clairecommunicationsdotnet

A young friend recently posted on Facebook, “In fact, most young people are, like myself, pretty fed up with both parties.”

Reading that post instantly created a range of emotions in me from anger to fear to regret and ending up somewhere just above despair.  I am somewhat calmer now, but after some thought, I still think this is a very disturbing trend.

Short response:  On 95 out of 100 issues, there isn’t an inch of space between the policies of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.  To abandon the Democratic Party is to deny the many accomplishments of the Obama years, despite a very narrow majority in Congress.  If the Democrats didn’t accomplish more, it’s not because their hearts and minds didn’t want them too; it was simply that there were too few of them in Congress to do so.

Let’s go back away and look at where the party’s been.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan’s folks convinced everybody that trickle down, getting tough on crime, pursuing the goals of the Christian Coalition, etc. were the best things for the country.

In my mind, this is the start of the trend that has led us to today’s party. The Republicans learned how to build on fear and resentment, on anti-intellectualism, on a desire for simpler times, etc. to grab first the national dialogue and ultimately the government.

Since then, the Democrats have been on the defensive. We have never been able to take charge of the issues and direct the debate, even when the Democrats are in power.  We are always countering powerful Republican imaging – welfare queens, Willie Hortons, aborted fetuses, out of work miners.

Our best ideas don’t lend themselves to frightening photos or cute clichés. They are more complicated. They require some thought and some explanation. And the growing populist movement, ultimately cheer-led by the Limbaughs and the O’Reillys, portrayed thoughtfulness and fact-based thinking as weak.

During the post-Reagan years, the Democrats tried to push big ideas through. . . and perhaps my young friend is too young to know how much abuse Hillary Clinton took for trying to give us universal health care in 1993.  But that’s just one example. There are dozens of others ranging from environmental protection to consumer protections.

So it’s been a fact of life – and it may have contributed to survival of the Ds as well as to their lack of appeal – that Democrats generally don’t sound like the firebrands of their predecessors.  Even during the recession, they couldn’t promote the ideas that FDR ran with so successfully in the 1930s.

That said, the Democrats did some great stuff in the eight years during which Obama was president. None of this would have been started, let alone pursued, by a Republican president or Congress.  Just off the top of my head:

• The Lily Ledbetter Act. Within months of taking office, President Obama introduced and passed this act, which extended the period for filing an equal pay lawsuit. I have no idea how many people are affected by this act, but as a symbol, I think it’s a doozy.
• The Affordable Care Act. Even my young friends will know about this one. Suffice it to say that despite holding many hearings and accepting something like 180 amendments from Republicans, the D’s still couldn’t get a single Republican vote on the final bill. If nothing else, the prohibition on excluding pre-existing conditions is a giant win for Americans, as is expanded Medicaid.  And there are many others.
• Dodd-Frank Act. The financial industry was out of control, and everybody knew it. Wikipedia says Dodd-Frank created the broadest changes to the banking industry since Roosevelt’s post-depression initiatives. This was a big deal – and it needs to be defended continuously, as it’s been a target of the Republicans ever since it was enacted.  This law just makes sense.  (I honestly don’t know why anybody would defend a system that continuously implodes on itself, losing massive amounts of money for both the wealthy and the poor, but then I’ve never understood a lot of things about American industry.)
• The Clean Power Plan. This is another big deal – and it also makes a lot of sense, as today the U.S. has the capability to replace coal plants with a whole array of low-cost and low-carbon substitutes. The current president has made it known that he’s out to get this one, too, knowing full well that absolutely nothing can be done to bring back coal jobs.

What else? Expanding national monuments? Adding regulations to gas and oil production on public lands? Protecting Dreamers?

And, oh yeah, they brought us back from the worst economic downturn since the depression.  And while they didn’t get us out of the wars, they didn’t start any either.

