The Greater Good

Tough Decision for the Fed

2007-10-30T15:02:00.000-06:00

Today is the much anticipated release of the Federal Open Market Committee minutes. This is an exceptionally difficult decision for the Fed. The market has already discounted another quarter point decline in the fed funds rate, so even if they do drop the rate the market may sell off anyway. Neither the market nor the economy got much of a boost from the September rate cut, so what exactly could they hope to gain from a smaller cut a month later? On the other hand of they don't cut, the market will certainly fall out of bed. What's a Fed Governor to do?

Meanwhile the dollar has been looking more like the yen...down, down, down. The entire world is getting very nervous about the dollar and it won't take much more downside to ignite an all out dollar panic. The bond market has been rallying into this anticipated rate cut, but eventually the bond market is going to start discounting the inflationary impact of these rate cuts, which will cut the legs out from under the market and the economy.

As for today, I am betting that the Fed will not cut the fed funds rate. There is too little to gain from a small cut and big risk on the dollar front with a bigger cut. Holding firm will generate a sharp move down in the stock market, especially in financial stocks, but probably not a bear market. Holding firm will also stabilize the dollar and maybe even generate a dollar rally. Overall the Fed gains credibility by holding firm and buys time to try to work out the credit mess.

Update: Well, the Fed cut the rate by a quarter point. As expected the dollar and bonds dropped sharply. Stocks finished higher after an initial plunge and gold rallied to close just below $800. Notable: Bill Gross stated that another full point reduction will be needed to relax tightening credit conditions. The Fed may be contemplating just that, in increments. The bond market will not like that much. I don't think there is any way out of this that is not painful. Inflation here we come.

I've Been on Tilt

2007-10-20T11:37:00.000-06:00

I have not posted anything to this blog in weeks. The reason is that I have been on tilt...in a state of disbelief, suspended from participation of any kind in public dialogue. It all began with Democrat capitulation to President Bush on the Iraq war, followed by capitulation on FISA, and then to add a different dimension to the overall surreal state of public affairs, the deafening silence from both sides regarding the Larry Craig incident. Republicans are understandably embarrassed and would like the whole matter to just go away, but you can imagine their sustained public indignation if the transgressor had been a Democrat. Democrats on the other hand seem to be afraid of offending their gay constituency. Apparently it is politically incorrect among Democrats to criticize sexual indiscretions that occur between members of the same sex, no matter how depraved. Salon even jumped into the Craig issue with a featured piece about how "hot" bathroom sex is! I found myself wondering what planet I am on.

Follow up these events with continued capitulation by Democrats on virtually every point of contention with the most unpopular, clearly deluded and dangerous President in modern history and I find myself disoriented. The American people overturned the Republican Congress to put an end to the disastrous war in Iraq and the cowardice of the Democrats elected for that purpose is extremely disappointing. I am hoping that there is some method to the madness, and at some strategic point they will start holding the line, but at this point such thoughts seem more like fantasy than legitimate hope.

Personally, I am questioning what purpose it will serve to continue to weigh in on public affairs. Is there any value in putting forth a balanced view, or is it just a waste of time? Are we headed into ever more violent foreign policy and lawless government regardless of which party is in charge? Is political correctness (both "conservative" and "liberal" versions) so dominant that honest debate is no longer possible on any issue? Are we condemned to continue to be ruled by the least among us? I remain suspended and unsure of the answers to these questions.

Alan Greenspan's "The Age of Turbulence"

2007-09-15T09:49:00.000-06:00

Alan Greenspan has finally come forth to share his experiences with the Bush Administration and the Republican majority. This is a welcome blast of light shining on the super secret world of George Bush's Washington. Unfortunately it comes about six years too late. Tremendous damage has been done in those six years that might have been averted had he been willing to speak out while he was in office.

