SummersTimes

A Tale of Two High Schools

2009-05-20T22:49:00Z

Here in Illinois, support of public schools is heavily predicated on local property taxes.

That's in part because the State of Illinois has largely abdicated its responsibility to fund schools adequately.

You'd think that Article X of our state constitution -- which provides in part that "the State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of education" -- would compel 50%-plus state support.

But no.

Back in 1973, the Illinois Supreme Court interpreted this provision, and stated that this clause was meant to "to express a goal or objective, and not to state a specific command." Blase v. Illinois, 55 Ill.2d at 98, 302 N.E.2d at 48.

The state -- to its shame -- has ratcheted down school funding ever since.

And as the sausage-making continues in our General Assembly (in a headlong rush now to a May 31 budget deadline), education funding -- in the face of what, a $12 billion shortfall overall? -- is likely come out shorter than ever.

The result? More reliance on property tax.

This is a horribly insidious process, because well-to-do districts have the wherewithal to shore up their schools in the face of declining state support.

Poorer districts -- with lower assessed valuations, and already maxed out on tax rates -- can do next to nothing except scrimp and cut and defer.

In other words -- the haves hang in there. The have-nots lose ground.

If you're a child living with the haves, you're going to have good educational opportunities.

If you're running with the have-nots, well, tough. Have a nice life, kid.

I grew up in Wilmette, Illinois.

And yes. By dint of living in Wilmette, I graduated from New Trier Township High School.

Yeah. That New Trier.

I probably received one of the finest public educations anywhere on the planet. And believe me, I'm grateful for it.

For over thirty years, I've lived on a small farm near Harvard, Illinois.

And therein lies my tale of two high schools.

Today, New Trier students are 2% low income. Harvard is 41%.

New Trier continues to receive national accolades for quality education. Harvard is on "academic watch status" for its performance.

And as for an indicator referred to dryly as "Operational Expenditure Per Pupil 2006-07", try this one on for size:

New Trier, $17,541. Harvard, $7,972. (Source: www.iirc.niu.edu)

This isn't a gap. It's a chasm.

So imagine the gnawing sense of irony I experienced today opening my snail mail.

One of the items was a solicitation from the New Trier Educational Foundation. Addressed to me as an alum.

"Dear Scott: With a tradition of excellence built by the immense dedication of its faculty and staff to inspire young men and women to make positive contributions to their communities, New Trier High deserves its reputation as a leader in secondary school education across the country. One of the reasons that New Trier is so special is the kind of educational programs made possible by grants from the New Trier Educational Foundation."

The missive goes on to list some of the programs the Foundation has funded in the past: New Trier Rowing Club, Fitness Studio (??) upgrades, New Trier Drum Line, and Solar System Robotics.

The pitch continues: "For the 2009-2010 school year, the Foundation committed almost $50,000 but still had to turn down a number of worthy projects to stay within the grant budget. With the support of alumni, parents and the community, we can increase our future budgets to avoid leaving great ideas unfunded."

Finally, the letter (signed by three different chairs) implores: "Today, we ask you to support the expanded efforts of the Education Foundation as it seeks to fund more and more projects which cannot be funded within the District 203 budget (emphasis added). Together we can ensure that New Trier continues to be the gold standard for secondary school education in America."

Whaaa......? New Trier passing the hat????

These folks are earnest, and they surely mean well. I do not condemn their motives.

The problem isn't a shortage of frosting for New Trier's figurative cake.

The problem is that New Trier kids get cake, and Harvard kids get crumbs. Through absolutely no fault of their own.

This, it seems, is an intractable problem here in Illinois. The years come, and the years go, and it just seems to get worse and worse.

I want every child to have the same New Trier-style chances I had.

I say plainly that the older I get, the more I despair of this ever happening.

No matter. Wherever my advocacy now takes me -- I pledge to be unrelenting in my insistence that every schoolkid in America gets some semblance of a fair shake. And a fighting chance to do well in life.

Because that, my friends, is -- as best as I understand it -- the essence of the American way.

On Afghanistan, Hamburgers, and Julius Caesar

2009-05-06T17:16:00Z

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings." Julius Caesar (I, ii, 140-141)

May 5, 2009. Dateline: Arlington, VA. Barack Obama and Joe Biden go out for lunch. Have burgers at a place called Ray's Hell Burger. Stand in line like everyone else. Pay like everyone else. Sit at a table and chow down like everyone else.

http://aht.seriouseats.com/archives/2009/05/barack-obama-joe-biden-eat-at-rays-hell-burger-arlington-va-washington-dc.html

Gee, ain't they swell? Down to earth average guys.

Meanwhile, back in Afghanistan..............Obama-ordered bombings, ostensibly of Taleban, "inadvertently" kill scores of civilians. Again.

According to the BBC: "US air strikes in Afghanistan on Tuesday killed dozens of civilians including women and children, officials from the Red Cross have said. Afghan officials in the western province of Farah told the BBC as many as 100 civilians might have died. The civilians were said to have been hit while sheltering from fighting." news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8035204.stm

So -- first things first. Our top leaders go out for burgers. And our hearts go all pitty-pat.

And second things second. The loathsome war goes on, and they screw up. Again.

And we the citizenry wince, perhaps, and look the other way. Again.

I happen to think that Obama's pronouncement a couple of weeks ago -- that Afghanistan now is "America's War" -- was (and is) a colossal mistake.

But I'm not so dogmatic and shrill as to think that the president and vice president dined in studied nonchalance, oblivious to the latest "collateral damage" or "friendly fire" or whatever euphemism-du-jour.

Obama, I fancy, was (and is) pretty upset by yet another horrible tactical and military goof.

I'd like to think that Barack and Joe went back to the White House after they supped-among-the-people and demanded some answers. And, more importantly, changed military tactics.

(An outright halt to bombing would be a good start, I daresay.)

Sure, I looked at the burger pictures.

Yeah. Nice press pop.

And yeah, the first time I looked at figurative page seven about the latest carnage, I, too, winced.

And moved to the next news item.