OK, my friends. You’re probably going to tell me they didn’t do enough. Sure, they didn’t do as much as we would like – remember, we have a Congressional system here, and the problem with executive orders is that they can be so easily overturned, as we’ve seen to our horror.

But I can guarantee that if Obama had come in from the beginning and said he would only go for Medicare for all – we wouldn’t have gotten anything.  Seeing the reactionary nature of industries coupled with the horrors of Fox and Breitbart, the uproar would have been phenomenal, and we might have lost even more Congressional seats than we did.

So I ask:

What could a new Democratic party led by a Bernie Sanders or an Elizabeth Warren or a third party (Jill Stein? God forbid!) make happen in today’s political world that Obama and his party didn’t do?

Do we really expect to see that somehow Bernie’s charisma (did I really say that?) will shine the light of reason brightly enough that Republicans will stand up and demand free college and free healthcare?

Furthermore, do we have any reason to believe that any of these candidates have the political skills to craft and guide legislation that will succeed?  Because really, what has Bernie Sanders accomplished in his years of office?

And basically, what ideas and skills would you like to see in a different party that you don’t think the Democrats have the ability to create?

Perhaps the party was in disarray . . . maybe people like me weren’t paying enough attention.  I don’t know how much of Donna Brazile’s story to believe, as we have seen that she is somewhat disingenuous about the way she’s telling the story.  But sure, the party could have done better.

They could have gone after the union vote more. They could have gone after minorities and youth more effectively. And we need more Obamas, who can inspire and who can tell the story in a way that more people can relate to.

But when it comes to basic ideas, I don’t think we can do any better than the party we have.  It is a party of great ideas – about health care, about environmental protection, about consumer protection, about human rights and civil rights and housing and education.  We all can learn more, we can become more creative and communicate better, but the party’s values and dedication are in the right place.

And can there really be any comparison?

So, I hear that people are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.  But, as they say, let’s talk.

First of all, as I’ve tried to point out, I don’t see anything evil about the Democratic Party. I think it’s done well by this country.

But second – can there really be any comparison between the flaws of the Democratic Party and the total lack of ethics, judgment, compassion, wisdom and morality of today’s Republican Party, even if you don’t include the current president?

And are people really ready to sacrifice health care gains, protection of immigrants and minorities, women’s rights, environmental protection and any chance of peace on earth because they think the Democrats took too much money from the wrong lobbyists? Or because they are mad that their guy didn’t get the nomination? Or because they’re trying to prove a point?

Can it be they really they don’t see the difference?

Good grief.

So what is next?

Clinton, for all her flaws, won the popular vote by 3 million and came close to getting as many votes as Obama.  That’s with 30 years of venom having been dumped on her since – yes – since she started talking about universal health care.

So indeed, it is possible for a Democrat in the Clinton tradition to win elections.

But the party never did unify behind her. And it wasn’t only that she was a flawed candidate.  It was that many Democrats and Independents apparently were looking for The Perfect Candidate — that saintly, ethereal untouched-by-money idealist who is both visionary and pragmatic and charismatic and a true leader.

Hmmm. Maybe we have to accept something less than that.

Could it be that we could just agree that agreeing 95 percent of the time on issues is enough?  And that if we worked hard for our state legislators and our representatives in the House and the Senate, as well as the next Democratic candidate for president, that we might have the majority we need to really accomplish something?

Perhaps the perfect candidate is out there.  But until then, we have an awful lot of really smart, really dedicated, really committed and really knowledgeable Democratic incumbents and candidates willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary to lead this country.

I’m not waiting for perfection.

Well, that title isn’t really what this article is about, but I get there eventually.

This started as a Facebook post, but it’s too long and preachy, so I went for the blog. But it plays off threads started by my friends Ivan and Corky on FB.

Ivan was saying there’s no sense in those of us on the left arguing with each other about nuances. But Corky thinks we have to unite around certain big ideas and redirect the Democratic Party.

