Sometime after the victory at Gettysburg work began on a national cemetery to give the Union soldiers who died there are proper burial. In October of that year, with about half the work completed, the oversight committee decided to have a commemoration ceremony in November before the weather got too bad. Edward Everett was chosen to be the main speaker. The President was invited to attend and make a few remarks.
Lincoln left Washington by train on November 18. His retinue included cabinet secretaries Seward, Usher and Blair. Those who accompanied him noted that his complexion was a sickly gray. He looked exceptionally tired and he complained of weakness and headaches. The symptoms were put down to fatigue brought on by the burdens of the war effort. Frustration with the lack of progress had spurred the Commander in Chief to superhuman efforts in his search for a winning strategy.
The Confederate army had won battle after battle in spite of the disadvantages it faced. The Union army had failed to capture Richmond and now it was unable to corral General Lee and defeat him in a decisive battle. General Grant seemed unwilling to take on Bragg’s Army of the Tennessee. Overall, Lincoln’s Army had proven to be expensive but ineffective.
The next day the President stoically endured the ceremony. After Everett’s two-hour oration, Lincoln rose to deliver his comments. A big powerfully built man, he strode boldly to the podium. He studied those attending for several minutes. They likewise appraised him, and judged him to be the rock on which the country’s future could be built. When he broke the silence, he said,
“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
On the train ride back to Washington, Lincoln’s condition worsened. Doctors determined that he had a mild case of smallpox.
Jan stared in shocked disbelief. Her fork suspended halfway between the plate and her mouth. “What?”
Sue repeated, “I saw your brother in a TV show last night.”
Anger took over. Jan’s lip curled into a sneer. Her head wagged back and forth. “Impossible. He’s dead. He died three months ago.”
“It was him,” Sue insisted. “Even had that little birthmark at the corner of his left eye.”
“Where? What show?”
“The Detectives.”
Jan followed Sue home because, of course, her friend had recorded the show. Ed Jones was mostly a corpse in the episode. There was a scene with him in a bar before he died during an armed robbery gone bad. The effect was uncanny. It seemed as if her brother Dan must’ve been alive to portray Ed Jones. Jan began to wonder if he had worked as an actor in that episode.
Over the next week, she made a careful study of her brother’s papers. Nothing suggested he had worked as an actor in the recent past. He certainly had not been paid for his participation in an installment of The Detectives. She engaged private eye Jim Reynolds to investigate.
The show had been filmed two to three weeks after Dan Byrnes died of heart failure at 38. The decision to use his body in the story was made the day after his death. The producer had been looking for someone to be the “vic” in his upcoming episode. He stopped by the hospital to cheer up a friend and spotted Byrnes’ body on a gurney in the hall. Inspiration struck and wouldn’t let go. He could use an actual corpse. He would have to use a plastic replica in some scenes and he would have to find a way to bring the man back to life for events leading up to the crime. But he could build on the remains of a man who had just died.
The producer tasked an assistant with contacting the morgue to get pictures of his new star and investigate the man’s background. A couple of surveillance cameras produced videos of Dan Byrnes walking around carrying groceries and stopping to chat with friends. That was enough material to create Ed Jones using a body actor and film magic. A 3D printer could use the pictures to produce a copy of Dan’s body.
Six months later, Jan filed a lawsuit charging that The Detectives had used her brother’s likeness without his permission or the permission of his estate. Six months after that, producers of the popular TV drama settled out of court. They agreed to pay a million dollars to cover legal costs and emotional distress. In addition, Jan would receive a royalty check every time the episode was aired.
Opening lines are overrated. Some swear by them. How-to books insist you need that one line that will hook readers and drive them to plow through a 400-page story. I just completed a workshop that devoted a whole class to the topic. The leader trotted out the opening line of a bestselling novel: “Susie did not come down for breakfast.”
That line does grab one’s attention. Diners in a restaurant would pay attention if someone stood and proclaimed, “Susie did not come down for breakfast.”
I once met a Japanese woman who was reading The Prophet to teach herself English. I began reading the book aloud so she would know how it sounded. Soon about two dozen strangers had gathered to listen to my rendition of that masterpiece.
An opening line is like an emergency vehicle with lights flashing and siren blaring. If one speeds past while you’re running errands, you know something must have happened. There’s a story. But do you follow the ambulance to get to the bottom of it?
If that same vehicle is parked in front of the house across the street, you will probably try to find out what is going on. You are interested in the lives of people you know.
The author of this novel follows up on her bizarre opening statement by introducing Susie’s family. That is technically a data dump but it serves to build a connection between readers and characters. The introduction makes Susie’s family acquaintances like the people living in the house across the street.
The two elements work together. The reader is willing to listen to the mundane details of an ordinary family’s life because the opening line grabs her attention. Those details connect her to the family. Once connected, Susie’s failure to show up for breakfast becomes a matter of deep concern.
Follow-through is a crucial element of most successful actions. A batter must connect with the ball to get a hit, but his follow-through determines where the ball goes after it leaves his bat. And that may be the difference between a hit and an out.
A long arcing pass that falls into the receiver’s hands as he sprints to the end zone is a thing of beauty. It’s fodder for highlight reels. But the passer’s footwork and body mechanics – his technique – determine the ball’s trajectory. Technique is an unassuming servant who works her magic in obscurity.
In a recent blog post (killzoneblog.com/2022/08/the-three-types-of-opening-lines.html), James Scott Bell discussed three types of opening lines:
Action: The opening line drops the reader into some intriguing action.
Voice: The opening line is clear, unique, arresting, and immediately lets the reader know what kind of story lies ahead.
Wood: The opening sets the stage for the story (my take on Bell’s explanation).
More simply, the opening line tells the reader what happened, or who was involved, or when and where it happened. The rest of the book explains how and why.
