Where there's a Will, there's a way

The SJ-R has an article today about the new "Seven Wonders of Illinois" that were selected by the public in an online vote. Five out of the seven were natural areas and none were Lincoln sites.

This highlights that Springfield, for all of its historic sites, lacks diversity in its appeal as a tourist destination. Besides a downtown that leaves tourists with few dining and entertainment options on weekends, we don't have an outstanding natural area to attract visitors.

Lincoln Memorial Gardens is a beautiful area that already attracts visitors but its relatively small. We should take that as an indication of the potential for a larger natural area with hiking trails, biking trails, and maybe even horse back riding. Giving people something to do other than visit Lincoln sites will help make Springfield a weekend destination rather than a one-day stop.

Now, if only there were a body of local government that owns a large portion of land, including undisturbed wooded areas, creeks, and maybe even a historic building, that would make a good nature preserve. Oh yeah! The proposed Hunter Mud Puddle property!

I've heard that the Chamber of Commerce is pushing for Hunter Lake. I would suggest the business community think about which option is better for Springfield's economy in the long run: more tourist dollars, or higher water rates for businesses? Its not as though there's only one way to meet our water needs.

Posted by Will at 11:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the things I love about Presidential primaries is that it gives the opportunity for the discussion of ideas that are often brushed aside in the narrow political debate that happens in the corporate media.

I'm going to give a first impression of the debate and I may update this as the debate goes on. Its currently airing on MSNBC.

My first thought is that Brian Williams' questions are ridiculous. Iraq is a serious issue but he has managed to ask about it in trivial ways. He just asked John Edwards about getting his hair cut. Are you kidding me, Brian? Here were are with a major national debate and you're asking about Edwards getting a freaking hair cut? Give me a break! This is exactly what's wrong with the shallow way the national media covers the Presidential race.

On another note, Mike Gravel is challenging Dennis Kucinich for the role of angry guy struggling to be relevant.

Update at 6:30:

Ok, the exception to Williams' lousy questions are two pretty good straight-forward questions to Kucinich. What Dennis should have said is that he isn't gaining more support because he can't organize his way out of a wet paper bag.

Ok, Biden just made it obvious to Williams that his question was pointless by simply answering, "yes." Good job Joe.

Update at 6:35:

Hillary Clinton talks and no matter how hard I try to listen all I hear is, "blah, blah, blah."

Now Williams is asking about partial birth abortion, which is the wedge issue Republicans would love to introduce into the debate if they had the chance. Everyone on the stage is pro-choice, so why does this need to be asked? Save it for the general election.

Update at 6:40

Name a justice you like without explanation? Maybe Williams will ask them what their favorite color is next. Could a Fox News debate have been any worse than this?
Ok, I guess this is now officially live blogging.

Update at 6:45

Now Williams is bringing up the other favorite wedge issue used by Republicans, gun control. What purpose does it serve to ask who has had a gun in their home? Why not talk about some issues that are up for debate among progressives and center-left Democrats? I'll bet anyone $100 that Williams doesn't ask who would repeal or change the Taft-Hartley act to make it easier for workers to exercise their right to organize a union.

Update at 6:50

Hillary Clinton is finally ready to try again with health care. Well its about freaking time! After the plan she helped form failed in '93 the issue was dropped by the Clinton administration. I'll say this for George Bush and the Republicans: if a Republican had been in office he/she would have kept bringing up the issue again and again instead of giving up for the next 7 years like the Clintons did. I'm glad you're ready to try again Hillary, but the rest of the public was ready to try again years ago and we left you behind.

Update at 6:54

Obama just did a great job of answering a question about the symbolic issue of the confederate flag by bringing up more pressing issues that affect people everyday. Point for Obama. Another point against Williams' lousy job as host.

Update at 6:58

Richardson isn't doing a bad job. At some point, centrist Democrats are going to realize that Hillary Clinton has zero chance of winning the nomination. Richardson might be the one to benefit from that the most if people jump ship before the nomination is decided.

I just heard Edwards apologize for his Iraq War vote for the thousandth time and its getting a little old. He just made a wonderful statement about the environment and conservation.

Kucinich is talking about his house, and it is indeed a small home in a very middle class neighborhood. His neighbor is a nice old lady who always waves when he comes home.

Update at 7:07
I'm a little worried at how much I agree with Gravel's argument that we need to stop focusing on who we should be afraid of. Will I be that cranky old man in the future?
Kucinich to Gravel: "Stop stealing my act!"

"Being stubborn isn't a foreign policy" Richardson just made one of the best one-liners of the night.