I talked about this juxtaposition -- burgers and bombings -- with my wife. And, as usual, she-of-extraordinary-insight was entirely correct.

The fault is not entirely in our "stars" -- pun intended.

To a certain extent, the fault is with we the underlings -- we, the people -- for not calling and emailing and agitating and demanding an end to the wars.

The Chicago Tribune on Illinois elections: "Sound and fury, signifying nothing"

2009-05-03T20:14:10Z

Ah, Mother Tribune. Such indignation! Such fury!

Today (May 3, 2009), in a piece entitled "Give Lawmakers Your Ultimatum. And Do It Now", the editorial board implores voters to go to the figurative ramparts. www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-edpg-editcorrupt-sbmay03,0,6028615.story

Railing about "this supremely corruptible (Illinois) government", they're in high dudgeon: "You remember their pandering promises? You thought their lip service was legit? The sly sluggishness in Springfield suggests you're on the short end of your lawmakers' deceits."

("Pandering promises"? "Sly sluggishness"? Alliterate on, valiant Tribune!)

"That means speaking to your lawmakers in the language they best understand: 'If you don't deliver major reforms, I will not vote to re-elect you. Instead I will work for your defeat. Honest.""

Oooookay. Here we go. One more time, now, from the top: "Throw the Bums Out, Opus #766609".

Umm, attention Tribbies: throwing the bums out is an idle threat. And all the pols know it.

Because they've rigged the system.

Illinois election law is so perverse and undemocratic that almost exactly half of the House contests in 2008 -- 58 of 118 -- were uncontested. UNCONTESTED.

On the Senate side, only 21 of the 39 open seats had two or more candidates. Source: www.ilcampaign.org/blog/2008/10/eight-general-assembly-battles-have.html

It's a wee bit difficult to defeat incumbents if roughly half run unopposed. Ya dig, Trib?

And the Democrats and Republicans are forever tweaking the Illinois Election Code to insulate themselves from challenges, meaningful or otherwise.

Care for a current example of that?

House Bill 723, now pending before the Senate, will make the filling of vacancies in nomination ("slating") almost impossible for newly established parties, such as the Illinois Green Party (of which I am of course a member, as well as a former candidate for U.S. Congress). ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=723&GAID=10&GA=96&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=41436&SessionID=76

(It seems like one or more of the House sponsors were -- shall I say? -- "rudely surprised" to find that the Greens had the temerity to slate opponents against them in 2008. Competition! Why.....talk about nerve!)

This is precisely what the "legacy parties" -- the go-along and get-along Democratic and Republican Parties -- want. No competition. Gerrymandered districts, in which parties and politicians alike choose their voters (and not the other way around). No other political parties. No way in Hades for voters to turn them out.

(And if there are but the feeblist of occasional threats to their cherished status quo, why -- legislate those threats right out of existence!)

Think of it. Nearly half of the legislative races in Illinois are uncontested. And we call our political system a democracy!

The Illinois Green Party stands apart. One of our "four pillars" is grassroots democracy. Find out more at www.ilgp.org.

Similarly, information on the Green Party of the United States is at www.gp.org.

Think Green Party, friends. It represents the common sense electoral reform all of us -- including the Tribune (though they don't know it -- yet!) yearn for.

Until then -- rants like the Trib's editorial today truly are, in the immortal words of Shakespeare's Macbeth, "sound and fury, signifying nothing".

Piracy off the Horn of Africa: A Modest Proposal

2009-05-02T16:10:00Z

The larger cause of the piracy is, of course, the rather shameful reticence of the world community to do anything about the fact that Somalia has not had a functioning government for nearly twenty years. Another discussion.

So what's the world community doing for the present to throttle the pirates?

Oh, sending a few warships to churn around aimlessly in the Gulf of Aden. Buzzing a few helicopters around for show. Apart from occasional press pops like rescuing a U.S. ship captain-held-hostage -- not really succeeding.

Take it from a former merchant seaman, folks. (Didn't know that about me, did you?) This is a lousy way to run a naval operation.

Time to revisit tactics from World War II and earlier. Run convoys.

That's right. Have merchant ships rendezvous at fixed points, and then move them as groups (a dozen at a time, perhaps) with naval escorts.

Viola, end of hijackings.

Once that's accomplished -- then, perhaps, the navies on missions to nowhere might turn themselves to something more useful.

Like humanitarian assistance for the Somalis.

Read more about convoys here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoys

Kiva: making a macro difference through microfinancing

2009-04-17T11:55:00Z

I've spoken before -- most recently during my 2008 campaign for U.S. Congress -- about microfinancing and microcapitalism.

I've talked about revitalizing our economy on a grassroots basis. Lifting ourselves up by enabling and training and coaching entrepreneurs in our home towns. And extending to them microloans and microgrants to get them up and running.

Bicycle shops. Community agriculture. Software startups. Niche products and services that are internet-driven. Carpenters. Cobblers. Butchers and bakers and candlestick makers.

If there's a community need -- let's help our neighbors and families and friends fill it.

Let's encourage one another. Let's give one another the dignity of work.

There's an internet-based organization called Kiva that does this on an international basis.

Just this morning, I made another four microloans of $25 each through Kiva's auspices.

One was to a grocer in Nigeria. Another supports farming in the Philippines. Two went to tailors in Uganda and Togo.

Each of my modest $25 stipends gets aggregated with the loans of other individuals to pool a little bit of startup money -- typically between a few hundred to a couple of thousand dollars per enterprise. These individuals and groups partner with local microfinance experts and mentors, and the money gets put to work.

As the businesses get launched, the money gets paid back, a little at a time. In my case, I reloan the money to new startups as soon as it gets repaid.

To me, Kiva is one of the most constructive -- and inspiring -- economic development models around. Because it is internet-organized and internet-driven, Kiva's administrative costs are incredibly low.

I hope you'll join me as a Kiva supporter and participant.

Find out more at www.Kiva.org.

Gouge the Rescuers

2009-04-15T12:09:00Z

Here's an item from the April 13th Wall Street Journal: "Bailed-Out Banks Face Probe Over Fee Hikes".