For Action/What, Bell references successful novels like John D. MacDonald’s Darker Than Amber, which begins, “We were about to give up and call it a night when somebody dropped the girl off the bridge.”
For Voice/Who, he likes Mickey Spillane’s Vengeance is Mine, which begins, “The guy was dead as hell.”
Incidentally, Charles Dickens used a very similar opening for A Christmas Carol. “Marley was dead: to begin with. There is no doubt whatsoever about that … Old Marley was dead as a doornail.”
Charles Frazier’s debut novel, which won the National Book Award and sold 3 million copies while sitting atop the New York Times bestseller list for 61 weeks, is another example of a story with a “voice” opening. The first lines set the tone with an observation that combines the story’s plot with similes appropriate to Inman and other impoverished, rural characters. “At the first gesture of morning, flies began stirring. Inman’s eyes and the long wound at his neck drew them, and the sound of their wings and the touch of their feet were soon more potent than a yardful of roosters in rousing a man to wake.”
The remainder of the chapter introduces Inman and places him in the Old South. No one sentence serves as a hook. A vivid portrait of the man and his circumstances captures the reader and pulls her into the story.
A Wood opening is not looked upon kindly by Bell. “There’s an old saying: Your story begins when you light the fire, not when you lay out the wood. I like that. It holds for any genre. But with literary fiction, and epic fantasy or history, an exception is sometimes made. Presumably, fans of these genres are patient in the beginning, knowing they are in for a long immersive ride.”
Bell goes on to assure the rest of us that even these genres can start with action.
Holding an audience’s attention, whether a single reader or a large group, is an art. Getting someone to follow you through essential backstory or world development, whether that world is the old South or “… a galaxy far, far away,” requires exceptional skills.
Mort Sahl bragged that his pal Lenny Bruce had such mastery of his delivery that he could draw his setup out for ten minutes before dropping the punch line.
It is easy to bear with someone who is saying something interesting. Lee Child’s dissertation on automatic handguns is engaging. (A Jack Reacher Novel: The Enemy p.245)
A Civil War novel given to me several years ago opened with a gang of Confederate soldiers getting ready to rob a bank in Colorado. When the author launched into a classroom-style lecture on why the Confederacy needed gold, I closed the book and never opened it again.
Just as epic fantasy and historical stories can begin with action or character, an action novel can open with a setup that leads into the story.
Bell opens his novel Try Dying with: “On a wet Tuesday morning in December, Ernesto Bonilla, twenty-eight, shot his twenty-three-year-old wife, Alexandra, in the backyard of their West Forty-fifth Street home in South Los Angeles.” Bonilla then drove to a spot overlooking a freeway and blew his brains out in such a way that his body fell onto the roof of a passing car, killing the driver.
This is setup – laying down the wood for the fire. It is a brief prologue to the story’s “intriguing action.” Remember: “Your story begins when you strike the match…”
But the author pours on lighter fluid before striking his match. “…The driver, Jacqueline Dwyer, twenty-seven, an elementary school teacher from Resida, died at the scene.” This short sentence creates sympathy. Without it, the murder-suicide-accidental death would be “… simply another dark and tragic strange coincidence…”
Then Bell throws on the match. “But the story did not go away. Not for me. Because Jacqueline Dwyer was the woman I was going to marry.”
With that, the reader is primed to follow Ty Buchanan on his search for the truth about Jacqueline’s death. A search that costs him his job, his house and his car. A search that leads him afoul of the law and drug dealers who come close to killing him. Readers follow him all the way to the end, where he solves the mystery and emerges a better man.
The opening to my novel, Demented, takes a similar approach. This is self-promotion, but I can speak authoritatively about that opening. It is borderline. Two dozen of my fellow writers reviewed and commented on it at a meeting of our writers’ group. A dozen Beta Readers gave me feedback on the novel and a couple of editors had a go at it. Some liked the opening. Others didn’t. Some had strong criticism.
I tried several alternative versions, but in the end, I decided this was the best I could come up with. First, the kindling:
“They gathered at the same table in the Il Mediterreano on Connecticut Avenue in D.C. every Friday night. They called themselves The Gal Friday Group. Most of them had mid-level jobs as administrative assistants, accountants, or lawyers. Cindy Foster had been promoted to manager of the Tax Services department at the D.C. office of America First Financial Services recently, but the group decided she could stay because she was one of the founding members. Ellen Magee was a partner in a law firm, but it was a small one, so that didn’t count. There were twelve women in the group, but there were always a few no-shows.”
Then the lighter fluid:
“Ellen turned to look. Two men had entered the restaurant and were walking toward their table. Their expensive suits and flashy ties were overkill for the Mediterreano. The man in front was middle-aged, medium height, balding, and bespectacled. The second was a six-foot-tall, 220-pound athlete. He had sharp, Teutonic features with blond hair and blue eyes. His gaze was fixed on Cindy as he made his way into the restaurant.”
And finally, the match:
“[Cindy] paid for her meal and went to the ladies’ room.
When she came out, Adan was waiting for her. “Didn’t you use to be Cindy Smith?”
She glared but said nothing.
He squinted and bit his lip. “Ah’m trying to remember where we first met.”
“At my wedding reception,” Cindy snapped. “You showed up without an invitation.”
Adan screwed up his face in a doubtful expression. “No.” He shook his head. “Ah’m sure you are the Cindy Smith I dated in college.”
“You have me confused with somebody else.”
He grinned. “You were a year behind me at Georgetown. You were the last good girl Ah dated.”
The way he said “good girl” made her stomach churn. She fought to stay in control, but when she looked into his face — and she could not help looking — she saw that sadistic grin and those predatory eyes. She could feel him on top of her. The metallic smell of testosterone made her itch all over. A scream tried to force its way out.