Update at 7:11
Dodd is giving the correct answer to why Republicans aren't better at protecting us. Democrats have been the ones demanding that Bush do more to secure the nation.
The other answer to the question someone should have given is that conservatism has always been more effective at using fear to manipulate the public than liberalism. Remember that Bush used images of 9/11 in his first re-election campaign commercial. Republicans benefit from the terrorism issue because conservatism has always been the ideology of fear.

Update at 7:19
Williams just raised the final issue of the Republican trio of wedge issues to get working class voters to support their millionaire-class agenda: gay marriage. How unsurprising. Why don't you ask a question about free trade Brian?

Update at 7:24
General Electric employee Brian Williams avoids discussion of renewable energy by asking about Nuclear power. Again, how unsurprising. At least the candidates have good things to say about the issue.

Update at 7:27
Barack Obama speaking about Iran just showed Kucinich the difference between a thoughtful foreign policy stance and foreign policy by slogan.

Final update.
I think this was my first try at live blogging. It happened spontaneously. Maybe I'll let people know in advance if I do this again if anyone is interested.

Brian Williams made a comment to those watching who did not hear their questions asked. Oddly enough the important questions not asked about unions, trade, and renewable energy, are all important items that NBC's parent company, General Electric, would rather not have on the table. What an odd coincidence. I lost a lot of respect for Williams with his poor performance tonight.

Posted by Will at 6:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

I stopped by UIS today to see the Tibetan Monks of the Drepung Loseling Monastery work on their sand painting. I've seen it done in videos before but never in person. Its pretty impressive. Go see them in the lobby of the PAC building from 10:30AM to 6:30PM today and Thursday.

Wednesday night at 6:30, also in the PAC building lobby is a presentation about the recent history and situation of Tibet today. Friday is a closing ceremony at Noon, and the monks are putting on a concert Friday evening. This is something unique that we're lucky to have in town for a while.

Posted by Will at 11:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There have been some exciting Earth Month events so far and I've got two more I want to encourage people to attend.

Tonight (Tuesday) Becki "Good at Fighting" Clayborn, the Regional Representative with the Sierra Club’s Midwest Clean Energy Campaign, will be giving an overview of Smart Energy Solutions for Global Warming and how Illinois can help move the US toward a cleaner energy future. The presentation will describe the major sources of global warming emissions in Illinois and how the Sierra Club is working to reduce those emissions. Becki will talk specifically about the five C’s of Illinois Sierra Club’s Clean Energy Campaign: Cars, Cool Cities, Coal Power, Carbon regulation and Clean Energy. Becki was one of the staff involved in the Sierra Club agreement with CWLP and she went through Al Gore's program to train people to give the An Inconvenient Truth slide presentation.

The meeting is at 7:00pm in the Carnegie Room of Lincoln Library. Some entrances will be close due to renovation but you'll still be able to enter through the South entrance or the parking garage.

Springfield's official Earth Day celebration will finally be here Saturday, April 28th 10am-2pm at the State Fairgrounds-Expo Building! It should be fun and a good way to find out about organizations and activities in the area.

Posted by Will at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I know this is getting posted on a lot of blogs but its too good to pass up. This is from the White House Corespondents' Dinner on Saturday.

Pretty soon I'll get around to writing about a couple earth week events and Greenfest in Chicago. On a side note, did anyone else notice that Schoenburg's most recent column covered the same topics as my last two blog posts? That was nice to see.

Posted by Will at 11:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

No more than 100 votes decided the races for Alderman in Wards 4 & 8. I hope the losing candidate in one of those wards will ask for a hand recount because that hasn't happened since the adoption of the new voting machines.

Every time I bring up the new voting machines someone associated with county government responds with hostility and accusations of me being a conspiracy theorist. But, they never address any of the questions or issues I raise. Additionally, I'm disappointed at how little the local media has examined the issue.

Until someone calls for a hand recount (or at least a hand count audit of randomly chosen precincts) we will never know for sure that the new voting system is completely accurate. If such a hand count audit has been done before, then the county had done a good job of not publicizing the results.

This isn't about accusations of voter fraud or internet hacking. Anyone who works with computers knows that programs don't always do what you expect them to do. Unless we compare a hand count to the totals given by the voting system then we're only guessing that the votes are being accurately tabulated. I don't understand why that's controversial.

I think either candidate would be doing everyone in the county a big favor by proving or disproving that the voting machines are accurate by requesting a hand count verification of the results.

