Nebraska's Blue Dot Envisions the (d)emocratic Ideals of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson

As a proud Nebraskan, I am deeply concerned about the proposed changes to our state's unique Electoral College Vote (ECV) system. While I respect Governor Jim Pillen's commitment to lowering property taxes, I must express my concern about ending Nebraska's approach of splitting ECVs.

Our current system, shared only with Maine, gives Nebraska a louder voice on the national stage. It draws attention from presidential campaigns, media outlets, and brings presidential campaigns to our doorstep. This spotlight on Nebraska isn't just about political clout; it's about ensuring our values and concerns are heard at the highest levels of government.

The wisdom of our Founding Fathers echoes through this debate. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, architects of our nation's foundation, warned against the dangers of concentrated power. They envisioned a system where power checks power, fostering moderation and compromise. Our split ECV system embodies this vision, encouraging candidates to engage with Nebraskans, and sets a stage to encourage younger Nebraskans to stay here after graduation. An imbalanced, one party system stifles debate, encourages the brain drain, leads to extremism, and removes Madison’s intent that incumbents act with moderation and caution.

Madison's words in Federalist Papers #47 and #51 remind us that diffusing power protects against tyranny and corruption. By pitting power against power and subjecting government actions to a system of checks and balances, Americans created a form of government that today is the model for much of the world.  By maintaining our current ECV system, we honor this principle, ensuring that the diverse voices are represented in presidential elections.

The "blue dot" in Nebraska isn't a flaw; it's a feature that keeps our state politically dynamic and relevant. It forces candidates to consider the nuances of our electorate, promoting a healthier democracy where ideas compete and compromise flourishes. Eliminating this system would remove the fear of being punished in the next election cycle; a crucial incentive for elected officials to moderate their positions and respect the views of all voters.

In these times of political polarization, Nebraska has an opportunity to lead by example. By preserving our split ECV system, we can show the nation that it's possible to elevate the competition of ideas while ensuring the sanctity of our democratic process. Yes, some have and will abuse this intent but by leading with better ideas, rather than flexing political muscle, Nebraska  can demonstrate to the rest of the nation what’s been lost in these tumultuous times and help forge a path back to a healthy two party system.

As we look to the future, let's choose the path that honors our state's unique role in national politics, upholds the principles of our Founding Fathers, and strengthens the fabric of our democracy. Nebraska's split ECV system isn't just about electoral strategy; it's about preserving the very essence of American democracy that our forefathers envisioned.

The Solution Ain't Rocket Science, its Depolitizing Green Tech

 

The endless waves of change have many gasping for air. The Surgeon General reports Americans are suffering an epidemic of anxiety. Apart of this is the concern that government is broken and unresponsive.

In November, many voted to disrupt the state of politics in hopes of better and more responsive government. Historically, external shocks spurred political change. These shocks were often the result of war, new technology, access to rights, demographic change, or populism.

In the early 20th century, Nebraskan William Jennings Bryan’s populist Presidential campaigns and his dalliance with evangelicals as the prosecutor in the Scopes Trial (where he argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools) shocked America’s political system. Today, in an intriguing 100 year echo, we see a similar populist shock in the guise of a second Trump Administration.

We'll be fighting in the streets, with our children at our feet. And the morals that they worship will be gone (Won’t Get Fooled Again, The Who).

At the heart of this change is the question how is good or responsive government defined.

Some argue that ending the Electoral College will solve the problem, although our Founders found direct democracy frightening. Others argue for modified voting models, including Ranked Choice. Andrew Yang says the current system incentivizes bad behavior by elected officials. Everyone seems to agree there is too much money in politics.

Personally, good government is fiscally responsible: something both parties willfully ignore.

I'll tip my hat to the new Constitution. Take a bow for the new revolution. Smile and grin at the change all around, then I'll get on my knees and pray, we don't get fooled again.