Cindy choked it back and pushed past him. She charged through the restaurant, past the patrons enjoying an evening out. Cindy caught Ellen’s worried expression out of the corner of her eye but kept going. She did not stop until she reached the ticket kiosks on the second level of the Metro station. Tears streamed down her cheeks. She leaned against one of the boxy machines for some time, sobbing and fighting for control.”
Goldie Locks and the Three bears gets my vote as one of the most successful short stories of all time. It’s the tale of a simple rural family living peacefully in a national forest. Neither the Bear family nor their house is described in any detail. They are simply Papa Bear, Mama Bear and Baby Bear. Their names could be Bruno, Ursula and BJ for Bruno Junior. It’s a typical morning. Ursula cooks up some oatmeal. The family takes off on a short walk in the woods while waiting for their breakfast to cool.
As soon as the Bears leave the house, an intruder, a presumptuous girl named Goldie, walks in and vandalizes the place. It is not clear why the Bears didn’t lock up. They probably thought their house was out of the way and therefore safe. Or maybe, no break-ins had been reported recently.
The story doesn’t give a description of the intruder. Feminine pronouns and her name, “Goldie,” provide hints. Her actions in the next part of the story give a better feel for her appearance and character. The key point here is that her intrusion is the first door of no return. Once she walks into the Bears’ home, the situation has been irreversibly set up for the mischief in the second act.
The intruder immediately sits down at the breakfast spread and samples the cereal in each of the bowls. Bruno’s is too hot (still?). Ursula’s is too cold. But BJ’s is just the right temperature. This suggests Goldie is a child, like BJ. She finishes off the kid’s breakfast. Then she wanders through the house looking for loot. Apparently, Goldie is bigger than BJ. She ends up breaking his chair because she is too big for it.
Goldie discovers the bedrooms and realizes it’s time for a nap. She was up early, and the hot cereal is making her feel sleepy. Again, she tries Bruno’s bed first. This is a character trait. She pictures herself as an imposing adult. Then she tries Ursula’s bed. In a modern retelling of the story, they should have a sleep number mattress on their king-sized bed. Finally, our girl discovers BJ’s bed. It is probably a crib, but that is left to the imagination.
She falls asleep. This is the second door of no return. The story is headed for its inevitable climax. Bruno and his family return from their walk. They discover an intruder has been in their house. It is easy to imagine the feelings they experience. Anger. Violation. Fear. Bruno steps up to meet the situation head-on. He marches (not stated but what else would he do) over to the breakfast table where he discovers his meal has been sampled. How did he know this? Was the spoon left in his bowl?
Ursula and BJ discover their breakfasts have been desecrated. The intruder has eaten all of BJ’s porridge. The family is incensed. They charge further into their house and discover more vandalism wreaked by the intruder. BJ’s chair has been destroyed. Bruno and Ursula somehow divine that someone sat in their chairs. This is not explained, but usually, everyone takes their word for it.
Bruno leads the way into the bedrooms. He sees that the intruder used his bed. Did she mess up the pillows?
Ursula is horrified when she discovers that the intruder has used her bed.
BJ, apparently wandering off on his own, discovers Goldie sleeping in his bed. Bruno and Ursula rush in to catch her. The girl is quick-witted and fleet of foot. She races out of the house before the family can act.
The Bear family lets her go. Perhaps they’re tired from their walk. Or they may be vegans. We never find out.
This simple story endures because it appeals to its intended audience. I can’t count the number of times my young daughters requested it.
It is a sophisticated three-act drama. The opening scene introduces the characters and sets up the action. In the second act, the intruder, Goldie, vandalizes the house leading to the climax. In the final act, the bears discover the crime and find the culprit – who escapes.
Details could be added. They aren’t necessary. The story works just as it is. But would it work if the intruder was a boy with walnut hair and a reputation for making trouble?
William Smith, Esq, walked south along Ridge Avenue enjoying the mid July weather. A block after he turned right onto 10th he came to the shoe shop. Young Tom was on the sidewalk shining shoes and selling copies of the Inquirer. Smith stopped to get a shine. He enjoyed talking to the boy.
The father had died from influenza over ten years ago. The family struggled but seemed to be coping. Tom and his older brother were making steady profits from their shoe business. His sisters had jobs as servants in some of the best households in Philadelphia. His mother worked at the Mercantile Bank.
Smith stopped more for the conversation than the shine. Tom was going to sell him a newspaper but, in the process, he would cover important events. The young man had taken the time to study the day’s edition. He had the headlines down and he knew the stories behind them.
“Shoe shine, Mr. Smith?” Tom called.
“Yes, sir,” he replied as he took a seat and placed his feet on the iron pedestals.
Tom handed him a paper. “We’re getting’ whooped,” the boy said. “Mr. Lincoln is going to have to do something about it.”
“Is that a fact?”
“Yep. Them rebels chased our boys all the way back to Washington.”
“What is the president going to do about that? Do you think he’ll lead the troops in the next battle?”
The boy stopped shining shoes long enough to shoot an angry glare at Smith. “No, sir. He’s puttin’ a new man in charge.”
Smith chuckled. He was still furious that Lincoln had tried to put Robert E. Lee, a slaver, in charge of a battle to end slavery. “That should be interesting. Who do you think he’ll choose?”
“General McClellan. No question. He whooped the Confederates last week.”
“We’ll see.”
“You won’t have to wait long. We’re gonna take the fight to them pretty quick.”
“What makes you say that?”
“We’re being mustered in,” the boy crowed. “This may be the last time I get to shine your shoes.”
Smith studied his friend. A runt. A blonde, gray-eyed runt. He could not have weighted more than a hundred pounds soaking wet. But he was aching to get into this fight. “Well good luck. If I don’t see you again, I hope you do well.” He reached in his pocket and pulled out three pennies for the shine and the paper. “I don’t know that I would be as eager as you for this fight.”