"Since the Troubled Asset Relief Program was launched last October, banks bolstered by capital infusions have boosted charges on a wide range of routine transactions, hiked rates on credit cards and continued making loans criticized as predatory by consumer advocates."

"Last week, for example, Bank of America Corp. told some customers that interest rates on their credit cards will nearly double to about 14%. The Charlotte, N.C., bank, which got $45 billion in capital from the U.S. government, also is imposing fees of least $10 on a wide range of credit-card transactions."

Ain't that sweet. We the taxpayers bail out the big banks.

And what do we get as thanks? Higher interest! Higher fees!

One would think that Congress and the Bush and Obama administrations would -- as modest concessions to taxpayer generosity -- attach common-sense conditions.

Such as credit card reforms on the banking industry.

Such as compelling automakers to move more quickly on hybrid and electric and hydrogen cars.

But no.

Let me get this straight.

The banks get bailed. And then they turn around -- and gouge even more! And that's okay!

We dare not complain: "Any revolt over price hikes could intensify the crisis by depriving institutions of a key income source, say banks."

Okay. We all know the drill.

Let's just go through the Congressional Catalog of Phony Gestures once again, and convene a few useless hearings, and feign indignity and fury, and thump the table a few times, and sputter in mock horror about what an outrage it all is.

And then we'll all go back quietly to business as usual: the screwing of the American public.

(View the WSJ article at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123958015246312123.html)

Mail-in voting? Let's leap to online voting

2009-04-09T13:54:00Z

This past Tuesday, April 7th was election day in Illinois. (Again.)

The "consolidated election" (what? five months after the November elections?) featured local races -- municipalities, townships, school boards, and the like. A special Congressional election was conducted in northwestern Chicago and nearby suburbs for the seat vacated by Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff.

Turnout in most places was very light -- probably under 20%.

Statewide, the expense of administering these elections runs into the many millions.

There's got to be a better way.

In an effort to curb costs, Governor Pat Quinn was quick to suggest mail-in ballots.

“Very, very modest turnouts, certainly for special elections, I think we ought to see that as an opportunity to do mail voting that they have in some other states, like Oregon,” Quinn said. “It’s worked out pretty well, more participation.”

Vote by mail? Well, sure, it's a start.

But vote via snail mail? That's so -- oh -- 19th century.

Let's leap ahead to online voting.

Logistical problems? Sure. Access issues? You bet. Security concerns? Certainly.

But if we can bank online, surely we can devise some sort of impressive-enough security to vote online.

And I daresay voting-via-internet would drive down administrative costs -- big time.

Ya think?

Income Tax Idiocy

2009-04-07T18:15:00Z

Today is April 7th. Eight days until taxes are due. (And aren't we all having fun!)

Back in 1976, Jimmy Carter said that our tax system was a "disgrace to the human race".

It's worse now.

As an Illinois attorney, I do some tax work -- but not much. As an accommodation to a few of my clients, I'll occasionally help out.

This year, a college student approached me for help. He had less than $14,000 in income for 2008, so I thought: yeah, sure, simple. Help the guy out. A quick form 1040-EZ, plus an Illinois return. Done.

Wrong!

It turned out he had income in both Illinois and Indiana.

So I had to fill out three different returns. Federal, plus Illinois, plus Indiana.

With apologies to the good people of Indiana -- your revenue collection system is the pits. The absolute pits.

I spent over two hours wading through Indiana's idiotic forms and instructions governing part-year residents. And their convoluted county tax system.

The result was a five gobbleygook page Indiana return. Five pages. On overall income of less than $14,000. On Indiana-only income of $8,500.

Not only that: Indiana also wants to see copies of the federal and Illinois returns. So that's eleven pages total.

The Indiana take: $289.

(For cryin' out loud! What are Indiana's processing costs on an eleven page return? For a lousy $289?)

What in blazes are lower income people supposed to do in the face of abominations like this?

Geez. Can't the nation (and the assorted states) just say, "If you make less than $ X, you don't need to file"?

Okay, Indiana, here's eleven pages of tax returns. Take your lousy $289. Have a nice day.

While I'm at it -- a quick memo to Governor Mitch Daniels and the Indiana legislature.

"What are you THINKING?"

Had Enough of Corporate Bailouts? Get Ready for Another B-word outrage: Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

2009-03-31T22:34:00Z

Yesterday (March 30, 2009), President Obama floated the other b-word: bankruptcy.

"While Chrysler and GM are very different companies with very different paths forward, both need a fresh start to implement the restructuring plans they develop," Obama said. "That may mean using our bankruptcy code as a mechanism to help them restructure quickly and emerge stronger."

Here it comes, folks. Another huge win for spectacularly awful corporate managers. Another catastrophic loss for taxpayers, bondholders, employees, and retirees.

Remember when United Airlines filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy (that is, reorganization under Chapter 11 of the federal bankruptcy code) back in 2002?

Among other things, the airline eventually succeeded in palming off its pension obligations -- underfunded by about $10 billion -- on the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), a federal agency already overburdened with soured plans.

That was bad enough. But because PBGC coverage is limited, United employees and retirees were effectively forced to take huge pension cuts.

Obama's signals are frighteningly clear.

Employees of GM and Chrysler -- and other companies -- are next.

And the corporate miscreants know it.

It's easy. Do what United did.

Break faith with employees.

File for Chapter 11, and shed those pesky pensions. And, perhaps, dump health plans and other benefits, too.

So reflect on this.

The massive federal bailouts -- backed by we, the taxpayers -- weren't good enough.

That's right. The bailouts weren't good enough.

Thanks to Chapter 11, the fat cats now will stick it to us.

Again.

The social costs of guns

2009-03-07T15:25:00Z

My first blog entry -- just over a year ago -- was about gun and ammunition control.

A recent University of Chicago study (http://crimelab.uchicago.edu/gun_violence/report.shtml#2) prompts me to revisit the issue today.

The report estimates that each gunshot wound tied to a crime carries with it approximately one million dollars in social costs.