Today, the national debt is $36,000,000,000,000 or $106,626 per citizen. The right-of-center Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reports Trump contributed $7.8 trillion and Biden contributed $4.3 trillion to the national debt. Regardless, both parties continue to ignore this well-kicked can, and Americans have a government they are unwilling to pay for.

A change, it had to come. We knew it all along. We were liberated from the fold, that's all. And the world looks just the same, and history ain't changed, cause the banners, they all flown in the last war.

How did this happen? The apparent reason is the ‘if they’re for it, we’re against it’ charade. Team politics causes gridlock and condemns compromise – and both parties are guilty. Dan Osbourne’s non-partisan run for the U.S. Senate was propelled by running as an Independent. Arguably, running as an Independent, Osbourne got 75,000 more votes than Preston Love (D) despite 20,000 fewer votes being cast in the Osbourne/ Fisher race: it’s not about policy – it’s about party.

There's nothing in the street, looks any different to me. The parting on the left, is now parting on the right

Another shirked issue is the well-established fact that climate change is caused by human behavior.  One wonders why anyone would willfully endanger future generations.   

Today, the United States is the world’s top oil producer, with 36 billion barrels in reserves. Nonetheless, oil companies received $7 trillion in global subsidies in 2022. Predictably, propped up by your taxes, The Wall Street Journal reported big oil had record profits last year, including Exon raking in $36 billion and Chevron $21.4 billion.

One thing is sure: technological advances fire the economy, create jobs, and open new markets. The book Chip Wars examines how microchips realigned the politics of Southeast Asian politics, drawing the US closer to Taiwan, pushing the USA to the front of the infantile tech industry, and creating millions of jobs and mountains of wealth. In the mid-90s, as middle-class Americans accessed desktop computers and the internet, it created jobs, new companies, online sales, and mountains of wealth. Today, Nvidia, a chip manufacturer, capitalized at over two trillion dollars, is the most valuable company in the world.

Today, as the rest of the world responds to global warming, demonizing green tech for team politics not only advances Chinese tech, it’s bad for workers, bad for jobs, bad for the future, and forgoes mountains of wealth. The solution ain’t rocket science, its depoliticizing green tech.

Meet the new boss: same as the old boss. Then I'll get on my knees and pray, we don't get fooled again. 

Gen Z, Anxiety, and the Surge of Suffering

 

Today, it seems we are bombarded with existential threats to human existence, including global warming, the next presidency, illegal immigration, unscrupulous media reporting, and the next pandemic. Since the 2020 pandemic, Americans are suffering from increased levels of anxiety

In his latest book, The Anxious Generation, best-selling author Jonathan Haidt examines how social media and isolation have negatively affected ‘Gen Z’ [ages 12 – 27]. In an era of “safetyism,” where parents hesitate to let children walk to the end of their driveway without supervision, children are safe at home but released on the internet, where pornography, bullying, hate groups, and other high-risk behaviors are a click away.

Help, I need somebody.

 Haidt finds that America’s next generation of workers are emotionally isolated and suffering from diagnosable mental illnesses, including depression, anxiety, and ADHD. Symptoms include being socially awkward, demotivated, unable to focus, self-harm, and suicide. Described as a Surge of Suffering in Haidt’s previous book, The Coddling of the American Mind, mental illness is rising rapidly and affecting college students at unprecedented rates, including anxiety (25%), depression (20%), and ADHD (7%).  Self-harm and suicide levels have risen dramatically since 2010. This “rewiring” is caused by over-exposure to electronic devices, including smartphones.

The U.S. Surgeon General‘s report, Social Media and Youth Mental Health, reports that 95% of youth aged 13 – 17 report they “almost constantly” are engaging in social media. The American Psychological Association issued, Health Advisory on Social Media Use in Adolescence, discussing ways parents can, you guessed it, protect their kids from the effects of social media and the anxiety that accompanies it.

When I was younger, so much younger than today, I never needed anybody's help in any way.

