Utilities continue to incur high costs due to distributing 95% of their bills through the mail, according to Chartwell's survey of 94 utilities. Bills sent through the mail are more expensive than bills delivered electronically. Some utilities have seen success in decreasing the percent of customers receiving paper bills. One utility with more than 300,000 customers enrolled about 20% of its customers in paperless billing through promotions on almost all of the material produced by the utility. This utility also incentivize employees to enroll customers. Another utility company, Arizona Public Service, donated $1 to the Tree Research and Educational Endowment every time one of their customers signed up for paperless billing over a three month time span. Arizona Public Service was able to switch almost 17,000 customers from high-cost paper bills to low-cost electronic bills. While consumer marketing has been successful in decreasing paper bills mailed out, many utilities are looking to cut costs by delivering bills through secure email. In an effort to reduce the costs of distributing bills, 40% of utilities are planning to offer or are considering delivering bills through secure email.
So what do i get out of the deal? You help the environment, definitely, but unless there is something else in It for the average person, there is no reward in switching over to e-billing. If the utility company wanted to provide a discount for switching over to e-billing, i bet thy would have a huge and tremendous success and conversion rate.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
irtual education in Idaho Kicks Chicago's butt.
Online schools are great for students with different learning styles and abilities, says schools chief Tom Luna. great opportunities for students with different learning styles and abilities by providing cost-effective, targeted programs for tutoring, make Idaho students and educators say virtual learning has revolutionized their lives.
"It opened my mind to the world," said Delanie Ross, 16, of Emmett. "That world is so much bigger than it would have been in Emmett. It helped me as a person." Ross said she was struggling with school and didn't have aspirations beyond becoming a fast-food employee or a store cashier until she became a full-time student at Inspire Connections Academy, one of about a half dozen virtual schools in Idaho. Now she wants a medical career.
"I like how the school helps me in that - math's not a strong point," she said. Virtual school also has introduced her to friends, other virtual students, across the United States, and gives her the flexibility to travel and dedicate more or less time to assignments depending on the difficulty, she said. Ross was one of several students, state officials and experts who spoke at a forum on virtual education sponsored by the Idaho Charter School Network at Boise State University last week.
Idaho is one of the fastest-growing states in virtual learning for K-12 students and was rated No. 3 in the nation for policy and practice by e.Republic's Center for Digital Education. About 5 percent of all K-12 students, around 14,000, are taking classes online full or part time. However, it is not without challenges, as educators and lawmakers figure out how to manage funding and oversight, and tackle concerns from those who have yet to grasp the ever-evolving virtual world.
Superintendent of education Tom Luna said the current education model follows Henry Ford's mass production methods. But online learning offers great opportunities for students with different learning styles and abilities by providing cost-effective, targeted programs for tutoring, make-up classes, and concurrent and advanced credit. "We have to move away from the business model we've adopted," Luna said. "One thing to remember is it will only be hard on the adults."
Luna and speaker John Watson, founder of Evergreen Consulting Associates, which advises on virtual/online education policy, said virtual education is vital in bolstering economic development, engaging students in education and preparing them for a changing jobscape.
Watson said about one in four high school students don't graduate, and that wasn't a problem decades ago when high-paying manufacturing jobs were plentiful. But with those jobs moving to other countries and technical and informational skills more in demand, higher learning is even more important, he said. Virtual learning also allows small and rural districts to access classes and educators they couldn't afford, Watson said. Sen. Russ Fulcher, R-Meridian, said he agrees online learning is critical, but legislators have been wary of virtual systems. Educators, parents and students will have to prove the system works and show how much students are really learning to expand support, he said. "We're living in a different world than we were 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago," he said. "It's not for everyone. But it is for a significant population."
What can't chicago learn a lesson or two from this? Is it so hard to find help, or give advice to students and teachers in need. This is a good augmentation to the overcrowded, understaffed schools. This is an outlet for the bright or promising pupil to better themselves when their environment would not sustain such an endeavor.
