The Electoral College as a Football Game

Imagine a college football game between two in-state rivals.

(In Oklahoma, it would be Bedlam between OSU and OU.)

One team, fill in name of your choice, played a great game.

They ran up over 700 total yards.

They dominated the line of scrimmage on both offense and defense.

They scored a safety and 6 field goals.

To top it off, officials and the media had picked, and clearly favored, this team to win.

The other team, pick a name, did not play very well at all.

They were not able to stop the other team on defense. In fact, it was only through luck that they were able to keep them from scoring a touchdown. The defense was clearly not very good.

On offense, they were even worse. They punted on almost every possession. They fumbled 3 times. They gained less than 150 yards. In fact, they had exactly three lucky plays

They ran back a punt for a touchdown.

They had one long run from scrimmage that went for a touchdown.

They recovered a fumble near the other team’s goal line and ran it in for a touchdown.

But…THEY WON THE GAME 21 - 20!!!

The first team played better. They scored more times. They gained many more yards. They had the edge in turnovers. They held the opposing offense to low yards gained.

It doesn’t seem fair that they did not win; however, no one complained after the game was over. They were disappointed but they didn’t riot or try to have the outcome changed.

Why?

Because, they knew the rules before the game started.

Should the rules be changed so this never happens again?

What do you think?

Playing with Fire

 

A recent Wall Street Journal article titled "An Electoral College Coup: The Clinton campaign now suggests the election was rigged," explores attempts by supporters of Hillary Clinton's failed presidential bid to persuade electors to abandon their duty and vote for Ms. Clinton. This would, indeed, amount to a coup and the fallout would be disastrous.

Consider the following.

Both houses of Congress are controlled by Republicans.

All cabinet appointees and Supreme Court nominees must be ratified by the Senate. In the face of a coup, it is unlikely that any appointee or nominee put forward would receive approval. The United States would be without senior leadership for the foreseeable future and the Court would remain split with at least one vacancy.

All budget bills must originate in the House of Representatives. There is little reason to expect that the House, believing the Presidency is held illegitimately, would fund any function of government beyond the minimum required services.

The United States would be leaderless and essentially unfunded while political factions battled in court for at least two years.

Anyone believing this is a good thing is genuinely an enemy of the country. 

They are playing with fire. 

Rubicon Redux 

"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.” Frank Herbert

 I had occasion recently to visit with a friend about a blog post (available here) I shared some years ago. In that post I posed a question about what Julius Caesar, Cortez, MacArthur, and Rosa Parks had in common. They each made a bold decision and took action from which there was no return. Were they afraid of what would happen? Perhaps they were. We cannot know with certainty. If they were, they acted in spite of their fears. They each crossed their Rubicon.

Following that visit, I have been reflecting on the impact of fear on how we live and believe that, at a personal level, few things are more insidiously damaging to one’s life than fear. Our fears hold us back. They prevent us from acting boldly. They are the Rubicon we will not cross. Great writers have addressed this topic better than I can. I share some of their thoughts here, with observations of my own.

“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.” H. P. Lovecraft

Fear of the outcome, the unknowns, of our actions, the impact on others, and what others might think of us, prevents us from acting boldly.

“Fear keeps us focused on the past or worried about the future.” Thích Nhất Hạnh

What we have is safe. The other side is unknown. However, choosing to be happy with the status quo forecloses opportunity.

"Opportunities are like sunrises. If you wait too long, you miss them." William Arthur Ward

There is often a price to be paid for letting fear dominate. In most cases, opportunities are NOT like sunrises. They are available for only a brief period of time. Once a window of opportunity closes, it cannot be opened again.

Frank Herbert, in “Dune” addressed the topic. “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.”

And from my favorite Stoic philosopher, Marcus Aurelius, “It is not death that a man should fear, but he should fear never beginning to live.”

The good news is; we are in control if we choose to be. 

Again from Marcus Aurelius, “Our life is what our thoughts make it.” 

One never knows when the opportunity to cross their Rubicon will arise. 

Be bold. 

Don’t let fear alter the course of your life forever.

Better Return on Our Tax Dollar Investment

 I received the following post in my Facebook timeline recently. The full release by Congressman Cole can be found at: https://cole.house.gov/media-center/weekly-columns/funding-fight-cure.

One of the most important investments Congress makes with our tax dollars is the funding of university grants to support basic scientific research or the search for treatments or cures of diseases or cancers. Unfortunately, these grants turn out to be give aways rather than investments. Although society does ultimately gain some benefit from the funded research, the greatest return on these investments enures to the benefit of the researcher, their university, and ultimately, big pharma.

How does this happen?

In 1980, the Bayh-Dole Act was passed as a form of economic stimulus. In a nutshell, this act allows universities to claim ownership of inventions or scientific discoveries that result from federally funded research. The net effect of this is to incentivize universities and their researchers to jealously guard their research in anticipation of the financial and professional rewards that will result from patenting their discoveries. The payoff comes when these patents are sold or licensed to industry. 

How about a solution that would lead to more rapid advances in science and a better return to society?

My proposal:

All the fruits of federally funded research should simply go into the public domain and be unpatentable. Big pharma would be free to use the research to commercialize the findings; however, the drugs would essentially be generic from day one. The cost of the basic research and initial trials being already borne by the taxpayer, our ROI would come in the form of more drugs and treatments for more diseases and cancers at lower cost as more producers are allowed to compete. 

Bayh-Dole was essentially a wealth transfer from taxpayers to universities and the pharmaceutical industry. Congress should act more like venture capitalists and less like a non-profit charity. Bayh-Dole should be repealed or modified.