In his new book, "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World," to be released Monday, Greenspan "is harshly critical of President Bush, Vice-President Cheney and the Republican controlled Congress, as abandoning their party's principles on spending and deficits." For anyone who has been paying attention, these observations have been blatantly obvious from the beginning of the Bush regime. But coming from Greenspan, a man of enormous public esteem and a self described Libertarian Republican, they suddenly take on more gravitas and credibility, and will hopefully help to frame the utter corruption of the Republican Party and promote a clean sweep of the "evildoers" in '08.

New York Times front page review of "The Age of Turbulence" here.

The Tragedy of Mother Theresa

2007-08-26T08:35:00.000-06:00

In her lifetime Mother Theresa attained iconic status as a handmaiden of God. Tragically, her public image and her inner reality were far from resonant. The recent publication of "Mother Theresa: Come Be My Light," a compendium of her letters, reveals the inner desolation and torment she lived with for the last fifty years of her life. How could one so dedicated to doing God's work be so desolate and so miserable for so long?

I believe the answer to that question lies in fundamental beliefs about God and human relations with God that Mother Teresa embraced as a Catholic. The notion that "God is separate from myself" is fundamental to Catholicism (and most variants of Christianity as well as the other Western religions) despite the fact that Jesus taught "the kingdom of heaven is within." Where else might one find God than in His/Her kingdom- within myself? There is also the extremely destructive emphasis in Catholicism on "myself as a sinner," hopeless, helpless and eternally damned without the intervention of God who lies outside myself.

We create our own reality with the mind, and our beliefs are primary drivers in that creative process. If I believe that God is separate from myself, then I will look outside myself to find Him/Her, especially if I also believe that I myself am an unworthy sinner. But since the reality is that I am already One with that unified wholeness that we call God, there is nothing to be found outside that wholeness. Therefore if I look outside myself for God I will find nothing, because the reality is that there is nothing outside myself to find. Religious demagogues and their misguided acolytes have been misleading seekers for centuries into rejecting themselves as unworthy sinners and looking outside themselves for salvation.

Mother Theresa reported the reality of her experience...honestly, and tragically. Her belief system, reinforced by her spiritual advisers, prevented her from seeking fulfillment outside the limitations of that belief system. This led her to persevere, heroically but futilely, in a spiritual dry hole. If she had had a framework that would have allowed her to re-characterize her experience she may have been able to find her salvation within herself, where it was patiently waiting for her.

Where are the Real Republicans?

2007-08-25T12:08:00.000-06:00

Where are the real Republicans? You know, the ones who believe in limited, transparent government, checks and balances, fiscal responsibility, taking care of yourself, minding your own business, strong national defense.

The current crop of Republicans seem to believe in such principles only where they apply to limit the ability of anyone to challenge their power (refusal to comply with Congressional subpoenas; exempting themselves from the FOIA), or where they deny government support to individual people (the current campaign to deny health insurance to uninsured children). But these principles do not seem to apply to limits on the wielding of power as long as those in power are Republicans (waging war with borrowed money; executive secrecy), or where power over individual people is the issue (unsupervised wiretapping; abandonment of habeas corpus). There are dozens of such issues in play where the power over individuals by government and corporate interests has been expanded and where the ability of individuals to challenge that power has been diminished. Folks, this is not conservatism. This is corruption and the consolidation of power for its own sake.

Seems to me that our Founders well understood the impulse to abuse power and set up our system to minimize the damage any individual or group could do. In the past it was Republicans who were most vigilant in guarding against such abuses of power. I know there must be real Republicans out there. I implore you to take back your party. We need real Republicans, just as we need real Democrats. The fundamental impulses of these two parties are not mutually exclusive, they are complementary. Balance is the key, which requires ongoing vigilance and occasional corrective action as well as mutual respect. We'll see what the Democrats do when they get back into power, but right now it is the Republicans who have lost their way and need to get back to their roots.