Tom grinned. “That’s okay for you but if you’re Irish you have to prove you’re an American too.”
The big man smiled. A tight-lipped smile. He nodded and found two more pennies for the boy. “Good luck.”
Smith folded the paper under his arm and continued his journey to the office. A block away, he caught sight of his reflection in a store front window. He paused to admire the elegant figure he saw. He straightened his red bow tie. Not that it needed straightening. He smiled and gave a slight nod to the smooth, black face that smiled back at him.
But he couldn’t get the conversation out of his mind. Yes. He believed Lincoln would find a way. He was a farm boy and a fighter. He had risen to the highest office in the land. He knew how to win. He would beat the rebellion. But he wouldn’t do anything about the plight of southern blacks. Slavery would go on just as it had for the last two hundred years. That would only change if Smith and his friends made it change.
He scowled and shook his head. Dark times were coming. The group would have to take over power and force the whites to end slavery. If that’s what had to be done, that is what they would do.
Give the southern rebellion some time to play out. But the chaos it was creating could provide the perfect opportunity for a takeover.
A National Health Care Plan must be a top priority. Now. The Coronavirus Pandemic of 2020 has highlighted our weaknesses. The patient deluge overwhelmed our resources. We were slow in addressing shortages. Those shortages began with facilities and trained personnel and went on to include vital equipment and supplies. Our inability to supply our “front line” workers with PPE was criminal.
The great debate over Medicare-For-All versus improvements to the ACA missed the 900-pound gorilla in the room. Health Insurance is not Health Care. Insurance alone cannot solve our problems. National policies are needed to ensure that healthcare resources are available in places that are not economically attractive. Policies are required to ensure that general practitioners as well as medical specialists, are available as needed. Telemedicine can help. AI and smart devices may relieve some of the pressure but not without regulation.
Shortly after I retired, chewing gum pulled the crown off a molar. I was able to push it back in place, but it kept coming loose when I ate. I needed to see a dentist. My Medicare Advantage Plan included a dental plan, but the coverage was provided by an outside company. It took several days to get an appointment with a dentist who accepted that plan.
I had insurance. Getting health care was another matter. Every insured American faces this dilemma at times.
Demand for health care grows as our population grows and ages. Today’s 325 million population needs more doctors and hospitals than a population of 200 million (1967 – 50 years ago). We expect to add another 25 million over the next decade. That means more doctors and hospitals.
Older people, for example, those in their eighties, need more health care than people in their prime. Approximately 7 million Americans are eighty-five or older. That is up from 4 million at the turn of the century. Another 47 million of us are between sixty-five and eighty-five. We also need more health care than their children and grandchildren.
My medical issues have increased as I have aged. Many of the problems, high blood pressure, and Type II Diabetes, for example, are easily treated with medication. I take the pills prescribed by my primary care physician twice a day. When I’m running low, I call the pharmacy for a refill, which generally shows up in the mail the next day.
But I have needed four surgical procedures in the last ten years. Both hips were replaced in 2012. I had a cataract replacement surgery in 2018 and a hernia repair in 2019. None of those operations were performed at the hospital a few blocks from my house. Prince George’s Community Hospital, where my second daughter was born and where my first wife died, fell on hard times. A few years ago, it was taken over by the University of Maryland.
I believe I could have arranged for the surgeries to be performed at the hospital nearest my home since I am on Medicare. But I would have had to find a doctor to perform the operation. That doctor would have required me to get X-rays. An evaluation from “my” doctor would have been necessary. I found it easier to work through Kaiser Permanente, which manages my Medicare Advantage plan.
Kaiser took care of the X-rays and set me up with an orthopedic surgeon. He performed his surgeries at a hospital in Bethesda, twenty-five miles from my house. I was left with the challenge of arranging transportation.
The cataract surgery was performed at a Kaiser medical center in Rockville, thirty miles from my house. My son-in-law generously took time off to make sure I got there and back.
The factors that determined my choices, the real issues for people needing health care, are not considered in statistical studies. These problems will continue to become more challenging as the demand for health care outpaces resource development.
We are not producing doctors fast enough to keep up with the demand. A shortage is coming. “… Americans [already] feel the shortfall … According to public opinion research conducted in 2019 by Public Opinion Strategies for the AAMC, 35% of voters said they had trouble finding a doctor in the past two or three years. That’s 10 points higher than when the question was asked in 2015.” (Patrick Boyle, Staff Writer June 26, 2020)
In another decade, the physician shortage could exceed 100,000. Double that if we are to provide adequate health care to currently underserved populations.
Hospitals are closing. Financial challenges are forcing them to find rescuers or shut their doors. Johns Hopkins University has taken over some hospitals in the D.C. Metro area. The Prince George’s Community Hospital, which opened in 1944, struggled for decades. It was taken over by the University of Maryland Medical System in September 2017. It will be replaced by a new facility scheduled to open in 2021.
The venerable Providence Hospital, which had served Southeast D.C. for over 150 years, closed in April 2019. It reopened as Providence Health Services Care Center focusing on primary and community care services.
Rural hospitals are closing at an alarming rate – 120 have gone under in the last decade. One-third of those closings came in the last two years. An additional 450 are at risk. Yet we are going to need those hospitals and more to meet health care demands over the next decade.
This trend creates another set of health care issues. These facilities house the resources needed for emergency and specialized care. They cannot be adequately replaced by small medical centers or doctor’s offices, let alone home care.
Many local residents use the Emergency Department of a nearby hospital as an alternative to the doctor’s office. This “non-optimal” use of emergency rooms grew by thirty million annual visits between 1996 and 2006. The many reasons for this situation boil down to The United States does not have a health care system. We have a patchwork of care providers, facilities, and insurance providers.
