Notes from the Left Coast

Drummond Pike’s Blog

Among European progressives, there is a strong rallying cry for financial reform through the closing of tax havens. A French leader was just at the PES Congress podium decrying the loophole – perhaps in the EU? – that permits tax havens to escape more stringent regulation because there 12 of them and they have treaties with one another. If one has 12 such treaties, then you are somehow off the hook. I clearly need to learn more about this! It’s fascinating that progressives in the US aren’t more focused on this issue. This recent case with HSBC where the IRS finally has acquired access to a list of thousands of American holders of offshore accounts only addresses part of the problem and hardly serves to take the issue off the table.

It is an interesting thing, as I’m becoming more familiar with the issues before the PES Congress (http://www.pes.org/), to begin to understand the confusion European progressives seem to be experiencing in their failure to gain more traction with the voters even in this period of economic dislocation. It’s vaguely reminiscent of the confusion plaguing the Republicans these days – they are so certain they were right, they just can’t understand why folks don’t respond. Perhaps it’s just the natural swinging pendulum.

Just now, a French leader is decrying the failure of Europeans to address the financial crisis because of their ongoing failure to leave national agendas at the door and address the system as a whole. 

She’s then followed by the Finance Minister (I think) of Austria who argues that the financial crisis is not over because the stock market is rising – instead, the true measure is when the unemployment rate declines. He went on to push for an aggressive requirement that the financial industry be required to finance an insurance pool that will preclude the need for taxpayer funded bailouts in the future.

Next up is the head of the Czech Socialist Party who argues for a unified surveillance program or capability as well as the Tobin Tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax) that has gotten a good deal of attention at this Congress.

Last, Javier Moreno Sánchez – Global Progressive Forum’s new leader – announced a new campaign for financial reform – get rid of toxic products, pass a Tobin-like Tax, and implement a regulatory regime; the campaign is called the Europe Campaign for Financial Reform. Unlike the US, where energy seems to be flagging to get these ideas in front of a Congress preoccupied with healthcare and other matters, Europe seems more prepared to address this thorny issue. Not the first time, I should think.

* * * *

As the PES Congress winds down, delegates slowly head for the trains or the airport. In a slowly emptying hall, a couple of fascinating speeches concluded the gathering.  The first, by a French leader whose name I didn’t catch, noted the absence of elected officials from the crowds. In part, he said, this reflected the electoral challenges experienced by social democrats and socialists in the recent EU elections. But in part, he argued, this resulted from the struggle of progressives to establish a clear identity. As with the first day, this sounded much like an echo from the post-2004 US experience.

Poul Nyrup Rasmussen then returned to conclude the proceedings. His remarkably personable way of communicating helped him accent the plan that gave rise to his runaway election to another term as President of the PES: grow the activist base of the Party from 20,000 to 50,000 by the next Congress, strengthen the structure of the organization, and run campaigns that clarify what progressives stand for: job growth, a green economy, and financial reforms. I conclude that we will see much more of this man over the coming years.

*  *  *  *

After lunch, I was sought out for a meeting with Javier Moreno Sánchez, the new Secretary General of the policy organization associated with the PES, the Global Progressive Forum, and several of his staff. Having delivered a speech in the morning, and otherwise been running ragged for the duration of the Congress, he looked tired but happy. His talk, referenced above, reflected his dominant policy interest – the passing of effective financial reforms for the EU. It turns out they had been hoping that Rob Johnson, my good friend who is now heading up a new program on economic policy with the Roosevelt Institute, would have been with us today to deliver a speech, but missed his plane. Needless to say, it would have been warmly received.

As we explored the ways the GPF and Tides might collaborate over the coming period, and there were many, I had the sense that this wild-haired idea of coming so far was indeed a stroke of good fortune for us both. Our nascent project to establish a presence in Europe will get a real jump-start as we build this relationship on the many topics of mutual interest: financial reform, immigration policy, Afghanistan, gender equity, and advancing the possibility of a green economy. The PES/GPF network is comprised of our European counterparts, and we should look forward to getting to know them over this next period.

As the only American attending this conference (so far as I could tell), I wondered if the boatloads of our colleagues, jostling one another for a glimpse of the official sessions as the meetings in Copenhagen commence, will be as fortunate. Somehow, I doubt it.

Dear Mr. Beck,

Thank you for giving Tides such extraordinary and generous attention on your shows. In the “no such thing as bad publicity” category, it doesn’t get much better. My mother drilled into us that manners really matter, so thank you.

I doubt you realize it, but you’ve really begun to rally folks behind a commitment to change, of the sort that was so decisively demonstrated in last fall’s elections. I have to say that of all the things you decry about the people and programs we support, going after a video explaining sustainability to kids is really something.