And for the second year, The Walton Family Foundation – Gallup Voices of Gen Z Study reports that merely 51% “of Gen Z are thriving in their lives.” Of these, 79% of the next generation of workers “agree they have a great future,” while only half report feeling prepared for that future.

Similar aberrant behaviors are exhibited among older Americans. Just in time for the election, Iran, along with China and Russia, are, once again, using social media to spread conspiracies, provoke activists with fake news, heightening division and elevating social anxiety. And although outlets like the Omaha World-Herald, FactCheck.org, RealClearPolitics, PBS, and SNOPES actively debunk political stories and quotes, efforts to undermine American self-confidence and trust in the system are working.

But now these days are gone, I'm not so self-assured. Now I find I've changed my mind and opened up the doors

Amid this distrust and anxiety, PEW found that 41% of respondents reported that the American Dream was once possible but no longer achievable. Gallup reports that 83% feel American morals are “only fair” and “poor.” As anxiety goes up, support for representative democracy, such as ours, is increasingly questioned. Support for authoritarian leaders and autocratic regimes is rising in the USA and numerous other nations. According to PEW, 83% of Americans feel that elected officials “don’t care” what people like us think.

But every now and then, I feel so insecure. I know that I just need you like I've never done before

Recently, I became aware of efforts to help, including a 24-hour crisis helpline, by dialing 988. On September 28^th, the suicide awareness and mental health Out of the Darkness walk and fundraiser will take place at Stinson Park. Bridges to Mental Health trains medical practitioners to heighten mental health awareness among medical practitioners. Omaha's Kim Foundation “serves as a supportive resource and compassionate voice for lives touched by mental illness and suicide.”

Help me if you can. I'm feeling down, and I do appreciate you being around.
Help me get my feet back on the ground. Won't you please, please help me!

Times, They Are a Changin''

Come November, as things stand at the moment, voters will choose between two very different visions of America’s future. Democrats are offering a business-as-usual vision that respects the institutions of self-governance. Conversely, Republican activists are signaling distrust for anyone and everything by vying to insert a norm-breaking, self-described authoritarian.  Things are so akimbo, the NGOP endorsed against their own incumbents including Senators Fisher, Ricketts, and Congressmen Bacon, Smith, and Flood.

Still don't know what I was waitin' for, And my time was runnin' wild. Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes: Turn and face the strange (Changes, David Bowie))

On both the right and the left, internal factions have made leadership difficult. Voters might recall Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, and recent Nebraska governors straddled similar divides. Biden, despite recent challenges, has, with limited success, navigated the complex interests of Progressive extremism, moderation, political partisanship, and existential threats including Gaza, Ukraine, Taiwan, COVID, global warming, and cyber-terrorism. Among Biden’s credits is his selective silence, allowing him to negotiate in today’s hyper-partisanship and often unreasonable climate.

Ch-ch-changes. There's gonna have to be a different man. Time may change me, but I can't change time.

The Parties intentionally force voters to choose the political extreme or cast inconsequential votes. Traditional conservatives and liberals are pigeonholed between a MAGA agenda and the Progressive Left.

Often, partisans argue moral equivalency with, “You think we’re nuts? Look at what they’re doing!” Suggesting their form of crazy is less toxic.

On the right, MAGA conservatives have grabbed the political reins by electing candidates across all layers of government. Their intent is to redefine American norms and traditions by undermining governing institutions, weakening the Constitution, justifying a violent insurgency, and normalizing behaviors that 10 years ago they would have considered inconceivable.

On the left, Progressives leverage educational systems to alter language and thus how we think. American pop culture has as much global influence as our military might. Tied together, our vocabulary of ideas includes, knowingly or not, legacy views on race, gender, and religion, including definitions of good and bad behaviors. 

Obviously, language, and through it, norms, values, and thereby behaviors, have evolved for thousands of years.  America’s language and the imagery embedded within it, developed in a society historically dominated by white males and Protestantism. 

