Editorials and Opinions

Gary Tischler • October 3, 2012

Who says you can’t win for losing? The Washington Nationals managed to do just that last night when they lost a game—2-0 to the deservedly maligned defending National League East champion Philadelphia Phillies—then were handed the National League East title when news came—quickly, thank God—that the Pittsburgh Pirates had beaten the Atlanta Braves.

Nationals Park rocked. Champagne ensued. The mighty Nationals had won the NL Eastern Division title, and we could all let out a sigh of relief because this thing had been stringing out just a little too long.

Now, the Nationals and their forefathers, other Washington baseball teams, not only are in the playoffs and post-season play of any kind for the first time since 1933—now, there was an economy in the dumpster—but are division champs. They can now think seriously about winning the World Series, something that no Washington team has done since the mighty Walter Johnson had pitched the Senators to a title in, let’s see . . . 1924.

National fans are, of course, of a recent vintage—when the Nats first came to Washington they had been something called the Montreal Expos. The new Nats were as bad as they might have been but not as bad as they could have been, given the fact that first-year-manager, the venerable, tough Frank Robinson managed them to a .500 record at RFK Stadium.

Times have changed. There is a new stadium which everyone pretty much loves and which bodes well for the future in terms of redevelopment, new businesses and restaurants and further buzz generating from the Washington-is-a-major-league-city quarters. The Lerner family, owners of the Nationals, have turned out to be a class act, as is general manager Mike Rizzo and the redoubtable manager Davey Johnson who is in the fine tradition of grizzled but not frazzled major league managers and ex-player. In other words, it’s fair to assume, just by looking at him, that he might have hung out with Casey Stengel and Yogi Berra.

It should be noted here as we’re popping the champagne that kudos should also go here to former Mayor Anthony Williams and also to Councilman Jack Evans, both of whom lobbied energetically and continually for a team in Washington.

Now, thanks to a vastly improved farm system, we have a stellar pitching staff. We had the big buzz of the debut of Stephen Strasburg, and the contratemps over the early ending of Strasburg’s season (they were right). We have Bryce Harper, a teenager who plays baseball like a jalopy driver at Indianapolis, that is to say, full-tilt boogie, recklessly, with great bravado and speed. The steady guys—Desmond, Morse, Zimmerman, Espinosa and LaRoche—produced runs and homers in bunches, but it was Harper who gave the Nats a huge spark when he was called up.

As for 2012, we knew the Nats might be good and improved this year, but who figured the best? Who thought of the World Series? We’re thinking it now. Imagine the 2012 World Series: Washington Nationals versus Baltimore Orioles into the seventh game. Does anybody have a guy named Muddy on their team? Go, Nats, and congrats.

Jack Evans •

In this column, I typically try to focus on the types of issues that make the news and are important to a lot of residents in Ward 2 and across the city – taxes, education, ethics, public safety, and economic development. This week, I thought I would pull back the veil and show some of the inner workings of our government that are less glamorous but are nonetheless very important, and tell you why they may be more closely related to the newsworthy issues than you might think.

As chair of the Committee on Finance & Revenue, I have jurisdiction over legislative matters such as general obligation bond acts, revenue anticipation notes, industrial revenue bonds, and financing programs such as “TIFs,” or tax increment financing. I understand those topics may sound a little bit like what you would read when you have trouble sleeping rather than something to be passionate about, but they provide the critical nuts and bolts which enables the government to function smoothly.
Next week, for example, my committee will hold a hearing on the “General Obligation Bonds and Bond Anticipation Notes for Fiscal Years 2013-2018 Authorization Act of 2012.” This is the legislation allowing our capital projects planned for 2013 to 2018 to go forward. Specifically, the bill would authorize the District to issue general obligation bonds or bond anticipation notes of up to $3.75 billion. The proceeds will fund items such as school facilities, recreation facilities and government offices included in our Capital Improvements Plan.

As I discussed during the confirmation process for our Chief Financial Officer, our bond rating really comes into play here in determining the amount of interest we have to pay in exchange for renovated libraries, schools and parks. Since financing and other costs have to be included in our budget and financial plan, and represent around $1 billion per year, small changes in our bond rating can cost (or save!) us millions of dollars per year. This has a dramatic impact on the funds we can spend on education, public safety, economic development, and health and human services.

