What is your bias?

Over the course of 40 years worth of studies, Gallup Polls has determined that we are all biased, particularly when it comes to politics.  For example, after every election year, poll results overwhelmingly show that the party that lost an election always has a dim outlook for the future while the party that won the election always feels that everything is looking up.  In addition, when a politician is accused of an indiscretion, the opposing party is always shocked and appalled, while the party in power always sees it as a minor misstep.  The only true way to know a serious scandal is if all parties isolate themselves from the accused.

In this context, let’s look at the three “scandals” that hit the Obama administration over the last month.  First of all, consider the use of the word “scandal”.  By definition, scandal refers to the violation of morality or propriety.  Conversely, the accusation of a scandal that is not proven to be true is, in itself, a violation of morality and propriety by the accuser.  It is in this environment that Newt Gingrich recently cautioned Republicans to go easy in order to avoid possible political overreach.  According to Gingrich, the Lewinsky scandal of 1998 was overreach, ultimately resulting in sympathy for Democrats and disdain for Republicans.  As it stands, Obama’s current approval rating sits at a comfortable 53 percent.  

Let’s take a quick look at each of the big 3 and consider some of the facts:

 1.  Justice Department spying of Associated Press - After Republicans opened the door to wiretapping and other questionable means of fighting the war against terrorism, Republicans also demanded that the White House monitor and stop security leaks to the AP.  Now we find that the Obama administration is slammed for doing exactly what his critics suggested.

           2.  Benghazi attack  – The question here is exactly what the accusation is.  Is there a problem with the perceived cover up, or a problem with the lack of response to the attack, or both?  Since the accusation is not clear, it appears that conservatives are just groping and hoping for something to stick.  Although we all agree that this is a tragedy, and mistakes were made, it is hard for a fair minded person to define the whole event a scandal.  As it stands, Hilary Clinton and Susan Rice have already taken most of the heat for their involvement, which makes it look like a witch hunt aimed at female Democrats.  I assume this is not the impression Republicans were trying to make but it is there.

 

       3.  IRS targeting of Conservative groups – Yes, the IRS has admitted to targeting of conservative groups, making it difficult for them to get 501c4 tax exempt status, but additional scrutiny of political groups is exactly what the IRS was supposed to do.  This is because a group engaged in politics is disqualified from tax exempt status.  This burden of scrutiny was given to the IRS in January 2010 after the conservative group Citizens United was given leeway by the Supreme Court, modifying the tax law to allow 501c4 status to entities engaged in politics “as long as politics is not their primary activity” – a poorly defined criteria.  After this ruling, congressional members asked the IRS to carefully scrutinize new applications.  Of course, without clear criteria, the IRS was able to act as they saw fit, creating the obvious indiscretions.  Interestingly, Obama demanded the resignation of IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller despite the fact that he only served the position for 8 months.  Congress still cannot tie the actions of the IRS to the White House, but they continue to try.  

You may argue that the summaries above are somewhat forgiving of a tyrannical administration that is slowly violating our civil rights.  Perhaps that is my bias, but I invite you to check your own bias.  Did you vote for or against Obama?  How or where did you hear the news?  Did the source of the news suggest that you should be outraged?  Did the source suggest this should be the end of Obama?  Even Newt Gingrich understands that these overblown suggestions are produced by political entertainers who are in the business of firing up their conservative audiences, sometimes successfully, but evidently not so much this time.  The public outrage that was suggested only seems to exist in the mind of the commentators.  With that, we have a duty to check the facts.  In today's information age, fact checking has become easier than ever before.

It is undeniable that each of us sees the world from a certain degree of bias.  This bias depends greatly on our life experiences – for example, how we were raised, or the opinions of our parents and friends, or the media outlet that we listen to.  Although most of us would like to believe that we are fair minded and unbiased, we will be much more intellectually honest if we all admit that we are prejudiced.  Furthermore, we need to recognize that others around us are the same way, but not necessarily on the same side.  Until we check the facts, we really don't know anything except our bias.

Tony F.   2013

As the Crow Flies

It takes 1 hour and 45 minutes to travel the 75 mile route from Boulder to Winter Park, CO.  In a typical car this trip equates to about 3 gallons of gasoline and about 13 lbs of newly released exhaust pollutants.  This is a shame, particularly since Boulder and Winter Park are in fact only 27 miles apart, nearly 1/3 the distance of the highway route!  Also shameful is the fact that a more direct path from the Front Range to Middle Park has existed since the mid 1860’s, first in the form of wagon passes, later upgraded to Rollins Pass.  Rollins Pass was once accessible in a family sedan, but was closed to all traffic in the mid-1960’s because no money was allocated to maintain or improve the route.  Even now, residents of Boulder County continue to fight the potential re-opening of Rollins Pass, citing environmental protection in an area where a railroad and highway had existed for 100 years.

Why does this matter?  It matters because the Boulder/Winter Park example is one of a great many modern highway routes through Colorado that force us to take the long road to get over short distances.  Instead of taking the best route, we widen, improve, and maintain much longer stretches of highway.  This wastes time, maintenance costs, resources, and most importantly a great deal of fuel over the life of the highway.  In Colorado, we tend to think we are protecting the mountain by not crossing over it.  Instead, we travel all the way around the mountain and pollute the entire range with exhaust. 