"It opened my mind to the world," said Delanie Ross, 16, of Emmett. "That world is so much bigger than it would have been in Emmett. It helped me as a person." Ross said she was struggling with school and didn't have aspirations beyond becoming a fast-food employee or a store cashier until she became a full-time student at Inspire Connections Academy, one of about a half dozen virtual schools in Idaho. Now she wants a medical career.
"I like how the school helps me in that - math's not a strong point," she said. Virtual school also has introduced her to friends, other virtual students, across the United States, and gives her the flexibility to travel and dedicate more or less time to assignments depending on the difficulty, she said. Ross was one of several students, state officials and experts who spoke at a forum on virtual education sponsored by the Idaho Charter School Network at Boise State University last week.
Idaho is one of the fastest-growing states in virtual learning for K-12 students and was rated No. 3 in the nation for policy and practice by e.Republic's Center for Digital Education. About 5 percent of all K-12 students, around 14,000, are taking classes online full or part time. However, it is not without challenges, as educators and lawmakers figure out how to manage funding and oversight, and tackle concerns from those who have yet to grasp the ever-evolving virtual world.
Superintendent of education Tom Luna said the current education model follows Henry Ford's mass production methods. But online learning offers great opportunities for students with different learning styles and abilities by providing cost-effective, targeted programs for tutoring, make-up classes, and concurrent and advanced credit. "We have to move away from the business model we've adopted," Luna said. "One thing to remember is it will only be hard on the adults."
Luna and speaker John Watson, founder of Evergreen Consulting Associates, which advises on virtual/online education policy, said virtual education is vital in bolstering economic development, engaging students in education and preparing them for a changing jobscape.
Watson said about one in four high school students don't graduate, and that wasn't a problem decades ago when high-paying manufacturing jobs were plentiful. But with those jobs moving to other countries and technical and informational skills more in demand, higher learning is even more important, he said. Virtual learning also allows small and rural districts to access classes and educators they couldn't afford, Watson said. Sen. Russ Fulcher, R-Meridian, said he agrees online learning is critical, but legislators have been wary of virtual systems. Educators, parents and students will have to prove the system works and show how much students are really learning to expand support, he said. "We're living in a different world than we were 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago," he said. "It's not for everyone. But it is for a significant population."
What can't chicago learn a lesson or two from this? Is it so hard to find help, or give advice to students and teachers in need. This is a good augmentation to the overcrowded, understaffed schools. This is an outlet for the bright or promising pupil to better themselves when their environment would not sustain such an endeavor.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Enterprise Management and Government For Cook County
I wonder if Cook County should use something like SAP or Oracle. This is a case where a true Enterprise (ERP) system such as sap or oracle should come into play. There is so much bloat and waste in local government, the ability to run your government like a business and see where every dollar is going, and where every dollar is coming in. You can focus attention on the things that need to be fixed, and everyone will know what everyone else is spending.
The people will know how much everything costs, because the budget, books, and reports should be completely open to all. The system should be an open book for all of its citizens. Its our money at work, and we have the right to know where and how it is spent. Furthermore, we should question every expenditure. Call your local congressman, senator, alderman, city council member, what have you, and express yourself. Ask for a copy of the budget, see what happens.
The technology to weave the day to day operations of the government should function seamlessly, and provide you and every a report on what is profitable, and what is not. Not everything makes money, nor should it, that is what the government and services are all about, bet we need to quantify and monitor all expenditures to ensure the right money is being used for the right reasons.
Lets not forget the human equation. we need an accurate count of every employee, their salary, salary structure, etc. We need to keep that in line with the rest of what is normal, so that we keep everything in check. If the government would run as ERP system, I'm sure they will find more money then they know they had, and it would be well worth the investment in time and resources. The people would be surprised to find out just where there money is going, and how much that garbage can costs, or the street light costs. We need to end the way things have been done, and start fresh with a new mentality where everything counts, big and small, and everyone has a right and a voice.
The people will know how much everything costs, because the budget, books, and reports should be completely open to all. The system should be an open book for all of its citizens. Its our money at work, and we have the right to know where and how it is spent. Furthermore, we should question every expenditure. Call your local congressman, senator, alderman, city council member, what have you, and express yourself. Ask for a copy of the budget, see what happens.
