Thoughts on election

In many ways, Democrats deserved the huge slap in the face they received in this week's election. The really unfortunate part is that it had to come as a result of promoting right-wing fanatics who are hell bent on pushing their pro-business-at-all-cost and anti-humanity agenda with no regard to plunging the US deeper into the toilet than the Bush-Cheney years already achieved.

Dems and Obama both deserved this. Dems in Congress completely squandered the mandate they were given in 2008, and then proved once again they suck at running coordinated campaigns. They have been so focused on glowing in their glory, they really were not interested in reforming how business is done in Washington.

Obama deserved this because he completely forgot why and how he got his job as soon as he got inaugurated. He was quick to adopt the ways of DC, push half-solutions in backroom deals just to be able to say he got something done. He needed to stand his ground, even if that meant not getting any of his key reforms passed for the first 2 years. He needed to name and shame anyone blocking true reform, as opposed to losing the moral high ground once he started becoming one of them. Healthcare was trickier, he really should have started with Wall Street. A huge majority of voters would have stood behind him if he had tried to push true reform in this space. First error of course was to bring half of the Goldman Sachs exec suite to Washington with him!

As for the right-wing nuts who have completely monopolized the GOP agenda, I don't know what bothers me more: That many of them are utterly incompetent and downright intellectually challenged. That they lie, cheat and intimidate as the only way to beat their opponents, since they don't know what reasoned debate is and their ideas have no chance of prevailing on their own merits. That they claim to be patriots while completely selling out their country and constituents to benefit the few, rich and powerful who bankroll their campaigns. And so on. I guess it all bothers me. A lot.

I would pity them all if they weren't so dangerous. We saw during the Bush years what happens when these people have control. Jobs are lost. Lives are lost. Nature is raped senselessly. And the very rich get WAY richer.

John 'I fell asleep in the tanning booth' Boehner is pathetic. He said this week that President Obama needs to change to bow to the will of the people. Yeah, just like Boehner and his buddies did in 2008, right?

But let's go with it for a minute. Just like Boehner doesn't seem to believe that the overwhelming Democratic vote in 2008 was a mandate for Obama to push his agenda, let's also question whether the overwhelming Republican vote this week is a mandate for them to push their agenda.

Instead, let's do this. I challenge Boehner to commit to bowing to the will of the people. Let's setup a very broad national referendum - possibly as broad as the census - on the key questions that keep dividing this nation: Healthcare; gun control; abortion; tax reform; campaign finance reform; true democracy vs. the antiquated electoral college; etc...

We would make sure to do 2 things: 1) We would ensure a very thorough security system to make sure the results were not 'modifiable'. Biometric authentication with hard copy record of each vote to start. 2) Each party would agree to support legislation and/or constitutional amendments to enact the will of the people.

Ready? Watch Boehner and his buddies laugh off the idea. They know they only work for a small - albeit powerful - minority of voters in this country. They have absolutely no interest in enacting the will of the people.

If I was Obama, I'd go on the offensive for the next 2 years. Demand congressional investigations into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and all other neo-cons who led this country to war on the basis of lies and fabrication, causing untold death and suffering. Demand campaign finance reform and expose in the process the huge sums of shady money that paid for the Republicans to get elected this week. Put them on the defensive. Scare their corporate backers into realizing they will be brought into the spotlight and their influence exposed.

And don't stop there. Shake up your cabinet. Fire Geithner for God's sake! Fire Gates and put a peace maker in that job. Demand nothing less than full accountability from everyone in your administration. Make examples out of those who don't get the message. Clean up your own house. You will regain the trust of the people if you follow through on what you promised your voters in 2008!

Letter to Senator John Cornyn

I wrote Senator Cornyn some time ago to urge him to support the EPA's right to regulate C02 pollution under the Clean Air Act. GOP senators were mobilizing to prevent this from happening due to pressure from industry lobbies who want to keep polluting freely.

Below is the response I received, to which I replied. You can find my response below his:


On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:31 AM, wrote:

Dear Mr. Sarda:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s greenhouse gas endangerment finding.  I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this matter.

In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded in Massachusetts v. EPA that carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases may be regulated under the Clean Air Act (CAA).  In response to this decision, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a finding on December 7, 2009, that the present concentrations of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, constitute an endangerment to public health and welfare.  A second EPA finding concluded that emissions from new motor vehicles and their engines also endanger public health, and therefore are also subject to regulation under the CAA.  I am pleased that our nation’s air quality has steadily improved since implementation of the CAA; however, I remain concerned that the treatment of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, as pollutants under the CAA is a disservice to the American people and misrepresents the legislative intent of the Act.