Finally, I have to put in a quick plug for our Washington Nationals. I was so happy to see the Nationals clinch a spot in the playoffs last week! Having successful professional sports teams is such a morale boost to the city (not to mention a big driver of tax revenue!). The Mayor announced that the John A. Wilson Building, the District’s city hall, will be lighted red at night for the duration of our playoff run to honor the Nationals’ first postseason appearance.

As always, please reach out to my office if you have any legislative ideas or government service issues I can help with. And don’t forget to catch some Nats games!

Georgetowner • September 20, 2012

In this day and age, there are a number of ways to find people we have lost. We — Washington, the arts community, the theater community, actors, writers, musicians and students — lost Jaylee Mead last week. The astronomer and arts philanthropist died at the age of 83 of congestive heart failure.

Even though she’s gone, we can still find her. If you love the performing arts, just look around you. The Mead name belonged to Jaylee and her late husband Gilbert, who died in 1997, and it is on any number of lobbies, theaters, spaces, and buildings where their focused, passionate philanthropy had an enormous effect, from the Arena Stage to the Studio Theatre, in addition to places like the Kennedy Center, the Woolly Mammoth Theatre, the Levine School of Music, the Mead Theatre Lab for Experimental Plays, among many other groups. They were also active in education and youth causes.

Look to YouTube, where you would be delighted to find Mead holding forth in a parent role in a local production of “Pippin” singing “It’s time to start living because spring will turn to fall in no time at all.”

The Meads, with the focus of their trade, and the hearts and passion of their tastes and intelligence, were active all over Washington and left their mark on the city. There was no question that Jaylee Mead had a huge impact on the theater world of the city, and as a result, the city itself.

Spectacularly and most notably, the Arena Stage now bears the name of The Mead Center for American Theater, owing to the Meads’ $35 million in gifts to go with matching pledges.

Joy Zinoman, the retired artistic director and founder of the Studio Theatre, described Mead’s efforts as “unparalleled.”

Mead provided a million dollar loan to Zinoman when she was contemplating to move the Studio Theatre to the 14th Street space it occupies now. “It was brave. It was a great risk. She was providing this for a place at the time we could only rent and not buy for ten years. That was the situation at the time,” Zinoman said.

“She was my friend, certainly, but more than that—benefactor, sure, inspiration, sure, but also a kind of mother figure, even though we weren’t that far apart in age,” Zinoman said. “She was just so brave, undaunted, she took off on a car trip across the country, she was at the theatre almost every night. I admired her more than you can imagine. We all loved her. It’s a great loss that you feel strongly.

“She was very tough and rigorous in her approach to giving. She knew what was needed, and she approached giving with the rigor of a scientist and the spirit of a great soul,” Zinoman said. “She had a vision, just like the rest of us, and she helped us to achieve ours.”

Zinoman acknowledged that Mead was an influence on her in more personal ways as well. “I can be, let’s say, a little volatile. I think that’s no secret. I could get angry easily and lash out. And Jaylee, well, I think she tempered me, helped me be a little calmer in those situations.”

It’s generally acknowledged that the Meads changed Washington with their philanthropic efforts. Most folks would concede that while the later presence of Whole Foods near 14th and P Street helped, it was the Studio Theatre in its bigger, new location that pioneered the economic revival of the area. Something similar is happening in the Southwest waterfront area where the Arena Stage is located.
We lost Jaylee Mead on Sept.14, but look around—she and her husband left a big footprint on the Washington landscape and its culture, a footprint you could tap dance in.

Georgetowner •

In the early 1970s, the late comedian Pat Paulsen wrote a book called “How to Wage a Successful Campaign for the Presidency.” In it, he prepared speeches, advertisements, debate responses, and answers to media questions for any candidate.

If Paulsen were alive today, he might have written a mock acceptance speech from a Presidential candidate that looked something like this…

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, delegates.