Doctors, nurses, counselors are in short supply. If you need one, you have to make an appointment. You will probably be put off for days or weeks unless you have a real emergency. When you show up for your scheduled appointment, you will be asked to wait until the doctor is ready to see you.
If you want to get into a hospital for a hip replacement, for example, you will have to meet with a doctor and schedule the operation at the convenience of the doctor and the hospital. Both the doctor and the hospital bed must be available for surgery to be performed. They will both bill your insurance provider. Payment will be due at the time service is provided. If you have insurance, doctors and hospitals will trust your provider to make the payment. Otherwise, it’s on you to fork over the dough or produce a credit card that can be charged.
The arrangement is not user friendly. You pay for insurance so you can afford health care. Health care providers collect from insurance companies like sugar daddies. The insurance companies flourish as long as there are no disasters to create unexpected demands on their resources.
Shortages are not uniformly distributed. The northeastern part of our country is well supplied with hospitals and care providers. The south and southwest are at the other end of the spectrum. Massachusetts has 450 physicians per 100,000 population. Mississippi has less than 200.
Most of the hospitals that closed and those at risk of closing are small, rural facilities. Universal health insurance, such as a reboot of the Affordable Care Act or Medicare-For-All, would boost demand in more impoverished areas and help keep the care facilities open. Enacting those measures will require the Democrats to gain control of both the Senate and the House and then hammer out the legislation. This process could take more than a year. Realizing the benefits will take even longer.
In the meantime, other health care issues must be addressed. Medical facilities must be provided. Those that are in operation must be supported. Those that are needed in poorly served regions must be built. Medical professionals to staff those facilities and provide other forms of service must be trained and nurtured. Medicare-For-All is probably a good idea. Health care for all should be our real goal.
James Baldwin’s vision of race in America: “When any white man in the world says give me liberty or give me death, the entire white world applauds. when a black man says exactly the same thing, word for word, he is judged a criminal and treated like one.”
I know it’s hyperbole. The exaggeration is so obvious. But it is also intended to express a truth about the world as the writer perceived it. I believe that truth must be challenged.
There are always takers when someone, white or black, stands up in defiance. There are also inevitable consequences, whether the rebel is black or white. Patrick Henry and his fellow patriots were criminals in the eyes of the ruling authority. The idea of splitting from British rule divided those living in America. Many white, red and black – slave and free – opposed the move. Black men joined red men and white men in the battle to put down the revolution.
Victory in the War of Independence would not have been possible without help from England’s European foes such as France. The struggle continued after the war ended. Twenty years later, British sea captains kidnapped American sailors and forced them to serve in the English navy. The war was renewed in 1812. A British force captured and burned the American Capitol and continued north to attack Baltimore. They were famously repulsed in a fearsome battle for Fort McHenry and control of the Potomac River.
Frederick Douglas was punished for thrashing a cruel slave master, but he eventually made his way to freedom. By contrast, Melville’s Billy Bud was hanged for a similar offense.
As a runaway slave, Douglas was in violation of the statutes, and he was in grave danger. But he was able to build a career and a reputation as an orator and writer. He was able to travel to England and return to the United States. He was a leading abolitionist and friendly with President Abraham Lincoln. “… he very much saw himself as a founder of the Second American Republic.” (Daniel Blight: www.history.com/news/frederick-douglass-book-omissions-autobiography)
In 1964, when Baldwin made his statement on race in America on the Dick Cavett show, a well-documented opinion held that African Americans couldn’t be racist. They were not in positions of power. That premise is no longer valid. In many American cities, the mayor, the chief of police, and the city council are offices held by non-white citizens. Prince George’s County, Maryland, has been run by African Americans for the last 25 years. The population of the county is predominantly African American. A fact that Euro Americans experience at meetings or even out shopping.
The myth of two vast armies confronting each other is powerful. In Baldwin’s vision, the Army of the Good is powered by the staunch, beleaguered warriors in humble, earth-colored garb. It stands against the Army of the Evil suited up in shiny metal armor and mounted on white steeds. It is a mighty wedge conjured up by a great writer. The intent is to stir up race-based animosity leading to bloody conflict. That will end badly.
Two such armies dominated America 150 years ago. For the most part, soldiers in both armies were white men. My great grandfather and many other male relatives in my family tree fought for the North. I have no information about their attitudes toward slavery. My great grandfather was the son of an Irish immigrant of modest means. One older brother seems to have had a successful business as a house painter in Philadelphia. The other older brother fought for the Union until he was wounded at the Battle of Antietam. After receiving a medical discharge, he joined the painting business. Other relatives who fought in the Civil War were farmers from Illinois and New York.
My guess is they were supporting President Lincoln’s efforts to preserve the Union. It is possible that, as recent Irish immigrants, they joined the fight to prove they were real Americans. Regardless, it is safe to say that neither the Thirteenth Amendment nor the Fourteenth would have much meaning if the Union Army had failed to win the war.
It is difficult to determine how people react when someone says, “Give me liberty or give me death.” The phrase is a cliché, a platitude. When Patrick Henry proclaimed those words to the Virginia Assembly, they had the same impact as Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on a public bus.
He was arguing for amendments that would raise a militia independent of British authority. His speech was enough to get those amendments passed. But the vote was not a landslide. The “white world” was not applauding. The men at that meeting were shaking in their boots because they knew there would be consequences. They also knew Patrick Henry was right, it was too late to back out.