I support efforts to improve our nation's air quality based on sound scientific and economic principles.  However, the EPA's determination on this matter disregards numerous proposals before Congress that seek to address our nation's environmental challenges, in favor of expanding EPA's regulatory authority under the CAA.  Any decisions regarding how to control greenhouse gas emissions should take into consideration the impact these costly regulations will have on stakeholders, including states, industries, and citizens.  Furthermore, it is essential that this process is transparent and accountable to all Americans, and I strongly believe that Congress is the most appropriate forum to review the scope and magnitude of the impact that the EPA's endangerment finding would have on our economy. 

As such, I joined several of my Senate colleagues in co-sponsoring Senate Joint Resolution 26 (S.J. Res. 26), a resolution which would have prevented the EPA from moving forward with their endangerment finding or proposing any substantially similar regulations.  Unfortunately, the Senate failed to enact S.J. Res. 26 when it was considered on June 10, 2010, and I remain concerned about the consequences of empowering unelected bureaucrats to impose a new national energy tax on American families.  As a member of the United States Senate, I look forward to a full and open policy debate regarding environmental issues, and you may be certain that I will keep your views in mind as the Senate continues its work on this matter.

I appreciate having the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate.  Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator

517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov


This is what I sent today in response to the reply from his office:

Dear Senator Cornyn,

thank you for your response. However I must point to a part of your response that exemplifies the problem we're facing:

'I support efforts to improve our nation's air quality based on sound scientific and economic principles.'

The reason that EVERY LIVING SYSTEM on this planet is in decline - every single one - is because economic principles have been used as a primary guide to drive decisions. Killing the ecosystem and its inhabitants is not sound business. As long as short-sighted, profit-minded special interests control the agenda, the health of our country and its citizens will continue to suffer.

If a foreigner tries to endanger American lives, we call it terrorism. If an American business does the exact same thing, we call it free enterprise and 'sound economic principles'.

The leaders of our nation, yourself included, have a moral and civic obligation to protect our land from any harm that can come to it. Sometimes the right choice is not the cheapest choice, but it's still the right choice. Letting the EPA regulate industries that pollute our air is not only within their mandate, it is an absolute necessity!

Do the right thing for all your constituents, Senator, not just the small group of industry barons who have bottomless pockets to finance political campaigns.

Sincerely,


Bruno Sarda

Blog Action Day: Water as a human right

Today is Blog Action Day 2010. This year, the topic is water. Why?

Water is something all living creatures on this planet need to survive. And as much as some boardroom executives may claim different, nobody owns water. We just use it. It evaporates, it gets flushed, it works its way back into the system somehow. Fact is, water can't be manufactured. No new water has been created since the beginning of time. Sure, different climate patterns means that at different times there could be more or less water in the air, or in the soil, or in the oceans, etc...

The bottom line is this: We all need water, just like we all need air. And just like with air, what one group or country does to its water is bound to have downstream impacts on others, neighbors as well as people on the other side of the globe. More and more experts in fact are predicting that water may become a key trigger for armed conflict in the coming decades.

So on this Blog Action Day, my message to my fellow humans is this, and especially those closer to me in the Western world: None of us have more of a right to water than another. When we use more than our fair share, we are stealing from someone else. When we pollute and waste the water we have, we are committing crimes against our species and our planet.

I was happy to see the United Nations declare access to water a human right recently. But then this needs to turn into meaningful action:
- Never again should we see the type of corporate greed that led to the water riots of Cochabamba several years back. All nations should secure water as a public utility and protect its access, ensure its cleanliness, and defend it against any attempt by one group to profit from its control and distribution.
- All companies that rely on water as part of their business operations must be held to the highest standards to safeguard it from pollution or excessive, wasteful use. The shipping, oil and mining industries specifically come to mind for the former, and some forms of agriculture for the latter.

My sincere hope is to see more and more people act as citizens of the earth before acting as citizens of a given nation, or employees of a given company, members of a given religion or political party, etc...

We only have one planet, it belongs to all of us - and none of us. Let's cherish it, and treat it as though our grand children and their grand children and their grand children have as much of a right to a vibrant, healthy and bio-diverse planet as the one our grand parents inherited from their grand parents.

