In Cold Blood

So I need to confess to something... I'm a murderer. Yup, that's right. I hate to admit it, but I'm a cold-blooded killer. Last night, I violently took the life of one of God's little creatures. A small field mouse that somehow found its way into our home.

For the last two weeks its been an escalating war. I first caught sight of him while cleaning the house for a party at the beginning of December. I'd been kneeling under the table when I felt something brush past me. The little sucker scared the me half to death. I turned and chased him across the kitchen only to watch him take sanctuary under the fridge. I grabbed the broom and swept behind the fridge, not thinking beforehand just what I'd do if he came running out. Nothing happened though. Next I moved the fridge which succeeded in sending him scurrying into the adjacent bathroom. I quickly shut the bathroom door and tucked a towel under it to buy time to formulate a battle plan. Armed with my broom and a large plastic bowl, I laid siege to the bathroom. But again, nothing happened. Baffled, I waited until the first party guest arrived and had him help me do another sweep of the bathroom, but the mouse had somehow made his escape.

That's when the mouse droppings started appearing. First in the pantry and then under the sink. The job of finding and disposing of the droppings somehow got assigned to me. Soon I decided to do some major reorganizing. Throwing away anything he may have gotten into. Moving the easily accessible stuff into safer cupboards. And securing everything like pasta into extra ziploc bags. I also made room for mouse traps... lots of them.

Melissa picked up the traps from the store. She started with the humane ones that claim to catch mice unharmed so you can release them into the outdoors. Newsflash people... they DON'T work. Days went by and we caught nothing but turds. Our mouse had quickly realized the plastic boxes with swiveling doors were trouble and stopped wasting time on them, choosing instead to go straight for our packaged goods.

I followed up Melissa's purchase with some plastic snap traps. Our pantry and the cupboard under the sink looked like mine fields, with traps strewn every which way. These proved to be mere obstacle courses for our gladiator mouse. I tried baiting with everything from cheese, to crackers, to peanut butter, to nuts. I must have repositioned the traps some twenty times. Nothing worked and the droppings continued. I grew weary of obsessively checking the traps only to find them empty with nearby fecal matter taunting me.

Late one night, I opened the pantry and caught the furball sliding down the shelving affixed to the door. He slipped past me (startled and frozen in my tracks) and into the living room. With plastic bowl and broom in hand I went to work again, moving all the furniture in sight. I spent over an hour cursing loudly and scouring every inch of our front room, but to no avail. Damn mouse bested me yet again.

That's when the gloves came off. I went for the industrial-strength, heavy duty traps. Huge plastic, glue-filled trays (about 4 inches by 8 inches) that claimed to be the end-all and be-all of mouse traps. They were pre-baited, but I wasn't taking any chances, so I topped them off with crackers. The traps were everything they were made out to be. Three hours after they were set, our fourteen day siege was over. I came downstairs around 10pm last night to find our mouse sprawled across one of the glue trays.

Little did I know that the worst was yet to come. Mr. mouse was hopelessly stuck, but very much still alive. Not only that, he was... cute. When I picked up the tray, I was horror-struck to see him contorting his body in every which way vainly attempting to free himself. It was horrible. I felt like I was torturing Stuart Little. I fooled myself into thinking I might be able to free him, so knife in hand I went out to the backyard. They weren't kidding when they said this stuff was heavy duty though. My effort to scrape him off the glue pad only seemed to be making things worse. That's when I grudgingly resigned myself to the hammer. I slid the tray into a plastic bag in an attempt to censor the cruelty. I thought a little blow to the head would put a quick end to his misery, but instead lil' Mickey screamed and kept squirming. I hit him again and he screamed again. Aghast, I forced myself to hit him a couple more times just to make sure he was gone.

Thoroughly disturbed, I slipped the tray into a garbage bag and we laid the little mouse to rest in our trash can. Melissa said a few parting words and we tried to forget about the whole ordeal, but I'm haunted now. Visions from childhood plague me... the Rescuers, the Littles, the Secret of Nimh... even Jerry. Nostalgic mice are coming out of the woodwork of the past to exacerbate the guilt... and it's working. I don't miss the mouse poo, though.

The Beard

So I haven't shaved since the end of July. Why? I guess I'm not quite sure. I stayed pretty clean shaven all summer while working at my firm, so perhaps it was a reflexive reaction to the tyranny of frequent shaving.

I'll come right out and admit it. I've never been a big fan of the daily shave. It chafes. While I was a student at BYU (where the honor code requires men to be clean shaven) I even got myself a "beard card" (a shaving exemption requiring a doctor's note). The official line was that I had a mild case of pseudofolliculitis barbae and so my doctor "prescribed" me facial hair.

Left to my own devices, I typically shave every week or so. My current beard started out as nothing more than pure laziness. As I wrapped up my summer work, I jumped on a number of home improvement projects and shaving just wasn't a priority. Once I'd made it past the "sandpaper" stage (usually a week and a half or two), Melbo stopped complaining (er... as much). From there, the beard just gained momentum. It became something of a conscious undertaking. I decided if I was ever going to just "let it all go," now was my chance. I had no looming interviews, no clients to impress, no events to oversee, and no weighty Church callings to live up to. It became sort of self-perpetuating. The longer it grew, the more curious I became to see how long it could get.

Five months long now and my curiosity has been satiated. Maybe if I was tending a lodge in Alaska I'd have more patience, but as things stand now, enough's enough. So as part of Melissa's Christmas present, I shaved this weekend. In stages of course.

The first left me with lambchop sideburns that hung two inches past my jaw (of which there is no photographic evidence). Then I went to the biker bush (this was a big hit at Church). And finally I scaled back to the well-trimmed goat. I'll probably stick this out awhile. While growing a beard is fun... it's suprising what a little shave does to Melbo's libido.

Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas

Kiss of Death

So it seems as though my support can be the kiss of death, politically speaking. For the second time in two months a presidential hopeful that I've liked has dropped out of the run for the presidency. Two months ago it was Mark Warner, a centrist Democrat from Virginia, who cited family considerations as the reason for his decision. On Saturday, it was Indiana Senator Evan Bayh, another centrist Democrat, who claimed simply to be facing up to the political reality that he didn't have enough support this cycle.

While I'm sad to see Bayh go, I certainly understand his decision. Running for president these days is a pretty brutal undertaking and declaring an intent to run when he didn't think he could win would be nothing short of masochistic. The Democratic field already has its heavyweight contenders in Barack and Hillary, its second fiddles in John Edwards and Tom Vilsack, and its also-rans in Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich (with Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson sandwiched up there somewhere in between). Perhaps it really is best for the relatively young Bayh to avoid the damaging shrapnel that tends to fly during presidential primaries and instead begin plotting for '12 or '16.

Guess Who's Back... Back Again...

So the well's been relatively dry at the ole' blog of late. Finals this semester were absolutely miserable and my inspiration has lagged as a result. Beware though, it's five days removed from the hellfire now and my senses are beginning to return. I've got a lot of posts simmering on the backburner and more than three weeks of vacation to waste away (uninterrupted by travel mind you... Melbo is about to pop and the doc's advised us to stay put).

Peter Bis Revisited

Earlier this year I posted about an intriguing fixture up on Capitol Hill, a homeless man named Peter Joseph Bis that sits greeting passerbys making the trek from Union Station to the Dirksen, Hart and Russell Senate Office Buildings. Yesterday, our local NPR affiliate did a short segment on Peter that I thought some of you might be interested in.

The Election In Hindsight

This shouldn’t come as a shock to most of you, but I think the Democrats’ resounding victory in the election three weeks ago was a good thing for the country. Six years of virtual one-party control in Washington disrupted national priorities, short-circuited cooperative party interaction and limited productive administrative oversight. Worst of all, it derailed the vital deliberative process essential to healthy democracy.

Does that mean that the “glory days” are here? That somehow Democratic control of Congress will solve all the nation’s thorniest problems? No, of course not. Politics is politics. Party shifts never fully exorcize special interests pandering, pork-barrel projects and the ethical gaffes so endemic to American political life. That said, good things await us. Here’s why:

(1) No More Monopoly of Power
For 12 years Republicans in Congress have used procedural rules to suppress Democratic legislative proposals, amendments, and input, and curb minority party rights. They excluded Democrats from the legislative Conference Committees and held votes open for hours to strong arm wavering members to toe the party line. House Speaker Dennis Hastert even had a policy of only allowing votes on legislation that had support from a majority of the Republican majority, regardless of whether there was enough bipartisan support to pass a bill. Republicans also froze out Democratic lobbyists and sought to impose permanent institutional changes on the entire lobbying industry to advantage Republicans. Over time these policies had a corrosive effect on compromise, bipartisanship, and policy-making.

(2) Increased Bipartisanship
Both future Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and future Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi have made clear that they intend to work with the President and Congressional Republicans when the Democrats take power. Both Reid and Pelosi have stressed that they will treat Republican lawmakers “more generously” than they were treated as the minority party. Two days after the election, Pelosi met with President Bush and both vowed cooperation. Reid has similarly emphasized that Democrats “want to work with [the Republicans] to get things done. We want to be part of a Congress that functions.” With only a razor thin majority in the Senate and the specter of a presidential veto, Democrats will need to reach across the aisle to achieve their legislative goals. I believe they will, and as they do they will find some receptive Republican leaders. As governor of Texas, President Bush showed he could work well across party lines. Given the political necessity of it now, he will be inclined to do so again. Mitch McConnell, the incoming Senate Minority Leader, is someone disposed to bipartisanship. Reid and McConnell are said to have a solid working relationship and neither has his sites set on the presidency, both things that bode well for legislative compromise.

(3) Change of Policy in Iraq
The Democrats already forced a change of course in Iraq simply by virtue of winning the election. In the wake of what President Bush described as an electoral “thumpin',’” the President promptly sacked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a man whose prickly leadership style and poor management of the war effort in Iraq had begun to stir up a rebellion of sorts within both the military and the Republican ranks. The man Bush appointed to replace Rumsfeld is a political realist much more palatable to Republicans and Democrats alike. He is very likely to diverge from the neo-conservative philosophy that has governed much of our policy in Iraq.

Beyond this, Democrats will continue to spur change by pressuring the Bush Administration and actually seeing to a long-neglected Congressional responsibility, holding substantive oversight hearings on the war effort in Iraq. While President Bush clearly will not heed calls for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq (a move I agree would be unwise at this point), I’m convinced that Democratic pressure will prompt the President to reevaluate just what our goals in Iraq are and what exactly “success” there means. Next week, the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Commission is expected to announce its findings and policy proposals, which purportedly recommend a marked reduction in US troops in Iraq by 2008 and reaching out to both Iran and Syria to help stabilize Iraq. On the heels of their electoral victory, Democrats will be in a position to push the Administration to implement the Commission’s recommendations. Even if the President chooses not to adopt these recommendations, because of the demands he will be facing on the home front, the President will be in a better position to pressure Iraqi Prime Minister Al Maliki to strengthen the Iraqi government and quell the sectarian tensions that have erupted. Moreover, substantive Congressional oversight hearings (of which there have been almost none) will help our military efforts by holding the Administration, the Pentagon, and all the civilian contractors in Iraq accountable for their performance. This sort of counterbalance is desperately needed given the Administration’s reticence to acknowledge mistakes and its tendency to offer grossly over-optimistic assessments of the war.

(4) A More Fair and Sound Economic Policy
Democrat leadership has pledged to reign in pork-barrel earmarks, reduce the deficit, and implement a more fair tax policy. All of this will be done with an emphasis on helping middle and lower class families and reducing the growing disparity between rich and poor, a disparity that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has warned could harm the economy. The Democratic economic proposals on the table include:

• Raising the Minimum Wage: The Democrats want to raise the minimum wage by $2.10 an hour. Along with most Americans, I think this is right thing to do. The minimum wage has stayed constant for almost 10 years while consumer prices have risen 25%. Some conservatives fear this will simply raise unemployment, but they are hard-pressed to show that the minimum wage increases of the 1990s had that effect.


• Fixing the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT): Democrats want to raise the level at which the AMT kicks in. The AMT sets a minimum tax rate (around 27%) for the richest tax payers so that they can’t use deductions, shelters and loop holes to avoid paying their income tax entirely. Because of inflation and rising incomes, households affected by the AMT are expected to balloon from 3.8 million households this year to more than 30 million in 2010 (and ensnaring millions of middle-class households).


• Make Pork-Barrel Earmarks More Transparent: Earmarks on legislation have gotten out of control in recent years. Part of the problem is that members of Congress could attach them anonymously. Speaker-Elect Pelosi says the first thing on the Democrat agenda in January is to require that sponsors of earmarks to be identified.


• Increasing Support for Education: Democrats have pledged to cut the interest rates on student loans by almost half (Congress raised them earlier this year). They also want to increase the maximum Pell Grant available to low-income students from $4,050 to $5,100 and have considered making up to $12,000 a year in tuition tax-deductible (or giving out an equivalent tax credit). These are all proposals I strongly support (though I fear that even this isn’t enough to defray to skyrocketing). Democrats also plan to revisit No Child Left Behind Act to try to fix its deficiencies and ensure that it is fully funded before considering reauthorization.


• Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit: Democrats are discussing enlarging the earned-income tax credit which currently gives families with two or more kids $4,536 to offset payroll taxes. This is a smart, market-centered way to help low-wage workers because it allows them to keep the difference if the credit exceeds what they owe in taxes.


• Income Tax Changes: Several Democrats have floated a number of tax code changes, some which I’m pretty amenable to in order to ensure that social programs I think are important are provided for. These include raising the income tax on the very top tax bracket from 35% to 36% and allowing the cut in the maximum tax rate on capital gains and dividends taxes to expire (this was cut to 15% in 2003).


• Balancing the Budget: Speaker-Elect Pelosi has promised to restore a House rule from the 1990s that required new spending to be offset by spending cuts or tax increases and the new Budget Chairmen are calling for a balanced budget within five years. While some might target this as window dressing, I think it would have a positive effect on the mindset of congressional appropriators as they approached drafting the federal budget.


• Economic Shock Absorbers: Democrats have discussed expanding government programs that cushion the fall of those who lose jobs in our country’s rapidly changing economy. These might include targeted federal programs offering help with health insurance, wage-loss, and job retraining. Ultimately, better preparation before and more assistance after job losses would help workers and diminish calls for protectionism (i.e. these are trade-friendly proposals)


• Changes to Medicare: Democrats have also talked about making changes to the Medicare that would save the federal government billions. These proposals include giving the government the ability to negotiate with Drug manufacturers on drug prices (much like the negotiating power that the Veterans Administration has) and reducing billions in what Democratic leaders claim the government overpays insurance companies that run Medicare’s managed care programs. These proposals are, in a sense, band-aids. But with such a slight Senate majority, Democrats are not in a position to do much more. Ultimately, I’m in favor of more progressive health care reform that does not depend so heavily on company largesse.

(5) Ethics Reform
Democrats back a stronger ethics reform package. Republicans this past year stripped any meaningful lobbying reform provisions from the proposed reform legislation in the months following the Abramoff plea deal in January. As the Democrats prepare to pick this legislation up, they plan on putting several substantive amendments up for a vote. Whether all of these provisions will pass is still in question (there are Democrats who aren’t crazy about all of them too), but allowing each to be introduced to a full floor debate and vote is sure to result in a much more sweeping ethics reform package than would have passed had the Democrats not been elected. In fact, had the Democrats lost, any real chance at a substantive lobbying reform bill would have been scuttled because Republicans would have been left with the impression that the public had moved passed the various ethical scandals that have plagued Congress these past few years.

(6) Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Democrats are much more likely to pass the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that, although supported by the President, stalled in the House last summer. The Senate bill that passed last year struck an important balance in that it provided for increased border security while also dealing humanely with those undocumented immigrants that had been living in the US for years. This was in stark contrast to an earlier House bill that was almost draconian in its approach to undocumented immigrants.

(7) Energy Policy and the Environment
Just by winning the election the Democrats already appear to have had what I consider a positive effect on energy companies and the environment. Democrats, as a whole, simply take environmental concerns like global warming more seriously. A Democratic victory also ensures that the government will focus more on investing in alternative forms of energy and energy conservation rather than rushing to open pristine wildlife preserves like ANWR to drilling (Let me make clear that I’m not opposed to drilling to meet our energy needs, but I would want a more bipartisan, non-ideological survey of what damage might be done to the fragile eco-systems in question and whether that harm is worth the estimated oil reserves we are tapping into). A Democratic victory also prevents the passage of any more duplicitous legislation like the “Blue Skies Act” and the Healthy Forests Initiative that have actually loosened environmental protections.

(8) Overriding the Stem Cell Research Veto
In retaking the Senate, the Democrats appear to have won enough votes to overcome President Bush’s veto this summer of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The bill won passage by a 63-37 margin in the Senate, not quite large enough to override a veto. But four of the Senators who voted against the bill (Allen, Dewine, Santorum and Talent) were defeated in November’s election, giving the measure what seems like a veto-proof 67 votes.

(9) A More Moderate Democratic Party
This election swept a large number of conservative and moderate Democrats into office. By fielding a broad range of centrist candidates this year, the Democrats ran competitive races in a large number of “red” states and districts. As a result, the two moderate Democratic Caucuses in House of Representatives, the Blue Dog Democrats and the New Democrat Coalition, got 24 new members between them (with some overlap). Similarly, in the Senate three of the new incoming Democrats, Bob Casey (PA), Jim Webb (VA), and John Tester (MT), all come from centrist-conservative stock. This moderate bloc has already begun to put forward centrist legislative proposals.

What does this all mean? Well, as Nancy Pelosi herself pointed out the day after the election, it means that the Democrats will “have to govern from the center.” Some doubt whether Pelosi has it in her to do this, but I think those that do underestimate her. She wants to make her mark as a successful Speaker of the House and to do this she clearly understands that she must work with moderate members of her own party as well as House Republicans and the President. Harry Reid, considered a moderate in his own right, faces an even more difficult task in governing a very evenly divided Senate (51-49). Those who know him best, including several stalwart Republicans, have expressed confidence in his ability to lead in spite of the challenges. Republican consultant Sig Rogich has said of Reid “His personality will be more conducive to being a majority leader than minority leader. He has always been more of a consensus-building type than the over-the-top partisan that his current role has demanded.”

In Conclusion
Certainly there are still many traditional liberals like Charlie Rangel who will be chairing Committees in the new Congress, but look at who these congressmen are replacing. Republicans like Bill Thomas, James Inhofe, Jerry Lewis and Peter Hoekstra are just as extreme as their liberal counterparts. I don't think there is a net loss there. In spite of ideologues, I think that this Congress will, overall, produce better legislation that addresses many of the problems I am most concerned about. The “liberals” have a large wing of moderate Democrats to keep them in check, and the Democrats, as a whole, will keep conservative Republicans in check.

I am really buoyed by the moderating influence that Democrats will have on a broad range of legislative and policy initiatives on the environment, energy policy, intelligence and national security, foreign policy, judicial confirmations, the economy, health care, and oversight. I think they will provide an important check on the President and Congressional Republicans and, through the ensuing gridlock, we’ll manage to come away with more compromise and better all-around legislation.

Why Obama's a Class Act

The year is 2004. A small town reporter for the Henry County Daily News finally builds up the courage to talk to the apple of his eye (a foxy intern for a competing paper) while attending a press conference held by then state senator Barack Obama. This local reporter even manages to sit next to her, probably flirting with just the right amount of charm and humor. No doubt motivated in part by the desire to sweep his coveted intern off her feet, he stands to ask a question during the question-answer period of the press conference... and that's when Obama declares open season on him in front of hundreds. As casanova tries to spit out his question, Obama cuts him off:

“Wait a minute son, this is for professional media only” (Obama)

“What do you mean? I work for the local paper,” (love-struck reporter)

“Oh, I’m sorry. I thought you were a college student. You have such a baby face,” (Obama)

Our reporter turns back only to see his dream girl laughing at him right along with everyone else... and bam, just like that, a budding romance is crushed underfoot. The resentment over a love lost, however, has been nursed for over two years now.

That is... until Obama made things right last week.

Er... Sore Loser?

In a little followed race this year in Texas's 1st Congressional District, Democrat Roger L. Owen challenged the Republican Representative Louie Gohmert for his seat in Congress. Owen got smeared in the general election on Tuesday 68% to 29%. And while Owen's party won back control of the House, the Senate, and a majority of the nation's Governorships, losing his own race apparently still didn't sit too well Roger. He now claims to no longer consider himself an American or a Southern Baptist... oh and it seems he plans on leaving the country too. We'd ask where, but he's made it clear that we're not to contact him.

Update: Just in case anyone was interested in Mister Owen's past criminal history and the special interest groups who were actually responsible for his conviction:

Why I'm Studying To Be A Lawyer

This summer Melbo and I decided to take on a little home remodeling... I clearly had no idea what I was getting myself into. Our plan was to gut the main floor and install wood flooring, new tiling, a new kitchen, and a revamped bathroom. We kicked off the festivities in August after I finished my time as a summer associate. My brother-in-law, a contractor from cheesehead country, drove down to volunteer two weeks of his life and we went to work (aided by the generous help of my father-in-law and my other brother-in-law). We managed to finish the floor, set the tiling, build a new mantel and hearth, and install most of the kitchen before my contractor brother-in-law had to take leave.

Sounds good, right? Well... that's when school started back up. The remaining remodeling work (the "finishing touches" including caulking and grouting tile, finishing the kitchen, plumbing, re-doing the bathroom, painting, etc., etc.) stretched itself out painfully over the next 6 weeks. It was pure misery. Luckily Melbo's mom came into to pinch hit with the painting (a veritable lifesaver) while her dad did some bullpen work in the bathroom (he's a quintessential jack-of-all-trades), but we ended up living in a state of perpetual construction for almost two months nonetheless. And while there's still a long list of little to dos (like replacing our kitchen ceiling fan), at least the drapes are hung and the semi-normal life of a law student has resumed. We're now relishing the home improvements... and, through it all, I've even learned something. I'm not sure I could hack being a full-time handyman.