The Politics of Unity

2007-08-25T11:06:00.000-06:00

The politics of unity is the simple yet sublime process of consolidating the disparate interests of society into public policy that supports all the people. Such a process requires that our elected representatives give themselves over to that process, and it requires a political environment of tolerance, mutual respect and open and honest debate. It is not compatible with the corrupting influences of negative campaigns and nonstop fund raising that characterize our current political process. We the people can enforce such a regime by refusing to be manipulated by demagogues, by demanding an end to big money political campaigns, and by giving our support to those leaders who exhibit wisdom, emotional maturity and a genuine desire to engage in public service. The politics of unity is not necessarily something that every citizen will be able to practice, but I think that everyone should be able to recognize that in the long run it is in their best interest to give their support to leaders who can and do.

Are Democrats Really So Lame?

2007-08-21T13:59:00.000-06:00

Kudos to Salon's Joan Walsh for her brilliant review of Matt Bai's "The Argument" entitled "Are Democrats really so lame?" This tour de force puts our current political battles in (modern) historical perspective and highlights the real issues confronting us, which are easy to forget in the midst of the shouting match/spin fest that passes for political debate these days.

I haven't read Bai's book yet, but Walsh's review is essential reading for anyone wanting to clarify for themselves what the current political war is all about.

I Propose a Debate

2007-08-20T15:46:00.000-06:00

Two people put forth very thoughtful commentaries on war today that deserve ongoing attention and debate.

Glenn Greenwald in his blog "The rigid pro-war ideology of the foreign policy community" looks into the mindset of what he calls the Foreign Policy Establishment and their propensity for waging wars that are "in the national interest" rather than just in self defense.

Victor Davis Hanson in his article "Why Study War?"cites the history and, in his opinion, inevitability of war while arguing for broader study and greater cultural awareness of the history and art of war.

I would like to propose a debate, or mutual commentary, between these two thinkers, based on the issues raised in their respective pieces. This interchange can take place here, on The Greater Good, or wherever suits the writers. Both of these pieces raise serious issues about war in a thoughtful way that could be further illuminated with ongoing debate and commentary. This is a critical issue for America today and we can all benefit from the interchange.

BCA Research on the Credit Crunch

2007-08-20T15:22:00.000-06:00

BCA Research is one of the best in the economic forecasting business. Their thoughts today on the current market correction:

"Caution is still in order in the near term, but a concerted policy response should put a floor under risky assets and pave the way for a subsequent rebound. Three key factors underpin our view: 1) the odds of a U.S. recession remain low and the rest of the global economy is strong; 2) the Fed will take additional steps as necessary to stabilize financial markets, with a cut in the Fed funds target rate likely to follow soon, and; 3) markets will respond favorably to a change in Fed policy. Bottom line: markets will remain volatile in the near term, but policy support suggests financial market turmoil should begin to ease in the weeks ahead."

Best Ever Op-Ed on Iraq

2007-08-20T08:14:00.000-06:00

Today's New York Times carries an op-ed by seven soldiers who are currently serving or who have recently returned from serving in Iraq, entitled "The War as We Saw It." This is by far the most well informed and honest opinion piece I have seen on the war.

Best on Jesus

2007-08-18T15:13:00.000-06:00

"Love Without End" by Glenda Green.

Best book I have seen on the teachings of Jesus. Expansive, inspiring and intellectually satisfying.

More on Credit Hysteria

2007-08-18T09:38:00.000-06:00

On Thursday morning, the Dow was down 8.2% from its highs on a closing basis with a Wednesday intra-day low of minus 10.7% (S&P down 9.1% and 12% respectively). In the face of this very normal correction the Fed dropped the discount rate 1/2% and signaled that it will do whatever it takes to calm the markets. Why?

If you want a blow by blow there is a torrent of commentary in all the media. You can read all the reasons why the economy is at risk and the sky is falling, reasons that have been extant for years by the way, that are suddenly urgent. There is a good article on Salon by Andrew Leonard that explains the basics in layman's terms. But let's go right to the bottom line first.