So what I think — and what I’ve thought since 1980 – is that, as Ivan says, there’s no point arguing about small differences. What we need to do is get a majority in both Congress and in our state legislatures. After that, we can argue about whether we should continue with the ACA or move to a single payer system. Or how to approach climate change, or figure out a way to get campaign finance reform through the Supreme Court or take on the really big issues.

But there’s absolutely no point in going into the next Congress with the current party distribution united behind a single payer health care system when we don’t even get to make amendments on Republican bills.

And I also don’t believe that an issue like single payer health care is going to rally the populace to such an extent that they are all going to vote Democrat on the basis of that — when, if you remember — a large portion of the population didn’t even know that the Affordable Health Care Act was the same as Obamacare.

I think what we need is to agree that we’re all going to work really hard — at the local level, at the state level and for any Democrat Congressional candidate that has a snowball’s chance of winning. That may mean supporting a candidate that you don’t agree with 100 percent. (Hmmm. Would I go door to door for a candidate who’s not pro-choice? That would be a hard one, but I might do it if it meant we could achieve other essential goals.)

I would send money to and go door-to-door for a Democrat who supports 80 percent of what I care about if she or he could take out a Republican incumbent or win a race in a close district.

Then when we get a good, solid majority in Congress — when we know we can protect against the deliberate erosion of environmental regulations, when we can protect health care and the rights of women and minorities and immigrants and refugees, when we can legislate to protect our voting rights — when we can stop the assault on all that was achieved over the last 50 years — then we can look ahead to major changes like single payer health care, free universities, etc.

My goals for the next two years:

– Find and support candidate in a swing district who can use my help

– Support the efforts of President Obama and Eric Holder to fight gerrymandering at the court level

– Do what I can locally to keep established, working families from being torn apart by ICE.

I just have to keep reminding myself that I’m not helpless, that together we can do a lot and that I lived to see a Black president. Maybe it’s not true that all you need is love, but love is a great starting point.

Hi, friends:

This is a story about our travels to B.C. and Alberta, but it’s primarily designed for our friends who plan to take a similar trip in the future.

So it’s long and relatively detailed. But it’s also my memories of our trip.

I’ll start out with some tips:

Things to think about before traveling/camping in the Canadian Rockies:

The National Park camping facilities are terrific. If you go on line, you will see a selection of campgrounds at which you can make reservation  Note that there are many more campgrounds than are shown on the website.

The larger campgrounds, especially those with electricity hookups, fill up, so it’s a good idea to make reservations at those – well in advance, if you’re going in the busy season.  Every time you reserve on line, you’ll be charged an $11 fee. . . so if possible, make as many reservations as you can at one time. Otherwise, you’re adding about a third of the cost to each stay.

Click here for a great resource for national parks camping:

CanadaParksCamping10001

The other campgrounds at which you can’t make reservations are terrific, too.  They are on a first-come, first-served basis.  We were able to get into several of these.  While check-in time is at 11, you can go earlier and try to get in, in case people have checked out early.

Bugs are a big deal. If you are sensitive to mosquitoes, before you leave the car at any time, be prepared to protect yourself.  I was in pretty good shape, until we walked up to Bow Glacier, where the apparent dearth of flesh created horrifying swarms of biting bugs. By the time I slathered repellant on (maybe three minutes), it was too late.  The same thing happened when we got out of the car at a remote campground on the Columbia.  Again, if you are sensitive, carry lots of anti-itch cream. It’s almost impossible to avoid getting bitten.

Canadian dollars are coins called Loonies, which would seem to be an insult to the queen, whose picture is on them, but I guess she doesn’t mind.

We had been advised to take U.S. dollars, but in fact, that’s not the best. Some places don’t take them, some will just take dollar for dollar, and some will give you a less-than-realistic exchange rate. The best thing is to use a card or get cash from an ATM.

