Category: Politics

When speed enforcement gets out of hand

The United Kingdom is the poster child of an abusive police state. Thanks to its 6,000 automated speed cameras:

  • 4,500,000 drivers, 28% of all UK licensed drivers, have speeding convictions.
  • 900,000 drivers, 7% of all UK licensed drivers, are one conviction away from a driving ban.
  • 92% of moving violations are speeding tickets.
  • Almost $200,000,000 of revenue is raised annually with traffic fines.
  • Half of speeding violations are for less than 10 mph over the limit.

This is the sorry state where automated enforcement will bring us.

If you aren’t outraged, you haven’t been paying attention.

Sources: http://www.carkeys.co.uk/news/2007/march/30/12839.asp (most) and http://www.cfit.gov.uk/mf/reports/ar2004/index.htm (licensed driver count)

Organic food is bad for the earth

Organic shoppers think they are doing the earth a favor with their organic purchases. The Organic Trade Association even says: “Organic agricultural production benefits the environment by using earth-friendly agricultural methods and practices” followed by a litany of environmental plusses like less greenhouse gas, nicer to animals, etc. (source)

However, a lengthy UK study found that organic methods can hugely increase land usage, energy consumption, and environmental impact. For example, organic tomatoes use 642% more land, organic milk produces almost 100% more soil and water pollutants, and organic chickens cause 341% more resource depletion.

Like I mentioned in an earlier article, organic methods would be cheaper if they were really more “earth-friendly.” This isn’t a stretch; major inputs to food prices are energy, labor, and land. If you use more, you have to charge more. Organic products are 10% to 40% more expensive simply because they use that much more energy, land, and resources than conventionally-farmed materials.

Want to do the earth a favor? Stop buying resource-intensive versions of conventionally-produced products.

(Props to the Dallas Observer blog article that clued me in to the subject!)

Close-minded liberals won’t win Bush Library debate

Southern Methodist University is almost assured the George W. Bush Presidential Library. This is a fantastic opportunity for the university. However, some who claim the mantle of liberalism are practicing extreme close-mindedness as they agitate to scuttle the project.

To be fair to liberals involved in the library debate, most haven’t engaged in third grade, ad hominem attacks. Most of the informed argument is about a think tank, part of the proposed library package. Indeed, the anti-library petition, started by Andrew Weaver and George Crawford, states: “the operation of the think tank will not be accountable to SMU or the United Methodist Church that owns the University.” (source) Read between the lines: “we don’t like dissenting thought if we can’t control it.”

The irony with Andrew Weaver is particularly rich. In a 2005 review of a book about the religious right, he slammed institutions where “debate and dissent are discouraged,” and he whined about tactics of “political hardball and takeover bid.” What else is he trying to do with this 11th hour, anti-library campaign but squelch even the possibility of a dissenting viewpoint? What else is this campaign besides “political hardball and [a] takeover bid” to hijack the will of SMU’s Board of Trustees? Andrew whines about others, then does what they do wrong with even greater fervor? According to an account of hardball tactics bordering on harassment, this isn’t Andrew’s first time at this.

Fortunately, the overall picture is looking good:

  • People are not taking the anti-library petition seriously, and it isn’t commanding respect. Even a silly “impeach Bush” petition has far more signatures! “‘To reach the conclusion that this petition represents an overwhelming expression of concern would not be accurate,’ said Patti LaSalle, associate vice president for public affairs at SMU. ‘We’ve also received many letters from United Methodist members and leaders expressing favor for the presidential library.'” (source)
  • Student support appears to be strong. No organized, student-based opposition has taken off, and the Student Senate fully endorsed the entire package.
  • There is no sign of any Trustee dissent. To wit, Rev. Mark Craig, an SMU trustee and Senior Pastor of Highland Park United Methodist Church, said that the library opponents are “a fringe group, a marginal group without any standing other than the fact they happen to be one of 8 million United Methodists[.]” (source)
  • Faculty opposition is going nowhere, does not appear to represent anywhere near a majority of the faculty, and is even being viewed by some as an untimely, 11th hour revolt. The only credible movement within the Faculty Senate is to oppose an executive order established early in the Bush presidency. Indeed, the entire SMU History Department, which includes library supporters, is concerned about this order.
  • There is no credible movement to separate the think tank from the rest of the package. SMU President Gerald Turner has made it clear that “the library complex is an all or nothing venture.” (source)
  • Many faculty members have clearly stated their support of the library:
  • There is introspection on prior opportunities SMU frittered away, including losing what eventually became University of Texas at Dallas because of prior objections to conservative views.
  • The last recalcitrant, lawsuit-happy tenants of the University Gardens complex, where the library might be built, has been evicted. While his case is technically on appeal, it is unlikely to go anywhere now because SMU’s ownership of the property is clear.

As a lifelong, active United Methodist and an alumnus of SMU three times over, I am thrilled that SMU has been selected to receive the Bush library. I strongly support this, and I am glad that the opposition has had little effect on the debate.

I am an “Enterpriser”

I don’t normally do online “surveys” because most of them are made up, stupid, or grossly faulty, providing pointless conclusions.

However, I came across the Pew Research Center‘s 2005 Political Typology survey. It says I am an enterpriser. I am satisfied with that label, but I depart somewhat from Pew’s description of this group:

  • I am more religiously observant than the nation as a whole.
  • I rarely watch Fox News. Most of my news comes from left-leaning sources like NPR, CNN, BBC, and The Dallas Morning News. (I supplement with Drudge Report.)
  • I do not favor government intervention in moral issues. I strongly support a robust separation of church and state. Mingling the two causes tyranny and corruption.