The technology to weave the day to day operations of the government should function seamlessly, and provide you and every a report on what is profitable, and what is not. Not everything makes money, nor should it, that is what the government and services are all about, bet we need to quantify and monitor all expenditures to ensure the right money is being used for the right reasons.
Lets not forget the human equation. we need an accurate count of every employee, their salary, salary structure, etc. We need to keep that in line with the rest of what is normal, so that we keep everything in check. If the government would run as ERP system, I'm sure they will find more money then they know they had, and it would be well worth the investment in time and resources. The people would be surprised to find out just where there money is going, and how much that garbage can costs, or the street light costs. We need to end the way things have been done, and start fresh with a new mentality where everything counts, big and small, and everyone has a right and a voice.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Political Sleeze and your alderman, Service for loyalty.
This is a great article I just have to share that rings very true. The link to the full text is included below.
Did you know that garbage cans are political. You can't buy them; they're a special, rat-proof type only available 'free' from the City. If you need one, you call your Alderman's office (unless you're on the Alderman's *&#! list, in which case, you get your neighbor to make the call). One of the Alderman's assistants passes your request on to Streets and Sanitation. In a week or so, guys from that department drop off your new can. By providing you with a garbage can, the alderman does you a favor, in return for which he or she expects your loyalty.
The City delivers all its services in a way analogous to free garbage can distribution. That you've already paid for the can or service with taxes is irrelevant. Loyalty is an additional sort of tax, payable by voting for the alderman and saying nice things about him or her. Failure to show loyalty can, as I found out, result in punishment.
Service-for-loyalty might work, were it not for the fact that there weren't enough City services to go around. Chicago has fifty wards, each headed by an elected Alderman, and scarcity-fostered competition for services. Wards of Aldermen most powerful in the ruling Democratic machine tended to have, for example, less crowded public schools, cleaner streets, and better parks. Weaker aldermen had smaller slices of the pie, fewer resources with which to reward their patrons.
The group I joined served as advocate for citizens in a neighborhood spread over three wards with a population of around 85,000. The area was un-gentrified, mostly low-income, with poor schools, nasty parks, and lots of gang crime. The group would invite officials to public meetings where citizens would confront them and try to embarrass them into getting the neighborhood its fair share of pie. (Like Obama 'organizing the community' in another part of town, we took our methodology from Saul Alinsky. The similarity ends there. Our group maintained an adversarial role toward the Democratic machine; he joined it.)
My role in the group was to put together its newsletter. You wouldn't think writing a throwaway with a circulation of five hundred would be a risky undertaking, but it proved to be so. TV and newspapers gave our group only occasional coverage, so the newsletter was our main means of communicating to the public what went on at the confrontational meetings. I never spoke at a meeting, or even asked a question, but I may have stood out because I was one of the few people there taking notes. I was playing 'newsletter lady' when I first encountered the person I'll call The Alderman, whose ward covered a big chunk of our territory. He was a longtime incumbent who presumably had enough clout to get our neighborhood the additional cops and other resources it needed, but had no record of taking initiative. Our group was a thorn in his side. He was all about 'go along to get along' and we were all about encouraging people to speak up and make demands.
The meeting was a panel discussion about ways to improve police response time, held in a church hall, with maybe fifty people attending. The Alderman came in late with three or four guys, skeezy types who orbited around him like a pack of stray dogs hanging with their alpha dog. No doubt, they were his precinct workers. While the first panelist addressed the group, The Alderman lounged in the back of the room, talking too loudly with his entourage. Their voices distracted my attention away from the speaker, and I noticed other people turning around to watch them, too. I expected the discussion moderator or the speaker himself to ask The Alderman in a polite way to shut up, but neither one did. Of course not, I realized. The Alderman was the most powerful person in the room, doing us all a favor just by showing up, and if he wanted to behave like a rude sixth grader, he could.