Posted by Will at 1:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

People always complain about dirty campaign tactics but some politicians will continue to sling mud for one reason: it works. We saw proof of that yesterday when negative push-polling was used against several candidates for Alderman who lost their race. The SJ-R reported about push-polling against three Democrats and the online comments suggest there may have been additional Democrats targeted.

The Republican defense in one case was to point out that Sam Cahnman is a Democrat running against another Democrat. But, anyone who attends county board meetings knows how much local Republican leaders loathe Sam Cahnman so its not a stretch to think that they would work against him.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: negative campaigning will only stop when people vote against those candidates who benefit from it. The candidates themselves all say they aren't involved in this ugly campaign tactic and it wouldn't surprise me if that were completely true. However, I wish the SJ-R would provide some context in its articles about the negative and personal attacks the Sangamon County Republicans make against Democrats in election after election. This is their standard mode of operation and it will continue to be that way until Republican candidates start losing elections as a result.

People can complain about negative campaigning all they want, but voters in Springfield just endorsed it again by voting for the opponents of those who were personally attacked.

Posted by Will at 12:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

When I heard Billy Earl predict that Mayor Davlin would win by 60% I wasn't sure the margin would be that wide but Billy was absolutely right. I'm pretty happy with that result considering the fact that Bruce Strom never responded to the Sierra Club candidate questionnaire and one of his main campaign themes was bashing one of the best things Springfield has ever done for the environment.

60% is as well as any Democrat can expect to do in Springfield, which leads one to ask how he did it. One obvious answer is organization. Besides having far more money than Strom, Davlin had excellent Voter Identification and Get Out The Vote operations that were far beyond anything I saw local Democrats do in the 2006 November election. Most of the credit for that goes to unions and Davlin's ability to recruit volunteers.

Another reason is Davlin's cross-over appeal to Republicans. His victory did not hinge on turning out traditional Democratic voters. Less than 2,000 people voted for Alderman in mostly Democratic Wards 2, 3 & 5, but the more Republican wards had close to or over 3,000 people vote in Aldermanic races.

My own precinct, for example, is usually about 60% Republican, but gave 60% of the vote to Davlin. I'm guessing part of that is his personal relationships with many people in town and that the business community views him as a pro-business moderate.

That helps explain why his large victory didn't help many other Democrats on the ballot. Out of 10 wards, only two candidates supported by the Sangamon County Democratic Central Committee won their election. Those two winners, Frank Kunz and Mark Mahoney, both have their own base of support and organization outside the regular Democratic Party.

Davlin accomplished some good things during his first term and I hope his large mandate will allow him to accomplish more, regardless of the make-up of the city council.

On another note, I was happy to see my friend Art Moore win his election to school board. It looks like some changes are coming in district 186. Congratulations to all the candidates who won Tuesday!

Posted by Will at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

A friend called me up Saturday with an extra box ticket to see the Springfield Stallions game. I've never been to an indoor arena football game before and this was my first football game of any kind since college because I'm more of a baseball and rollerderby fan. So, it was fun just for the experience of something new.

Another local blogger and the SJ-R already reviewed the game so I won't retell the story of their loss, which is best summed up by the announcer playing the Mission Impossible theme in the second half. Let's just say the visiting team was very good.

I had a good time but the crowd was pretty sparse. The team won't last long if they don't get more people in the stands. Also, the announcer needs to learn how to pronounce the name of one of their top sponsors, CEFCU. Hopefully, they have better luck scoring more points and more fans in the seats at their next game.

I do have one suggestion for them. Change the team name. What do "Stallions" have to do with Springfield? Has this area ever been known for raising horses? The generic name reminds me of the come-and-go baseball teams we had after the AA Cardinals left. A name with no relation to Springfield suggests that the team isn't committed to staying here. If they stick around next season they should come up with a name that has some kind of connection to the area. Maybe they can get creative and make it something unrelated to Lincoln, like the Springfield Grafters. Anyone else have ideas for a new name?

Posted by Will at 2:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I'll encourage people one last time to vote in the Springfield city elections tomorrow. If you haven't already, be sure to check out the responses to the Sierra Club candidate questionnaire on environmental issues. Voter turn-out in local elections is always lower than national elections but in many ways local government has a greater impact on our day-to-day lives than the federal government.

When election day is over, you might head over to UIS to hear Winona LaDuke speak about three of my favorite topics in a talk entitled, "Politics, Women, and Environmental Justice."

Posted by Will at 2:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

About 20 people braved the cold and rain Saturday to take part in Springfield's Step It Up rally. It was part of a national day of action that included over 1,300 events to promote reductions in carbon emissions.

