Greetings from
The Publisher . . .
Our Fast- Moving World & a few
“Important” thingsI don't know about you, but I say—what a month! Is the world spinning faster these days? I'd wish someone would check.
Of course spin is the norm in the political world—especially at this stage of the contest. Even beyond that, however, it just seems that a lot came up for a lot of people I know.
One of the common elements I heard or noticed myself was that the things that came up were important and needed to be handled. And they were often things that needed to be taken care of in order to move on or grow—but were still uncomfortable or a challenge. And also, the solution or means seemed to be there at the right time.
I do a form of contemplation that helps me know the best area to focus on. In the process of doing that this past month, within 24 hours I got a call offering what I was looking for six times I can easily remember right now. It wasn't that that phone call resolved the issue once and for all, but it was the next step that I was looking for.
I wondered about what was going on in a particular area of my body. The next day someone called and said that was their specialty. I had a legal question. A lawyer called the next day. That happened over and over. What seemed to block it was when I got in the way and too quickly dismissed what was in front of me, telling myself that “this” was not what I was looking for—i.e., it didn't fit my pictures. Otherwise, the options or answers were there.
Another vital element I noticed was that it also meant interacting with others. I would do my contemplation and end with the missing piece identified or knowing what I needed to know next.
Although the calls came in by themselves, expressing what I wanted worked great too. So much came from interactions that at first I didn't think had anything to do with what I was looking for.
I was at the EarthFaire—what a great job they did again this year—and heard two people talking near the solar cooking booth about rainwater collection. I told them I wanted to listen in and was invited to join in. I was researching that. I found my steps were right there, and then one fellow gave me an example of how to approach it—“it's like when you do this, first you . . .”—and he addressed another area where I needed more answers or clarity.
Humm. I wasn't planning on getting anymore specific, but I realize that not doing so contradicts what I'm saying works and denies a possible benefit from popping in as so many things have this past month.
Rainwater collection is one area of research for me. That looks like it needs to be in place before the backyard can be finished. I'm also remodeling and have even less knowledge in the areas of layout, colors, floors and walls. There is a lot I don't know!
We're reorganizing the office. And the legal thing deals with whether editors are employees or independent contractors. There are so many rules and regulations it can look contradictory.
The bigger mystery is why the government focuses on small businesses and the small amounts of money that brings them—brings us/US. Yes, there needs to be standards and protections for people, but their focus is confusing—especially taking into account what Ka Hsaw Wa and Katie Redford wrote about last month. There are incredible abuses taking place.
A stockbroker informed me that a similar thing is going on for a lot of people in his industry with the SEC—the focus is about the dot on the “i” and crossing the “t,” not abuse.
At times, it looks more like government agencies are fund-raising—more than protecting people.
Did you see the Parade magazine in April that compared what people make in different professions around the country? I'm always amazed at that. At the end of if was an article that stated that 61% of corporations “paid no corporate income taxed between 1996 and 2000.” What corporations now (2004 figures) pay in taxes accounts for 14.4% of the Federal governments revenue. In the 1940 they accounted for 50%. And the scale is still moving towards individuals paying more.
Then I read in the San Diego Union that the IRS has decided to shift its focus from large businesses to small businesses to look for more revenue. Over and over, especially in the last eight years, it appears the focus is on having individuals and small businesses bear the burden, while large corporations negotiate their tax bill. It's no mystery what corporations are taking in record profits. Nor do we have to look very far to discover whom legislation is really benefiting no matter what the name of it. Mortgage relief helped investors and speculators the most. Senior drug benefits helped the drug companies the most.
It looks like a time to get more independent—or cooperate better—if we want to protect ourselves.
What's important? I think what's very important right now is the primary election June 3 in California. While some may think the important issues relate to a candidate's tears or emotional expressions, or the rants of upset black preachers or what a neighbor said or thought years ago, I don't think so.
Heaven knows real people don't express emotions or get upset and we certainly should know what our neighbors are doing and thinking at all times. Or perhaps it's not even the government's job to know.
What may be most important now is that the entire House and 1/3 of the Senate is up for reelection. This is a group known in some circles as the enablers, as in Presidential enablers. Congress allows—a lot in recent years.
What they think deserves some attention. The thing about Congress is that we know the Presidential candidates need not get into too much detail on their proposals since it's the devil that fills in the details.
We do want to know if a Presidential candidate is proposing individuals pay for their proposed health care system, or insurance companies are paying, or if it's the polluters who aggravate or cause diseases who are paying. We at least want to know where the candidates start. But then it's Congress and the lobbyists who will write the specifics and deal with the details.
This President, of course, is a little different in that after Congress passes a law he doodles a signing statement, drawing conclusions about what he thinks it means. He's done this more than all of the other US Presidents combined, but given his knowledge of the Constitution, is he really qualified?
Congress doesn't object or do anything about it. They enable him. There needs to be more focus on Congress now because this is the time to listen to legislator's platforms—so we can hold them to it. The promises to us/US—the voters—the ones they make or break, are important, right?
Many have wanted to impeach this President for too many reasons to mention here, but what about Congress? The voters can't impeach a President, Congress can. People can impeach Congress though. Don't forget, we did impeach a governor recently.
Take a look at U.S. Representative Brian Bilbray. Not that he is an exception; he's simply an easy example of what to watch for. He was a Congressman, then a lobbyist in DC, and now Congressman. He ran on a anti-lobbyist platform calling for taking the power away from Washington lobbyists and giving it back to the people—unfortunately, to his people it seems. That is, the ones he earmarks.
Earmarks, according to the Office of Management and the Budget, “are funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents the merit-based or competitive allocation process, or specifies the location or recipient.”
You can tell it's election time because he always grabs his surfboard when in town to show his support of the environment. Somehow Rep. Bilbray stays on top of the wave and maneuvers around his pro-environment and anti-lobbyist platforms long enough to vote against an Energy Bill seeking cleaner energy and against the bill stopping Congress from adding earmarks to legislation—and he never falls off his platform/board and wipes out.
Shouldn't we be holding Congressmen to their promises? Isn't it time for a some questions and maybe a few wipeouts?
It should be mentioned that long after the energy bill vote he said he voted against it because the bill called for more corn ethanol use, which just about everybody now realizes is not environmentally friendly. He even knew that when he voted—before the research and report came out.
But this isn't about him really. It's about us knowing whom we vote for and what they say—and then do. We have this month to figure that out.
The Presidential candidates will most likely still be there after the primary. The media won't all of a sudden talk about issues. Nothing will really be missed. And even if that changes, what can the wining candidate do without a supportive Congress.
Wouldn't impeaching a Congressman/woman tell them to pay attention?
Okay, it's time for the answers to pop in.
Have a great month,
Steve
HOME - FEATURES - NEWS - FROM THE PUBLISHER
LETTERS - COLUMNS - MUSIC REVIEWS - BOOK REVIEWS
PLANETARY CYCLES - CALENDAR - ABOUT TLC - CONTACT US
CLASSIFIEDS - RESOURCE DIRECTORY
ARCHIVES - SUBSCRIBE - ADVERTISE - SEARCH