The town of Banff and Lake Louise are quite beautiful – but they are not the most spectacular nor are they far from the only places to go. In the busiest seasons, missing those two places wouldn’t be the worst thing that could happen.  We thoroughly enjoyed visiting Kootenay and Yoho National Parks, even though we’d never heard of them before we planned our trip. There are countless stunning places in both those parks, although they are not well known in the U.S.

Expect to find super busy spots everywhere – but in most places, once you get away from the highway, things are much more peaceful. Some places you can get in first thing in the morning, but we think late afternoon is better because it gets quieter the longer you stay.

If you want to camp your way through the Rockies, you might think about renting one of the many styles of motorhomes now available. We saw lots and lots of rented camping units everywhere we went. Most were from Canadian companies like this one: http://www.canadream.com/. Many of the ones we saw weren’t any longer than the Sprinter. The smallish ones seemed really convenient, particularly because several places we went prohibited or restricted longer RVs and trailers.

The border! We thought we were prepared for the border crossing – with car registration, insurance, etc. It turns out, we prepared for all the wrong things.

We are scofflaws!  On the way into Canada, we forgot about some bottles of Oregon wine we had taken as gifts. So not only did we have too much (they only allow two bottles per person), but we seemed suspicious because we didn’t claim everything. (They did search the entire van . . . ) But the customs man was very nice and charged us less tariff than he could have. Still, it was $80.

Then, coming home, we were conscious of alcohol, but we didn’t pay any attention to our refrigerator full of vegetables. The U.S. folks didn’t search the whole van, but they did go through the fridge and waved the green onions at us, which we did not report (again, what scofflaws!). They confiscated most of our veggies.

I guess the message is: check out the expectations before coming and going. We just spaced out that part.

It’s worth planning some stuff ahead. For example, just before we left, we learned about this great place to visit in Yoho Park – that requires reservations three months in advance. But by far, most stuff doesn’t require any preplanning.

CanadaParksCamping10001

OUR TRIP

We left the Wenatchee River Festival on Sunday afternoon, June 19, and drove to a state park on Lake Chelan for a picnic lunch. This decision ultimately led to a two-night stay at the campground (showers, neighbors who had been at the festival, other nice people), and a chance meeting with Ron Clark, who advised us about possible solutions to our battery glitch (another story for another time).

Tuesday, June 20: Who knew northeastern Washington was so beautiful?

We drove up Highway 97 to Highway 20 east through the Selkirk Mountains. Shortly before the Highway turns north, we stopped at a National Forest Service park with three campgrounds on Lake Thomas.  The one called Lake Thomas has limited trailer-size access, so we were the only ones in this lovely campground right on the lake. Highly recommended! Bring bug spray.

Wednesday, June 21: Canada is beautiful and Canadians really are nice.

We drove up Highway 20 to the border, where we had a lovely interaction with a nice guard who realized that we didn’t know there was a limit of two bottles of wine per person, and who gave us a break on how much we had to pay in tariff.  (Canadians really are nice, aren’t they?)

They went through every inch of the camper, including the safe, but they didn’t make any comment about how cute it was.

Oh, well. We get enough comments.

Once into Canada, we turned right on Highway 3, which took us through more of the spectacular Selkirk Mountains. We turned north on Highway 93/95, and started gasping at the site of the craggy Rocky Mountains to our right and the snow-covered peaks of the Columbia Mountain Range to our left.

After a while, the Columbia Lake appeared on our right. It’s the headwaters of the Columbia, and is fed by snow melt from the Rockies and the Columbia mountains.  The Rocky Mountain Trench separates the two ranges, and there is some interesting stuff about the river system there which Matt will be happy to share.

Radium Hot Springs Village is a booming tourist town right on the Highway.  But just up the road there’s a very big but very lovely campground called Redstreak, park of the Kootenay National Park.  It’s got lots of sites, but they are spread out, so it feels private.  We are in H 14, which seemed to have the most space around it – and gives us a view of the Columbia peaks. (Friends who may stay at this campground – we think we got the best site.)

