Bacon's Rebellion

AZA’s ANTIPARTISAN AGENDA

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

Since the fifth post on INFRASTRUCTURE that was just put up is intended primarily for Groveton and Larry G., EMR took the opportunity to post AZA’s revision of his AntiPartisan comment on the Virginia “Official” Saltwater Fish” post by Peter Galuszka on 23 February. For the background on AZA’s AntiPartisan agenda see the comments by Groveton and others in the Saltwater Fish string.

……………..

Professor Risse asked me to update and revise my comment on Mr. Gooze’s Saltwater Fish post:

As of this morning, Dr. Risse’s Perspective “ENOUGH?” indicates that 17 nation-states with over 410, 000,000 citizens in North Africa and the Middle East are in some form of revolt / unrest about the distribution of resources, economic equity and governance structure. (Mauritania and Oman joined the party in the last 24 hours.)

That is more citizens / subjects than the expanded EU and nearly 100,000,000 more than are in the US.

The eventually outcome of these revolts and unrest is, of course, not clear but it is a new day on the planet. An example of what Dr. Risse calls Punctuated Equilibrium as I recall. Now we hear the Beijing riot police are on alert for a demonstration… That DAMNED INTERNET.

If Tunisians, Egyptians and even Libyans can do it, so can Virginians.

Now that the General Catastrophe is over, it is the season for those holding seats in the VA senate and house to declare if they will run again. Mary Margaret W. says she will not…

We suggest everyone within the sound of this Blog calls or emails their favorite two or three MainStream Media contacts and states “I am CONSIDERING running as an AntiPartisan candidate.”

The platform / agenda of AntiPartisanism? Here are some talking points:

Call a constitutional convention in order to redraft the VA constitution in order to:

1. Take Agency control out of the hands of the two currently dominate political Clans and their major campaign contributors.

2. Transform governance structure so that the primary level of decision is at the primary level of impact.

3. Set the terms of the state executive and all regional executives to two four year terms.

4. Insure that state, Regional and Community legislative bodies meet at on a regular basis and never take long ‘recesses’ as the judicial and executive branches do now. Governance is a full time job.

5. Set up a procedure to insure that all legislative districts are drawn by a NonPartisan body elected at the Community level to perform this task every ten years.

6. Expand Freedom of Information and governance transparency.

7. Make other changes to reflect economic, social and physical reality in the 21st century replacing the 18th century ‘traditional’ perspectives as appropriate.

AntiPartisan candidates might also want to pledge to limit their time in state and regional legislatures to 8 years (e. g. two senate terms, four house terms).

For more on the AntiPartisan Agenda and for data on the level of support for Fundamental Transformation of governance structure at the time of the Fall 2010 federal election, check out the posts by Prof. Risse on 1 November and on 8 November in the archives of this Blog.

AZA

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

Comments

16 responses to “AZA’s ANTIPARTISAN AGENDA”

  1. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    well the real challenge of fundamental change in governance once you get past the despotic regimes and are into the realm of Democratic governments is that you have to convince a majority of citizens to to support serious changes to the way they live – like owning and using large private vehicles to achieve personal mobility.

    And that's what I find interesting about EMR and company's "vision" for change.

    The vast majority of folks who are currently opposed to the status quo Dem and Republican strangle-holds are basically opposed to governance in the whole in the first place as abridgment of their individual freedoms and to give but one example – most of them are violently opposed to mass transit and taking money from them to fund it.

    In the world of more functional settlement patterns you need people who see the need for society to support changes that are thought to be beneficial to ….society and some people view this approach as unalterably opposite from the right as an individual to make your own choices even if they are perceived by others to be dumb.

    So the challenge here is – can the case be successfully made to get a majority of people to support fundamental change not only in Governance but Settlement patterns.

    The Soccer Mom example I gave previously is just such an example.

    Mom may well work at another job but even a casual observer of NoVa Demographics knows that there are a substantial number of children who citizens lavish heir taxes on for education and parks and rec, etc and yes.. Mom (and Dad) do get off from work and drive their SUV home to load up their own kids plus neighbor kids to cart them off to a soccer game ..or whatever.

    Can those who believe we must change the way we create and maintain settlement patterns convince Mom that Soccer for the Kids is an existential threat to civilization as we know it?

    That would be a powerful challenge if your goal is to convince people to willingly change in a Democratic society or have the govt tell them what they must do in their own best interests (as decided by the govt).