In modern times the sentiment is better expressed in actions. In 1916, the Irish developed an elaborate revolt against oppressive British rule. The Easter Sunday Rising lasted only 6 days because expected help from France and Germany failed to materialize. The leaders were rounded up and hanged for treason. The last of those leaders, Irish native, Sir Roger Casement, was a distinguished British diplomat. After choosing to side with his fellow Irish,he traveled to Germany and arranged for a shipment of arms to the rebels. A clear case of treason. The execution came five years after Casement was knighted by King George V for outstanding service to the Crown.
The Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961. Over the years, 239 people have been gunned down while escaping to freedom by going over or under the wall. We don’t say their names. We don’t even know them. No one rioted. No protests. So much for being cheered by “the whole white world.”
On March 7, 1965, John Lewis started out leading a protest march from Selma, Alabama to the state capitol fifty miles away. He only made it to the middle of the Edmund Pettus Bridge at the edge of the city. There he and his followers were brutally attacked by state troopers and county deputies. The members of the protest march were beaten and jailed. But the horrifying assault was captured on film and distributed to national TV news outlets.
According to Christopher Klein in an article on History.com, “How Selma’s ‘Bloody Sunday’ became a turning point in the Civil Rights Movement,” (www.history.com/news/selma-bloody-sunday-attack-civil-rights-movement), ABC interrupted a highly rated show about Nazi bigotry and atrocities “to air the disturbing, newly arrived footage from Selma.” The similarities couldn’t be missed. Fifty million Americans witnessed American police acting like Nazi Storm Troopers.
“Outrage at “Bloody Sunday” swept the country. Sympathizers staged sit-ins, traffic blockades and demonstrations in solidarity with the voting rights marchers. … The events in Selma galvanized public opinion and mobilized Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act, which President Johnson signed into law on August 6, 1965…”
Pay inequality – fact, fiction, or murky reality?
One senator running for the Democratic nomination
repeated her stats as a mantra at every opportunity. White women are paid less
than men, and black women are paid even less. Payscale.com proclaims: “Women
are still paid less in 2019.” (tinyurl.com/Pay-Gap-2019)
The website gives two different gaps. The first, the
one touted by the Senator, is 21 cents on the dollar based on the median salary
for all men versus the median salary for all women. The second is a more
realistic comparison based on men and women in the same job with the same
qualifications. That gap is 2 cents on the dollar. At the $50 k/year or
$200/day level, that’s $4 per day or about $20 per paycheck before taxes.
The Payscale.com analysis used self-reported data
from 1.8 million respondents to an online survey. It took into account a wide
variety of factors, including age, gender, race, industry, occupation, and
location. That is very impressive.But it only represents one percent of the
American workforce.
We live in an imperfect world. Inequality is part of
that imperfection. Given all the variables that go into determining how much
individuals make, exact salary equality is an unlikely outcome. While some are
stuck in low paying jobs, otherschoose careers that offer them rewards other
than a high income.
Wage may not be the most important characteristic of
a job. A friend of mine with a Masters in Electrical Engineering had a day job,
a consulting business, and a teaching gig. When someone convinced him that
marketing was a better deal, he dropped those pursuits and took an entry-level
marketing job. It paid off in the long run, but there was no guarantee when he
took a low paying job so he could change careers.
In some countries, India, for example, people’s
career choices are decided by standardized tests. A good friend of mine from
India complained about the process. He told me that people who scored the
highest on the test became engineers. The next group became lawyers, and the
third group doctors. He said if he had scored lower, he could have become a
doctor and made a lot more money.
The Payscale.com article points out that women are
probably making less on average because they are more likely to be stuck in low
paying jobs. There is some truth to that, but women and men choose jobs that
give them satisfaction regardless of the pay. People become teachers, social
workers, medical professionals, firefighters, and police officers for
idealistic reasons.
Many people in low paying jobs are working so that
they, their children, and their children’s children can have a better life.
Senator Elizabeth Warren touts the story of her climb from poverty. Senator Amy
Klobuchar likes to talk about how her grandfather was a miner who managed to
put his son through college, giving him a start in journalism.
My father’s grandparents left coal mining in
Scotland and England to take up coal mining in Kansas and Colorado. Their sons
became coal miners. On the 1930 census, my dad’s father, who was working as a
building super in St. Louis, gave his occupation as coal miner.
My father joined the Navy in the 1930s because that
was the only job he could get. It didn’t make him rich, but he was able to
raise his three kids.
My sister got a scholarship. My brother and I used
the GI Bill after Vietnam. That doesn’t work for everybody, but that is the way
many people get their start.
I come from an equal opportunity, equal pay
environment with policies that promoted diversity and the advancement of women
and people of color. Our company, as a federal contractor, was required to
implement equal pay policies and procedures. Enforcement was strict. During my
last seven years before retirement,all of my supervisors and most of the
managers in the building were women.
That did not eliminate the perception of pay
inequality. During one meeting, my boss informed me that men are paid more than
women. I asked her if I made more than she did. When she didn’t answer, I
pointed out that she signed off on my evaluations and recommended my raises. I
told her that if she thought I was overpaid, she should stop recommending big
raises for me. The topic was never mentioned again, but I continued to get high
marks for my performance and generous raises.
One way to get a different perspective on pay
inequality is to look at typical people and their job choices instead of
crunching lifeless numbers.
Consider a man who has a mother, sister, brother, a
wife and an ex, two daughters, and a son-in-law. The man himself makes 80 k per
year after thirty years as a senior project engineer. The mother and the sister
are both teachers. They make 58 K and 70 K respectively as they approach
retirement. Both have Masters degrees and could be making 25% more if they took
jobs teaching in college. The brother makes 130 K as a GS15. The wife makes 20
K as a receptionist, and the ex makes 20 K as a typist turned data entry
person. One daughter makes 75 K as a GS13. The other daughter makes 75 K as an
Army Major. Her husband makes 76 K as a Master Sergeant about ready to retire.
