Does U.S. Senate follow advice it honors?

Every year, the U.S. Senate has a member read George Washington’s Farewell Address.  For more details of this, see https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Washingtons_Farewell_Address.htm.

It is a slog for many of us today to read the Address in its entirety, but it has much that has been ignored, even by those who read it.  For example,

"Hence likewise they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establish-ments, which under any form of government are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty."

Or, very germane to the current Senate:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.  The disorders and miseries which result gradually  incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.”

Have the many Republican Senators who have read the Farewell Address already forgotten:

"It is important, likewise, that the habits of think-ing in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another.  The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism."

There is much to agree with and some to disagree with, but the main thrust should be a guide for all of us.  What bothers me is how much those who annually read and listen to the reading of this document soon ignore it.

I ask my readers to select a few key points and write, email, or phone their two Senators if they are honestly following these points or have compelling reasons in the public interest to ignore some of Washington’s advice.

For the text, see https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21/pdf/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21.pdf.

See also "Did George Washington warn us about Donald Trump".

Awful Motors has introduced “new, improved” wheel design

Awful Motors has introduced square wheels, a cool new feature on all of its models.  Awful Motors stated in its introduction that round wheels were boring, they just went around and around.

This just in, after thousands of complaints of Awful Motors’ square wheels, the company has announced that by popular demand it will replace the square wheels with octagonal wheels, providing a significantly smoother ride.

Far-fetched?  This is not far from the abrupt changes that so many software designers put into their products.  A feature was working fine for millions of users, and then some designer has a “better idea”.

Some bothersome changes I’ve found recently are Yahoo! Finance’ rework of its pages and the Star Tribune’s changing relatively simple software to move between the print edition and an expanded article to cluttered software that never seems to work as one would wish.  I have no idea how other readers perceive the changes to the Star Tribune, but Yahoo had a page for comments.  These comments were almost all negative.

Google once had a simple way of moving from blog authoring to statistics without signing in again.  Now one has to log in over and over again and there are several clutter pages between authoring, feed analysis, and income review.

Apple, once the computer for the rest of us, has morphed into guess how this cool new feature works.  In the first few years of the Macintosh I was eager for a new version when real advances were made - hard drives, color, drag and drop, and on and on.  Now, I update to a major new release only when I buy a new device.

Often I think these changes are not for the benefit of the uses but the employment prospects of the designers.

"For want of a nail…” updated

Because an employee was laid off, certain data was not gathered.
Because certain data was not gathered, a report was not made.
Because a report was not made, a contract was lost.
Because a contract was lost, revenue was lost.
Because revenue was lost, a company was lost.

George Washington: Ignored Father of his Country

The United States Senate reads “George Washington’s Farewell Address” every year, alternating between the two parties.  It was read by John Hoeven, R-ND on February 23, 2015.  The House of Representatives last read it publicly in 1984.  You can find a copy at http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/WashFarewell.pdf.

Whether Congress listens to the reading or not, I think they often forget what George Washington wrote, maybe within hours of the reading.

Washington warned again and again about faction.  One example is:

“[The obstructions of constituted authorities] serve to organize faction; to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils and modified by mutual interests.” [page 14]

He went on about how unprincipled men could actually take over the government, subverting the will of the people.

In the same month that a Republican Senator read “Washington’s Farewell Address”, the Republicans went right back to factionalism, finding all kinds of fault with President Obama and pushing a corporate agenda.

As General of the Continental Army, Washington provided lessons that we have not learned about wars but “insurgents” in many countries know only to well.

Washington and the Continental Army knew the country; the British did not.  Boxed in several times, Washington managed to escape with his army.  For example, he was in Manhattan and Brooklyn when the British invaded Long Island.  He commandeered every boat he could and took all his men, cannon, horses, and more to Manhattan on a foggy night and then on to White Plains..

"I am well convinced myself, that the enemy long ere this, are perfectly satisfied that the possession of our towns while we have an army in the field will avail them little.”  Think Baghdad, Kabul.

He predated by almost two centuries Mao Zedong: “enemy advances, we retreat; enemy retreats, we pursue.”

George Washington also stuck to the task from 1775 until the British surrender at Yorktown in 1781.  What is the average tour of duty of a general in Iraq or Afghanistan?  And of course, every general has a different idea of what to do.  Oh, yes!  Washington would let himself be outvoted by his officers.

As President, George Washington was for efficient government, not necessarily for limited government: “for the efficient management of your common interests in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable…  It is indeed little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.” [pages 15-16]

“[The spirit of party] opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.” [pages 17-18]  Does this apply to the Congressional invitation for the prime minister of Israel to speak before it?

“And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.” [page 20]  Note that he doesn’t specify what religion, one of the numerous Christian sects or one of the many non-Christian sects.

Washington wrote a section on the need for public credit and to use it sparingly by “cultivating peace”.  If war is necessary, the burden should not be put on future generations.  “[Y]ou should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes…”  He followed this with a discourse about the problem of selecting what to tax.  I wonder what he would think of all the highways that we demand, the degree of safety oversight we want, and the research we want.

He wrote a couple pages about the necessity of treating all nations the same. “The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, in is some degree a slave.”  What would Washington say about our relations with Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt?  All of them manipulate us more than we manipulate them.  George Washington considered those who resist these entanglements as the “real patriots”.

He also extended this view to commerce: “our commercial policy should hold an equal hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences…” [page 28]

As much as we have put Washington on a pedestal, he is more modest: “I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors.”

He looked forward to enjoying “the benign influence of good laws under a free government…”

Sorry, Mr. President, but fools have rushed in where heroes fear to tread.  We have many bad laws under a bought government.

Mel votes in almost every election, mostly in the hope of avoiding really bad laws.

Also published in the Reader Weekly, 2015-03-05 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2015/03/04/4899_george_washington_ignored_father_of_his_country