One crime. One ten-cent bullet. One wound. One million bucks.

The authors estimate that per year, this translates into $2.5 billion of associated social costs in the City of Chicago alone.

$2,500 per household, they say.

For now, I'll not address the agony and suffering associated with the promiscuity of guns.

From a strictly bean-counting standpoint -- I, for one, don't particularly care to shoulder this "hidden tax".

Memo to gun owners: pony up.

You want guns? Then you defray the social costs.

Stop sticking these staggering sums to the general public. You pay.

Gun owners, you pay. You pay for all of the gratuitous gun violence, even if you don't personally cause it. Pay for the privilege of gun ownership in the form of punishing and punitive excise taxes on arms and ammunition.

Gun owners, you pay. You pay for the broken and ruined lives of innocents, even if others are pulling the triggers. Pay for your privilege in the form of mandatory liability insurance on weaponry.

Pay? Pay how much?

How about enough to cover each shooting-related crime in the United States to the tune of, oh, say, one million dollars?

How about enough to cover twenty-five hundred bucks per American household?

How's that for a concept? Gun owners covering the social costs of gun violence as a condition of having guns.

Seems fair, doesn't it?

Instant Runoff Voting

2009-03-03T16:30:00Z

Here in Illinois, we're having a special primary today (March 3, 2009) in the 5th Congressional district.

It's for the seat vacated by Rahm Emanuel, now chief of staff to President Obama.

The district stretches from Lake Michigan through the northwest side of Chicago and then west into a few suburbs.

Remarkably, there are twenty-three candidates running in three different party primaries: Democratic, Green, and Republican. Voter turnout is forecast to be incredibly light.

This gives rise to the prospect that the respective party winners (particularly among the Democrats) can emerge with but a tiny plurality.

A "winner take all" with something like, say, 12% of the vote? Not for me, thanks.

We need a better voting system.

Ever hear of instant runoff voting (IRV)?

In a nutshell: "IRV is a voting system for single-winner elections that guarantees majority winners in a single round of voting. IRV allows voters to vote their hopes instead of their fears by ranking candidates in order of preference without worrying about spoiler dynamics or wasted votes." -- www.InstantRunoff.com

(Hey, if we can rank our votes for positions on All-Star baseball teams, or for contestants on American Idol -- why the heck can't we do the same on something that really counts? Like -- our democratic system of government!)

So -- who else but goo-goos (good government types) support IRV?

Well, during the 92nd session of the Illinois General Assembly, we had Senate Bill 1789. It didn't go anywhere. www.fairvote.org/?page=2188

The sponsors, you ask? Oh, a couple of obscure back-bench guys. John Cullerton. Barack Obama.

(For those of you from outside Illinois -- Cullerton recently was elected as president of the Illinois State Senate.)

Thinkin' of Lincoln, Part 4: Was Lincoln Ever in McHenry County?

2009-01-24T04:35:00Z

Was Lincoln Ever in McHenry County?
by Scott Summers

It certainly would be wonderful -- wouldn't it? -- if we knew that Lincoln the Lawyer had practiced here in McHenry County. Or if he had visited Algonquin or McHenry. Or stopped in Hebron or Ringwood or Richmond.

Were it so, we would recount with pride the tales about his times here. We would joyously trace his steps.

And so the question: did Abraham Lincoln ever set foot in McHenry County?

Alas, no. Strictly speaking, no.

I regret to report that there are absolutely no historical records -- no court papers, no letters, no newspapers, no photographs, no contemporaneous accounts, no documents of any description -- conclusively establishing that Lincoln was here.

The closest I can come are a couple of McHenry County court cases that Lincoln handled on appeal -- in Springfield. Find out more about them through these links: http://www.lawpracticeofabrahamlincoln.org/Details.aspx?case=137887 and http://www.lawpracticeofabrahamlincoln.org/Details.aspx?case=137888

Ah. But notice I say that Lincoln was not here -- "strictly speaking".

Let's have some fun. Let's put on our stovepipe hats, and start "thinkin'".

In 1859, Lincoln was on the political stump. Capitalizing on the recognition he received from his debates with Stephen Douglas the year before, and pressing his “dark horse” status within the Republican Party for the national campaign to come in 1860, Lincoln undertook several short speaking tours. One of his trips was to Wisconsin, where he gave speeches in Milwaukee, Beloit, and Janesville.

Consider this excerpt from "The Lincoln Log, A Daily Chronology of the Life of Abraham Lincoln", http://www.thelincolnlog.org/view/1859/10

Saturday, October 1, 1859.
Beloit, WI and Janesville, WI.

Lincoln arrives at Beloit at noon, and speaks at Hanchett's Hall. In evening he makes speech in Janesville. Beloit Journal, 5 October 1859; Janesville Gazette, 4 October 1859; Speech at Beloit, Wisconsin, 1 October 1859, CW, 3:482-84; Speech at Janesville, Wisconsin, 1 October 1859, CW, 3:484-86; Wisconsin Hist. Coll., XIV, 134.

Sunday, October 2, 1859.
Janesville, WI.

Lincoln remains at home of Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Tallman, where he spent night, and accompanies his host and hostess to Congregational Church. Wisconsin Magazine, January 1924-February 1924.

Monday, October 3, 1859.
Chicago, IL.

Lincoln arrives in morning and registers at Tremont House. Chicago Journal, 3 October 1859.

Did you catch that? Janesville on October 2nd. Chicago on the morning of October 3rd.

Now. By what route might Lincoln have traveled from Janesville to Chicago?

We really don't know. And for that matter, we probably never will know.

But I've uncovered some information that suggests Lincoln may have passed through our county by train.

To be specific -- I theorize that Lincoln transited McHenry County during the early morning hours of Monday, October 3, 1859.

Let's be very clear: "transited" is the operative word. I don't mean to make more of this than it is. If -- if -- Lincoln was here in McHenry County, it was a fleeting event. He was rushing through. And his quick ride very well may have taken place in the middle of the night.

Are you intrigued enough to keep "thinkin'" with me?

