leadership

Republican Foreign Policy Melt-Down

13 May
by John, posted in leadership, Liberty, Middle East, Policy, President   |  No Comments

For me George Schultz summed up Ronald Reagan. I have seen Schultz repeat it in various formulations many times.  Some people run for President to be President.  Ronald Reagan ran for President to do things.

It was a time of big ideas – 1980.  Reagan had decided that containment of the Soviet Union had reached its limits and that detente was just as limited a doctrine.  The time had come to call evil, evil.  To rearm and assert that the binding glue of civilization was not collective dehumanization, but liberty.

Today we have the Republican Party, the party that gave us 4,000+ dead in Iraq based on ideological misjudgment, determined to prove that President Obama conspired in Benghazi to do …  I have no idea what it is the President’s administration is covering up.  But this blog has associated itself for a long time with the view that President Obama is a smart and intelligent fellow with a wonderful family who is by  temperament and skills incompetent as President.

What we know about Benghazi is that the President’s administration through incompetence and bureaucratic in-fighting got four guys killed.  Then through incompetence it bungled every non-political aspect of reporting on the facts.  Given the President’s inability to pass any material legislation since 2010 that he is incompetent is hardly news.

When I was in Budapest in 2004, I was amazed at how many Hungarian business people, waiters, artists, and people across the capital stopped to thank me as an American for freeing them from communism.  When I took a cab ride out to the airport, the driver refused to charge me and drove me around the city to see memorials, tank shell holes, and the other visible signs of the Hungarian struggle for liberty.   In Warsaw that year it was the same experience.

There was a long bipartisan effort to contain communism.  But it was Reagan’s decisive abandonment of Carter’s bumbling “human rights” agenda, in favor of a foreign policy based on liberty that changed the game.  Reagan’s aides were concerned he was a neophyte unable to carry his own weight in foreign policy.

Instead he, almost alone,  had the central analysis correct.  The CIA’s estimates that the Soviets were outgrowing the US were wrong.  The US could simply out muscle the Soviet economy in any arms race.  It was a dangerous theory for a nuclear war strategy, but it forced the Soviets  to the table.  And for all the foreign policy elites scoffing, let me state the following unequivocally.

This blog values the opinion of that Hungarian cab driver more than the views of any “expert”.   Under the policies of those elites I crawled in fear under my school desk.  Because of Ronald Reagan my children never have.

This is what I know about Republican foreign policy today.  There are two wings.  One believes we should intervene militarily in every Arab or Persian crisis, while not advocating intervention in any black African, Asian, or Latin American country suffering war induced famine, rape, and genocide.  It does not care that every US kinetic intervention in the Middle East with the exception of the Gulf War in 1992 has cost more lives than anticipated.  Every such intervention has yielded unintended results worse than the initial problem.

The other wing believes the United Nations is a global conspiracy.

We are witnessing the passing of the baton on foreign policy competency to the Democrats.  Since 1968 the Republican Party has owned national defense and foreign policy.  It was the party of limited decisive intervention.  This began to collapse with the 2003 Iraq invasion and the rise of Neo-Con “invade every culture we do not really understand” policies.

Now, rather than articulating a vision for how to engage in Asia on a broad economic, cultural, humanitarian, and lastly military basis, we have the Benghazi investigation.   Even as a Democrat I would venture to guess that would not be President Reagan’s foreign policy agenda for 2013.

The Known Natural Gas Problem

06 May
by John, posted in environment, leadership, Policy, President   |  No Comments

Right before I departed on my spring time tour of rural Nebraska and Colorado, I attended FrackingSense’s “Atmospheric Perspective on Oil & Gas Operations” from CU’s Jana Milford, a professor with expertise in airborne pollutants, and NOAA’s Gabrielle Petron, who is busily measuring field levels of airborne pollutants in oil & gas fields. It was very hard to get either of them to use the word fracking. They just do not accept it as scientifically relevant to the pollution issue.

It reminds me frankly of listening to someone who is an expert on firearms pointing out why “assault weapons” is an irrelevant term in gun violence.

For two years while at CU Law I interned for the National Wildlife Federation, the Environmental Defense Fund, and a coalition of water groups in Summit County, Colorado.  It was hardly a pro-extraction group.  But whether it was whooping cranes on the Platte, pronghorn antelope in Wyoming, or air pollution from uranium mining it was all about science.  In those days and in heavily rural Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and Nebraska the emotion was all on the side of the farmers and ranchers.

After several months of attending the FrackingSense forum at the Center for the American West I have had everyone of my preconceived views confirmed, but one.  Water pollution, traffic, noise, pipeline construction and maintenance are all solvable problems under assault from people who act as if hydrocarbon production is a new untested industrial process.  These problems deserve much more study and innovation, but they are not the problems to focus upon. The air pollution impact is much worse than I thought.