In this example, the average female only makes 56 cents for every dollar the average male makes. But simply averaging the salaries makes no sense because there are factors other than gender that strongly affect what each of these people makes. They have different levels of education. The wife and the ex-wife earn less than half the average salary of the college-educated women. The men make more money, but they also have more seniority.The wages for the people in this example are arrived at in different ways. The military has a pay schedule for enlisted ranks and a pay scale for officers – neither gender nor race is a consideration. Local school boards set teacher’s salaries. The United States Office of Personnel Management determines pay for the General Schedule (GS) grades. The company the man works for sets its own compensation policies, but it has to pay a competitive salary, or he could go to another company offering a better deal.
Pay inequality is not necessarily a bad thing.
Salary can be an incentive to get qualified people to take on difficult and
challenging jobs. When there are underlying factors that prevent some people or
some groups of people from competing for those challenging jobs, those factors
should be addressed. But correlation is not the same thing as causality.
Averaging together a random bunch of salaries to show that women only make 79
cents for every dollar that men make does not prove anything. In fact, a closer
examination of the data shows that women make 98 cents on the dollar.
If the issue exists because women are more likely to
choose social work and teaching, the only way to fix the pay inequality problem
is to raise the salaries of social workers and teachers.
The Martian Fantasy grows
stronger. Manned Mars Missions are on the horizon. If you believe Elon Musk,
human colonists will be headed up there in 2024.
Mars
has been our neighbor practically forever. No Martian has ever complained about
our behavior. But the Red Planet and its inhabitants have long figured in our
dreams and nightmares.
War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells
(1898)
Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A.
Heinlein (1961)
Total Recall (1990 movie starring
Arnold Schwarzenegger)
The Martian by Andy Weir (novel self-published in 2011; movie
2015)
We have spent hundreds of
billions probing our neighbor. That investment has given us increased
scientific knowledge and impressive technological developments. The Mars Rovers
were an unexpected success. Projects aimed at colonizing Mars promise to
produce more scientific knowledge and generate even more technology. The
question for me is: Will the benefits justify the costs?
Investors
are getting behind manned mission projects. Potential colonists are lining up
to be the first settlers on Mars. It should be a great adventure like
discovering America or conquering Mount Everest. Volunteers for the Mars
missions hope to be like the astronauts who took us to the moon:
- Advancing scientific knowledge
- Developing new technology
- Expanding our frontiers
- Doing new and exciting stuff
There
are some good reasons for leaving the invasion of Mars to science fiction
writers. For example:
- A less risky exploration of
the Martian surface using new generations of rovers would provide new
technology and advance science at a lower cost.
- Our frontiers have already
been expanded by successful space missions. Voyager sailed off into
interstellar space in 2012 after visiting all of the planets in our solar
system. Cassini spent 13 years studying Saturn, which is 6 times further
from the sun than Mars. Exploring Mars would be like exploring your
neighborhood lovers’ lane.
- The Apollo Project that put
men on the moon is often cited as an example of what we could expect from
a manned mission to Mars. But the moon is three days away while Mars is
six months further out. That extra distance translates to more
opportunities for things to go wrong. The radiation environment between
here and Mars is worse than anything human travelers have ever had to cope
with.
- The Apollo Project cost an
estimated 288 billion in today’s dollars. Elon Musk has announced a
trillion-dollar budget for his Mars colonization project. That is about
four times what it cost us to put a man on the moon.
- Support for human-crewed space
missions is lukewarm at best. There have been no human missions to the
moon since Apollo 17 almost fifty years ago. President Bush attempted to
restart the effort sixteen years ago. His goal was to return to the moon
by 2020. President Obama killed that effort in 2009 and set the priority
on a manned mission to Mars by 2030. At the beginning of 2020, the US
cannot even put an astronaut on the International Space Station orbiting
two hundred miles away.
NASA
has reaffirmed its plan to launch a manned mission to Mars by 2030 (https://www.nasa.gov/topics/moon-to-mars/overview). SpaceX has published plans to launch colonists to
the red planet beginning in 2024. (https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-timeline-for-getting-to-mars-and-starting-a-colony). The company’s CEO, Elon Musk envisions having a
self-supporting colony with a population of one million by 2050.
An
independent review of the NASA plan by the Space and Technology Policy Institute
concluded that the goal could not be met.
The
SpaceX plan is high risk at best. Musk’s Starship has not flown a single
mission to date. The company plans to start using it to provide services such
as ISS resupply missions and satellite launches starting next year. A launch
window in late 2022 will be used to send two Starships to Mars with initial
supplies. In 2021, before the first trip to the planet next door, a group of
space tourists will be treated to a trip around the moon. Then assuming all of
those missions have been successful, SpaceX will load up its Starships with one
hundred passengers each and send them off to colonize Mars.
What
if something goes wrong? The company’s Falcon rockets can be used as a backup
if problems crop up during the commercial deliveries phase. Any problem on the
lunar fly-by would almost certainly delay the Mars timeline. Failure of the
2022 mission to deliver supplies to Mars for the anticipated colonists would
force a change in plans. Humans arriving on an alien planet for an extended
visit will need those supplies to survive.
The
SpaceX timeline shortchanges testing. An eighteen-month in orbit shakedown
mission is needed to demonstrate that the Starship(s) are capable of making it
to Mars and back.
Developing
its payload delivery capabilities would allow SpaceX to prove its systems and
gain experience while bringing in revenue. At least six Mars rover projects are
planned for 2020 through 2024. One of those projects calls for bringing samples
back to Earth from Mars. The company or companies that provide the spacecraft for
those missions will gain invaluable experience that can be applied to
establishing a human outpost on the red planet.