Real Estate and the Web

I've been fortunate to work with the Web since 1995, and have witnessed many business models go through dramatic changes in the process. I saw first hand during my days with Charles Schwab how millions of online  investors became more empowered than ever. Banking, shopping, travel planning, communicating, working remotely as well as in the office, looking up information (when was the last time you went into a public library, dialed information or opened a phone book?) all changed. Many transactional aspects of our lives were impacted by the advent of Web 1.0.

Then came Web 2.0, the social Web, creating multidimensional elements to what were often binary transactions. Being able to read opinions of prior purchasers before buying a book, booking a hotel room, etc... Not only opinions about what they had purchased, but who they had bought it from. eBay made buyer and seller ratings their hallmark.

One industry that has remained remarkably stale - as far as I can tell - is residential real estate. The more I pay attention to it, the more it seems antiquated and full of costly inefficiencies, and I wonder why the Web has not cracked this business. And I'm not just saying that because I'm in the process of trying to sell my house in a difficult market (well, maybe that is why I'm saying it...).

Sure, there are plenty of sites now where you can search for listings and see basically what an agent used to see in the MLS. But even if you do all the hard work, you're still forced to go through an agent to reach the buyer, and your agent will have to talk to the seller's agent, and so on... I have personally not run across any good sites that rate real-estate agents (some sites do this even for school teachers!). I have not found any good social apps that help connect buyers and sellers directly. Even leaving aside the (excessive!!) sales commissions still attached to real-estate transactions, wouldn't a prospective buyer much prefer to communicate directly with me and other area sellers to ask questions about the neighborhood, the house, the schools, etc..?

Some agents seem to use Twitter at times to showcase their listings, like the one below, but I'm not sure that is very effective without many followers...:
@NWAustinrealtor Just reduced the price on this great N Austin Home. Who do you know that wants to live here? Let me know. http://postlets.com/repb/4122661 

I'm an online marketing professional and I believe in the power of the Web to eliminate inefficient intermediaries and connect buyers and sellers. As such, I have a hard time sitting tight while told to wait for the 'right buyer to come along'. I intuitively believe there are proactive levers I could be pulling to market my house, tap into pools of buyers who are themselves trying to make sense of all the inventory out there, etc... Problem is, I don't know where to start.

Anyone have suggestions as to how the social Web can be put to work to modernize the way houses are bought and sold? Is this done somewhere already, in the US or elsewhere? Would love some ideas!!

PS: And of course, if you know someone who is looking for a beautiful NW Austin home with gorgeous pool, send them my way :-)

.

Great job description!

Friends,

Change Congress is hiring A SOCIAL MEDIA MAVEN (aka, "Maven")(logo in the works).

Maven will be charged with cultivating Change Congress's social media community. Using whatever tools make sense, s/he will drive messaging and activity to grow the community of activists eager to wrench fundamental change in DC.

Requirements:

• Endless social media (blogging, Twitter, Facebook, Vimeo, etc.) experience;
• Endless passion for the cause of fundamental change;
• Endless energy to leverage the political events of the moment into a continuing narrative about why fundamental change is necessary.

Duties:

• Working with sister organizations, you will feed the community regularly and well, with messaging around news events, candidates, organizations, and activism connected to the cause of changing Congress, as well as petitions where appropriate;
• Working with researchers, you will identify stories relevant to the cause, and feed the community with those stories;
• Working with leaders from the reform community, you will feed the Change Congress blog, either with your own content, or with invited content;
• Working with your own imagination, you will plot strategies for driving energy to this movement;
• In 10 years time, you will be thought of as the one person who understood how social media could change the world, because you will have changed the world using social media. (How management will assess this requirement is still under review.)

This position is currently part-time, though it will grow with demonstrated success. We will agree on a regular level of output, and on targets to measure success. You will be wildly underpaid given the work you're doing (saving democracy), but you'll feel very good about it.

Please, only qualified, serious candidates need apply. Submit your resume to monica@change-congress.org. Include 2-3 paragraphs or a link to a YouTube video (joke) (maybe) telling us why you would be perfect for this job.

And if you're not the perfect person, please pass this along to that person.

Thanks!

Larry Lessig

Letters to my senators

Every single Republican senator has decided to oppose Wall Street reform. All of them. Some of these people are actually pretty sensible. But standing up for what they believe, and for what their consituents want by an overwhelming majority, would be political suicide if it means going against party leadership and against their biggest donors.

So tonight I sent the following letter to both Texas senators, Hutchinson and Cornyn. I don't expect more than a canned answer thanking me for sharing my concerns...