The bottom line is this is not the end; this is not the top. In the final analysis that's all you need to know. Of course we are playing probability games here, so there is always a chance that any given day is the end. But on this particular day the chances are very small. This does not mean that there are not issues, problems, perhaps even fatal problems with our financial system. It means that for the vast majority of us, unless we are directly involved with the mortgage industry, this is not the day that the piper is going to be paid. Why?

The most important indicator has to do with sentiment. Markets are products of human psychology. The fuel for the markets is fear and greed. Market tops are made with greed induced enthusiasm and bottoms are made with fear induced despair. The level of negative sentiment displayed over the past two weeks, rising beyond mere despair to the level of outright hysteria, is the sign of a market bottom, not a top.

However, the Fed move to drop the discount rate 1/2% with the economy humming along and the Dow down a mere 8% from its highs tells you something. It tells you that the Fed is very afraid of the credit bubble collapsing. This is a conversation for another day, but the practical implication is that the Fed will move aggressively to halt any downside momentum. I have learned from bitter experience that it does not pay to fight the Fed. It does pay, however, to follow in its wake.

The Dead Document

2007-08-12T12:21:00.000-06:00

An excellent column in today's Denver Post by Ed Quillen on the state of our Constitution under the Bush Administration, enabled by our cowardly Congress.

Primitive Politics

2007-08-12T11:53:00.000-06:00

It seems that America is transfixed in a polarized state. We no longer know what "liberal" and "conservative" mean. They certainly no longer mean what they did ten years ago, considering that a so-called conservative administration has just run up the greatest deficit in history and waged two wars on borrowed money, and the previous so-called liberal administration severed millions from the public dole and opened our borders to job plundering by global corporations. But no matter. Whatever liberal and conservative mean, even if they are opposite of what we think they mean, we're certain that one or the other are nefarious and a threat to the republic.

We have fallen into a primitive state, a tribal mentality in which "we" are the good guys and the "others" are the bad guys. It matters not one whit if the reasons we are good and they are bad change regularly or even reverse from time to time. The fact is that since we are "we," and they are "they," then "we" will always be "good" and "they" will be "bad." Bad being worthless hateful scum deserving of all manner of terrible consequences just for being alive. If they are far enough away, we can even kill them, celebrating our righteousness as we do so. If they are too close to home, then we limit ourselves to undermining and discrediting them.

We need to be careful though. The constant demonization of your neighbor is a toxic seed that can bear frightful consequences. Before this downward cycle of polarization is done, I would not be surprised to see political violence in America. It would be far better for all of us if we realized that we have been duped by demagogues, reject the whole business of political polarization and look to the principles of unity to guide us.

Reflections on the Lie

2007-08-08T19:12:00.000-06:00

Franklin Roosevelt demonstrated his idealism:

"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."

Lenin demonstrated that Communism and Democratic Capitalism have a lot in common:

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth."

While the real wisdom of the lie echoes through the ages from Plato:

"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil."

Those engaged in the relentless "spin" in what passes for political dialogue these days would do well to contemplate the words of Plato.

Ignore Credit Hysteria

2007-08-07T08:41:00.000-06:00

Negative sentiment regarding the sub-prime meltdown and subsequent normalization of credit spreads has reached the level of outright hysteria. Even people who should know better have suddenly morphed into Chicken Littles. I am one who is always ready to point out liabilities and weaknesses in the system, sometimes accused of being negative in fact, but this has gotten out of hand. The liabilities that bite you are the ones you aren't paying attention to. This one has already done its worst.

Credit spreads have been insanely narrow for a long time, distorting capital markets and enabling many marginal deals to be done. The normalization of credit spreads is a cleansing and strengthening event. It has already washed away many marginal players and it will force greater discipline on the marketplace, creating a healthier financial environment. The transition is, and will continue to be, painful for segments of the housing and mortgage markets, and for those who have grown accustomed to easy money from various "carry trades," but this is an overall positive development that will likely extend the life of the current expansion.