Off the record some of the top regulators in Colorado had warned me that this was the main issue.  There are two grave distortions fostered by the environmental community diverting our attention from the methane, and more importantly, volatile organics currently flooding our new hydrocarbon fields.  First, is that the unscientific video in Gasland and elsewhere points to a water table crisis.  Second, is that the Clean Air Act does not apply to oil & gas production through the so called “Halliburton loophole”.

Both of these are false.

There are water use issues in some watersheds in Colorado, but in no watershed does oil and gas production require the kind of permanent substantial use that agriculture (80% of CO water useage mostly for cattle production) and municipal usage require.   There is a ready and functioning water market with increasing use of industry recycling.  You have a 100% recycling of the fracking fluid and a reasonable near term chance of 100% recycling of produced (ancient underground) water.

The issue is that there is substantial leakage of methane, and worse, volatile organics at the surface in the oil & gas fields.  The leaks can come from drilling, particularly completion of the well processes.  The leaks come from tanks, pipelines, dryers/evaporators, and other equipment.  All of those leaks are regulated at the federal level under the Clean Air Act.

It is the exact opposite of Gasland.

We need the EPA to act within its existing authority to tighten the amount of leakage through the use of technology, enhanced monitoring, and inspections.  The Clean Air Act is one of the most successful US regulatory efforts in history.  Go back and watch video from the 1960s of any major US city before the Clean Air Act .  You will cough in sympathy.

So much of the FrackingSense presentations have been about what we do not know. But it was clear already from Ms. Petron’s previous work and published measurements in Utah and Colorado that a field can be a “sea of methane” from leaks. More importantly accompanying that methane are volatile organics that in the presence of sunlight convert into ozone (O3), one of the original air pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act.

Regardless of your view of the science on methane and climate change, nobody debates that ground based ozone kills people.

Instead of wasting all this effort on unknown water pollution and temporary disruptions to the surface, the environmental community should be focused like a laser on what we already know.  We have a bad ozone pollution problem, regulated under the Clean Air Act, which we can abate right now.  All it requires is the President to stop campaigning and start acting under existing law.

Moving Into a New Era on Gender Discrimination

12 Apr
by John, posted in competitiveness, leadership, Pursuit of Happiness, Veterans   |  No Comments

Last year I described attending a talk with Justice Ginsburg and had the distinct honor to meet her and discuss the role of the court in leading us out of gridlock.  Listening to her describe the challenges of women in the 1950s through the 1970s was to remember a time when adults around me openly talked about differences in the sexes in ways we now see as blatant discrimination.

Women were better at raising children.  Women that worked were somehow abandoning their children.  If a women had to work, there had to be something wrong with their husband’s ability to provide for his family.  Women were not good at leadership.  Women had physical limitations.

I wrote a few weeks ago about the valuable contribution Sheryl Sandberg and others are making toward putting a coffin nail in these old arguments.  But there is one area where society, predominantly men, still tell women what they can and cannot do based on physical difference. Earlier this week I sent out an intemperate Tweet about a New York Times sports piece regarding Brittney Griner of the Baylor  that screamed sexism to me.

But rather than argue the merits of Ms. Griner’s talent in a hypothetical NBA game, let us examine a far more demanding physical and mental barrier that is about to fall.  A change that will rip the heart out of this last bastion of discrimination against women – that the general stereotype that men are stronger than women has any relevance to the performance of individual women.

Women officers, many of them graduates of the US Naval Academy, are attempting to pass the Marine Corps Infantry Officer Course (IOC).  The NBA is a joke compared to the IOC, let alone actual combat.  When the first woman passes the IOC the last vestige of justification for gender discrimination will be gone.

I was lucky enough as a child and teenager to know and work with a few World War II combat veterans.  In college I worked next to a Marine sergeant with two tours of duty in Vietnam. Next week I will hunt turkeys with a triple combat veteran Army sergeant from our more recent wars.

These vets are all about one thing – merit.  Can you do the job or not? Most of them probably would not support women in combat in the abstract.  But if they get an order they obey and move on.  That is particularly the case if they can connect the order to objective evidence such as women passing the IOC.

There are many “elite” units in the US military: the SEALs, Air Force Pararescue, Army Special Forces and Rangers, and others.  But the Marine Corp regards all of its infantry, armor, and air units as elite.  They train to the highest standards across the corps and their officers to the highest of the high.

I have no doubt that in the coming mixed infantry units men will predominant.  The stereotype has some validity.  But let us remember Audie Murphy – one of the most decorated combat infantry officers of World War II.  He weighed somewhere between 110 and 145 lbs and was 5’5″ to 5’7″ during his military service.