For example, I once used the phrase, ‘personal responsibility’ in meeting. The room exploded, accusing me of using ‘conservative code words.’ Recently, campus protesters used the Arabic term ‘intifada’ (uprising) despite knowing the term offended others. In my case, I learned quickly that I needed to change my choice of words if I wanted to successfully navigate the conversation.

Ch-ch-changes. Don't tell them to grow up and out of it.

Words and how we use them, matter. An aspect of modern politics is redefining language and the images embedded within it - thereby changing values, and ultimately behavior. Sometimes the results are desirable while in other cases, its caveat emptor (buyer beware). In a politicized setting, illegal immigrant carries a very different mental image than undocumented worker or DACA recipient.  President Mr. Obama’s refusal to use the phrase, radical Islamic terrorist, demonstrated his choice to protect American-Muslims. Equally poignant was, ‘Chinese flu’ despite its use being associated with increases in violence against Eastern-Asian Americans.

As society explores greater equality, there are five attitudes associated with changing mores including rejection, tolerance, acceptance, celebration, and participation. In 1996, 27% of Americans supported same-sex marriage: today that number is 71% - a societal move from tolerance to acceptance.

It’s important to be aware and thoughtful while society navigates a tsunami of societal change. If we normalize deviancy, we’re going to get more of it – especially when it emanates from the highest ranks of political office. What we accept and how we adapt will define how we, and others, live out our lives.

Strange fascinations, changes are taking the pace I'm goin' through. Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes

Today, we see college students, whose grandparent’s generation protested the Vietnam War, and fought for Civil Rights, women’s liberation, sexual liberation, the environment, and Stonewall, testing these ideas. And whether you agree with their actions or not, they have successfully forced their concerns to the forefront of the American mind.

We know they have been successful because Americans are discussing a very complex issue and conversing about rights, duties, international relations, and America’s evolving role in the world. It is through these conversations that we share ideas, debate Constitutional meanings, examine the conflict of rights, and, ultimately, learn. Through engagement we form norms that influence behaviors and define national values and morality.

I think it's time we stop, Children, what's that sound? Everybody look, what's going down. (For What Its Worth, Buffalo Springfield)

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson argued that the role of government is to protect our rights. He warned that “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it…” Earlier, Jefferson penned, “…governments are instituted among men, deriving their JUST POWERS (emphasis added) from the consent of the governed”

Arguably, our model of self-governance is founded on the idea that when government acts unjustly, the obligation of citizenship is to engage in dissent against the perceived injustice. Of the five rights enshrined in the First Amendment, four ensure the rights of peaceful dissent. These sacred words mean citizens have a duty, empowered by Constitutional rights, to protect our rights including those who are unable to protect their own rights.

There's something happening here. But what it is ain't exactly clear. There's a man with a gun over there, telling me I got to beware.

Riding alongside this national conversation are three rich ironies: those who historically dismissed liberals as “snowflakes” are now making the snowflake argument by rushing to the defense of those who “feel unsafe.” While public safety is a legitimate concern, especially in educational institutions, as we saw in the #MeToo movement, some claims are intended to silence dissent, cancel legitimate concerns, and punish the innocent.

A second irony is the students have modeled domestic political extremists by being disruptive, thwarting compromise, and asserting that their rights and concerns supersede the rights and concerns of others.

A third irony is that those advocating a pardon for those convicted for their role in the violent January 6^th insurrection are, at the same time, criticizing students for engaging in generally peaceful protests.

There are battle lines being drawn. Nobody's right if everybody's wrong. Young people speaking their minds, getting so much resistance from behind.

These protests include domestic and international components. Domestically, the focus is on the law and the conflict of rights. Should one body of students act in a way that impedes the rights of other students? While lawyers can, and likely will, debate this, it seems pretty clear that public safety is the overriding issue.