Update: The August 4th Economist goes into detail why "tighter credit conditions are just what the markets need."

The Fruit of Welfare "Reform"

2007-08-05T10:40:00.000-06:00

A single mother leaves her two small children in the car while she goes to work. They expire in the heat. Link.

This one made the national press. But if you take the trouble to look, there are hundreds of cases like this every year where confused and overwhelmed single mothers make a mistake, or are pressured into a bad decision, and their children die or are seriously endangered as a result. This is the fruit of welfare "reform." And let's not even get into the contribution of single mother households to the gang problem.

The problem of single mothers is a complex one, and there are a wide range of responses to the problem ranging from all out welfare to forced adoption and sterilization. Either extreme is probably not what a "civilized" country should accept, but exactly how civilized is a society that leaves single mothers to flounder until they finally make a fatal error, and then arrests them and charges them with homicide?

Mothers are the most important people in our society. They are the grooms of the future. Government can't take care of everyone, or even all the single mothers. But government can certainly organize, pressure and jawbone for real solutions. What we have now is callous neglect that morphs into institutionalized brutality when a mistake is made.

Ironically, prison will probably be a blessing for this woman. At least she won't have to make any decisions or find a job. She will never be right after this.

Give Credit Where Credit is Due

2007-08-04T10:01:00.000-06:00

Newt Gingrich delivered what I hope will be a watershed speech at the Young America's Foundation National Conservative Student Conference at George Washington University this week. While his comment that the war on terror is a "phony" war has gotten all the press, the greater significance of this speech was summed up in this comment:

"Republican political doctrine has been a failure."

The reason this statement is so significant is that one of the defining characteristics of the current Republican leadership is their absolute refusal acknowledge the validity of any criticism or to ever admit any fault or failure. It's refreshing and inspiring to hear a politician of any stripe speak his mind without the spin cycle, but especially a prominent Republican.

Newt's comments on the utter failure of Republican domestic policies are stunning in their bluntness and honesty. Regarding the so-called war on terror, he had this to say:

"We are today engaged in a phony war...None of you should believe we are winning this war...We have not been taking this seriously."

This last comment in particular is most significant. Where are the war bonds? Where is the war tax? What sacrifice have Americans been asked to make to meet this great threat to our nation? Where is the Manhattan Project to get us off our dependence on Mideast oil? The more significant comments in this speech have not gotten the coverage they deserve. I for one disagree with Newt's solution to the problem of terrorism, which is to be even more aggressive and militaristic, a certain path to ruin in my opinion, but the honesty of his speech and his opinions should be commended. We need much more of that in our political dialogue.

Q2 Newsletter Published

2007-07-31T18:44:00.000-06:00

The Risk and Opportunity Q2 newsletter, "The End of an Era" is finally out. This is always a major effort for me, but helpful to assess and bring into focus the broad scope of influences playing out in our world, and hopefully also helpful for my readers.

This letter reviews the recent publication, "End of the Line: The Rise and Coming Fall of the Global Corporation" by Barry C. Lynn. This is an important work that our policy makers need to be aware of, and I hope this letter helps spread the word.

Window Into Insanity

2007-07-16T15:31:00.000-06:00

Our mainstream media covers the war while generally shielding us from the reality of war. The truth is that most of us don't want to know. Testimony last Saturday by Marine Corporal Saul Lopezromo in the murder trial of Corporal Trent Thomas, which received fairly broad coverage, opened a small window into the brutality and insanity of war.

Lopezromo didn't hold back, and pretty much summed things up while testifying about their orders to "crank up the violence level" and the practice of dead-checking.

"If somebody is worth shooting once, they're worth shooting twice."

This is hands down winner of quote of the day for July 14th, 2007 and should be a finalist for quote of the year.