Of course, your assertions about last night’s topic, The Story of Stuff (www.storyofstuff.com) were absurd, but the attention you brought to them really helped. It:

• Drove more than 25,000 new visitors to the www.storyofstuff.com site – more than twice their usual number of daily visitors. Thanks to you, 25,000 (and counting) visitors heard The Story of Stuff’s message and many signed up to get involved.
•  Raised more funds to help The Story of Stuff increase its impact and reach. Contributions are streaming in from existing supporters, as well as from brand-new donors who are now much more interested in supporting The Story of Stuff because you oppose it.
• Sparked an avalanche of calls and emails from parents, teachers, principals and school administrators from coast to coast about how valuable The Story of Stuff is to teaching kids about sustainability.
• Fired up the progressive netroots and grassroots in support of The Story of Stuff.

You’ve really done your part to help increase The Story of Stuff’s impact, and as our elected leaders grapple with the very real issues of global climate change and the need for sustainability, your assistance in rallying progressives has been just wonderful.

You know, with all you’ve had to say about Tides in recent months, we’ve never had the chance to talk. But if you are ever in San Francisco — you know, like for a wedding or something — I’d love to buy you a cup of coffee: Fair Trade, of course!

All the best!

As happens on many Monday mornings, I peruse my accumulated email – an unending slog through a backlog that seems to grow no matter what I do. This morning, I found this picture along with an email from one Victoria Watts of Survival International, who was announcing they were opening a new office in Berkeley.

I’ve heard of the group and that they do good work, so, with my cup of green tea in hand, I opened the photo.What struck me in this simple picture of the vitality of life in another part of the world was the contrast to my morning’s dose of sad news from the Middle East: a general declaring that we have too few troops in Afghanistan, a diplomat suggesting that if Israel bombed the Iranian nuclear labs it would save us many complications, and the ‘confession’ by an Iraqi held in connection with recent bombings that killed over 100 innocent souls.

As I cross into my sixth decade, and my fourth in this work, I am as befuddled as ever by the choices and priorities we make as a species to engage in unending violence toward one another instead of taking care of one another as this gentleman so clearly is doing with his child. What is it that makes so many of us – mostly male - so certain that our way is the right way, and anyone with a different notion is dirt.

Not so long ago, Robert McNamara died. He was one of the “best and the brightest” – those remarkable Ivy League educated folks who joined the Kennedy’s in the last great political paroxysm of progressive change 50 years ago. After the assassination, he stayed on as Johnson’s Secretary of Defense and, under his leadership, helped drive the US into its now iconic nightmare of Vietnam. Many things were used as rationales for that sad debacle – the Cold War, the Domino Theory, Contain China, the need for the US to be seen as the Superpower, the cause of democracy, the defense of the free enterprise system, and many more.

Virtually none of these stood the test of time. They were corrupt intellectually, and they corrupted all who subscribed to them who knew.

The question of our time is, do we accept that coexistence with fundamentalist governments is impossible – so impossible that we are willing to sacrifice young soldiers to impose our will over them? If one witnesses the longest of these regimes – Iran – it is hard to avoid that their challenge is far more internal than external. McNamara died a broken man, falling into tears in a recent interview as he recalled the mistakes he made the failure of his leadership at the time.

Will those who are leading us now, who are calling for more troops for Afghanistan, or bombs for Iran, will they learn from our past mistakes?  I’d hate to see Mr. Gates or Mr. Obama sitting in tears some decades from now as they reflect on their decisions.

I came to Yokohama, the historical port for Tokyo, to give a talk about our new GreenSpace enterprise to support development of new green, Nonprofit Centers. The occasion is the “TBLI” (Triple Bottom Line) Conference that occurs regularly each year in Europe and Asia.

The trip turned into a wonderful opportunity to reprise my time in Japan nine years ago, lecturing to those active in the nascent movement to create a nonprofit sector in Japan. A new law was passed in 1998 creating the possibility for these corporate structures which hadn’t previously existed in Japan. Since, there have been three refinements in the law, and there is much work being done to expand the applicability for tax deductibility. Only some 300 NPO’s are deductible out of the 36,000 that have been formed, and there are other aspects to the question of establishing clear boundaries for appropriate NPO activity in the advocacy sphere. It’s a vibrant time in this small sector of Japanese social landscape, and it holds so much potential.