A friend of mine took this picture at the event. I may post more later.

Posted by Will at 2:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

The Illinois Times feature story this week is on pollution from coal power plants with a focus on the CWLP/Sierra Club agreement about the new power plant in Springfield.

As much as I like being on the cover, there are at least half a dozen other people who deserve more recognition for the agreement than myself. That includes the Midwest Regional staff of the Sierra Club who did so much work on it, Becki Clayborn and Bruce Nilles, along with other leading volunteers like Diane Hughes and Verena Owen. CWLP deserves some credit as well. I don't think they would have done all of the things in the agreement without some prodding from the Sierra Club, but it was clear early on in the negotiations that CWLP's leaders had genuine concern for the environment.

I especially like that the article quoted what I said about clean energy being a wilderness issue. There's some debate within the environmental movement, and within the Sierra Club in particular, over whether too much focus is being put on clean energy issues as opposed to land preservation issues. Land preservation was the central (and almost the only) issue of focus in the environmental movement before 1960. As much as I appreciate what was done in the past, this is no longer a movement of wealthy outdoor enthusiasts whose main focus is protecting their recreational playgrounds.

A quick look at the Great Smoky Mountains National Park web page on air pollution makes it obvious that you can't protect wilderness areas without confronting pollution from coal power plants. Beyond the short-term effects to plant life and air quality, the problems related to climate change will have further detrimental effects on natural areas throughout the world.

The Times article does a great job of running down the problems associated with coal power plants. I also like the quotes from Robert Kennedy Jr. who is probably the most effective spokesperson for the environment that I've ever heard. He co-wrote Riverkeepers about his work in the organization of the same name and it articulated much of what I was thinking about the environmental movement at the time I read it.

The article also mentions CWLP's Smart Energy Forums to seek public input on where to direct their energy conservation efforts and related issues. Check out the schedule for the meetings here and be sure to attend one!

Posted by Will at 3:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The State Journal-Register published a letter to the editor today from myself and the other members of the political committee for the local Sierra Club Group. Here it is for those who don't get the paper:

The Sangamon Valley Group of the Sierra Club would like to thank all of the candidates who participated in our Environmental Candidates Forum on March 27 - Gail Simpson, Sam Cahnman, Tina Jannazzo, Debbie Cimarossa, and Barry McAnarney - as well as the additional candidates who completed our candidate survey - Tim Davlin, Bob Bartnick, Mark Mahoney, Joe Rock, Kris Theilen and George Petrilli.

To find out where the candidates stand on environmental and conservation issues impacting Springfield, please visit our Web site at www.illinois.sierraclub.org/sangamon.

Springfield is receiving national attention for becoming a leader in using clean, renewable energy and committing to expanded energy efficiency and conservation programs. We hope that with the increased focus on environmental and public health issues, our elected officials will have the opportunity to do even more.

One way voters can have an impact right now is to share your concerns with candidates currently campaigning about issues such as clean energy, smart growth, public transportation, bike trails, reducing emissions that contribute to global warming and other environmental quality of life issues.

Will Reynolds, Bill Crook, Chris Pearson, Jennifer Sublett

The Sangamon Valley Group of the Sierra Club , Political Committee, Springfield

Posted by Will at 1:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I started writing a comment in response to a post Greg made at CES Blog and when I saw how long it was getting, I decided to make it a post here.

Greg cites an interesting article in The New Yorker about studies that claim most voters base their decisions on whether and how to vote on trivial reasons and with very limited information. That's a reality that anyone working in politics is forced to confront on a regular basis.

Republicans leaders, and especially the talk radio hosts, show they understand the points made in the article that most voters make their decisions based on general impressions rather than informed policy judgements. That's why they're able to convince people that Bush "stands by his convictions" by getting Bush to act and speak in a certain way, even though he constantly flip-flops and plays to both sides of an issue.

You see it most of all in how they deal with environmental issues. They don't even attempt to defend the conservative position that polluters should have little or no restrictions and that taxpayers should have to pay the cost to clean up the messes of profitable companies. Can you imagine the public response if someone openly argued what the pro-pollution forces in government are actively pushing for: that middle-class taxpayers should cover the bill to subsidize the costs of production for companies that make billions of dollars a year, even while we all get sick from the pollutants they release into our community?

Instead, they make it a cultural identification issue. The goal of Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and every other conservative commentator is to make sure that when you hear the word "environmentalist" that you immediately get an image of a white guy with dreadlocks, living in a tree, who hasn't showered for at least a month. The corporate conservative critique of environmental issues in the popular media doesn't get much more substantive than that.