We took the trail into town (kind of steep with some intimidating wooden stairs, but worth the walk), turned right and ended up a great pub with seven kinds of regional micro-brews.

Redstreak has water, electric and showers. Yay. (Electric charging has become important because we’re still having a bit of a problem with the electrical system.)

Thursday, June 22

We drove up to McLeod Meadows Campgrounds on Highway 93, which continues onto Lake Louise in Banff National Park. We already have used up our quota of “wow,” and are moving into, “whoa” and “ow!” Spectacular peaks on both sides. While Matt says that the Colorado Rockies are higher, what’s amazing here is that that snow-covered peaks and spires are continuous on both sides.

They are also notable for their amazing shapes and ruggedness.

McLeod offered a lovely camp site right on the Kootenay River. Great camp grounds . . . lots of sites, but again, it feels very private, and when we arrived there were few sites occupied in our area. For you potential vacationers, McLeod doesn’t take  reservations.

In the afternoon, we took a hike to Dog Lake.  The trailhead starts right next to our campsite. We crossed a beautiful bridge across the Kootenay (same river that’s called Kootenai in Montana) and arrived at a little trail intersection. We took a bike path/old road north for a while, knowing it would loop back toward Dog Lake.

Apparently, we arrived early in the season, and we had to climb over, under or bushwhack our way around a number of downed trees.  Same on the loop up to Dog Lake.

It was a steady, but not too intense, climb – and worth the walk. Dog Lake, like everyplace else here, has gorgeous views. The forest is spongy moss – really yummy to walk on – and we saw lots of beautiful wildflowers on the way. Dog Lake is pristine, surrounded by peaks on one side and lovely marshes on the other.

This was our first real encounter with mosquitoes.

Top event of the day? Probably when a grouse ran onto the path, er, grousing. Matt said, “She wants us to follow her.” That meant she was trying to lead us away from a nest. Matt, quickly recognizing this behavior, tiptoed to the spot from which she had emerged. Gently moving aside the grasses, he found a teeny baby grouse in a nest.  He was able to snatch a photo.  Mrs. Grouse kept trying to steer us away.  After a while, she was satisfied that we weren’t going to harm her babies, and she apparently went back to the nest. At least she left us alone.

In the evening, we went back to Radium Hot Springs for a little while. (By the way, the hot springs appears to be a big swimming pool. At 7 p.m. it was filled with swimmers. Not a funky hot springs like the ones we’re used to in Oregon.)

On the way back to the campground, we noticed a sign with an illustration of a bear, surrounded by flashing lights. We commented on that, wondering if bears really cross at a particular place.  About three minutes later, we saw a black shape on the side of the road, which indeed was a little black bear. Very cute, if you dare call bears cute.

Friday, June 23: Jaw-dropping beauty and baby goats

This morning, we drove farther north on Highway 93, maybe 30 or so miles, to the Stanley Glacier Trail. About a third of the way there, we saw another wildlife sign:  this one with lights circling a drawing of a goat.  Remembering our bear siting, we speculated about goats. Just then, we saw 15 or more mountain goats, including some babies, running down the rocky hillside.

Matt slowed, as even though there was a concrete divider next to the highway, he knew they were capable of jumping it. They did not, but we got a great view. Unfortunately, we couldn’t find a place to stop and watch them. It was lovely, though.

We got to the Stanley Glacier trailhead, which had quite a few cars.  I’ll leave it to the guide books to describe the trail, but as you can imagine, much oohing, aahing and holy cowing happened.  It’s a great walk – kind of steep at first, flattening out but with rocks, but worth it for spectacular streams, sheer rock walls, a great view of a glacier, wildflowers, and, well, you know, general great stuff.

On the ride home, I saw the goats at the top of the hillside. Lovely.