One of the most interesting conversations I had was with Professor Kanji Tanimoto and a small seminar group at Hitotsubashi University (in Tokyo) comprised mainly of executives with multi-nationals and banks (Microsoft, HSBC, etc.). We spent a good deal of time talking about Katherine Fulton’s premise that the for-profit and nonprofit sectors are converging toward each other. The old paradigm where business really ONLY cared about the bottom line is giving way to a new paradigm where success in business may in fact be more linked to practices that incorporate ESG (environmental, social, and governance) aspects into HOW businesses do business. In Japan, it would seem, the NPO sector can play a role in working with businesses to embrace this emerging awareness.

This discussion was a wonderful connector back to the TBLI Conference that had brought me to Japan in the first place. More on that in another blog post.  Let it suffice to say that while our friends on the right continue to see Tides and progressives in a very limited light, there is an expanding and fascinating world out there in the business community that ties together strands of creative private enterprise and deep commitments to addressing social justice and global sustainability. The inanity – and occasional tragedy (witness the assassination of Dr. Tiller) – of the right / left divide simply must give way to a new synthesis.

Japan has unique characteristics as a society – a very different and non-western society – that may enable it to make significant contributions to this evolving possibility. A more homogeneous society, Japanese have the ability to forge a new consensus and move quickly to pursue implications of a changing awareness.

Out for a walk, trying to stave off jet lag. Japan is plus 15 hours from SF, and the flight is 11 hours, so from an 11 AM departure, I am in the fog two days later, wanting to sleep when the world around me is awake. 

I’ve been fascinated by Japan since I first visited at age 15 for a summer exchange program in 1964. During that trip, among the most moving experiences was sitting at the ceremony in Hiroshima, commemorating that most terrible event. The ability of this culture to have absorbed that and all else that WWII brought, to have suffered the war years and the harshness of the ensuing occupation, and then to have dusted off the defeat and forged into the economic miracle that became the second half of the 20th Century…just boggles the mind. Even then, they had shifted remarkably to acceptance and learning when confronted by Americans. Now, for all the challenges that last decade might suggest as the Japanese have endured stagnant economic growth, it is us who might want to emulate them. 

I’m here to speak about the non-profit sector and what it has to offer those interested in social change. They have literally invented the NPO Sector, as they refer to it, over the past decade, and they are well along to making it a fixture in Japanese society. But this is not the area from which WE have to learn. We might learn a lot from them about how to manage limited resources, imported energy, and a rapidly changing economic outlook. 

Japan is different from the US. It is socially homogenous in a way the US will never be, and that produces both benefits and challenges. But they have got some things very much right. Waste is frowned upon. Recycling is a way of life. Transit is extraordinarily well developed, and urban landscapes are pedestrian friendly. Though their ubiquitous advertising has more in common with “Bladerunner,” they have evolved a savings, not a consumption culture. 

Among the most notable things, though, is the degree to which politeness is deeply ingrained in the culture. During my walk, I passed by a construction site. As with most commercial driveways, there was a security person ensuring people and vehicles maintained safe passages. As I approached, he conferred with the survey team blocking the way, then turned to me, and with a deep bow, showed me the way.  A most remarkable experience.?

Also of interest:

In the rain, running through DC
VP sirens-blaring events of past years
Only rarely echo along Mass Ave,

Then, right around the Finnish, then the Belgian, Embassy,
across the Connecticut Ave sky bridge,
veering into the Embassy conclave covering
the escarpment above the Rock Creek,

So, Joe has replaced Cheney,
And….
what does it mean?

fewer sirens,
less torture.

My Country, ’tis of thee….

A week ago, I attended the Global Progressive Forum, organized by Poul Ryup Rasmussen, former Prime Minister of Denmark and held in the Parliamentary hall of the European Union – an amazing space for such an event. It is called the Hemicycle and is a large oval space surrounded by 3 floors of “sky booths” containing the translators who were borrowed from the EU for the purposes of this two-day session. For an American, at least of my generation, it is with some embarrassment that I watched many of the representatives from various African, South American, Asian, and European countries in a facile way move between languages depending on who their audience happened to be. Me, I was consigned to grabbing the earphones whenever the speakers departed from English. (I’m happy to say that both of my children have avoided the mono-linguistic shortcomings of their father…)

A second, equally simple, observation at the GPF was the comfort that virtually the entire rest of the planet has with the idea of socialism and, perhaps more to the point, social democratic systems where the state plays a far more important role ensuring the social welfare of all its citizens and workers. America’s often outright hostility and deep skepticism of the role of government – not to mention the idea that government can be as well run an enterprise as any private organization of similar scale – has confused me for years. After all, my parents generation benefitted from the astonishingly successful governmental intervention in both the domestic economy and in international relations with more success than any other period in modern history. Government was the answer to the Depression and to the rise of fascism across the globe. No private enterprise could have achieved either outcome, much less had the foresight that was the Marshall Plan and the reconstruction of Japan and Korea. Yes, and the same generation was on duty when Vietnam happened and the Cold War flourished, but as a whole, there were an awful lot of good things about that era, and one has to think we may well be headed into a similar time. Lord knows, there are as many compelling challenges on the table.