I've examined microfilm of the Janesville Gazette for Monday, October 3rd, 1859, as well as that for the Woodstock Sentinel of that date. Each newspaper prominently displays train timetables on their respective front pages. And these bits of circumstantial evidence give rise to my theory.

Lincoln had hoped to leave Janesville on Sunday, but passenger trains back then ran infrequently on the sabbath. Having missed the only train of the day because he couldn't find his boots (a poignant and funny little story for another time, perhaps), Lincoln had to hold over on Sunday with the Tallmans.

(A quick aside: the magnificently restored Lincoln-Tallman house in Janesville is one of my favorite "undiscovered gems" along the Lincoln trail. Furnishings include the bed in which Lincoln slept. Find out more at www.rchs.us. And although the third floor room in which Lincoln spoke is not readily available for inspection by the public, Hanchett's Hall in downtown Beloit is easily viewed from the street. A mere hour away from much of McHenry County, this Janesville-Beloit combination is a fun day trip for local Lincoln fans!)

There were three train lines out of Janesville in October, 1859. One, the Milwaukee and Mississippi Railroad, ran from Janesville to Milwaukee, with connections there for Chicago. I offer only rank speculation that Lincoln – delayed and in a hurry – probably did not take this rather roundabout journey.

The Galena and Chicago Union Railroad is a possibility. It would have connected in Belvidere for Chicago. Had Lincoln taken this route, he would indeed have passed through McHenry County on the segment of line known affectionately now as “H.U.M.” – Huntley, Union, and Marengo.

But the departure times for Chicago contained in the October 3^rd Janesville Gazette were either 9 AM or 10 AM (there is a discrepancy in the line's page one advertisement) and 8:15 PM. These departures would not have been able to place Lincoln at Chicago's Tremont House on Monday morning.

The shortest distance between Janesville and Chicago then – as now -- is the old Chicago and Northwestern train line, known today as the Union Pacific Railroad. And it cuts a diagonal right across McHenry County.

Wouldn't you know it: the timetables for the Northwestern reported in the October 3^rd Janesville and Woodstock papers don't quite match.

The Janesville Gazette posts passenger departure times on the Northwestern of “12:00 A.M” (midnight, presumably) plus 3:30 PM and 9:30 PM. The Sentinel corroborates the afternoon and evening trains.

But the Woodstock paper carries no mention of the midnight train out of Janesville. What's more, it reports an 11:00 AM Janesville departure for Chicago not stated in the Janesville paper.

Fortunately, an overlay of the two timetables seems to point to only one train capable of delivering Lincoln to Chicago on Monday morning, October 3rd: the midnight train out of Janesville.

So let's recap by ranking the possibilities from least to most likely.

We'll guess that Lincoln didn't travel from Janesville to Milwaukee to Chicago. It's possible – but it seems too circuitous and slow for a man in a hurry.

The timetable for the Janesville to Belvidere to Chicago trip on the Galena and Chicago Union line – including the Huntley-Union-Marengo segment through southern McHenry County – seems to preclude Lincoln's Monday morning arrival in Chicago. (But note that this line might have been his Sunday choice, had he made it: the timetable contained in the Woodstock Sentinel states plainly that the Northwestern did not run on Sundays. So there remains a chance Lincoln was “humming along” on H.U.M.)

The accounts of Lincoln's stay with the Tallmans mention only Saturday night – not Sunday night. This, plus the account of his Monday morning arrival in Chicago, indicate to me that Lincoln was on the midnight train.

During the very early morning hours of Monday, October 3, 1859, I think that Abraham Lincoln was passing through McHenry County – our McHenry County – along the tracks of the Chicago and Northwestern Railroad. Rolling through places we know today as Lawrence. Harvard. Hartland. Woodstock. Crystal Lake. Cary. Fox River Grove.

One more thing.

It's harder to pin down – but there's another possibility that Lincoln transited McHenry County by train, this time on a Chicago to Rockford round trip. Consider another entry from www.thelincolnlog.org:

“Saturday, July 7, 1855. Chicago, IL. Sometime during session of U.S. courts in Chicago Lincoln goes to Rockford, where he studies reaper manufactured by Manny & Co. He has been retained for defense in McCormick v. Manny & Co., and during June had interview with P. H. Watson, prominent patent lawyer of Washington, DC, in regard to case. Abraham Lincoln to Peter H. Watson, 23 July 1855, CW, 2:314-15.”

What do you think?

It depends on the time of year, I suppose. But the next time you cross train tracks anywhere in McHenry County, look up the line toward Janesville, or out toward Rockford.

Tell me. What do you see?

There, way off in the wind-whipped wisps of snow. Or there, perhaps, looming in the drizzle and fog and mist. Or there. There, mirage-like, in the shimmering summer heat. Do you see it?

Is that an old-time locomotive, snorting and chugging and hissing its way down the tracks?

Why, it's almost here. It's slowing down. Stand back!

Look. There, in that passenger coach. The gaunt and lanky man. Him. Right there.

That one. The one with the sad eyes and kindly smile. Him, in the wrinkled black suit. Gazing out across the McHenry County prairie.

No. It couldn't be. Could it?

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Generic

Warsaw Ghetto, 1943; Gaza Ghetto, 2009

2009-01-04T18:11:19Z

As Gaza writhes today in agony, let us ponder the stupefying irony of another unspeakably brutal event: the 1943 uprising of the Jews confined by the Nazis to the Warsaw ghetto:

At 3am on the morning of April 19,(1943) the Nazis surrounded the (Warsaw) ghetto and the battle began.(About) 2000 Germans armed with a tank, two armored cars, three light-anti-aircraft guns, one medium howitzer, heavy and light machine guns, flame throwers, rifles, pistols and grenades faced off against 700-750 Jewish resistance fighters. The Jews had managed to stockpile a few thousand grenades, as well as a few hundred rifles, revolvers and pistols. But they possessed only two or three light machine guns. The Germans planned to clear the ghetto of 60,000 Jews in three days. The Jews hoped to hold out as long as possible.