You may assume that the routes we currently take were chosen due to their overall superiority.  Perhaps the scenery was better, more people tended to travel that way, or it was a less expensive route to maintain.  Although each particular highway has a unique history, this is generally not true.   Let’s explore the possibility that currently popular solutions are not necessarily the better ones: 

It is a little known fact that the QWERTY typing keyboard is NOT the most efficient typing layout.  During the invention and development of mechanical typewriters, the keys might have been laid out to place the most important keys in the home row, but this increased the likelihood that the hammers would tangle with each other as they made their way to and from the paper.  The most used keys were actually placed away from home row to slow the typist and give the mechanical arms a greater chance to recoil.  The positioning of the QWERTY keys was therefore based on an inefficient mechanical principal that no longer exists, but we are not likely to improve it because this is how we have learned to type.

The English dictionary and alphabet is a conglomeration of several languages and several rules of spelling, thus making it arguably the least efficient language in the world.  The spelling of each word in the English language must be memorized.  By comparison, Korean is so efficient that there is no such thing as a spelling bee in Korea.  Their writing system is perfectly phonetic.   This is unfortunate because English is the dominant world language, spoken in more countries than any other, and sapping an unnecessary amount of brain power.  The spelling issues could be corrected by creating a phonetic alphabet, but it is fair to guess we will not improve the alphabet either.

This is green.

This blog post is intended to illustrate two points: 1) We do not make the most efficient choices, so there is no logic in assuming that the dominant choice is the best choice, and 2) In an attempt to protect our environment, we create scenarios that are even worse.  In his book "The Conundrum", David Owen presents a wide variety of examples where we truly misunderstand the notion of efficiency, sustainability, and being "green".  He argues, quite convincingly, that a dense high-rise city is far more efficient than a spacious tree lined suburb.  In one of his most compelling arguments, he states that the greatest problem with environmental efficiency is the environmentalists themselves.  This is what stands in the way of wind power, hydro power, and solar power as we attempt to protect our views and pristine habitats.  If we are to get any cleaner, greener, or more responsible toward our environment we need to stop taking the long road in the name of environmental protection.  The most efficient way to get there is as the crow flies.

Tony F.  2013

Climate Change be Dammed

Some time within the next 10 years a majority of the world population will come to the consensus that Global Climate Change is occurring, and is not preventable.  It is also likely that within the next 10 years enough data will be collected to create a more realistic model of how we will be affected which could in turn lead to policy change.  In the absence of such consensus, computer models, and policy, we have the opportunity to make some wild predictions as to what Global Climate Change may look like over the next 50 years.  Here is mine:

2010-2020  Due to steady funding and innovation in fossil fuels, hydrocarbons will continue to feed our energy needs.  Political and social pressures will influence a decline in energy and water consumption but population growth maintains a constant need for resources.  Alternative energy will continue to expand slightly with political boosts, but will have a continuing disadvantage due to the low cost of fossil fuels.  Weather will become more extreme.  Droughts will last for increasing periods followed by tragic floods.

2020-2030  On going patterns of long drought followed by flood will influence a growing need for water and storm management.  Extreme drying and subsequent flooding cause a noticeable loss of fish and wetland habitats.  The lack of water during the growing season stresses food production.  Grazing patterns of livestock become more tightly regulated in an effort to reduce over grazing and desertification.  Residential lawns and greenbelts are slowly replaced by rock beds, regional plants, and xeric landscapes.  Public sentiment shifts toward new dams and reservoirs to satisfy the need for water storage, flood prevention, food production, and hydro energy.

2040-2050  Dam building projects are underway.  In order to increase the payback on dam costs, tax incentives are removed from fossil fuel production to increase energy costs and the value of hydro energy.  For the first time, alternative energy becomes competitive.  Energy and water efficiency continue to grow in popularity due to rising water and energy costs.  Innovations in agriculture bring more efficient crops.  Building codes and master development plans encourage dense, multi-use communities where water use and energy efficiency are the focus.


2050-2060  Fossil fuel production falls behind alternative energy after a significant boost from hydro.  Despite the increased intensity of storms, multiple water reservoirs keep flood waters and snow melt at bay while rationing water flow at a more consistent rate for irrigation, hydro-electricity, and riparian habitat.

Do you notice a theme here?  Carbon emissions will not be the driving force of policy decisions over the next 50 years due to a lack of alignment of public opinion.  Water supply and management will instead be the force that shifts public sentiment.  Although dam building is not politically popular right now, we will eventually learn that our very survival depends on water storage.  We will realize that the long range answer to climate change is dams more so than any other solution.

During America's industrial expansion from 1920 to 1960, a great number of dams were built largely due to shortage of water near growing populations.  A great many of these dams enabled rivers to flow more consistently, water supplies to be more predictable, farm land to be more productive, and energy to be generated without carbon emissions.  It was a win in many ways, and we continue to flourish as a result.  In recent years, we have become so much more focused on minor environmental issues that we have completely reversed trend.  Despite this, when water needs affect us at home we will demand swift action.  There will be a day when the public cries for more dams and supply ducts to provide fresh water for human use instead of allowing it to flow out to sea.

Tony F.  2013