The international component raises a moral concern that strikes at the very core of American citizenship. Should students pressure their government to reexamine America’s role in the death and maiming of innocent women, children, and men in Gaza? Dr. Martin Luther King argued that in the pursuit of justice, we have a moral obligation to obey a just law and lovingly disobey an unjust law. If the actions of Israel in the Gaza Strip are unjust, then, according to King and Jefferson, we have a moral obligation to “redress grievances” without fear of punishment. According to Gallup, the majority (54%-56%) of Americans now “disapprove” of Israeli military actions in Gaza.

Although the Declaration of Independence is Jefferson’s ideal vision of American society, unlike the U.S. Constitutional, it is not a legal document. However, the Declaration has moral standing and includes our concepts of equal rights, the social contract, and self-governance. It empowers our democratic principles, asserting that the authority of government rests upon the consent of the governed and that the obligation of citizenship is to act when for causes that are not “light and transient.” Jefferson also defines the natural rights as, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

What a field day for the heat. A thousand people in the street. Singing songs and they’re carrying signs, mostly say, "Hooray for our side."

So what do we do? Some have taken to the streets and, thankfully, we live in a land where this is their God given right. Others are less certain. At a time when our rights often seem under siege, should we defend other’s rights?

In his correspondence with the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson is credited with a quote often attributed to Voltaire or Beatrice Hall, “I don’t agree with what you say but I will defend your right to say it.”

Also ascribed to Jefferson, John Philpot Curran wrote, “It is the common fate of the indolent (lazy) to see their rights become prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance.” Simply, we must be vigilant when rights may potentially be taken away. The applicable question here is, “Whose rights are under threat in this situation?”

Today, public discourse seemingly demands we take an immutable or unchangeable position on issues that often require complex solutions. Being inflexible is a bad idea. Complex issues get warped by partisanship in an election cycle. I would urge patience and respect towards this generation as they seek to discover their values and morals. An honest soul would admit our generation could have done better. Engage credible news outlets, and discuss complex issues such as, “Are the peaceful assemblies of student protests an appropriate moral response?”  These are exactly the sort of issues Americans should be informed of, concerned about, and discussing.

Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid: step out of line, the men come and take you away.

 

Shout! Shout! Let it all out. These are the things I can do without. Come on…

 

In an era where some demand access to every nook and cranny of democracy, we risk railroading moderation and compromise. So quick, find me a chair! I want to climb up and applaud the Unicameral for keeping leadership votes secret. The courage of these legislators to act in the best long term interests of all Nebraskans is to be applauded.

Debate and compromise is why, historically, the American model of self-governance worked. And as we all know from our private and professional lives, sometimes privacy matters.

The American model of self-governance was designed to be slow, inefficient, and force compromise, especially in our institutions. While modern political parties push for winner-take-all outcomes, our system of checks and balances pits political ideas against each other to force debate. By engaging reasonable but opposing ideas, we learn about the needs and wants of fellow Americans. This process teaches that neither Democrats nor Republicans have a monopoly on good or bad ideas, and although there is no moral equivalency between the right and the left at this moment, all groups suffer from bad actors. Through compromise, we get better policies and moderation, that legitimizes the outcome and dignifies the opposition.

But there are those who want to muzzle our democracy. Whether it is by legislation or intimidation, wittingly or otherwise, some will stop at nothing to take away our sense of security and freedom by attacking our model of self-governance.

This is done by undermining voter trust and confidence in free and fair elections.

Without trust, voters question the legitimacy of those elected.

Republican Senator Romney pays $5,000 a day to ward off threats to his family. An assailant’s hammer blows to Speaker Pelosi’s husband in their home was an assault on him and on democracy. Reuters’ report, Campaign of Fear, details an increasing number of assaults and threats on American poll workers.  Last year, of those who left their job in Election Offices, 1 in 10 cited threat and intimidation as the cause. In the aftermath of electing a House Speaker, threats against elected officials, their spouses, and children, were ghastly and sexually perverted. As the January 6^th Committee documented, this barrage on American Democracy is orchestrated and intentional. Nothing justifies or excuses this behavior.