By the time the second panelist spoke, The Alderman had joined him at the front of the room. His antics continued. Guys from his pack of dogs would stroll back and forth between the back of the room and the speaker's table, bringing The Alderman papers. He kept shuffling the papers and talking to his guys, showing no respect for the person at the microphone. At a second, better-attended meeting, The Alderman behaved the same way. Apparently, being a jerk was his customary manner.
I did not, of course, report, 'The Alderman acted like a jerk. . . .' I remember writing that he failed to show up for a meeting, and failed to support one of the group's initiatives, but I made no serious accusations, nothing about pay for play or other crimes for which Chicago pols are notorious. The newsletter merely made it clear that our group opposed the Democratic machine. None of my articles was quoted in the media, and I never received any reader feedback about content. No complaints, no suggestions, nada. I assumed nobody read it.
Oh, but somebody did. I was in a grocery store one day when I looked up and saw The Alderman. We didn't speak (we'd never met) but he gave me a loooong look, a staredown in the cookie aisle, as if to say, 'I know who you are and I don't like you.' A shiver of intimidation went down my spine, but on a more cerebral level, I was gratified. I walked away thinking, 'This powerful guy sees me as a threat? Ha.'
By this time, aldermanic elections were approaching, and the group was co-sponsoring a candidate forum for The Alderman's ward. Being a major cog in the Democratic machine, accustomed to running unopposed, he must have considered it a slap in the face to find not one but two candidates opposing him.
The night of the forum was unseasonably hot, and there was no air conditioning in the auditorium we'd borrowed for the occasion. The place was packed with several hundred potential voters, an excellent turnout for our grassroots democracy show. I took a seat in the front row so I could get a photo for the newsletter. I was eight months pregnant and could not sit comfortably on the hard chair. I fanned myself with my notebook, anxious to do my volunteer thing and get out of there. A man I did not recognize took the seat beside me. He was wearing cut-offs, and he sat so close I could feel the prickly hairs on his bare leg. I inched away.
The Alderman and challengers took seats at the speakers' table and began their opening statements. The first candidate had no chance of winning, because he had no community group or political party backing, and was a poor speaker. The second candidate, the one our group supported, was a retired pastor with backing from an independent political organization. He had no chance of winning against the machine, either, but at least, he spoke well. The Alderman was doing his jerk routine. I could barely listen to any of them because the guy next to me kept moving his chair over, so his sweaty thigh touched my sweaty thigh. I inched away again. He moved closer again. I leaned back, and felt his arm on the back of my chair. Ew.
I got up and fled to the back of the room. From there, I saw my sweaty companion leave his seat and join some guys standing by the door: The Alderman's entourage. They seemed to be enjoying a joke.
The joke was on me, I realized. How could I be so naïve as to think I could promote opposition to The Alderman and get away with it? My writing was an act of disloyalty, and as punishment, he'd sicced one of his dogs on me to do the creepy touching.
I finished the current newsletter and told the group it would be my last. My reasons for quitting were several: the intimidation I had experienced, though minor compared to what other machine opponents may have experienced, made me feel like a fool. The Alderman's subsequent landslide win made opposition seem hopeless, involvement in the group a time-wasting hobby with no hope of changing how the machine works. After my child was born, I was too busy for political involvement anyway. The vast majority of Chicago citizens are politically uninvolved, for a similar list of reasons, and their apathy lets the machine get away with what it does.
The events I describe took place in the 1980's, between the two Mayor Daleys, while Harold Washington was mayor, and democracy seemed to have a chance in Chicago. Washington died of a heart attack in 1987, and after that, power shifted away from the reformers, enabling the younger Daley to become mayor in 1989.