I remember talking to a guy that worked in a national park who said he's a "conservationist" not an "environmentalist." It was obvious from the conversation that he was an environmentalist in terms of the issues, but he didn't want to identify himself with the stereotype of hippie, tree-hugging environmentalists. I know there are millions of people with the same attitude.

Something else I kept thinking while reading the New Yorker article is that, like most academics who cover the topic, the writer doesn't seem to understand or even be aware of the profound impact political party organizations have on voter turn out. The most simple answer is that some people vote because a party activist called them on the phone and knocked on their door to tell them to vote.

I believe more elections are decided by that than by any other single factor, but academics enjoy spending more time on pedantic arguments based on surveys and psychological analysis. Sure, that's interesting reading for political junkies like me, but in practical terms, if either political party had a hard working committeemen in every single precinct in Sangamon County then turn-out would soar and I can guarantee who would win almost every race on the ballot.

Greg made another comment about political parties discouraging voter turn-out and that frequently occurs. In the future, I'd like to see the County Clerk's office do more to encourage voter participation. They could start by doing more to promote early voting and having an aggressive voter registration campaign.

I ran a voter registration drive in Arkansas and the difference in responses I get from state government in Illinois and Arkansas could not be starker. In Arkansas, I was able to get as many voter registration forms as I needed, as often as I needed, from the helpful Secretary of State's office. I received willing cooperation from state government and most County Clerk's.

When I came back to Illinois during the same election year, I had a State Board of Elections official tell me it was a violation of the rules for them to provide me with voter registration forms. They make the most prohibitive interpretation of federal laws intended to make voter registration easier. They discourage people from using HAVA and motor voter laws to get around the needlessly restrictive rules Illinois has used for decades.

I've had conversations with Illinois elections officials where getting them to admit that federal laws now make it easier to do voter registration drives was like pulling teeth. They seem desperate to hang onto Illinois' antiquated system that makes massive registration drives very difficult. Similarly, I had Sangamon County Clerk officials discourage me from using motor voter forms that make it easier for people to register to vote.

There are a lot of people in Illinois who still want voter registration to be a difficult process that is only in the hands of the political parties. Frankly, I'm ashamed that Illinois is decades behind an old Jim Crow state on this issue.

Anyway, if you're in Springfield, remember to vote early or vote on election day, Tuesday, April 17.

Posted by Will at 1:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a few down-ballot offices up for election this year that get less attention, but yesterday the SJ-R had a couple stories on candidates for School Board and SMEAA Board.

One of the more interesting races is for SMEAA Subdistrict 1. SMEAA oversees the Prairie Capitol Convention Center, and Subdistrict 1 is where Judy Yeager was removed from the ballot for turning in invalid petitions. SMEAA candidate Mike Ziri deserves credit for that. That leaves two candidates on the ballot for three positions (you'll get to vote for three candidates in that race). Judy Yeager is now a write-in candidate for the position, but she has competition from another write-in candidate, Lliam McDonnell. Lliam is a friend of mine who knows how to work hard helping other candidates get elected and I'm glad to see him running himself this time.

I've met a number of Democrats who ran for the SMEAA board in the past that talked about bringing more entertainment into town and better utilizing the Prairie Capitol Convention Center. Usually, they're defeated by Republicans who are happy to under-utilize the facility by bringing in boring conventions, entertainment that doesn't appeal to young people, and ensuring they have another source of patronage jobs now that they no longer have a Republican Governor. There's a good chance that could change this year if we get some new candidates elected with a fresh approach, so I hope that everyone in Subdistrict 1 will write-in Lliam McDonnell. You can find out if you live in the district by checking here.

The SJ-R also ran an article yesterday that quotes a friend of mine running for District 186 School Board, Art Moore. Art and I went to college together and we've kept in touch since then. He's a thoughtful, reform-minded person who I know will put a lot of energy into the school board if he's elected.

There happens to be a joint pizza party fundraiser tonight for Art Moore and two other School Board candidates, Alice Armstrong and Bill Looby.
Thursday, April 5 / 5-7 p.m.
Illinois AFL-CIO Headquarters (parking in back)
Conference Room (1st Floor)
534 South Second Street, Springfield

Even if you don't like the same candidates I support, please remember to check out who is running for these and other offices like Lincoln Land Community College Board. They may not be high profile, but they still have a large impact on the community.

