat in New Orleans and was immediately conscripted into the Confederate Army. It wasn’t his war, but he got to fight in it. He certainly wasn’t in any position to own any slaves. He and his descendants are buried together (at least the dead ones) in this small Mississippi town. My Dad’s family moved there in the 50’s when my Grandfather took a job there as a civil engineer. My Mom’s family are salt-of-the-earth Baptists and my Dad’s family are more worldly Methodists. Their churches are directly across the street from one another. One sprinkles and one dunks.

When I was a kid, I remember a cousin of mine saying, “black folks are just different than white folks” as a way of explaining why they couldn’t be trusted. Even then, we knew not to say the ‘N’ word: it was crude and ugly and might get your ass beaten. Of course, we’re all adults now. The cousin I used to argue with has since become quite liberal, and even started a liberal weekly newspaper. Another cousin married a wonderful black man and they are raising a passel of black kids that her mother and father, my aunt and uncle, couldn’t be more proud of.

Things have changed for the better there, that’s certain, but racism is still there, even in the people you expect to be the most enlightened. Recently, a different aunt wanted to buy a house in her neighborhood so that she could get it away from the “slum lords.” Slum lords? In rural Mississippi? Oh, that’s right, she means “people who will rent to black people.” And this is from the worldliest of my aunts!

So here’s my big theory: racism is no longer about the color of your skin, if it was ever about that minor, cosmetic difference. The color of your skin (or your clothing, or your hairstyle, etc.) is just a symptom that you might not THINK the same way I do. That makes you unpredictable. Unpredictable makes you frightening. Your skin color doesn’t scare me, but that you might not react to me the way I would like is very scary!

Skin color is simply a visual cue, a way of making a quick mental image of a person. Some of us are less afraid of people that may think differently than we do than others, but none of us are completely immune, no matter how much we think we are. My slum-fighting aunt has a very close black friend, but before you say ‘token’, let assure you that she has not befriended this woman because she’s black, but because she’s a very talented writer, and my aunt loves to surround herself with very talented creative people – regardless of race, religion or creed. She understands them.

Clothes are a similar way of saying “I think like you do.” I’ve often wondered why the western business suit is the norm for businessmen nearly everywhere in the world. One wears the uniform of a businessman to announce to all his business acquaintances that his mind works the same way theirs do; that there are not going to be cultural barriers to doing business. Mohawks, piercings and tattoos used to be more significant of the opposite: an announcement that you do not think the way ‘normal’ people do. These things seem tame, even mainstream, now that so many suburban kids and malls have taken it up. If you want to prove yourself different from the norm, you need to go in for some serious body-modifications. Or cover your face and head with a shawl.

So, back to Obama. He and his campaign have done an excellent job communicating all the things about him that say, “I think like you white folk do. Nothing to be scared of here.” Here’s a partial list of things not to be scared of: he was raised by his white mother and grandmother; in Hawaii (not the streets of Chicago); he went to Harvard; his black father was not around for most of his childhood.

(I’m not trying to say that President-elect Barack Obama has a ‘white’ background, and I don’t try to imagine the kinds of hurdles he had to overcome growing up as he did, where he did, with the skin-color he has. Blackness, unlike our clothing choices, can’t be changed.)

BBC Blogger Matthew Price wrote an interesting article while covering the McCain campaign. He paraphrased why some Obama supporters had switched to the McCain camp,

“It boiled down to a sense that he (Obama) was just a little bit too different. He seemed to have a different outlook, something they weren't quite sure about. Something unfamiliar.”

Here’s a challenge: if you think you’re immune to this, imagine yourself in an unfamiliar city somewhere in the US, and you need to stop and ask directions. There are four men on the curb waiting for a bus, all about the same age, height and weight; one is white and wears a business suit, one is black and wears a track suit, one is swarthy and wears a turban-and-robes, and the last is Hispanic and you can see tattoos on his bare arms. From which of these men do you ask directions?

OK, unfair question. There are a million other details you would factor in. But I’ll make this prediction about you: you’ll direct your question to the guy that you guess will give you a useful answer with the least amount of hassle and time. Part of that will be picking the guy that thinks the same way that you do. He’ll understand what you need right off without a lot of explaining, and he’ll give you directions that make sense to you and also don’t require a lot of explaining.

That, dear readers, is the New Black. It’s also exactly why I voted for Obama. He and his campaign convinced me that he was best choice to give us the most useful answers to our big national questions. Where are we going? How do we get there?

Thank God we’ll have a president we’ll be able to ask questions of!