That frame hauled gear and equipment approaching his own weight across North Africa, Italy, and Northwest Europe.  Ultimately in combat it is not just the physical frame but the heart within it that drives physical performance.

The point is some percentage of women will pass the IOC.  Once they do, the ceiling is broken. The Marine Corp validation of women on the merits for combat command will encourage more women to apply for IOC.  At that point whatever the natural ceiling is for women will rise or fall on the merits.

There will always be a place for gender based sports distinctions and competitions to allow women and men to test themselves across the general population.  But, children in general, and young women in particular, get far too much from too many about what they cannot achieve.  Ms. Griner should tryout for the NBA or not just as Annika Sorenstam made her decision without regard to the voices of discrimination.

Since when is it American to encourage citizens not to try because the mountain is too high?

Empowering Conservation One Young Person at a Time

01 Apr
by John, posted in environment, innovation, leadership, National Park Service, NGO, Public Service Volunteerism, Rocky Mountain National Park, Urban Policy   |  No Comments

Young adults working in parks is on one level all you need to know about the Student Conservation Association.  Liz Putnam founded SCA in 1957 based upon her senior thesis at Vassar.  From the simple idea of hard work outdoors in parks to serve the public generations of kids have become life long stewards not only of the public lands but of themselves.

I was in San Francisco ten days ago for the annual meeting of SCA’s board.  We actually stayed in Marin County or rather under the Golden Gate bridge at Cavallo Point Lodge in the decommissioned former Fort Baker.  What the Presidio is to the other side of the bridge, Fort Baker is to Marin County.

The National Park Service took over both former military installations.  You could argue those two pieces of property on either side of the Golden Gate were the most valuable potential development properties in the world.  You can see from the pictures the views are even more spectacular from Cavallo Point than from Sausalito.

Instead of homes for the rich the Park Service preserved the early 20th century military buildings and in a public private partnership built out a LEED Gold resort. The resort is accessible to non-profits, particularly conservation oriented, at reduced rates.  It represents in essence the end game of urban conservation – a restored and economically viable open space dedicated to the public.

The dinner on Saturday night to celebrate Liz’s 80th birthday was a typical SCA event – it was all about the kids.  Almost all the awards and speeches were from young adults in their late teens and early twenties.  The effects of leading crews armed with shovels and chain saws into the wilderness translates into the maturity to address a room packed full of baby-boomers.

But earlier in the day the Board had focused on another part of the SCA mission and another part of San Francisco Bay.  We drove across San Francisco into the old port just below the San Francisco Naval Shipyard to Heron’s Head Park.  Surrounded by public and low income housing, a recycling plant, and a remediated Superfund site, this is not a Golden Gate experience.

But here in the depths of an urban landscape in the midst of remediation were three SCA interns working with the San Francisco City Parks to restore this gritty wetland.  And once again these young adults addressed the Board on the history of the park, the ecology of it, the recovery efforts, and the community.  It is worth noting that almost all of the kids who addressed us over the weekend were young women.

We spent a couple of hours weeding around reintroduced Bay area native plants.  It was a far cry from the thirty days of living out of bear boxes and tents in Rocky Mountain National Park I have seen first hand with an SCA trail crew.  But it was also a reminder that SCA is not just about Yellowstone and Yosemite, the spectacular parks. It is also about inner-city youth making the connection locally to open space.

If you have a young person in your life that could benefit from hard work outdoors, introduce her or him to the SCA.  If you know a young person wanting to make their transition to adulthood include public service, introduce him or her to the SCA.  If you know a young person with the potential for strong leadership, but needing that one pivotal experience to achieve their destiny, introduce her or him to the SCA.

And if I can be of any help to you in connecting, just let me know.  Because SCA is not waiting around for Congress or moaning about the obstacles facing youth in America.  It is changing young lives for the better every single day.

Preserving San Francisco Bay

FrackingSense Update March 19, 2012

20 Mar
by John, posted in competitiveness, environment, leadership, Policy, Rural, West   |  No Comments

Last night’s FrackingSense at CU and the Center for the American West was less inspiring.  An engaging Colorado political scientist at Colorado State University, Charles Davis, described the national and Colorado debate on fracking.  Once again Patty Limerick from the Center for the American West did a fantastic job of moderating a crowd that clearly wanted to argue politics not understand the various goals and strategies of industry, environmentalists, government, and localities.

Whether it was because I already understood 90% of the material presented or the politics of fracking at this point is only arguing as opposed to data, this was a less satisfying night.

There is one early take it to the bank takeaway already from the outreach effort.  You cannot discuss fracking data or policy without a strong moderating voice focused on science and civility.   With that moderating voice and focus anything is possible.