Posted by Will at 12:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

That's right. Earth Day is no more. We have Earth Week now! In fact, there's so much going on that its more like Earth Month for all of April. I'm listing all the events I know about so far. Tell me if you know of any events I missed.

Showing of the movie Power Shift and panel discussion.
Wednesday, April 11, 7:00pm
Lincoln Library, Carnegie Room
This is one of the Step It Up events going on around the country. From the film website: "Circling the globe, POWER SHIFT explores the remarkable ways that energy touches our daily lives. Hosted and narrated by Cameron Diaz, this award-winning program reveals the abundant possibilities of clean, renewable energy."

After the movie there will be a panel discussion related to issues in the film.
Panelists include:
Dr. Tih-Fen Ting, Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies at UIS
Jim Johnston of Sustainable Springfield Inc.
Greg Claxton from Clean Energy Springfield
Moderated by Catherine O'Connor from the Sierra Club

Edens Lost & Found, Chicago: City of the Big Shoulders
Thursday, April 12, Reception at 6:00pm, Screening at 7:00pm
"This multi-part PBS series highlights practical solutions to improve the environment and quality of life in cities, for ourselves and future generations. The centerpiece of a multimedia program and outreach initiative, this special broadcast will showcase extraordinary community activists as well as forward-thinking professionals who are offering best practice solutions to transform their urban environments." This complimentary screening will feature and Q & A session with series producer Harry Wiland.

Step It Up Rally
Saturday, April 14, Noon-1:00pm
Federal Building, 6th & Monroe, Springfield.
Step It Up is organizing over a thousand rallies across the United States.

"Every group will be saying the same thing: Step it up, Congress! Enact immediate cuts in carbon emissions, and pledge an 80% reduction by 2050. No half measures, no easy compromises-the time has come to take the real actions that can stabilize our climate."

Winona LaDuke
Tuesday, April 17, 7:30-9:00pm
Studio Theater, Public Affairs Center, UIS campus
Winona LaDuke was already well known for her work on environmental and Native-American issues when Ralph Nader asked her to be his Presidential running-mate in 1996 and 2000. The topic of her talk is "Politics, Women, and Environmental Justice."

Election Day
Tuesday, April 17
Remember to Vote!

"The Future of Renewable Energy in Illinois" panel discussion
Thursday, April 19, 7:00-9:00pm
Brookens Auditorium, UIS campus
One nice thing about UIS expanding is the opportunities provided to hear great speakers and new ideas in the community. This should be an exciting panel that will include perspectives from both sides of the ethanol debate. The panel includes:
Rebecca Stanfield, State Director, Environment Illinois
John Caupert, Director, National Corn-to-Ethanol Research Center, Edwardsville, Illinois
David Pimentel, Professor of Ecology and Agricultural Sciences, Cornell University
Tih-Fen Ting, Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies, UIS, moderator
Before the panel, SAGE is sponsoring a picnic and concert with the band Patchouli, 5-6:30pm.

CWLP Smart Energy Forum
Thursday, April 19, 6 p.m.
Illinois National Bank Conference Center, 431 S. 4th St., Springfield
This public meeting is your chance to let Springfield's utility know what direction you want them to take with their energy conservation programs and related issues.

Household Hazardous Waste Collection
Saturday, April 2, 8 am - 3 pm
Illinois State Fairgrounds
Sponsored by the City of Springfield and the IEPA.

Earth To America
Sunday, April 22, 7:00pm
Lincoln Residence Hall, UIS Campus
UIS SAGE is sponsoring a showing of the film Earth To America.

Becki Clayborn presentation at the Sangamon Valley Group Sierra Club Meeting
Tuesday, April 24, 7:00pm
Becki Clayborn, Regional Representative with the Sierra Club’s Midwest Clean Energy Campaign, will be giving an overview of Smart Energy Solutions for Global Warming and how Illinois can help move the US toward a cleaner energy future. The presentation will describe the major sources of global warming emissions in Illinois and how the Sierra Club is working to reduce those emissions. Becki will talk specifically about the five C’s of Illinois Sierra Club’s Clean Energy Campaign: Cars, Cool Cities, Coal Power, Carbon regulation and Clean Energy.

Green Building Seminars with speaker Ron Jones
Thursday, April 26th
I'm especially excited to see the Springfield Area Home Builders Association sponsor an event like this. You'll need to register in advance with the SAHBA. From their website: "Ron Jones of HGTV and Green Building Magazine. Ron was named 2006 Green Advocate of the year (builder) by the NAHB and the National Green Builders Conference. Jones is a co-founder of Green Builder Media, LLC, a leading development, education, consulting and media organization and frequently participates in green-building workshops."