I am so proud to accept your nomination for the [Republican / Democratic] candidate for President.
Isn’t my wife great? Aren’t my kids beautiful and great?

Our nation’s economy is [in trouble / improving].

In September 2008, when our financial system was on the edge of collapse, the government did the [right / wrong] thing by letting a few large investment banks fail and then stepping in to save the others.

Many economists [agree / disagree] this led our nation, as well as the world economy, into its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.

A few weeks later, the nation’s largest commercial banks, where you have your checking and savings accounts, were on the brink of collapse. The government had to decide whether to let them [live / die] [with / without] government assistance.

A Republican President and Democratic Congress worked together on a $700 billion bailout. I believe they did the [right / wrong] thing.

A few months later, another President and Congress agreed on another $800 billion bailout for the auto industry and the rest of the economy. This time, I believe they did the [right / wrong] thing.
Since then, the situation [has / has not] improved [because / even though] the private sector has created 4.5 million new jobs. That is [as good as possible / not enough] given the circumstances. Government is smaller and has trimmed more than 600,000 jobs. That is [good / bad] because there were [too many / not enough] teachers, police, fire fighters, and other public servants.

Now, we [are / are not] through the worst of this crisis, and must move the country forward.
I have a five point plan to put the country back on track.

First, we must make our country energy independent. Our nation is blessed with vast quantities of natural resources that can allow us to be energy independent by 2020 and fuel our country for a century or more. We need to develop domestic sources of [fossil fuels / natural gas, nuclear power, wind, and solar energy]. We [must ease / are easing] the regulatory burden on our energy companies. New sources of energy can provide the new high paying jobs and become our largest export.

Second, we must improve our educational system and give everyone a better chance to succeed. I am so fortunate to have gone to Harvard [with / without] government assistance. Only an educational system designed at the [federal / state / local / parental] level can compete with Germany and Japan. Steve Jobs told me that Apple needs 30,000 new engineers who can be trained in America. My iPod has music from [fill in this blank to appeal to your voters].

Third, we [must negotiate / are negotiating] free and fair trade agreements so American workers and businesses play on a level playing field. We must stand up to China, and protect our intellectual property and the dollar.

Fourth, we must reduce the deficit by [raising / lowering] taxes. Spending is [out of / hard to] control because of [this / the previous] President.

Finally, we must [start / continue] to help small businesses, they are the source of new jobs of the future. Over the past four years, government has [hurt / helped] small businesses more than ever before.

If you vote for me, we will do this together. We can change the direction of our nation.
Thank you. Thank you so much.

God Bless the United States of America.

Pat Paulsen called this comedy. Today we call it “talking points.” This year’s candidates could have taught Paulson a thing or two about debating. When several of them got questions they didn’t like, they ignored it and said, “You ask the questions you want; I give the answers I want.”
If only Mitt Romney and President Obama could make us laugh.

Georgetowner •

Much has been said about Linda Greenan’s legacy [The Georgetowner, Sept. 5, editorial] as she retires from her long tenure as vice president for community relations at Georgetown University. For nearly two decades, Linda played an integral role in securing District government approval for university development projects such as the Canal Road entrance and the Southwest Quadrangle. She was the face of the university in negotiations with the community on the Campus Plan and on student conduct issues.

But Linda’s most lasting legacy may be as a leader in securing voting rights for college and university students in the District of Columbia. Sixteen years ago, a group of GU students sought to take a more active role in local government by voting in local elections and serving on Advisory Neighborhood Commissions. They launched a student voter registration drive and nominated G.U. students to run for seats on ANC2E. But a handful of Georgetown residents vigorously opposed them. They challenged the right of students to register in the District, and they challenged the credentials of students attempting to vote, creating long lines at the polls on Election Day.

Linda passionately believed that everyone should have the right to vote and to run for local office. She encouraged the students to stand up for their rights and guided them to victory at a day-long hearing before the Board of Elections.

As a result of Linda’s leadership, university students now can vote in the District and can serve on ANCs, and they routinely do so. College and university students in the District have Linda Greenan to thank for this. A fine and lasting legacy, indeed.