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry makes a good point, however. It is the one that Prof. Risse makes over and over:

    “Will citizens come to understand their own best interest while there are still the economic, social and physical resources to make the Fundamental Transformations necessary to achieve a sustainable trajectory for civilization.”

    If the current trajectory of dwelling values does not awaken citizens, what will?

    As I read the current market data – comparing similar dwellings in different locations – home values are now dropping in every location except those within walking distance of shared vehicle system stations.

    The difference is that since 2006 the mode-of-the-market houses with big yards Outside R = 30 had already lost 25 to 40 percent of their value but since 2006 those Inside R = 15 had not lost value or had gained until the recent decline.

    Send that email, make that call.

    CJC

  3. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    thank you CJC!

    I support better, more efficient, less destructive, more equitable settlement patterns – as well as transportation and cleaner rivers and air.

    and I may not agree on all the specifics but we are not going to impose these things on people.

    They have to be convinced to act in their own best interests an that is the frustration and the challenge.

    It really matters little in the bigger scheme of things how much of a food fight the settlement pattern wonks and gurus choose to engage in – because until they have the attention of those who will agree or not to change.. it's an exercise in esoteric dithering.

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Comments unrelated to AZA's proposed agenda have been deleted at AZA's request

  5. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    AZA:

    Well said. I am somewhat surprised to be in almost full agreeement with you. De-evolving power closer to the people is something I have been bloviating on for some time. I call it "Death to Dillon".

    Term limits? Absolutely.

    Full time legislation? Absolutely.

    Re-district without attempting an "incumbent full employment act"? Absolutely.

    Well written.

  6. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    Here's a troubling thing for those who believe in urban settlement patterns:

    " xplaining a Consequence of Closing Freddie and Fannie
    By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM
    Among the interesting consequences that could follow from shutting down the mortgage lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is the possibility that borrowers who now pay the same interest rates would be charged different rates in the absence of a federal guarantee.

    In an article in Friday’s paper, I described one example of the way that rates could diverge: Borrowers in rural and urban areas could face higher rates than those in the suburbs.

    ….

    Mainstream companies, from supermarkets to providers of high-speed Internet access, would rather do business in the suburbs. Financial companies are no exception. As a result, there is less competition to sell mortgages in urban and rural areas.

    A related, or overlapping, explanation is demographic. Poverty rates are higher in urban and rural areas. Potential borrowers tend to have lower credit scores and less money saved for down payments. In other words, lenders may charge higher rates on average because borrowers in these areas disproportionately pose greater risks."

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/explaining-a-consequence-of-closing-freddie-and-fannie/

  7. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    Id' agree to Groveton's "death to Dillon" concept with one proviso – that local citizens be given the right to initiate referenda and to initiate recall elections of elected.

    If these two things were available to citizens – government would become much more responsive.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry said:

    “Here's a troubling thing for those who believe in urban settlement patterns ” citing a NYT item “Explaining a Consequence of Closing Freddie and Fannie” By BINY AMIN APPELBAUM”

    One assumes what Larry was “concerned about” is anyone who believes in FUNCTIONAL Urban settlement patterns.

    Not to worry, Larry.

    The one who needs to worry is Biny. He /she is just a decade late. It is now clear that the fastest rising rates of crime, and poverty are in the lower density areas that some call “suburban.”

    Biny has 1970 to last 1990s view of lower density areas. And it is clear he /she has no idea what “suburban” means.

    You will note the study quoted was published in 2004 – data from 1990 to 2000? The recent work on Location Efficient Mortgages has sophisticated lenders aware that the best place to lend is in areas with functional and sustainable settlement patterns.

    Besides that is the only place that house prices are holding up. Lenders do not give bargain rates to buyers in areas with declining values. Have you checked the value of the houses in your Dooryard recently?

    Larry, please stop knocking yourself out looking for any scrap of evidence that your perspective on settlement patterns. Just admit your are wrong and move on.

    AZA

  9. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    @AZA

    The Republicans have consistently claimed that mortgage companies should be free to decide where they want to loan money (or not) rather than the govt.

    And this would be true even if the mortgage companies have got it wrong.

    For instance, mortgage companies if left alone will redline urban areas.

    Now you keep saying that we need fundamental change in governance and here we have a central govt and non-local mortgage companies involved in the decision process.

    So my question to you is what happens if the govt gets out of it and the mortgage companies pull out of much of the urban areas?

    Is that something that can be addressed with fundamental change in governance (or should it be)?