Retired
Apollo astronaut Bill Anders, now in his eighties, does not see any imperative
for manned missions. He doesn’t think there is enough public interest to
support them. “He’s a ‘big supporter’ of the ‘remarkable’ unmanned programmes,
‘mainly because they’re much cheaper.’… he says the public support simply isn’t
there to fund vastly more expensive human missions.” https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46364179
Mars
has been orbiting alongside Earth for billions of years. There is no reason to
believe that will change in the next hundred – or even the next thousand years.
Postponing manned missions for twenty or fifty years poses no risk. We have
nothing to lose by waiting until we are ready.
But
robots continue to develop. If we wait long enough, the “humans” that colonize
Mars will probably be made-in-Japan descendants of Kirobo and Actroid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_robotics#Androids
We need a Dream Team in 2020. A president is not enough. No one person can pull our country out of the ditch. None of the twenty plus politicians vying for the Democratic Nomination can do it alone. No Republican has shown any inclination to even try.
Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell has stood like
Horatio at the Gate blocking almost all legislative action and even a
nomination to the Supreme Court while pushing the appointment of
ultra-conservative judges and political functionaries. He will hamstring a new
president unless he is removed. The Democrats must gain a Senate Majority while
maintaining their majority in the House.
Many of the strongest Senate leaders have thrown their hat
in the ring. The president who takes office in January of 2021 will need those
leaders to create and pass legislation. Note that the Affordable Care Act is
affectionately known as Obamacare, but it was hammered out by members of Congress.
The President just signed the bill into law.
One of the first priorities for the newly elected president
will be staff. Cabinet level positions must be filled. Diplomats must be
appointed. The current president’s family business style has left the executive
branch in shambles. The next administration will have an unprecedented
rebuilding job.
Bridges must be rebuilt. Ties with our allies have been
strained to the breaking point. This country needs to re-engage with the rest
of the world. We need to rejoin the efforts to deal with Climate Change. We
need to restore relations with our trading partners.
The incoming president will have a lot to deal with. Former
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has provided an intimidating outline of
what the new person will have to deal with in her book “Memo to the President
Elect.”
How will the newly elected president when she or he steps
into this new role with its overwhelming challenges?
For example, if our resident expert on family finance, banks
and bankruptcy, Senator Elizabeth Warren, wins the White House she will face an
immediate identity crisis. She will have to give up her role as
advocate-in-chief to deal with the myriad responsibilities of Chief Executive.
Her grand scheme for remaking America depends on increasing
the taxes paid by “The Wealthy.” The Chief executive can request a tax increase,
but Congress has to approve it. The IRS has to enforce it. One problem exposed
by the scandals of the last two years is a lack of IRS oversight on wealthy
individuals. President Warren would have to address these issues. She would
probably want an overhaul of tax policies, but she would have to get that
through Congress.
Candidate Warren does not like the USMCA treaty due to
replace NAFTA. She has characterized it as NAFTA 2.0. But the US needs a trade
deal with Canada and Mexico. If President Warren wants something different, she
will have to have her trade negotiators work it out with our trade partners and
close the deal with the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico. Then
she will have to get Congress to approve the new pact.
At the same time the President is dealing with these two
mostly domestic issues, she will have to confront President Putin over Russian
interference in our elections, President Xi JinPing on trade relation between
China and the US, and Supreme Leader Kim
Jong Un over his saber rattling.
Of course, she can rise to the challenge, but she would not
be able to continue her role as chief advocate for the American Family.
The first thing I am looking for is experience with a
caveat. Neither John Kennedy nor Barack Obama had an impressive resume when
they ran for office. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton had served as governor
before running for president. Running a state government is not in the same
league as running a national government, but it’s better than sitting around in
Congress debating issues.
My top choices along with my rationale:
- Steve Bullock, Governor of Montana. He’s a
winner in a red state – although it’s a small state as my brother pointed out.
- John Hickenlooper, former Governor of Colorado.
I am only including him because of his executive experience. He has a lot to
prove over the next year.
- Jay Inslee, Governor of Washington. He has
impressive practical credentials in job creation and dealing with environmental
issues. He needs to branch out. Most agree Climate Change is critical, but bread
and butter issues are key to winning votes.
- Corey Booker, Senator from New Jersey and former
Mayor of Newark. He gets credit for executive experience because of his time as
Mayor. Newark is smaller than Montana but bigger than South Bend, Indiana. He
also gets National Level experience as a sitting Senator. I was particularly
impressed with the way he handled himself in the Kavanaugh hearings.
- Julian Castro, former Mayor of San Antonio and
former Secretary of HUD. He gets credit for executive experience and National
Level experience. San Antonia has a much larger population than Montana, and
Texas is a red state. He has a strong
stance on Immigration, which is a hot issue, but he needs to make his case in
other areas, especially foreign affairs.
- Amy Klobuchar, Senator from Minnesota. She gets
credit for National Level experience. She has won re-election twice. I like her
style. She will have to prove she can win on a national stage in the debates
and the primaries.
Five men and a woman. I believe each of them is capable of stepping
up to the job of running our executive branch.
I have two recommendations for Vice Presidential running
mate. My first suggestion is Janet Napolitano, President of the University of
California and former Secretary of Homeland Security. She was once considered a
top candidate to be the first female president of the United States. My alternate
is former National Security Advisor and former UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Either
of those women would also make a great Chief of Staff.
That is the main outline of a Dream Team. I believe America
needs to move forward. That starts with Democrats controlling both the House
and the Senate with a Democrat serving as Senate Majority Leader. Next is a
solid chief executive who is ready to address the entire spectrum of domestic
and international issues. The next president will have to be someone who can
attract high quality professionals to the cabinet and other high-level
government positions.
Our next president must be a unifying figure – someone who
can and will work to bring us all Americans together. We, the people, must be
part of the Dream Team.