Since the eighties, Chicago can claim progress in terms of new public landscaping, yuppification of vintage neighborhoods, and other exterior upgrades, but its underlying power structure is same old, same old. The neighborhood association still exists, still fighting for the same issues, its newsletter now on a website. The Alderman is still The Alderman of his ward. Daley is still mayor, with no opposition, other than federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the guy who put a wire on the governor and whose office is rumored to have a wire on practically every office holder. Most of the public schools are lousy, the murder rate is sky high, pay for play is the norm, and other than those nabbed by Fitzgerald, no officials are held accountable.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/chicago_politics_at_the_retail.html
Did you know that garbage cans are political. You can't buy them; they're a special, rat-proof type only available 'free' from the City. If you need one, you call your Alderman's office (unless you're on the Alderman's *&#! list, in which case, you get your neighbor to make the call). One of the Alderman's assistants passes your request on to Streets and Sanitation. In a week or so, guys from that department drop off your new can. By providing you with a garbage can, the alderman does you a favor, in return for which he or she expects your loyalty.
The City delivers all its services in a way analogous to free garbage can distribution. That you've already paid for the can or service with taxes is irrelevant. Loyalty is an additional sort of tax, payable by voting for the alderman and saying nice things about him or her. Failure to show loyalty can, as I found out, result in punishment.
Service-for-loyalty might work, were it not for the fact that there weren't enough City services to go around. Chicago has fifty wards, each headed by an elected Alderman, and scarcity-fostered competition for services. Wards of Aldermen most powerful in the ruling Democratic machine tended to have, for example, less crowded public schools, cleaner streets, and better parks. Weaker aldermen had smaller slices of the pie, fewer resources with which to reward their patrons.
The group I joined served as advocate for citizens in a neighborhood spread over three wards with a population of around 85,000. The area was un-gentrified, mostly low-income, with poor schools, nasty parks, and lots of gang crime. The group would invite officials to public meetings where citizens would confront them and try to embarrass them into getting the neighborhood its fair share of pie. (Like Obama 'organizing the community' in another part of town, we took our methodology from Saul Alinsky. The similarity ends there. Our group maintained an adversarial role toward the Democratic machine; he joined it.)
My role in the group was to put together its newsletter. You wouldn't think writing a throwaway with a circulation of five hundred would be a risky undertaking, but it proved to be so. TV and newspapers gave our group only occasional coverage, so the newsletter was our main means of communicating to the public what went on at the confrontational meetings. I never spoke at a meeting, or even asked a question, but I may have stood out because I was one of the few people there taking notes. I was playing 'newsletter lady' when I first encountered the person I'll call The Alderman, whose ward covered a big chunk of our territory. He was a longtime incumbent who presumably had enough clout to get our neighborhood the additional cops and other resources it needed, but had no record of taking initiative. Our group was a thorn in his side. He was all about 'go along to get along' and we were all about encouraging people to speak up and make demands.
The meeting was a panel discussion about ways to improve police response time, held in a church hall, with maybe fifty people attending. The Alderman came in late with three or four guys, skeezy types who orbited around him like a pack of stray dogs hanging with their alpha dog. No doubt, they were his precinct workers. While the first panelist addressed the group, The Alderman lounged in the back of the room, talking too loudly with his entourage. Their voices distracted my attention away from the speaker, and I noticed other people turning around to watch them, too. I expected the discussion moderator or the speaker himself to ask The Alderman in a polite way to shut up, but neither one did. Of course not, I realized. The Alderman was the most powerful person in the room, doing us all a favor just by showing up, and if he wanted to behave like a rude sixth grader, he could.
By the time the second panelist spoke, The Alderman had joined him at the front of the room. His antics continued. Guys from his pack of dogs would stroll back and forth between the back of the room and the speaker's table, bringing The Alderman papers. He kept shuffling the papers and talking to his guys, showing no respect for the person at the microphone. At a second, better-attended meeting, The Alderman behaved the same way. Apparently, being a jerk was his customary manner.
I did not, of course, report, 'The Alderman acted like a jerk. . . .' I remember writing that he failed to show up for a meeting, and failed to support one of the group's initiatives, but I made no serious accusations, nothing about pay for play or other crimes for which Chicago pols are notorious. The newsletter merely made it clear that our group opposed the Democratic machine. None of my articles was quoted in the media, and I never received any reader feedback about content. No complaints, no suggestions, nada. I assumed nobody read it.