Grace Bateman,
Georgetown

David Post • September 6, 2012

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he’s been reading “The Hunger Games” to relax. Me, too. Romney is reading the novel by Suzanne Collins. I’m reading the budget by Paul Ryan. They are remarkably similar.

Novels, of course, are fiction and don’t really happen. Budgets also distort reality and don’t really happen.

“The Hunger Games” is a novel about a country where the government has created a food shortage to keep the people in line. Each year, two dozen children are placed in an arena on a reality TV show where their objective is to fight for food, kill the others and be the lone survivor.

The Republican Romney Ryan plan – or TripleR, which sounds rather Reagan-esque, doesn’t it? – is also a reality show about whether the United States should continue to provide a social safety net for the elderly and the poor. To those affected, it is about survival.

TripleR is a quick read, at fewer than 90 pages long. It is mostly about what’s wrong with our national financial mess and is peppered with some really bold proposals that radically change the national approach to providing a safety net for those in need. Like most novels, TripleR ends in the future—30 years from now—when the budget is finally balanced, the nation is prosperous and everyone lives happily ever after. Of course, by then, most baby boomers will have met their maker, and the elderly population will be in decline.

Like Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 idea that simple is good and solutions are easy, TripleR proposes four simple steps: cut taxes, convert Social Security to a private savings plan, give seniors a voucher to buy their own health insurance and give states block grants for Medicaid to serve the poor and disabled.

TripleR avoided the rigor of being “scored” by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office that estimates the economic impact of new laws and budgets. Instead, TripleR created its own assumptions and reached its own conclusions. (I could do that. After all, I am a CPA. Accountant jokes are rare, but one fits in this case. A client has a question for his accountant who answers, “Tell me what you want and I’ll make it come out.”)

So, here’s the plan. Decide whether it’s fact or fiction.

First, cut taxes to the lowest rate in 80 years. Revenues will increase because everyone will work harder and invest more, knowing they can keep more of their income.

Second, convert social security to a personal savings plan. So, suppose the average family and employer invests the same 12.4 percent now paid into Social Security, or about $6,000 per year. For today’s twenty-somethings, that would add up to $600,000 over 40 years and provide a $3,500 monthly pension. Sounds good, but what about inflation? In 40 years, that $3,500 per month will be like $750 today. Put another way, and ignoring inflation, if you save 12 percent of your income every month, say $500 for 40 years, can you then live on, say, $1,000 per month (24 percent of today’s income) for the following 20 years?

Third, give seniors a voucher of $700 per month to buy their own insurance. I am 63, and if in perfect health, could buy insurance for about $700 per month after paying the first $3,500 each year. Like many my age, I’ve had some health issues. So, my insurance is already double that. My 78-year-old father-in-law had a heart attack 15 years ago and now has a pace maker which cost $30,000. Ann Romney, Mitt’s wife, has had cancer and has multiple sclerosis. What insurance company is going to sell any of us a policy for $700 per month? Buying my own insurance is also supposed to make me a better health care shopper since I won’t buy it unless I really need it. That would make me my own death panel.

Fourth, give states a “block” grant to cover Medicaid for the poor and disabled. That would save the federal government billions by shifting the entire risk of increasing health care costs and increased poverty rates to the states. Health care costs have risen three times faster than inflation for more than 20 years, and the number of poor people qualifying for Medicaid has increased dramatically. States are broke. How will they bear that burden? Maybe the poor will move to states with better benefits.

That’s TripleR. Individual responsibility, reduced retirement benefits and less health care for the elderly and poor.

Now, that really does sound like “The Hunger Games,” doesn’t it?

John Fenzel •

In his excellent Middle East travelogue, “Baghdad Without a Map and Other Misadventures in Arabia,” Tony Horwitz writes:

“In Egypt, aggression and impatience are frowned upon. The unofficial Egyptian anthem, ‘Bokra, Insha’allah, Malesh’ (‘Tomorrow, God Willing, Never Mind’), isn’t just an excuse for laziness. In a society requiring millennial patience, it is also a social code dictating that no one make too much of a fuss about things.”