Dear Senator:

I am disappointed by your vote against moving forward on Wall Street reform. Self-regulation has failed. Let's learn the lessons of the S&L collapses, the Wall Street scandals of the early 2000's, and the more recent banking debacles and abuses, and enact the reform and controls this country needs to stand tall once again.

Incidentally, please reply specifiying what amounts you've accepted in campaign contributions from the Financial Services industry. Your sworn duty is to the citizens and consumers of this nation whose tax dollars fund your paychecks, not to the irresponsible profiteers whose reckless greed nearly collapsed our economy and whose deep pockets and undue influence on Congress continue to threaten our democratic process.


Sincerely,


Bruno Sarda

Irony and reciprocity

As I read about all the emotions surrounding this question of illegal immigration, I can't help but find some irony in it.

Those who advocate cracking down on illegal immigrants in the US primarily argue that 'illegals' commit crimes and consume public services like schools and emergency medical care without paying for them.

First, let me say I believe anyone who comes to this country should do so following the law, arduous as it is to keep up with and navigate immigration laws. But the idea here is that demonizing an entire class of people who came to this country without proper status, sometimes decades ago, is terribly misguided.

Now, as far as I know, undocumented workers in the US are actually much less likely to commit a crime than the population at large. The vast majority just want life, liberty and the freedom to pursue happiness. And like with any large group, there are some who commit crimes, and those should be prosecuted for their crimes, no more or less than anyone else who commits the same crime. But to paint this community as 'dangerous' or 'a threat' is pure fear mongering.

And the fact is these 'illegals' actually pay into the system as well. They rent houses and apartments. They buy cars. They consume services in their communities. They pay sales taxes. And many of them actually do pay payroll taxes, even if they have no prospect of getting that money back. Those who argue that illegals are a financial burden to their communities may want to broaden their perspective, and not just look at what public services these individuals use, but in fact what they contribute to their local economies. Border states like Arizona and California would experience severe economic consequences if these populations should disappear overnight.

Now here's the ironic part. The people who complain about the illegal status of these immigrants and the so called burden they create in their communities should apply the same logic as basis to question US policies and practices abroad.

For example, the US regularly engages in illegal activities on foreign soil - illegal per United Nations charter, Geneva Convention, International Criminal Court, etc..., but also local laws. Where's the outrage? Surely if it's a crime for a foreigner to be in the US illegally, then it is no less of a crime for the US to be in another country illegally, and/or to engage in activities there that violate local and international laws?

Also, it is widely documented that multi-national companies, many emanating from the US, unfairly and sometimes illegally plunder natural resources across the world, exploit cheap labor under conditions that are illegal in the US, etc... If you think illegal immigrants are a burden to US communities, go ask local communities across the world if they feel US corporate activities and practices are net positive or net negative for them? When some countries muster up the courage to say enough and try to protect their borders from the invasive and destructive practices of corporate interests, it is usually reported as defiance to our sovereignty. As if we should have unlimited rights and access to their resources, yet we don't believe in reciprocating?

The politics of fear, combined with media conglomerates that only care about the business value of news, not the accuracy or fairness or objectivity of what they report, add up to a toxic recipe leading to large parts of the population being misinformed and unnecessarily fearful. History teaches us that's never good news.

Double standard

I was late getting to work yesterday. The freeway I usually take to get to the office was closed. Turns out a car had overturned and resulted in a fatality. I don't know who the victim was, but my heart nonetheless goes to their family and friends.

The scene that resulted was almost surreal. An entire freeway was completely closed to rush hour traffic. As I drove - very slowly - onto to the off-ramp, I could see there must have been a dozen patrol cars on site. Multiple officers were taking photos and video of the scene. Other officers were collecting pieces of broken glass and other debris. Others were taking measurements. Senior officers were overlooking this whole undertaking. And I thought wow, what a level of effort expanded to determine why this life was lost, to make sure justice is done.

Then my mind wandered to places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Where a long, brutal war kills blindly on a daily basis. Where many innocent victims will die needlessly just in hopes we might hit a bad guy, whatever that is and whoever gets to determine what that is. And it seems that rather than expand energy and resources to investigate and shed light on things that go wrong, to make sure justice is done because after all a life is a life, energy is instead expanded on covering up and keeping the truth from coming out.

The parallel struck me. That as a society we expect exact answers on things like what caused this car accident and who will be held accountable for the damages. But that when we learn our government - or its private contractors - indiscriminently kill and main and destroy private property in another country (or sometimes in this one!), we do not expect they should be held to a similar level of accountability and transparency.

Why is that? Are we saying a human life over there is worth less than a human life here?