ByApril 22, fire was devouring several sections of the ghetto, forcing many Jews to leap from burning buildings. In the next few days, the Germans began capturing and killing more and more of the ghetto inhabitants some of whom reported that the resistance fighters in the bunkers had become "insane from the heat, the smoke, and the explosions." Some Jews tried to escape through the sewers. The Germans responded by blowing up the manholes and using poison gas. On May 8, (the 24-year-old Jewish commander Mordecai) Anielewicz was killed. By May 15th, the shooting had become so intermittent that it was clear the ghetto fighters had been defeated. As a sign of the German victory, the Nazi commander blew up the great Tlomacki Synagogue.

All in all, several thousand Jews had been buriedin the debris, and more than 56,000 had been captured. About 30,000 of them were either immediately shot or transported to death camps. The remainder were sent to labor camps. Though the Nazis did raze the ghetto as Himmler had ordered, the resistance fighters had achieved at least one of their goals. Their commander Anielewicz articulated what this was in a letter to a friend shortly before his death. "My life's dream has been realized," he said. "I have lived to see Jewish defense in the ghetto rally its greatness and glory." By the end of the year, with very little left of Jewish life in Poland, the task for the Jewish resistance had become, in the words of one member of the underground, to "keep alive the remnants who have survived...so there will be some reserve for the future and witnesses to this crime."

Source: www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/holocaust/peopleevents/pandeAMEX103.html

Thinkin' of Lincoln, Part 3: Booth Saved Lincoln's Life

2009-01-01T18:08:00Z

Yes, you read that correctly: Booth saved Lincoln's life.

"Wait!", you say. "Booth murdered Lincoln!"

Ah. But I speak not of Abraham Lincoln and John Wilkes Booth.

Rather, I recall a largely overlooked encounter involving the president's eldest son, Robert Todd Lincoln, and Edwin Booth, elder brother of "Wilkes" (as the Booth family referred to the president's assassin).

The scene: 1863 or 1864, in a Jersey City, New Jersey train station. The president's son, a student at Harvard University, is on vacation and enroute to see his parents in Washington. Edwin Booth, a highly acclaimed Shakespearean actor whose theatrical talents greatly eclipse those of his soon-to-be-reviled brother, is on his way to Richmond, Virginia -- in the company, as chance would have it, of his friend, John T. Ford, owner of Ford's Theater in Washington.

Robert Lincoln narrates:

The incident occurred while a group of passengers were late at night purchasing their sleeping car places from the conductor who stood on the station platform at the entrance of the car. The platform was about the height of the car floor, and there was of course a narrow space between the platform and the car body. There was some crowding, and I happened to be pressed by it against the car body while waiting my turn. In this situation the train began to move, and by the motion I was twisted off my feet, and had dropped somewhat, with feet downward, into the open space, and was personally helpless, when my coat collar was vigorously seized and I was quickly pulled up and out to a secure footing on the platform. Upon turning to thank my rescuer I saw it was Edwin Booth, whose face was of course well known to me, and I expressed my gratitude to him, and in doing so, called him by name.

There is no evidence that Robert Lincoln ever told his parents about the incident -- perhaps because he knew it would be highly upsetting to his mother, and perhaps because he knew that his father was heavily burdened with wartime issues. Robert's recollection above was provided to Richard Watson Gilder, editor of The Century Magazine, in a 1909 letter.

So there you have it. Booth indeed saved Lincoln's life!

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works-2.5 Generic.

"Make the Rubble Bounce"

2008-10-29T16:10:00Z

Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates delivered a policy speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Here are excerpts of his remarks from www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1305

"(W)e must deal with the messy realities of the world in which we live. One of those realities is the existence of nuclear weapons."

"Try as we might, and hope as we will, the power of nuclear weapons and their strategic impact is a genie that cannot be put back in the bottle – at least for a very long time. While we have a long-term goal of abolishing nuclear weapons once and for all, given the world in which we live, we have to be realistic about that proposition."

"To be blunt, there is absolutely no way we can maintain a credible deterrent and reduce the number of weapons in our stockpile without either resorting to testing our stockpile or pursuing a modernization program."

Mr. Gates, it seems, is intent on keeping our nuclear menace trigger-ready. For shame. For shame!

Not only that. He would have us spend new billions on refurbishing and retooling our fiendishly awful nuclear armament. And testing it!

For Secretary Gates, genie stuffing is just oh-too-much-trouble. Can't-be-bothered. Let-somebody-else-do-it. "A very long time" from now.

Sorry, Mr. Gates. You have it precisely backwards. Horribly, awfully, appallingly, disgustingly backwards.

The "messy reality" you blithely overlook is the prospect of annihilation of the planet. The "messy reality" you cavalierly deny is the possible extermination of the human race.

And the time to deal with it is now. Now. NOW.

No more obfuscation. No more excuses. No more deferral. No more delays.

Rather than retool weapons -- let us retool treaties and protocols.

And rid ourselves of the curse and scourge and fear and terror of nuclear weaponry.

Let us finally, finally lay claim -- for ourselves, and for our children, and for generations yet unborn -- to the stirring ancient prophecy of beating swords into plowshares, and spears into pruning hooks.

And in so doing, may we avert the apocalypse foretold by Winston Churchill:

"If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make the rubble bounce."

The Scott Summers prescription: "Medicare for All"

2008-10-28T01:17:00Z

Let's try out some synonyms -- all "u" words -- for health care today in the USA.

Unaffordable. Unfair. Unsustainable.

And -- for nearly 46 million uninsured people -- unavailable. (1)

As far as I'm concerned, adequate health care is a basic human right. And it's a fundamental part of our social compact -- like police and fire protection, infrastructure, elementary education, and a common defense.

Every major industrialized country in the world has some form of universal health care. Except the United States.

I say: it's high time that we implement "Medicare for All". Period.

"So what!" quoth you, my erstwhile and gentle readers. "It doesn't matter much what YOU think, Scott Summers!"

Right you are.

So. Let's be calculating and steely and ruthlessly objective.

Let's count dollars. Let's count beans.