Oh, but somebody did. I was in a grocery store one day when I looked up and saw The Alderman. We didn't speak (we'd never met) but he gave me a loooong look, a staredown in the cookie aisle, as if to say, 'I know who you are and I don't like you.' A shiver of intimidation went down my spine, but on a more cerebral level, I was gratified. I walked away thinking, 'This powerful guy sees me as a threat? Ha.'
By this time, aldermanic elections were approaching, and the group was co-sponsoring a candidate forum for The Alderman's ward. Being a major cog in the Democratic machine, accustomed to running unopposed, he must have considered it a slap in the face to find not one but two candidates opposing him.
The night of the forum was unseasonably hot, and there was no air conditioning in the auditorium we'd borrowed for the occasion. The place was packed with several hundred potential voters, an excellent turnout for our grassroots democracy show. I took a seat in the front row so I could get a photo for the newsletter. I was eight months pregnant and could not sit comfortably on the hard chair. I fanned myself with my notebook, anxious to do my volunteer thing and get out of there. A man I did not recognize took the seat beside me. He was wearing cut-offs, and he sat so close I could feel the prickly hairs on his bare leg. I inched away.
The Alderman and challengers took seats at the speakers' table and began their opening statements. The first candidate had no chance of winning, because he had no community group or political party backing, and was a poor speaker. The second candidate, the one our group supported, was a retired pastor with backing from an independent political organization. He had no chance of winning against the machine, either, but at least, he spoke well. The Alderman was doing his jerk routine. I could barely listen to any of them because the guy next to me kept moving his chair over, so his sweaty thigh touched my sweaty thigh. I inched away again. He moved closer again. I leaned back, and felt his arm on the back of my chair. Ew.
I got up and fled to the back of the room. From there, I saw my sweaty companion leave his seat and join some guys standing by the door: The Alderman's entourage. They seemed to be enjoying a joke.
The joke was on me, I realized. How could I be so naïve as to think I could promote opposition to The Alderman and get away with it? My writing was an act of disloyalty, and as punishment, he'd sicced one of his dogs on me to do the creepy touching.
I finished the current newsletter and told the group it would be my last. My reasons for quitting were several: the intimidation I had experienced, though minor compared to what other machine opponents may have experienced, made me feel like a fool. The Alderman's subsequent landslide win made opposition seem hopeless, involvement in the group a time-wasting hobby with no hope of changing how the machine works. After my child was born, I was too busy for political involvement anyway. The vast majority of Chicago citizens are politically uninvolved, for a similar list of reasons, and their apathy lets the machine get away with what it does.
The events I describe took place in the 1980's, between the two Mayor Daleys, while Harold Washington was mayor, and democracy seemed to have a chance in Chicago. Washington died of a heart attack in 1987, and after that, power shifted away from the reformers, enabling the younger Daley to become mayor in 1989.
Since the eighties, Chicago can claim progress in terms of new public landscaping, yuppification of vintage neighborhoods, and other exterior upgrades, but its underlying power structure is same old, same old. The neighborhood association still exists, still fighting for the same issues, its newsletter now on a website. The Alderman is still The Alderman of his ward. Daley is still mayor, with no opposition, other than federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the guy who put a wire on the governor and whose office is rumored to have a wire on practically every office holder. Most of the public schools are lousy, the murder rate is sky high, pay for play is the norm, and other than those nabbed by Fitzgerald, no officials are held accountable.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/chicago_politics_at_the_retail.html
Friday, February 20, 2009
The state of affairs and lesser of two evils
Remember the state of the economy back in the 70s. Carter got the blame for that, as did Reagan for the economic boom and turn around in the 80s. Bush got the heave for the downturn, then Clinton got approval for inheriting the changes that his predecessors initiated. Who is to blame for all of this mess? No one person or act is at fault. The American people are stupid for buying more then they can afford. Mortgage lenders and banks are stupid for giving too much credit to those that can not pay it back, and President Clinton was at fault for letting regulations change that govern how much capital a bank had to have on hand versus how much it can loan out. All of these things and more have brought us to the dire economic situation we are in. the auto Industry has not helped up. The adult entertainment industry is hurting. The entertainment industry as a hole is feeling the pinch. There is not much that has not felt the pain that we have brought upon ourselves. Al is not loss, we have the power to fix this. We control our own destinies, and with a little help and some luck we can all prosper once more.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Obama and Chicago Politics, More of the same?