Earth Awareness Fair
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Illinois State Fairgrounds, Expo Building
This is the official Earth Day celebration for Springfield. Besides information from just about every environmental group in town, they'll have programs from the Illinois Raptor Center, free trees, live music, a freecycle garage sale, recycling for various items like printer cartridges and used cell phones, and all kinds of fun stuff.

This was cross-posted from CES Blog.

Posted by Will at 1:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I've read about the ways in which the FBI was used to harass political dissidents during the Vietnam War, particularly during the Nixon administration. I doubt anyone heavily involved in the peace movement will be surprised that some of the same tactics are being used today, especially since Bush's abuse of powers are becoming more reminiscent of Nixon as Congress is finally beginning to exercise its oversight role.

The Washington Post reports on new proof that the FBI is arresting and interrogating people for no reason other than their suspected political beliefs.

The probable cause to arrest the protesters as they retrieved food from their parked van? They were wearing black -- a color choice the FBI and police associated with anarchists, according to the police records.

FBI agents dressed in street clothes separated members to question them one by one about protests they attended, whom they had spent time with recently, what political views they espoused and the significance of their tattoos and slogans, according to interviews and court records.

I say this shouldn't be a surprise to peace activists because stories like this have been coming out ever since 9/11. A few are reported widely in the corporate media but most are not.

I was living in Knoxville Tennessee in 2003 when it was discovered that the Oak Ridge Police had been sending an undercover officer to observe the meetings of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance. I was still in Knoxville when newspapers reported that the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation had agents at several peace rallies writing down the names of speakers. The TBI finally apologized that one agent identified himself, but showed now remorse for spying on citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

I have a lot of respect for people who join the military to protect America from foreign threats to our freedom and liberty. Right now, I'm more concerned about who is going to protect us from the domestic threats to freedom and liberty.

Posted by Will at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Ward 8 Springfield City Council candidate Kris Theilen recently turned in his response to the Sierra Club candidate questionnaire, with apologies for being late. It will be added to the Sangamon Valley Group's website along with any others who respond before the election.

Posted by Will at 5:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you missed it, be sure to read today's guest editorial in the State Journal Register by Eric Grimm. He does a good job of explaining some of the science behined global warming and calling out conservative personalities that speak on behalf of companies who have a vested financial interest in polluting.

My favorite part:

For whatever reason, right-wing pundits have mounted a disinformation campaign to discredit global warming. I assume they’re still smoking cigarettes and denying they cause cancer. They trot out the rare scientific gadfly who doubts global warming, ignoring the great preponderance of scientists who believe it, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. One almost has to believe that because global warming has been identified as a “liberal” issue, they have a knee-jerk reaction against it.

Posted by Will at 2:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A friend sent me a link to a blog post on TPM Cafe by Zack Exley who was Organizing Director at MoveOn.org and directed online organizing for the Kerry-Edwards campaign. His background is somewhat similar to my own, although he has been doing it longer than I have, and the post touches on organizing issues that I always find interesting.

Exley writes that the two principle schools of thought in progressive organizing are derived from Lenin or Saul Alinsky, and names ACORN and the Highlander Folk School as being part of the Alinsky tradition. Shortly after college I became an organizer for SEIU Local 880, which was founded by ACORN. In 2004 I worked for Project Vote (the same group Barack Obama once worked for), which is also closely aligned with ACORN. While living in Tennessee, I was lucky enough to visit the Highlander Center and participated in a community group with its current director. Those who trained me would argue that ACORN has a different approach than Alinsky, but its safe to say that I've been strongly influenced by that tradition.

Its interesting to see Alinsky in the news again in relation to this year's Presidential election. Hillary Clinton did her undergraduate senior thesis on Alinsky and turned down a job offer from him. Barack Obama worked as a community organizer in an Alinsky-style community organization in Chicago. Despite his profound influence on American politics, I never heard Alinsky's name in college while earning a BA in Political Science. He isn't the sort of character that the establishment encourages people to learn about.

I'll get back to the topic of Exley's blog post, which criticizes both Alinsky and Lenin influenced organizers of separating themselves from "The People" who they organize and underestimating the ability of The People to lead themselves.

I strongly agree with his point that organizers need to trust the people they organize to show leadership and innovation that must be utilized and respected. I had this experience when I worked for Dennis Kucinich's campaign in 2003. I was charged with putting together mostly volunteer organizations in about a dozen states. Because of the campaign's lack of resources, I had to rely on volunteer leaders.