During the 20s & 30s Germany was reeling in the aftermath of WW1 and suffering an economic tailspin. Pastor Martin Niemoller was an early supporter of German right wing authoritarianism. But when Niemoller spoke out against Germany leadership in 1937, he was branded a political enemy and sent to a concentration camp. We are reminded of Reverend Niemoller’s words…

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

Martin Luther King’s 1965 march across the Edmund Pettis Bridge demonstrated the importance of speaking out and voting. By voting we exercise our Constitutional right to choose, empower, and legitimize those who govern. As political parties move further to extremes, many increasingly vote AGAINST candidates, in favor of the “lesser of two evils.” As populism and extremism spread across Western Democracies, 2024 promises to be an inflection point in the Founding Father’s vision of America as a city on the hill and a beacon of democracy to the world. Let’s pray, or whatever you do, that the American voter understand exactly what they are voting on in November because it is so much more than a partisan nod to President Biden or Mr. Trump.

In these times, you shouldn't have to sell your soul. In black and white, they really, really ought to know.

Blow Wind Blow: Language and the Culture Wars

 

Pick a pronoun – any pronoun.  It’s interesting that among a generation raised expecting to “have it your way,” some are bothered by today’s variety of pronouns. For some, the paradox of choice in pronouns means tacit endorsement of a “LGBTQIA+ agenda.” For others, it’s an affront to their politics or inconvenience. Still others fear being ridiculed for using the wrong pronoun. And then there’s laziness and disregard for others.  The attention to Pronouns points to how, amid the culture wars, evolving language impacts our perception of the world.

The older I get, my occasionally stodgy self recalls Jefferson’s reply when asked about the complexity of religious plurality, “it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” Upon reflection, some issues don’t really affect us. Most people just want a life that includes happiness, dignity, affirmation, and freedom from harm.  

How many roads must a man walk down, before you call him a man? (Blowing in the Wind, Bob Dylan) 

On the other hand, few things are as important, or as anxiety laden as societal change. Whether it’s due to advancements in technology, evolving demographics, climate change, or pop culture, Western society is changing rapidly and, understandably, many find this concerning.  How we respond defines who we are.

An important element of change is evolving language. Years ago, a senior member of the Bush administration made an obvious but simple comment, “These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

Buried within our language, inferred or explicit are the ideas, images, and accepted norms of American society.  Most think in their native language. This means reality is defined by one’s vocabulary of words and ideas. In other words, you can only comprehend the unknown by using words and ideas that are known.  By changing language, we change ourselves.

And how many years can some people exist, before they're allowed to be free? 

When asked, I venture most would happily do what they could to end discrimination. Science confirms that humans experience mental and physical damage to their health caused by the stress associated with continued exposure to ideas or actions that deny dignity, one’s legitimate membership in society, or signals possible threats including a loss of freedom. This phenomenon has been well documented among Black women. The language you and I use, the way we act, intentionally or unknowingly, can contribute to other’s stress.

Yes and how many times can a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see? 

Like you, I am no saint. But I try to remember that no one wakes up hoping I make their life more difficult.  More than once I have learned that a plumber is as important as a pediatrician, that a mechanic is as essential as a Mayor. With age comes wisdom. 

And how many ears must one man have, before he can hear people cry?

As we adjust to the inevitability of a changing world, is it too much to ask that we modify our language to accommodate those who struggle for legitimacy, safety, and acknowledgment?  Whether it’s due to ethnicity, religion, age, education, socioeconomics, race, or sexuality, are those who simply want what we all want, a happy life, such a threat that we tolerate scapegoating by office seekers and malcontents?

Yes, and how many deaths will it take 'til he knows, that too many people have died?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind. The answer is blowin' in the wind