The more things change, the more they stay the same. We are seeing no vast improvement in Chicago politics, let alone federal politics, and why should we. We have a mayor who rules with an iron fist, he is a good person, a talented politician, but not the less, not the best, in my opinion, at giving a clear answer to any question. A recent article I came across does a great job of explaining and illustrating some of this. I'll include my favorite excerpt and a link to the full article.
Illinois has had a 150-year history of public corruption. Three former governors have ended up in federal prison. The impeached governor, Rod Blagojevich, was recently arrested by the FBI, and is awaiting a formal indictment from the U.S. Attorney's office. Over the past 30 years, at least 25 aldermen, two city clerks and a host of lobbyists, judges, contractors and city employees were arrested, convicted and sentenced to federal prison for public corruption.
More than 40 government employees and trucking owners alone were indicted in the "Hired Truck Program Scandal," a scam by which private trucking firms bribed elected officials to place their service vehicles on the city payroll. One major political hiring scandal that took place in Chicago resulted in Daley's patronage chief, Robert Sorich, being sent to a federal penitentiary. Through it all, the Chicago political machine has survived. Despite some adjustments, it's still business as usual.
The Chicago system is the same one Obama used when he decided to run for a state Senate seat. He didn't court a local civic league group, or consult with his pastor, or his neighbors. Instead, he did things the old-fashioned Chicago way; he went to his alderman, an influential politician and told her he wanted that seat. He also mastered the talent of challenging petitions, knocked every opponent off the ballot and ran unopposed in his first election. This tactic has long been a real art form in Chicago politics.
The architect of that system is our country's most powerful mayor, Richard M. Daley. His style of running a political machine with an iron fist, a political army, and a huge war chest is second to none in this country. It was the inner circle in Daley's office that dispatched hundreds of workers and thousands of fundraising dollars to guarantee Rahm Emanuel would win his congressional seat in 2002 (his first political race). This is the same Rahm Emanuel who is now Obama's chief of staff, and who was privy to some of the same fundraising dollars from the tainted "Hired Truck Program".
Another member of the Obama team and inner circle is David Axelrod. The top political strategist in Chicago, he has also been Mayor Daley's chief consultant for a number of years and is a brilliant tactician. Axelrod also handled multiple campaigns for the Democratic National Committee and its most influential member, Rahm Emanuel.
Also adding to the Chicago flavor is Valerie Jarrett, one of Obama's senior policy advisors. A former Chicago Habitat Company CEO, she is a past cabinet member of Mayor Daley, and has worked with Bill Daley, the mayor's brother, who served on the Obama transition team.
The persons mentioned so far do not take into account all of the ancillary figures from Chicago that will also take up residence in D.C. as part of the Obama patronage army.
Although Obama professes to be a political outsider, he has certainly learned the ropes of fundraising the Chicago way. The Obama presidential campaign raised over $600 million, shattering all records. When Obama first ran for the state Senate, Chicago businessman "Tony" Rezko, who is currently awaiting sentencing for public corruption, funded a portion of that first campaign. Our president, "outsider" though he still claims, has openly acknowledged his own maturation in the Chicago political arena.
The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2009/feb/06/james-laski-obama-brings-chicago-politics-to/
As you can see, Obama has learned and studied from the best. I just hope, for all of our sakes, he is Like Daley in that he tries to do the best for the city and its people.
Illinois has had a 150-year history of public corruption. Three former governors have ended up in federal prison. The impeached governor, Rod Blagojevich, was recently arrested by the FBI, and is awaiting a formal indictment from the U.S. Attorney's office. Over the past 30 years, at least 25 aldermen, two city clerks and a host of lobbyists, judges, contractors and city employees were arrested, convicted and sentenced to federal prison for public corruption.