The Consequences of Non-Truth

2007-07-07T18:02:00.001-06:00

America is facing severe and intransigent problems on a variety of fronts that simply are not being addressed (e.g. trade deficit, health care, income disparity, foreign wars). In July '05 William Greider published a piece in the NY Times entitled "America's Truth Deficit." Greider's piece begins as follows:

"DURING the cold war, as the Soviet economic system slowly unraveled, internal reform was impossible because highly placed officials who recognized the systemic disorders could not talk about them honestly. The United States is now in an equivalent predicament. Its weakening position in the global trading system is obvious and ominous, yet leaders in politics, business, finance and the news media are not willing to discuss candidly what is happening and why. Instead, they recycle the usual bromides about the benefits of free trade and assurances that everything will work out for the best."

The refusal to deal with the real issues extends not only to global trade, but to every issue we face; health care, war, etc. Nothing has changed since he wrote those words except that the decay has progressed, the intransigence has become even more deeply entrenched, and the foundations of our system have been weakened even further.

We have no problems that we are not fully capable of solving, and in short order, but it is not possible to solve a problem if you refuse to acknowledge that you have one. This is the first step in AA and the first step that we need to embrace before we can address our problems in a meaningful way. The primary problem we have that underlies all the others is our truth deficit. When non-truth (spin) becomes the verbal currency of the realm then there is no possibility of bringing the light of reality to any issue or solution to any problem.

If we want to contribute to the solutions of our problems, the re-vitalization of America, and to a peaceful and equitable world, we can first and foremost demand truth from our leaders and from the press. We can refuse to accept the spin that comes to us daily from Washington and is carried uncritically by the media...and we can turn a deaf ear to the partisan rant brigades who constantly make dishonest appeals to base emotion, encouraging anger, mistrust, hatred, vengeance and violence. These things are the fruit of non-truth and they do not serve us.

The Partisan Disease

2007-07-02T19:57:00.001-06:00

I have come to the conclusion that partisanship is a mental illness. I first became aware of this in the early '90's while observing the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the savage wars that were fought there. I especially remember an interview with a Serbian man who was asked about the atrocities the Serbian forces had perpetrated on Bosnian Muslims in Sarajevo. The man refused to acknowledge that any such thing had been done by any Serb, and accused the Bosnians of doing all the things that the Serbs had in fact done.

I was troubled by the obvious insanity of the man. More troubling, however, is that I have since noticed the same pattern in our politicians and in their partisan supporters. Politicians have always been a slippery bunch. But the unreality that they are promoting these days has come to be something disturbing and I think, dangerous.

It is clear to me that partisanship is an unbalanced condition rooted in unreality and non-truth; a mental dis-ease characterized by self-aggrandizement and projection of all things undesirable onto the "others." And the truly disturbing thing about it is that with the steadily increasing polarization of our political process the leadership of our nation is increasingly in the hands of mentally ill people.

A person who is committed to unreality is pitiful. But such a person who is determined that everyone around them should acknowledge their unreality as truth is a menace. A group of such people banded together to force their unreality on society is a disaster.

The Blackstone IPO

2007-06-25T16:47:00.000-06:00

Investors, market analysts, traders and all other interested parties should note June 22, 2007 on their calendars. This is the day the Blackstone IPO hit the market. (See TheStreet.com’s analysis of the deal.)

This is no ordinary IPO. Blackstone is one of the premier private equity companies and the Blackstone principals are masters of value -- they buy cheap and sell dear. They buy companies that are “under performing” for various reasons, "add value" by introducing operational efficiencies and technology, shutting down or selling unprofitable operations, outsourcing, off shoring, and offloading pension and health care obligations. These activities greatly increase the cash flow to the bottom line and to the shareholders, in this case the Blackstone principals and their investors. But that is not the end of the game. Increased profit and cash flow is very nice, but the big bucks are made when the transaction is completed.