I found that every state had smart volunteers ready to step into leadership roles. Some groups were more active than others and some needed less guidance than others. Often what they needed was an organizer to integrate their work into the broader campaign and some occasional technical expertise from a professional organizer.

Exley has had the same experiences but doesn't mention what I found to be true when I got to know some of the volunteer leaders better. Most of them had participated in something political before and it was often a movement related to the Alinsky style of direct action and community organizing.

The point of Alinsky style organizing isn't just to work on the issue at hand but to teach people how to work together with or without a professional organizer. The fact that the people helping the campaign had first gotten involved during a union organizing campaign, a peace rally, or working with a community group on a local issue tells me that the empowerment aspect of Alinsky-style organizers is having exactly the long-term effect it's meant to have.

Another important point Exley fails to mention is that the typical online political activist is white, middle class, and middle aged. Its no surprise that he finds this demographic, which is more like his own background, more prepared to act with little direction.

That's a little different than organizing in an impoverished neighborhood with underfunded schools where kids are lucky to get a basic education, much less taught how to take direct action to improve their community. Even in the poorest communities there are existing leaders and intelligent people ready to step up. But its also a lot harder to train new leaders and get people to take action when they're more worried about paying the rent than going to the city council meeting you keep bugging them about. People in those communities are less likely to participate in the online organizing world in which Exley primarily operates.

When ACORN organizes to work on something simple that people are concerned about in their own neighborhood, like getting a stop light at a dangerous intersection, its never just about that project alone. Its about finding and training new leaders, and getting people to work together to solve their shared problems. Sowing those seeds creates the community leaders whose efforts Exley is so happy to reap with his mouse and sickle.

I agree with Exley's criticism of progressive organizers who underestimate the abilities of "the people" to lead themselves. If anything, that attitude is an abandonment of the community organizing principles I read and learned about.

But I also think Exley should give more credit to the organizers on whose shoulders he now stands. The fact that he is able to cast his wide online net and bring in so many who are ready to take leadership, is the realization of the goals of Alinsky-style organizers, who should know that their ultimate achievement is to work themselves out of a job.

The best online organizing strategies are those that fully take advantage of the legacy of the Alinsky approach.

Added on edit: I'm strolling around TPM Cafe a little more and discovering that Alinsky and organizing are big topics of debate right now, which is my idea of great brain candy. I may write more about this later.

Posted by Will at 8:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The State Journal has an article about sex offender laws in Springfield with an "editor's note" that asks if laws restricting where sex offenders can live is a good idea.

My answer without any hesitation is that its absolutely a good idea. I hear people claim that someone shouldn't be required to register for the rest of their lives after they serve their time in prison. I don't think people who make that argument understand the nature of many child sex offenders. They can't be treated like other criminals because this isn't like other crimes. Being a pedophile is a mental condition that isn't magically solved by a prison term.

Similarly, whenever this topic is discussed someone inevitably has a story about someone they heard about who was 18 and got convicted for having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend. Those cases are seldom prosecuted and are the rare exception to the rule. Since I began studying this issue I've found that sex crimes against children are far more common than I ever imaged. Its a disturbingly widespread problem that our society has been unwilling to confront until recently.

Laws were passed to ban child sex offenders from living close to parks and schools because this was happening. Offenders would get released from prison and set up residence where they could conveniently find a new victim or otherwise indulge their obsession.

Springfield's law that bars sexual predators from living near eachother is more unique, but I completely understand why the neighborhood asked for it. While running for County Board, I knocked on doors in the neighborhood that made this an issue because of several sex offenders living very close to eachother. Almost every person I spoke with had a lot to say about it. They were living on a street where children walked home from school every day.

The SJ-R article seems to suggest that the new law isn't being well enforced. I'm not convinced law enforcement in this area in general is doing as much as they could with enforcement of sex offender registry laws and especially public education designed to prevent child sexual abuse. The Cook County Sheriff, for example has a sex offender unit to enforce registration laws and inform the public. Why not have something like that here?

One issue I haven't heard discussed is where sex offenders in Springfield will go. The Illinois sex offender registry website lists 282 sex offenders in Sangamon County with 256 of those living in Springfield. If the new city law forces predatory sex offenders to move, will they move into neighboring communities in Sangamon County? This is one more reason the Sangamon County Board and Sheriff should revisit this issue.

I understand that many people don't feel as strongly about this as I do. I would encourage anyone who thinks the laws are too harsh to do some research on how common the problem of child sex abuse is and how frequently offenders repeat their crime.

Posted by Will at 3:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)