Friends, we're not getting our money's worth. We're not getting good value for our health care dollars.

Per person, we put more money into health care -- twice as much money per person, in fact -- than any other country in the world. (2)

Yet we get so-so medical outcomes. And still we have the aforementioned 46 million uninsured.   Plus stark disparities in care linked to race, gender, geography, education, economic standing, and age.

Billions of our health care dollars don't even get spent on health care. They go right off the top for insurance company marketing, and for bloated overhead.   All to service thousands upon thousands of convoluted and bewildering health care plans.

That's bad enough. But systemwide, our priorities are way out of whack.

In this country, we give lip service to preventative care, and instead pay copiously for exotic procedures and protocols associated with advanced disease.

That's not smart. As the old adage goes -- "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

Associated services and products are way out of whack, too.

Pharmaceuticals. Medical equipment. All at preposterous prices that dwarf those for the same products in other parts of the world.

Consider this: government already pays for over half of all health care spending in the United States. (3) This is in the form of direct insurance (Medicare, Medicaid, other programs) and indirect insurance (governmental entities such as schools purchasing private insurance for their employees).

Note well that with the exception of the military and the Veterans Administration and a few other programs, this is government-provided insurance. It is NOT government-provided medicine, i.e., "socialized medicine".

Does anybody -- anybody -- really have a problem with the concept of Medicare?

For over forty years, we've watched -- largely with approval -- as our parents, and grandparents, and great-grandparents, have benefited from the Medicare program.

Look. There's nothing magical about the age of 65.

Medicare works for America.

Let's now let ALL of America buy into Medicare.

In addition to finally, finally providing universal coverage, a new national health plan based on the Medicare model will provide a consistent and cost-effective single payer system that will keep administrative costs low.

And people will be able to choose their own physicians. Preventative care will be emphasized. Rather than being marginalized, public health will play an integral role. Leverage in purchasing power will drive costs down. Quality and care standards will be raised.

To be certain, Medicare needs retooling. Lots of it. Cost pressures have become enormous, and the program as presently constituted is in greater fiscal peril than Social Security.

Universal health care will be hugely expensive. And I say plainly that the massive new debt being taken on by the federal government now has me despairing -- greatly -- about the feasibility of all of this.

But I press on. My advocacy will not be stilled.

How shall we pay for "Medicare for All"? I say: (a) A modest increase in the existing Medicare payroll tax. (b) A slight (one or two percent) bump in federal income taxes, scaled mostly toward higher incomes. (c) Punishing new taxes on alcohol and tobacco and junk food. (d) Handsome savings as health marketing costs are largely eliminated and administrative overhead is reduced. (e) Fund transfers from a slimmed-down military. Plus a major intangible: a new social compact in the form of peer pressure. If we're to have national health care, then each of us -- as (and if) we are able -- MUST eat right, keep fit, refrain from tobacco, and drink but little.

Note well the significant savings that will serve as tax offsets. Some health costs as we now know them will largely disappear. Health insurance premiums. Co-pays. Deductibles. And we also can build in some new financial incentives in the form of restructured IRA-style health savings accounts: people can accrue modest sums of tax-free cash by engaging in wellness activities.

"But Scott, why the big fix? Sure, health care needs work. But an entire makeover?"

I believe that the incremental health care tweaks now being proposed by Democrats and Republicans alike simply will not solve the basic problems -- the stunningly high cost of health care, and the shameful lack of accessibility to it.

You know, it's kind of like owning an old beater of a car. It keeps breaking down, and you fix it, and fix it, and fix it, and defer, and delay, and the car just keeps breaking down no matter what you do. At some sorrowful point, you realize that you're merely throwing good money after bad.   And in your sadness and disgust and denial and despair, you finally come to the realization that you simply can't go on trying to fix it.

I really think we're at that stage now with health care.

We simply can't afford a fancy new car, figuratively speaking. So let's junk our pathetic beater of a health care system, and go instead with a decent and serviceable and reliable vehicle that all of us have come to know: Medicare.

Medicare for every American. "Medicare for All".

I am not alone in my thinking. Physicians for a National Health Program (www.pnhp.org) has endorsed "Medicare for All". Senator Ted Kennedy and Representatives John Dingle and John Conyers are among its eloquent advocates on Capitol Hill.

And if the voters of the 16th Congressional District of Illinois see fit to elect me, I, too, shall work tirelessly for universal health care.

"Medicare for All". The nation's health -- quite literally -- depends on it.

__________________________________________________

Footnotes:

(1) www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/09/15/gvl10915.htm

(2) www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=673038

(3) http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/335/7630/1126

Scott Summers talks about health care

2008-10-25T21:12:00Z

A number of weeks ago, I answered a series of questions posed by a group called "Your Candidates, Your Health".

It sketches out my positions on health care. Please see this link:

http://www.yourcandidatesyourhealth.org/profile.php?c_id=MjEzMjEy

Manzullo's Recent Votes: What's He Thinking?

2008-09-30T16:06:00Z

Meanwhile..............back in Washington..............

Congressman Manzullo recently voted "no" on the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008. It passed anyway.

Congressman Manzullo recently voted "no" on the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Tax Act of 2008. It passed anyway.

Congressman Manzullo recently voted "no" on the Job Creation and Unemployment Relief Act of 2008. It passed anyway.

Congressman Manzullo: what are you thinking?

The MegaMeltdown: A postscript

2008-09-30T16:02:00Z

POSTSCRIPT, September 29:

Today, the House of Representatives voted down the "financial rescue package", a/k/a "buy-in", a/k/a "bailout".

And markets worldwide are down precipitously.

Fasten your seatbelts, friends. And make sure that the figurative airbags are working. This is -- and will continue to be -- nasty. Very nasty.

President Bush, and Treasury Secretary Paulson, and Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke -- inadvertently or otherwise -- have us all in panic mode.

Wrong.

You know, I think Congress did the right thing today.

Whether or not the members really thought about it, Congress stood up for itself.

The founders intended for Congress to be a deliberative body. Not a sheep ranch.

America simply will not write a gigantic check unless there are meaningful reforms.