More than 40 government employees and trucking owners alone were indicted in the "Hired Truck Program Scandal," a scam by which private trucking firms bribed elected officials to place their service vehicles on the city payroll. One major political hiring scandal that took place in Chicago resulted in Daley's patronage chief, Robert Sorich, being sent to a federal penitentiary. Through it all, the Chicago political machine has survived. Despite some adjustments, it's still business as usual.
The Chicago system is the same one Obama used when he decided to run for a state Senate seat. He didn't court a local civic league group, or consult with his pastor, or his neighbors. Instead, he did things the old-fashioned Chicago way; he went to his alderman, an influential politician and told her he wanted that seat. He also mastered the talent of challenging petitions, knocked every opponent off the ballot and ran unopposed in his first election. This tactic has long been a real art form in Chicago politics.
The architect of that system is our country's most powerful mayor, Richard M. Daley. His style of running a political machine with an iron fist, a political army, and a huge war chest is second to none in this country. It was the inner circle in Daley's office that dispatched hundreds of workers and thousands of fundraising dollars to guarantee Rahm Emanuel would win his congressional seat in 2002 (his first political race). This is the same Rahm Emanuel who is now Obama's chief of staff, and who was privy to some of the same fundraising dollars from the tainted "Hired Truck Program".
Another member of the Obama team and inner circle is David Axelrod. The top political strategist in Chicago, he has also been Mayor Daley's chief consultant for a number of years and is a brilliant tactician. Axelrod also handled multiple campaigns for the Democratic National Committee and its most influential member, Rahm Emanuel.
Also adding to the Chicago flavor is Valerie Jarrett, one of Obama's senior policy advisors. A former Chicago Habitat Company CEO, she is a past cabinet member of Mayor Daley, and has worked with Bill Daley, the mayor's brother, who served on the Obama transition team.
The persons mentioned so far do not take into account all of the ancillary figures from Chicago that will also take up residence in D.C. as part of the Obama patronage army.
Although Obama professes to be a political outsider, he has certainly learned the ropes of fundraising the Chicago way. The Obama presidential campaign raised over $600 million, shattering all records. When Obama first ran for the state Senate, Chicago businessman "Tony" Rezko, who is currently awaiting sentencing for public corruption, funded a portion of that first campaign. Our president, "outsider" though he still claims, has openly acknowledged his own maturation in the Chicago political arena.
The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2009/feb/06/james-laski-obama-brings-chicago-politics-to/
As you can see, Obama has learned and studied from the best. I just hope, for all of our sakes, he is Like Daley in that he tries to do the best for the city and its people.
The economy, the market and some chocolate chips
Yes, the economy may be in bad shape for now. The stock markets have had their day. We will see some wild rides in the market for the next few months. Wild swings, highs and lows, but life will go on, and in the end, things will work out. You can be sure that much will never be the same. The auto industry in America will never be the same. It will be leaner, and hopefully a bit meaner. It will eventually be making more environmentally conscious vehicals. Better gas mialage, better fuel economy and all that. Hopefully, Labor costs and union situations will woork themselves out. In this economy, you need the representation of the unions, but the unions are bloat that are costing the companies, and the rest of society a chance at recovery. I have said it before, is it not better to have a job at a fair wage then none at all, for the sake of saying i have a union contract and you have to pay me? If the company goes under, good luck getting your benifits. remember what happened at Enron, and what United Airlines did to all of their employees? Abandoning their pensions, throwiing the very people who made them billions in front of a bus without so much as a thabnk you. My point is you have to help out he company, but not in blind faith, for you know that history has taught us that most companies do not have the employees best interestes at heart. We will all have to tighten our belts, just a bit, but we will all get through this. The ripple efect of the auto industry restructure wll be felt hard and across the globe, but this to will pass. Many cottage and smaller industries and companies will not survive this, some will. The larger companies will weather the storm beter, but in the end, people still need cars and busses and trucks, and there will always be a need. Now, if we can get a true incentive to have a forward thinking car company build the best hybrids and the best alternative fuel vehicals, we can lead the world in a revolution from oil depandance. Until then, wait, do what you can, enjoy a cookie or two and do your best to help yourself and the environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)