    I don't really think I was advocating one direction or the other but asking whether govt should stay out of the mortgage decisions and underwriting mortgages or should they not?

    what say you?

  10. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry Gross:

    Why not propose that AZA amend his Agenda to include recall and referendum? They may perfect sense at the Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community scales.

    EMR

  11. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    well I have not stopped AZA from signing on to those two and I'd consider both of them more fundamental to governance than a lot of things.

    If citizens could get things to a vote instead of waiting for a politician to do it and if citizens could get rid of a politician any time they felt he/she no longer represented their interests, we'd see a lot of fundamental change.

    But I'm not so sure everything would go the way that you'd want.

  12. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    don't ya'll find it ironic that Bob McDonnell is begging his Republican counterparts in Congress to not cut METRO funding?

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry Gross:

    Re your 5:19 PM post “What say you?”

    I say you are profoundly confused.

    Re your 6:19 PM post “do you find it ironic?”

    No.

    It is not the political party that matters, it is not conservative vs liberal that matters,

    It is the structure of governance. No one can get elected under the current system (or get reelected) without doing just what The Clown Show does for a living.

    AZA

  14. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    clown show?

    ha ha ha

    AZA – you might be a clown show yourself if you can't even respond to simple questions about settlement patterns and governance and hide behind less than pithy non sequitur.

    The question I gave you is where does a mass transit like METRO come from?

    what kind of governance does it take to get a mass transit system like METRO built and kept operating?

    more succinctly – who should pay for it in an ideal governance scenario – one that you would say is correct?

    this gets back to how you'd convince people to sign on to the kinds of governance that you believe necessary for fundamental change.

    Right now – it appears that METRO depends on 150 million dollars of money that does not come from the Washington NUR.

    Why is that?

    Why is METRO not fully funded by the people who use it and depend on it within the boundaries of the NUR?

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Let me take a crack at the comment addressed to “@AZA”:

    “The Republicans have consistently claimed that mortgage companies should be free to decide where they want to loan money (or not) rather than the govt.

    “And this would be true even if the mortgage companies have got it wrong.”

    I was not aware of a ‘consistent’ position by either political Clan.

    What ever the position is, the Enterprise loaning the money that would make the decision.

    Since the Great Recession there is a different view of what is a good place to invest and what is a bad place.

    “For instance, mortgage companies if left alone will redline urban areas.”

    Define “urban areas.” Do you mean:

    Areas with over 10 persons per acre gross (the census definition where about 80 percent of the citizens of the US now live)?

    Areas with at least 10 persons per acre at the Alpha Community scale (minimum sustainable settlement patterns WITH CHEAP ENERGY where about 70 percent of the citizens of the US now live)?

    Areas with declining house values (Most places not within walking distance of a shared-vehicle system station.)?

    Areas where ‘minority’ residents are in the majority?

    Areas with that were once called ‘the ghetto’?

    Mortgage Enterprises will loan where they can make money and under various definitions of ‘urban’ they would exclude 60 to 80 percent of the Households.

    See why you have to abandon Core Confusing Words? Your comment on the need to speak the citizens language recently is like telling a doctor to call all aliments of the trunk ‘ouchies in the tummy.”

    “Now you keep saying that we need fundamental change in governance and here we have a central govt and non-local mortgage companies involved in the decision process.

    “So my question to you is what happens if the govt gets out of it and the mortgage companies pull out of much of the urban areas?”

    The two federal Agencies ‘getting out’ does not mean that there would be no Agency controls or parameters for doing business in a Community, a New Urban Region or a MegaRegion.

    “Is that something that can be addressed with fundamental change in governance (or should it be)?”

    Yes it can and yes it should be.

    “I don't really think I was advocating one direction or the other but asking whether govt should stay out of the mortgage decisions and underwriting mortgages or should they not?”

    No, you have again jumped in the pepper vat desperately looking for fly specks to justify your warped vision of reality.

    ACSGP

  16. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    there is no core confusing words to those who really want to communicate – only obstacles put in place by those who insist you think and talk their way or else.

    redlining is pretty apparent as to what it is.

    It happens in dense settlement patterns we normally think of as cities or urban areas but dilapidated and crime-ridden.

    In those locations, private mortgage companies without govt involvement will not loan money even to qualified applicants because they fear that bad stuff will happen that will cause the occupant to abandon the property.

    "bad stuff"…like gangs moving into an area and making unsafe for families, etc.

Leave a Reply

ADVERTISEMENT