May we live in interesting times.

The Global Progressive Forum is a bit like the Take Back America conference has been over recent years in the US – a collection of activists, elected officials, and academics who all share a concern for how to move things back in a more progressive direction.  Europe, as many are aware, has been on a march to the right. Of course, everything is relative. The right in this context means a more conservative interpretation of European style social democracy.  By contrast to the US, Merkel’s and Sarkozy’s conservatism is downright leftist. Rush Limbaugh would choke just trying to say the word when describing Europe’s version of a safety net. He’d probably call it ‘communist’ or something which isn’t terribly far from the truth, again in contrast to the US experience.

One of the most interesting things to emerge from this two-day gathering held in the chambers of the European Parliament, has been the repeated raising of concerns about tax havens and the role they have played in the melt-down. This isn’t well understood in the US, but the movement of capital and income through tax-haven subsidiaries was a contributing factor in low accountability, but also in avoidance of tax. As everyone is desperate for revenue, there is some possibility that taking on this beast will become a signal call from many for how future reforms need to be structured.

One speaker noted yesterday that if one has to rely, as is currently the case, on agreements between two countries to manage tax reporting and reciprocity, the number of countries in the world would require some 18,000 agreements. Not likely.  However, a truly international regime – like the WTO, for example – could be put in place, perhaps required for participation in WTO or some such. A fascinating idea.

One other surprise, speaking of the WTO, has been that the Secretary General of the WTO, Pascal Lamy, is an honored member of this community and will be speaking tomorrow. Who knew he was one of these socialist leaning Europeans? It does make one wonder if we have got this all right – our American blanket critique of trade which we typically see as benefitting corporate interests over poor people. What appears to be more the case is that we just haven’t got it right yet. True, corporate interests have got a great deal of what they want out of trade deals, but the same mechanisms can be used for much more positive social impacts, if we just have the will.

It is an interesting contrast from the American experience to travel in Europe.

They have this thing called “mass transit” which most of us in the US associate with behemoth SUV’s – very large mass transporting us from our sprawled suburban homes to the mall or school or the office park where we work. And every time we need a carton of milk, it’s back into that huge gas guzzler and back on the road to the convenience store down the road. Now, of course it is true that many eastern cities (NY, Washington, Boston, Philly) all have aging subway systems that are well used. But for most of us, transit is us sitting at the driver’s wheel, frustrated at the slow moving mass of cars ahead and behind us.

Night before last, I flew to London, cleared customs in 20 minutes, caught an express train to downtown (it left 6 minutes after I got to the platform), and 20 minutes later I was at Paddington Station. Then it was a 15 minute ride on the “tube” to , a 40 minute wait for the Eurostar Train – a highspeed, quiet, comfortable ride for less than 2 hours to Brussels via the Channel where I arrived in downtown maybe 10 minutes from my hotel. The thing that I couldn’t get over was that it was all so EASY.

As we stumble our way toward decisions on what to do with the stimulus investments we are about to make in the US, investing in transit seems like such a sensible thing to do. We are so unbelievably behind most parts of the world, but we also have the opportunity to design a system that can truly meet future needs.

California will soon begin work on a high-speed train network to connect the northern, southern, and central metropolitan areas. Let’s add in a really robust Bus Rapid Transit system (which can be shovel ready very quickly), create metropolitan planning and management districts, and all the other elements we need to create a robust, green, and smart road to the future.

Also of interest:
TreeHugger.org  articles on High Speed Trains

Madoff. What more is there to say. Pretty soon, we’ll be saying “so-and-so pulled the most amazing ‘madoff.’” Poor Mr. Ponzi may end up being left by the wayside, eclipsed by the shear scale, the unreal duration, and the depth of betrayal exhibited by the now jailed Bernie. But, as we all rue his very birth, I think it worth asking a question about just how and why so many charities and their assets went down the drain.

These charities that invested much or, in the case of several, all their assets with the now notorious Mr. Madoff have exposed just how poorly they oversaw the investment process. Two questions emerge. How could regulators have failed to expose the fraud long before it was made public? Second, are the standards for charities in this regard adequate for the quasi-public nature of charitable funds? The first I will leave to the myriads of people addressing it (though I will be avidly consuming every article I can find on the subject). The second question, though, fascinates me. My conclusion? The answer is a simple “no.”

(more…)