This sentiment seemed alive and well in Cairo as Mohammed Morsi was sworn in as Egypt’s president last month. Not even the first choice of the Islamist Group, the Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi was widely viewed as an accidental president of sorts, and therefore destined to be a figurehead president. It was widely believed that real power would continue to reside, as it always had, in the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces—or SCAF.

But early last week, Morsi took everyone by surprise—including the United States. In a lightning-fast series of maneuvers and brokered deals that would make Machiavelli proud, Morsi removed his political and military rivals, and nullified a constitutional decree that gave the military council ultimate authority over Egypt’s administration, security and, significantly, the government’s purse strings.

Simultaneously, Morsi issued a constitutional edict granting himself full authority over the executive and legislative branches of government. Knowing a bridge too far when he saw one, he left the judiciary alone. To preempt any potential dissent from the judiciary, Morsi appointed reformist senior judge Mahmoud Mekki as his vice president.

The ostensible catalyst for the shakeup was the killing of 16 Egyptian soldiers in northern Sinai earlier in the week, but it seems obvious that this was only a convenient excuse for actions already planned. Morsi quickly exploited the incident, and replaced his defense minister, the army chief of staff and each of the service chiefs.

It is the moral equivalent of a U.S. president firing his Secretary of Defense and all of his Joint Chiefs of Staff in one fell swoop.

Morsi’s stunning consolidation of power followed a sequence that caught the occupants of Washington’s “C” suites and cabinet secretaries completely off-guard. Reluctant to admit a lack of advance knowledge of Marsi’s power-play, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said:

“We obviously did know that there were discussions ongoing about a new defense team — with regard to the precise timing, less so.”

In retrospect, the move should have been fully anticipated. The obvious historical examples of past presidents Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarek are clear evidence that staying power in Egyptian politics requires strength. Morsi was understandably motivated to reclaim the political power that the military had seized in the wake of the Arab Spring uprising last year.

To calm those at home and abroad, Morsi delivered a radio address, insisting,

“I never meant to antagonize anyone… We go on to new horizons, with new generations, with new blood that has long been awaited.”

Assuming an apparent wait-and-see posture, the White House has yet to offer any substantive reaction to Morsi’s dramatic power-grab, except to issue non-specific diplomatic statements about “shared interests” and the new appointees being “well known” to them.

Their silence on the real issues at hand is what’s so significant. Indeed, if the aim of the White House’s long-range goal was Egypt’s “full transition to civilian rule,” as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has articulated it, the end result has been hardly worthy of celebration. Any vision of a secular democracy in Egypt has been relegated to virtual-mirage status.

While the administration would like to calmly portray Morsi as doing what is necessary to place Egypt back on the road to democracy, it should be worried. Morsi’s actions point to a far more ominous course now underway.

A judge in Egypt’s Higher Constitutional Court (HCC), immediately responded to Morsi’s actions, saying, “A president does not have the power to abrogate a constitution, even a temporary one….”

With his newfound authorities in place, and with the ability to rewrite the new constitution, the process of Islamizing Egypt’s domestic policy is almost sure to follow.

Despite Morsi’s personal assurance to media chiefs that press freedom would not be restricted, actions to suppress media criticism against Morsi are now fully underway. The day after Morsi’s “Sunday Coup,” police attempted to confiscate all copies of newspapers critical of the Muslim Brotherhood and suspended the broadcast license of a television station that has actively criticized Morsi in the past. Last week, Egypt’s upper house of parliament appointed new editors for the country’s 50 state-run newspapers, effectively placing the media under Brotherhood control.

Morsi now has control of all executive and legislative levers of powers, and has reinforced his authority by imposing control of the media. In such an environment, and given the stated long-term goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, the implications for Israel’s security and the future of the Camp David Accords are obvious.

To even the casual observer of Egyptian politics, Morsi is now fully in the driver’s seat as president. As such, Horowitz’s continued observations of the “Bokra, Insha’allah, Malesh” anthem seems entirely, metaphorically, relevant:

“Egyptians undergo an odd personality change behind the wheel of a car. …But put an Egyptian in the driver’s seat, and he shows all the calm and consideration of a hooded swordsman delivering Islamic justice.”