I still think that Congress needs to enact a comprehensive solution.

And Congress needs to move expeditiously.

But this is an opportunity. An opportunity to create smart new public policy.

We, through our Congress, can -- and must -- resolutely work through the wreckage, and seize the opportunity to rework national fiscal policy for the better.

Tonight, I say: let's stay positive, friends.

In the coming few days, Congress will -- indeed, must -- set the stage for thoughtful and far-ranging solutions.

"We the people" have every right to expect that this debacle will not be visited upon us again.

The MegaMeltdown: Changing the rules, changing the game, and changing our way of life

2008-09-24T13:23:00Z

In meetups and speeches and one-on-ones during my current campaign for Congress, I've been asking a rhetorical question: "Whatever happened to capitalism in this country?"

When all of the financial dominoes fell, that became far more prescient -- and salient -- then I would have thought mere weeks ago.

We don't do capitalism anymore, friends. We've devolved to a perverse sort of semi-socialism.

We have welfare for the wealthy. And peanuts for the poor.

Privatize reward. Socialize risk.

Think about that. Wealth with no risk for elites.   Debt with no chance of reward for everyday Americans.

What kind of deal is that?

Whenever times are good, the fat cats make out. Big time.

Whenever the fat cats become too arrogant and stupid and greedy, they dump their problems on the rest of us.

Today, the treasury secretary is saying cavalierly -- and impatiently -- that Congress needs to get a move on. The mountains of overly ripe kitty litter are starting to reek. Hurry up and send in the taxpayers to start a-cleanin'.

"Clean it up," the secretary seems to say. "Or else the fat cats won't come back!"

Like -- we, the cleaning crew, WANT them back? Oh, please!

Okay. Enough of a rant. Deep breath.

People are asking: "Scott, what do you think? Scott, what should we do?"

It's a bunch of lousy choices, friends. For now, all we can do is make the least lousy choices.

Not a happy thought. Not a happy prospect.

On balance -- I think we have to go through with it. Bail 'em out.

If we don't, everything else is at increased risk. Our jobs. Our homes. Our retirements.

I'll not rehash all of the common-sense conditions that must attach, other than to mention a few in passing. More regulation. More oversight. More transparency.

Instead, I'll dwell on a few items that no one else is talking about.

Have you noticed that all the so-called regulation and reform is directed toward the big markets? And to the aforementioned fat cats?

As part of the overall package -- how about correcting some of the onerous and oppressive financial abuses under which so many of us labor?

How about workouts and writedowns for individual homeowners in mortgage trouble?

How about credit card reform? Payday loan protections?

Remember the "stick-it-to-'em" changes to bankruptcy laws a couple of years ago? Recind them.

Another thing.    We need to raise some revenue to service the monster debt.

In the best tradition of the old Ronald Reagan sleight-of-hand -- borrow and spend (which George W. has happily, and recklessly, amplified in the extreme) -- all this bailout does is pile on new debt.

No federal spending cuts. No new revenues. Just new debt.

That's irresponsible.

Here's a condition for the bailout that NO ONE is proposing. But politically, I have the freedom -- and courage -- to suggest it.

I propose a temporary income tax surcharge on the wealthiest Americans.

(The well-to-do have the most at risk in this mess, do they not?)

If you're in the top five percent of earners, pay an extra twenty percent for the next five years.

In other words, if your tax bill for year 2008 ends up at $50,000, well, it'll bump to $60,000.

Thank you very much. Have a nice day.

This is not the end of the mess. I regret to forecast that there will be more bailouts.

But let's not stoically absorb them and endure them. Let's seize on them as ways to force changes in public policy.

I was at a candidate forum in Rockford last night, and I was asked what I thought about the prospect of bailouts for the carmakers.

I told the crowd that I'd support them -- if, and only if, the manufacturers agreed to stop their decades of whining and procrastination and delay, and IMMEDIATELY cease making gas guzzlers.

Yes. Make them manufacture all high mileage cars, and move expeditiously to hybrids and electrics.

If they want our help, then they finally, finally, have to do the right thing. On our terms.

And now -- to the extent I can peer through murk -- the future.

Our lives are changing. Our country is changing. Fundamentally. Precipitously. Forever.

Let's start with government.

Our role as a dominant economic power is about to end. No one is going to buy up all our debt anymore -- except at high rates of interest.

You see, it's not just the debt that Washington is piling on. There's way too much debt now. Investors from across the globe are becoming skeptical. So the interest we taxpayers have to pay will go up, too.

The federal spending priorities are being force-fed to us. Defense. And interest on the debt. Figurative pennies for health and education and welfare. No discretion at all. The end.

Increase taxes across the board? There's not a whole lot that average taxpayers can kick in anymore. (Especially in our Congressional district, where unemployment in the Rockford area now is running at a spectacularly-awful nine percent.)

So we have to turn to the spending side. Time for another brave (foolish?) Scott Summers pronouncement.

Cut defense spending. Lots.

You know, our defense colossus isn't fighting a war on terrorism. It's still fighting the Cold War (much to the benefit of a subspecies of fat cats, the defense contractors.)

We don't need all the aircraft carrier battle groups. We don't need all the nuclear submarines prowling the oceans of the world. We don't need all the thousands upon thousands of nuclear-armed missiles.

We don't need idiotic missile defense shields that don't work. We don't need outrageous cost overruns on weapons systems of marginal usefulness (and dubious workability).

But you see, in our new economic order, my tirade on this doesn't matter.

The time has finally come. We simply cannot afford it.

What's about to happen to military expenditures in this country happened to the Roman and Chinese Empires. And to the British Empire. And even to the Soviets twenty years ago.

They all had to mothball their militaries. They ran out of money to support them.

So now will we.

I don't mean to leave you on a down note. Those of you who are coming to know me know that I'm outspoken. But you also know that I'm also optimistic. And hopeful.

In short -- events now are moving so rapidly that the fundamentals HAVE to change.

It's up to us channel that change positively.

This has become a bit long.   I'll have to leave it for now.

Thanks.