Private equity companies complete the transaction and realize their profit by creating a "liquidity event." This is either the sale of a portfolio company to another company, or the sale of the portfolio company through an IPO -- at a multiple of earnings. In this case Blackstone chose to offer shares in itself rather than offering the individual portfolio companies or the funds they manage. The fact that Blackstone has seen fit to do an IPO signals that the principals believe they have maximized the value of their portfolio and want to start cashing in. They are selling dear, and would not be selling if they thought their stock was anything other than dear.

If the Blackstone principals believe that they have realized the bulk of the value from their portfolio, that would indicate that valuations in general are at a peak...and it also sends a signal to the dozens of other private equity companies which will now be looking for a liquidity event as well. In fact KKR, another legendary private equity group, has also announced its intention to offer an IPO. Others will surely follow. This new supply of stock will put pressure on the market, a turnabout from the steady disappearance of stock caused by the buying up and privatizing of public companies during the buyout boom of recent years.

The private equity boom has been fueled by cheap money. Blackstone and other private equity companies, and public corporations as well, have been able to finance their acquisitions by selling junk bonds at very low cost. That source of money is now starting to get more expensive as lenders have suddenly realized that they are taking more risk than they are getting paid for. This will also start a trend toward issuance of stock rather than debt as stock values are high and debt is now getting more expensive. So from various sources we will see an increased supply of stock coming to market.

General liquidity and cycles indicate that the top is not upon us quite yet, but it is clearly time to be more selective and more cautious in the stock market. Historically we will be able to look back upon the Blackstone IPO as a demarcation point and the beginning of the end of this bull market.

Bloomberg on Partisanship

2007-06-21T16:13:00.000-06:00

Michael Bloomberg's comments as he announced his departure from the Republican Party highlight our most pressing need. As he put it;

"The politics of partisanship and the resulting inaction and excuses have paralyzed decision-making, primarily at the federal level, and the big issues of the day are not being addressed, leaving our future in jeopardy."

Bloomberg was speaking at "Ceasefire! Bridging the Political Divide," the inaugural event for the Annenberg School for Communication's recently established Center on Communication Leadership. Let's hope this message takes root.

Process Matters

2007-06-17T10:55:00.000-06:00

In 1994 and '96 I ran for Congress against one of the few elected officials who would not take PAC money, Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa. He was honorable in his service to a degree not often seen these days. By refusing to take money from vested interests he was able to maintain his independence. He looked to the common good and the interests of his constituents, voting his beliefs and his conscience after sober consideration of the issues. This high standard earned him the enmity of the rabid partisans who took control of his party in the '90's and who proceeded to marginalize him during his last years in the House. Rep. Leach finally lost his seat in the '06 election after 30 years of distinguished and exemplary service.

Jim Leach lamented the mean-spiritedness that arrived in Washington with the culture war in the ‘80’s, and which has been ratcheting upwards ever since. One of the things he liked to say during his campaigning was that "process is as important as product," meaning that our political campaigns should focus honestly and respectfully on the issues, and not engage in personal attacks and misrepresentations of the positions one’s opponents. His response to attacks made on him was to address the substance of the issue raised, if there were one, and to reiterate his position that campaign rhetoric should focus on the issues and not on personal attacks.

Throughout his career Jim never engaged in the character assassination, attack ads and appeals to base emotion which have become standard procedure in our political campaigns. Instead, he ran on his own moderate record, promising more of the same, and engaged in honest and respectful debate on the issues of the day. When in Washington he rejected the vicious partisanship that overtook the House during his tenure. He held to his high principles, consistently voted his conscience and worked in a genuinely bi-partisan way.

Process matters and it does directly affect the quality of the product we get. This is a general truism, and it is nowhere more pertinent than in our political process. If we want better government, we need thoughtful, honorable, respectful and wise people in government who will naturally conduct a better process. Throughout his career Jim Leach embodied these traits, practiced an enlightened political process, and upheld the highest values of public service. He has provided us with a role model for future candidates.