Categories
politics

For Sale: Senate Seat

Election season is upon us and that means I get to be entertained by campaign politics, which seems like regular politics on steroids. As I was looking at some of the close races being covered by the New York Times I stumbled upon one little blurb in one senate race that needs to be discussed. The article about this year’s senate race in Rhode Island has this little fact at the end of the article:

All told, more than 80 percent of the money in this race comes from outside the state.

This is just wrong. The fact that money has a large influence in our political system is not news but there should be sharp limits on which money gets to have that influence. I think that at least 75% of all money in any campaign should come from those who fall within the jurisdiction being contested. In other words, for a statewide office such as senator or governor, at least 75% of the money in either campaign should come from within the state. For national offices – in other words the president – 25% or less of the money should come from international donors. For congressional seats 75% of the money should come from within the congressional district. The same should hold true for campaigns at all levels of government. In all these cases the 75% limit should probably be applied to every type of donor – individuals, businesses, and special interest groups.

I suspect that this particular problem is most pronounced in senate and congressional races. I would be very surprised to learn that 80% of the money in a presidential campaign came from a foreign country – just as I would be surprised to learn that the campaign for my local school board seat was being financed by a corporation in Kissimmee Florida. Regardless of where the problem is the worst, the rules should be the same at all levels of government.

Categories
life technology

The Cost of Living with Technology

Years ago, I was in Missouri and I lived very close to a store run by Mennonites. One day while I was browsing in the store I found an ointment that is very soothing for sore noses and stuffy heads. Having those symptoms today, thanks to my allergies, I began looking for the ointment. When I could not find it I began remembering where I got it which finally led to the topic of this post. (How’s that for an introduction?)

Thinking about the Mennonites, and their Amish offshoot, I began to wonder what the cost of living was for them compared to the people who lived near them. The way I figure it, they still have property taxes like the people around them, but they don’t pay for telephones, or cable television. On the other hand, they have horses and other animals to feed and care for. They have carriages to maintain. They mostly grow their own food and make most of their own equipment. My best guess is that there are financial benefits and drawbacks to their lifestyle, but overall I would expect that their cost of living was lower than most people in this country.

I’ll admit that money is not everything in this life, so the real relevant question is – are they any less happy than those of us who have all of our modern conveniences? I suspect that any pollster who was willing to go door-to-door to ask them that question would discover that they are at least as happy as the rest of us. It’s something to consider next time your kid says he’ll die if he doesn’t get what he wants for his birthday.

Categories
culture

Learning for Life

Laura was talking about the need to do better at preparing young women for motherhood. This is not the first time that she has talked about this lack in preparing for life. It has not taken her very long to figure out that her expectations of motherhood were not accurate to the realities of motherhood. She was talking about a great idea which would help young mothers and young women who are not mothers yet.

Laura was proposing that teenage girls be given the opportunity to help young mothers during the early months after their first children have been born so that the new mothers have a little extra help and the young women get a very real perspective on what motherhood is like. They would have fewer incorrect ideas of what to expect.

As we talked about it a little I realized how much things have changed in the way we learn about life from the way they were less than a century ago. Back then children learned what to expect from life when they grew up by participating in the adult activities of their parents. Children might help on the family farm or for those who could not participate in the work that their parents did they might be required to work a job to help support the family. Back then young women learned what motherhood was like by being close to their mothers and by spending a fair deal of time taking care of younger siblings and helping around the house.

In our current society where children are not expected to do anything for their families but instead are supposed to devote their time to learning in the abstract (school) and being cared for as if they were guests at home, it is no wonder that childhood activity is often extended past college with people not knowing what they want out of life. I know that is not always the case but that seems to be the prevailing trend in society.