Next up: a game designer's fantasies of being President of the United States!

A Proposal for a Local Minimum Wage

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:10:53 -0400

For those of you that don’t know me personally, I describe my political leanings as “eat-the-rich-liberal”. I come to it honestly, from hippy parents, public high school in northern California and the UCLA School of Fine Arts.

So, you should also know that I’m all for everyone making a basic living wage. I’ve even spent time trying to work out how much the guy that mows our lawn makes, knowing little to nothing about his business aside from what we pay him. I worry.

For myself, I never expected to even make the kind of living I make now. It’s a blessing, I guess to have the bar so low that I can hurdle over it with just a few lucky breaks. It periodically strikes me that I might be able to retire one day. We’ll see about that. As my wife jokes of her brother’s insistence that she get an IRA; “I’m a comic. I’m just gonna die.”

Funny. ‘Cause it’s true. Our expectations are low.

So, without further ado, here’s my proposal to replace the current national minimum wage laws with a Local Minimum Wage

I assume that only a very small percentage of the population commutes more than 25 miles for a shitty job; the kind of jobs that might be affected by changes to the minimum wage laws. So for the sake of simplicity, let’s say that people generally live where the work.

Our US Census Bureau is a shining, glittering facet of our national government. They gather and publish a vast wealth of information. One of the points of data that the US Census Bureau can extract is the cost of living in any given area. (In fact, here’s an interesting chart regarding each state’s median housing costs!) Some elements of our standard of living vary quite a lot from place to place (like housing), and some things are largely the same no matter where you are in the US (transportation). Everything else is somewhere between (food, medical expenses, clothing).

County by county, or even neighborhood by neighborhood, we could calculate just how expensive it is to live and work there. That number can then be used to establish a nationally mandated, but locally derived minimum wage.

So here’s the rub; I would expect a locally derived minimum wage to be quite a bit different in many places than the current minimum wage. Places like LA, Manhattan, Boston and San Francisco may see their minimum wages increase, while many other places around the country (like northeast Mississippi, where so many of my own relatives live and work) would find their minimum wages decrease. The former would suck for small businesses in expensive cities and the latter would suck for the people that have crappy McJobs in the poorer quarters. To offset the shock, we would need to build a transition period to change things slowly; a 20% step toward the new process every two or three years should do the trick.

The upside of the plan is that areas of the country that have been poor and undervalued for so long will become more attractive to industry and jobs. As jobs move to those places, those places become more desirable places to live, as people begin to migrate there for the jobs, costs of living rise.

Meanwhile, back in the overcrowded cities, McJobs get replaced with better opportunities as the crappy jobs go away and the real-estate gets recycled by local businesses that know their markets and know what can be sold or what services can be supplied to the people that live there.

Over time, jobs spread out more evenly across the country. Some places will always be more expensive, and some places less expensive, but the natural flow of industry will find its level, and the basic minimum wage will allow everyone, no matter where they are, a strong, foundation for building careers and creating more businesses and jobs.

Again, feel free to poke holes in this crackpot theory.

Next up: Maximum Wage Laws! (Eat the Rich!)

And then we all lived

Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:10:05 -0400

I spent the last week traveling - for business – to the UK, and just flew home yesterday, Friday the 10^th. While in the waiting area of the gate at Heathrow Airport, I got to watch the New York Stock Market open. In the twenty minutes or so before I boarded the plane, and lost contact with the land-based world, I got to watch the wounded DOW bleed out another 7%. That’s right, SEVEN PERCENT in TWENTY MINUTES.

As I boarded the plane, I realized that by the time I landed in LA 11+ hours later, the stock market will have had a full day, in fact the final day of the week, in which to do whatever it is that it would do. Would I land to find that American Airlines was out of business? Would we find an eerie and deserted LAX, with no-one to unload our bags, no-one to extend the gangway to our plane and let us disembark?

Would there be air-traffic controllers to even guide us safely to the runway?

I giggled at the thought of it, and settled in for not knowing anything until we landed, and settled into my book (Sons of Heaven by Kage Baker in which the immortal cyborgs also face the end of the world as they know it.)

Of course, we landed and everything was perfectly normal. The world had not ended, I was able to reacquire my baggage and my wife met me out at the curb. Nothing was any different.

My lovely and talented wife ends some of her funniest and most alarming stories with “and then I wasn’t killed.” These are stories from her misspent youth, often about horrible decisions that she made did not actually end in her death.

I feel that really does describe what we’ve been collectively doing with our finances, and will also describe the end result. “And then we all lived.”