Leadership: where am I going?

I recently ended up in three leadership positions.

As of May, I am the lead for the ITS Web Technologies Team at SMU. This means I coordinate a 3 person team (including me) that maintains most technical aspects of SMU’s core multipurpose web servers, including our main server, www.smu.edu.


My shirt reads FUTURE PRESIDENT.

In April, I was elected president of the Lake Park Estates Neighborhood Association. This is a “close enough” fulfillment of an ambition to be elected into some public office before I turn 30. I’ve apparently had this ambition since I was 3; see the “FUTURE PRESIDENT” on my shirt.

Learning how to communicate to neighbors is interesting and fun. I’ve already taken one controversial stand on a very sensitive local issue, and I’ve come out unscathed–and may have even converted a couple of people.

In early 2006, I became a Assistant District Commissioner in the White Rock District of the Circle Ten Council of the Boy Scouts of America. (That’s a mouthful!) I help guide a small staff of Unit Commissioners in addition to being a Unit Commissioner myself for a couple of units.

Back up three paragraphs. Why do I want to be in an elected position?

Part of it comes from youth leadership experiences in Boy Scouts and Order of the Arrow. From that, and from the leadership training I received (such as JLTC), I learned that any idiot can be a good leader as long as he has a plan and knows how to motivate others. (“Idiot” unambiguously proves my qualifications!)


Fuzzy picture of me at the HOBY conference in 1993.

Part of it stems from an idealism partly instilled by a Hugh O’Brian Youth Leadership (HOBY) conference I attended as a high school sophomore. (I was floored when I found out my school chose me to go; I figured it would have gone to a “popular” kid.) That conference helped me understand that it is possible for me to do good and be a model elected representative.

Part of it derives from my general interest in politics. I was fascinated by my high school government course. Well before that, I discovered the world of radio political broadcasters. Yes, I was even a Dittohead for a while. (I outgrew Rush once I went to college.)

Finally, part of it comes from a desire to leave the world a better place than I found it. I see corruption, ineffectiveness, and wrong-headedness all the time, and I know there’s no excuse. I know I can do things differently and better.

But the real question is twofold: 1. am I qualified leader, and 2. can I do it?

Am I a qualified leader?


Me (2nd from left) with U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman (R), who I was able to get to speak to the Teenage Republicans group at Clear Brook High School in the 1994-1995 school year. From left to right: Mark Gandin, Aren Cambre, Steve Stockman, Lisa Fox, Chris Bensch.

I was developing effective leadership skills before college. Not being especially popular, I never was elected president of much of anything, nor did I bother with student council. However, I still managed to create an impressive academic resume. Some highlights include that I was a founder of a short-lived Teenage Republicans group; I innovated a radical, new slideshow format for my annual high school band banquet (we did it all on VHS tape instead of with a projector); and I gained excellent access to school administrators through doing special projects or fixing their computers. Even the Computer Applications teacher was asking my guidance on how to run his class! I had a lot of success with leadership in Boy Scouts–at one point, I was even telling the Scoutmaster what to do–and I did a decent job with leadership-related tasks in other areas.

Something happened in college. I lost my edge. Completely. I did a future leader mentoring program through SMU’s Leadership Consulting Council my freshman year. This was a good experience, but it didn’t gel. The only real leadership positions I held were in APO, and even then, I didn’t do a fantastic job. Even the APO chapter president thought I was a crack whore! (There’s more to it than that. You’ll have to ask me in person.)

Looking back, the only partial regret about my SMU experience, leadership-wise, was that I spent too much time in the time-sapping SMU Mustang Band. I liked playing music, and I tolerated marching. However, I am not a party animal, I don’t drink (never have, still don’t), and I am not excited about spectator sports, so I was not a good cultural fit. I finally dropped band my senior year, but that was too late to get deeply involved in other organizations. I probably should have spent more time trying to get into areas where I can utilize my leadership like Student Senate. Speaking of, I technically got elected into the Student Senate 1-2 years after I graduated! I asked several people write me in while I was working on my Master’s degree. Interest was so low that I actually qualified to be an Engineering Senator. Unfortunately, only full time students may serve on the Student Senate, so they had to pass me up for the next person. I wouldn’t have had the time to do that, anyway.

After college, my leadership record has been mixed. I got involved in Boy Scouts again as a Chartered Organization Representative with a troop that wasn’t running well. I had limited success in getting things turned around, but in hindsight I see that I did not manage conflict very well. However, since then, I have had a better record with the Commissioners’ Staff, involvement in my neighborhood association and church, work, and other small successes.

I think I am getting my edge back, but does this mean things turning around? Time will tell.

Can I do it?

Will I someday seek a “real” elected position? The more I think about it, the less I am sure. I value that my current employment doesn’t occupy my entire life. I have a good amount of quality hours off the job. I know lots of people for whom that isn’t the case, be it because of lengthy commutes, long work hours, fear of taking vacation time, excessive job duties, etc.

Many elected positions occupy your entire life. Take the Texas Legislature, for example. Even though it only has regular sessions once every other year, the legislators live in Austin for around 5 consecutive months during the session, only returning for the weekends. That’s 5 months of separation from one’s family and home. Even officials elected to local offices seem to find their lives consumed with job responsibilities. That isn’t appealing, and it becomes even less appealing now that I have a family.

One thing is sure: I must finish my doctorate, and I don’t see that happening until the of 2007 at the very earliest, if I am lucky! I am carefully limiting my commitments because I do not want to jeopardize that degree. If I screw up this doctorate, I will regret it forever.

I leave you with a parting thought, just in case I end up in a position of authority: