So Sorry, So Sorry

Funny what a difference a half a century makes.

Here it is, 50 years after Virginia's racist "Massive Resistance" policy against court-ordered integration came to an end. Commemorating it will be a conference tomorrow at the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. A time of reckoning and reconciliation is in the air. What is truly maddening, however, is how some of the same institutions that cheered, if not framed, the horrible policy are making limp-wristed and marketing-minded "apologies" about treating African-Americans so unfairly.

The U.S. Supreme Court's 1954 Brown vs. Topeka decision declared legislated segregation of schools unconstitutional, setting off shock waves throughout much of the South and the Border States. Some states such as North Carolina went ahead and more or less followed the letter of the law. Deep South Alabama and Mississippi saw a huge leap in violence and Ku Klux Klan activity.

In the genteel Old Dominion, white sheets and bull whips are frowned upon. So, the ruling white elite did the "gentlemanly" thing. Pushed by such political luminaries as Harry F. Byrd and his machine, a cabal of politicians, lawyers, bankers and businessmen decided a formal policy of "massively" resisting federal law and created committees, review commissions and various other bodies to enforce segregation and keep Blacks out of public schools.

Some school districts such as Prince Edward County simply shut down rather than admit blacks. Blacks students ended up being taught in homes or being sent to places like Sweden, earning Virginia a great reputation as a champion of human rights , you know "Mother of Presidents" and all that malarkey.

The arguments for Massive Resistance were framed in high brow style by the town's newspapers, the Richmond News-Leader and the Richmond Times-Dispatch. The likes of James Kilpatrick, later a TV star on CBS's "60 Minutes," played bizarre argument games with words such as "interposition" which is a fancy way of saying that states don't have to follow the U.S. Constitution if they don't feel like it.

One of the sorriest histories is that of Virginius Dabney, the esteemed and literate editorial writer of the TD. Dabney was considered progressive on many matters and had a national reputation. But he was under the thumb of the Bryan family that owned the newspapers and was forced to do their evil bidding. According to "The Race Beat" a history of Southern journalism in the civil rights era, authors Gene Roberts and Hank Klibanoff note that whenever the Bryans wanted to serve up another editorial boosting Massive Resistance, Dabney would recuse himself and let some ad salesman do it.

One can't exactly say that is the brave act of a great man. After all, The Virginian-Pilot opposed Massive Resistance editorially and won a Pulitzer for it. Dabney should have told the Bryans to stuff it and quit.

That is why the TD's editorial today "apologizing" for its past behavior is downright creepy. "The hour is ignoble" the editorial says. "The Times-Dispatch was complicit. The record fills us with regret, which we have expressed before."

So sorry. So sorry. Gee, but it would be insane not to backpedal from the policy especially since the U.S. president is half African-American and Blacks have made tremendous progress despite lingering racism. What's more, the TD's editorial has the smell of marketing. Having lost significant circulation, the paper needs African-American readers to sustain it, if not make it survive. So, 50 years after the fact, we get this lame apology.

Margaret Edds, a former Pilot political correspondent and editorial writer, nails it. Writing in Stlye Weekly, she notes that the entire Virginia leadership structure was complicit, especially the legal community.

Today, African-American lawyers such as Oliver Hill and Spottswood Robinson Jr. win all sorts of accolades from mostly white legal societies for pushing civil rights in court. It was an incredibly gutsy thing to do at the time and the threats weren't just shotgun blasts or burning crosses. The General Assembly passed laws targeting fund raising by the NAACP which paid for the lawsuits that won integration. The Virginia Supreme Court went after the Black lawyers on "ethical" grounds, as if supporting the U.S. Constitution and a Supreme Court ruling was somehow "unethical" by precious "Virginia"standards.

With this in mind, one can understand why years later some African-American Richmonders opposed putting tennis great Arthur Ashe's statue on Monument Avenue nearby Stonewall, J.E.B. and Robert E. and the rest of the Glorious Boys in Grey. Why not honor Ashe by keeping his statue in the segregated Northside neighborhood where he grew up and was welcome, and not on Monument Avenue where he was not welcome.

They may well have a point. Meanwhile, spare us the tepid apologies and the crocodile tears.

Peter Galuszka

The Myth of "High Speed" Rail

You have to love how Richmond works.

There's a certain elite that tries to make all the decisions and it includes whoever is the mayor, the Chamber of Commerce, a few heads of whatever banks and investment houses are left over, sometimes the Armstrongs and Gottwallds and almost certainly Jim Ukrop. The ruling party Pravda, of course, is the Times-Dispatch, whose publisher and editorial page editor are card carrying members of the ruling elite and typically act in their interests and not necessarily the public's.

So it is with "high speed" rail. All of Richmond's poo-bahs are on board grabbing Obama's stimulus infrastructure money to get "high speed' rail to expedite train traffic from Petersburg and Richmond to D.C. Mind you years ago, there really was some form of fast, efficient and reliable rail on the old Richmond Fredericksburg and Potomac. Marquee name streamliners like the Silver Meteor or The Champion zipped through Richmond just about daily and some of them hit speeds of 100 m.p.h. on their way to the Florida palm trees and beaches. In 1936, my late father spent his college summers attending Platoon Leaders Class at the Quantico Marine Base and if the Marines ever gave these budding officers liberty, dad was just as inclined to hop a train for the flesh pots of Richmond as D.C.

Obama has come up with as much as $13 billion for as many as 11 high speed rail corridors in the U.S., including the Midwest and California and the Southeast, including Richmond. Congress is considering up to $58 billion more and Virginia wants its chunk.

If the $1.5 billion Virginia is applying for is approved, federal money would be available to bypass the crowded CSX yard at Acca in Richmond, improve signals, straighten curves, add third tracks to bypass slow freights, etc. It could cut the travel time to DC from Richmond by an hour to 90 minutes.

But is that high speed rail? Not at all. It would only add 11 mph to the 79 mph top speed now. Yet everyone talks about this as high speed rail, especially the editorial page editor of the TD who is touted as a "high speed rail expert" by the leaders of the movement. Funny but Amtrak defines "high speed" as that above 110 mph.

What would it take to get true "high speed" rail. I just did an article on this for Style Weekly.My best guess is $4 billion. It would include the $1.5 billion improvements aforementioned, another $1.5 billion to electrify the tracks and a brand new $1 billion bridge across the Potomac at DC since the current one is used by slow freights and isn't electrified. It took $2.5 billion and seven years to improve the Woodrow Wilson bridge so we're talking years. And, my estimate doesn't include buying up land rights and fixing all those grade crossings from here to D.C. You can't have grade crossing at trains going from 110 to 150 mph. Too dangerous.

Here's another little irony. Many of the backers of high speed rail,including U.S. Rep and Republican Minority Whip Eric Cantor, can't stand Obama's stimulus. It's tax and spend time, they say. The "liberal" Obama is sticking our children with huge deficits. Relying on the evil federal government is not the way to go. Except when it means they might get to their D.C. meetings a little faster, that is. Plus, the usual neocon suspects such as the Cato Institute question whether you get that much bang for the buck with high speed rail.

But the word is out. I attended a breakfast meeting at a country club last week when high speed rail was touted. Jim Ukrop happened to sit at my table and when he learned I was a reporter working for Style Weekly that is beyond the control of the movers and shakers he got concerned. He started quizzing me on what sources I was talking to and if I have ever had any experience covering high speed rail. (about 35 years of rail issues although not necessarily "high speed").

My, I thought, how patronizing. I would never dare ask Ukrop if he knew how to run a supermarket. But that's Richmond for you.

Peter Galuszka

GOVERNANCE TRANSFORMATION

Let us talk of Fundamental Transformation of governace structure.

(Note: Peter Galuszka’s post on Commonwealth’s information technology “Behind the Northrop Grumman / VITA Scandals” 30 June 2009) spit into two themes as well as a sub-theme dealing with MainStream Media. EMR addressed the sub-theme on MainStream Media in the “Unbelievable Obliviousness” post of 7 July – FYI, there was an Ombudsman CYA in the 12 July WaPo on this topic. Many of the comments on “Northrop...” addressed the Commonwealth IT issue. The other theme that emerged was Governance Reform, examined here.)

EMR likes Groveton’s goal: The governance structure closest to the citizens governs best. EMR does not, however, think Groveton’s strategy has legs. Giving more power to Fairfax County and then ‘hoping’ they will devolve it further is not realistic. (Some of Groveton’s original comment in the “Northrop...” string is repeated below with EMR comments.)

Fairfax County has a larger population than seven states. It is hardly a “local” – as in ‘close to those governed’ – Agency. Closer than the Commonwealth, but NOT close enough.

At the same time Fairfax County does not represent even half the population of the Virginia part of the Nation Capital SubRegion and covers perhaps 10% of the area.

And that does not address the population or area of the National Capital SubRegion or the Washington-Baltimore NUR. The NUR is the fundamental economic, social and physical building block that impacts every citizen of the NUR not just in Virginia but in the Federal District, and parts of Maryland, West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

EMR, Groveton and TMT all agreed in the “Northrop ...” string that lower is better but what does ‘lower’ mean and how do citizens get there?

What the simple “closest governs best” mantra does not reflect is that in contemporary society there are many levels of impact and thus the criteria must be “the lowest level is best so long as it represents all those impacted by the policy, program, or regulation” of the Agency.

In other words: Level of control must be at level of impact.” Since there are often multiple levels of impact, there must be a governance structure that represents EVERY level and a system to share responsibility among levels.

History documents that it is counter productive to assume the highest level should controls except for overarching “self-evident truths” impacting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

This is the nub of the most important element of Fundamental Transformation of governance structure:

In contemporary society there is no single level that is the obvious nexus of control for all issues that are the responsibility of the First Estate.

It is possible to redistribute the powers and responsibilities of Agencies. EMR did that 40 years ago with the Adirondack SubRegional land use control, transport and amenity system that is still in effect (Although not optimum, it works better than many other attempts to Balance conservation and economic prosperity.)

EMR also did the same thing for many functions of governance for NUR and USRs in the draft legislation to restructure governance below the state level in New York state in the late 60s.

Fundamental Transformation means, FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION.

The issue is explored in more depth in The Shape of the Future but here is a sketch of how to get started:

The Cluster-scale is the LARGEST scaled component where direct democracy is a functional governance strategy. Most elementary schools have a room large enough for the Cluster to meet and discuss key issues. A board of seven or nine can keep track of most issue of importance at this scale. This level of democracy works, we prove it every day. It is hard, much harder than just kicking the issue up to higher levels and then complaining, but it works.

Let Clusters choose what Neighborhood they want to be part of. It will be obvious in some cases but it should not be a foregone conclusion that leads to the Neighborhood having the last word, and then each higher level assuming they are can supercede the lower level and more important or have the last say on issue.

In the same way, Neighborhoods choose what Village they want to be part of and Villages what Community, etc.

Let components of settlement pattern and of governance Agencies COMPETE for citizens instead of exercising the ‘right’ to control those of smaller scale. There would be a buy-in for a set period of years and a cost allocation for disengagement but the potential would always be there to choose some better fit for your Cluster, your Neighborhood, your Village, your Community.

The most important ingredient of the structure would be incentives to create Balance at each scale. For example delegating down taxing powers, level of autonomy and say about what happens in larger components by lower components increases with Balance.

This would be especially important at the Village, Community and SubRegional scales. This structure would give Clusters and Neighborhoods a direct say in Regional facility and infrastructure decisions without NIMBY protectionism.

You do not want it there (NIMBY), OK you can help pay for the added cost of putting the facility in a less efficient location, is an example of getting to the root of many settlement pattern dysfunctions.

It would not be Neighborhood approval of the nation-state defense budget but you get the idea:

Level of decision at level of impact.

If there is shared impact then there is shared decision making. The highest level would rule only on issues fundamental to the Federal Constitution. As Groveton has pointed out, that is the theory now but that is not the way it works.

As EMR pointed out in the “Northrop...” post (with clarification and spell checking):

If one protects the turf of existing Governance Practitioners, there would be little real change. Also, per Groveton's view, the GA likes the system the way it is -- they have control without responsibility.

When EMR was involved in Fairfax politics we found anything that the Chamber, the LWV and the Federation all backed went through the GA without a hitch -- e.g. the bond authority for building roadways in the 70s.

In other words, there is no specific difference between ‘city’ status and county status that could not be 'fixed' if there was a consensus on the need to change. If there is not consensus, the change is not going to happen regardless of status.

THE BIG PROBLEM IS THAT WHAT EVER ONE CALLS IT, THE 244,000 + /- ACRES OF FAIRFAX COUNTY IS NOT AN ORGANIC COMPONENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENT.

Fairfax County includes all or part of nine Beta Communities. Fairfax does not just rank between Dallas and San Jose in population (and is 200,000 larger than Detroit), it is also more populous than seven of the 50 states including EMR’s home state of Montana.

After Fundamental Transformation there could be a special fund to erect historic markers for Olde Fairfaxe.

Since these issue were first raised in the “Northrop...” string, there have been references to, questions about and cross postings to Senator Chap Peterson’s Blog. In this Blog, Sen. Peterson seems to not support Fairfax County morphing to ‘city’ status – the same for the need for Fundamental Transformation.

Then on Sunday, 5 July, WaPo did two stories on Fairfax County switching to ‘city’ status and a comment that contends that ‘city’ status would guarantee to more money for transportation – as if more money will mitigate the Mobility and Access Crisis without Fundamental Transformation in human settlement patterns....

Some may have missed a great breath of fresh air in a 3 July WaPo story “New White House Office to Redefine What Urban Policy Encompasses: Agenda May Address Suburbs, Too.”

Bruce Katz at Brookings has been working to redefine ‘urban policy’ as ‘metropolitan policy’ for years but keeps getting sabotaged by his habit of overusing the word ‘city’ and by his staff substituting ‘city’ for ‘Metropolitan Statistical Area’ (or New Urban Region) in their reports and press releases.

In SYNERGY’s Vocabulary Urban policy addresses the Urban area of the nation-state where 95 of economic activity occurs in 2009.

It is time to abandon the idea that “urban” is code for “central city” and for the interests of those citizens with a specific racial or cultural heritage.

If one is to go to the trouble of making a change, make a change that is worth the effort.

..................

For those who do not want to go back to “Northrop...”, here is the nub of Groveton’s suggestion with notes by EMR:

“I think Fairfax needs a two part evolution.

“First, the county needs city status to partly throw off the yoke of GA oppression.

“Then, the new city/county needs to recognize even more granular decision making areas - the existing supervisory districts are close but would have to be adjusted.

EMR suggests that there has been nothing stopping the County from doing this in the past. Every time a sub-county interest has appeared, it has been quashed by the County – e.g. the attempts by Reston to change status. Getting rid of the GA yoke would just put the primary focus on a different level with no difference in impact on the ground.

“Then, there would need to be referenda at the local level. At first, the referenda could be advisory. However, after the process was refined the advisories would become binding.”

Referenda can be useful tools but they are not a substitute for Fundamental Transformation.

“To all the hacks in the GA - The government that governs closest to the people governs best. So, why doesn't this happen in VA? I have begun to see the GA as "Useful Idiots" - ...”

All true, but that does not solve the problem.

EMR has given a lot of thought and experimented with levels of governance number and effectiveness of below the county level in Fairfax County for 27 years (1975 to 2002)and in Fauquier County since then. We hope this clarifies the context and helps sort out the response to the problems that TMT raised in the “Northrop...” and in “A Quick One for Peter” of 10 July.

EMR