Note:  Weekends get busy, and we will be here over the three-day Canada Day weekend.  It appears that campgrounds with electricity and that take reservations get booked in advance, so you may want to make reservations if you will be here over a weekend.  McLeod Meadows in Kootenay Park, like other less developed campgrounds, doesn’t take reservations.  We are told that if you get in early, these campgrounds and the ones in Yoho, where we plan to stay next weekend, should have space.  Today is Friday, and the campground we’re in now is only beginning to get filled.  Next weekend may be different as school will be out and it’s a long weekend, but we plan to hit one of the Yolo Park campgrounds by Thursday. We’ll let you know what happens.

Another note: the visitor center right by the entrance to Redstreak has free wi-fi.  We used it during the day from inside the building, then sat outside the center last night to use it.  Nice. Once outside of Radium Hot Springs and Redstreak, there is no cell service inside Kootenay Park.

Saturday, June 24

Note: Before I forget: Apparently one of the best places in Yoho National Park, and perhaps the whole area, is called Lake O’Hara.  It is so special that they restrict visitors by requiring you either to hike in (something like eight miles) or take a special bus.

The thing is, you can’t reserve the bus more than 90 days in advance, but if you reserve it 89 days in advance, you’ll probably be too late, according to my guide book.  So if this lovely area sounds interesting to you, pay attention to the timeline.

Now, back to today:

We stayed a second night at McLeod Meadows Campgrounds.  Yesterday, we got home in time to prepare a meal, clean up and have enough energy to play some music – a first on this trip. We sat in our bugproof shelter (a must, as this camp site is right on the river) and played until about 10:30.  Given the latitude and the fact that it’s around the solstice, it stays light very late. And it’s Central time, so we’re an hour ahead of ourselves.  So it hardly seemed late at all.

This morning, we packed up and got ready to go, but before we left, we felt we had to do some picking on the suspension bridge across the Kootenay River.  It was sunny, warm and lovely.  The bridge is skinny, so we’d have to stand up when people wanted to cross it, but we thought it was a good tribute to the river.

We headed north again on Highway 93, to a picnic area called Paint Pots. There is a little trail leading to some unusual water features. We chose not to take it and proceeded instead along a longer trail (I’m thinking it was 3.2 km) leading to Marble Canyon.

That hike was along the beautiful Vermillion River. It’s named vermillion after ochre in the rocks, but the river is a color green unlike anything I’ve seen. Across the river is, of course, a series of snow-capped peaks.  The hike was fairly easy, although it got pretty hot for a while.

Just before Marble Canyon the river flows through some amazing rock formations. At Marble Canyon, there’s a loop where Tokumm Creek, in conjunction with some seismic activity, has carved a stunning path through the rocks.  You can also reach Marble Canyon from a parking lot right on Highway 93.

We walked back along the Vermillion River to the Paint Pot parking lot, but we were too pooped to take the final loop to the paint pots.

We drove back to Redstreak Campgrounds, where we had reservations, and took ourselves out to eat in Radium Hot Springs. Early to bed.

Final notes on leaving the Kootenay Park and Highway 93, which we drove at least once a day.  We saw the goats several more times collected by the highway, enjoying the salt lick. We never saw the bear again.

Sunday, June 25/ Monday, June 26

Today was, sort of, our day of rest.

It started with laundry and groceries in Radium Hot Springs (the laundry is in the gas station at the beginning of Highway 93, FYI).

Then back up 93 into Banff, singing Across the Great Divide at the appropriate time – that would be when we leave B.C. for Alberta.

We crossed Highway 1, the Trans Canada Highway, and went about a mile, to reach the place we will call home for three nights: Castle Mountain Campground.

The campground is lovely. It’s got about 40 spots, but the way all these campgrounds are set up, it feels like there’s a lot of privacy. There are lots and lots of trees, and it doesn’t feel like you’re camping on top of other people.

It doesn’t have showers, but it has a really nice bathroom with flush toilets and hot and cold running water. It also has something terrific: a big clean sink with a long stainless steel counter outside the bathroom building, for washing dishes. That’s a terrific asset – we have started using it to save our own water and reduce use of our graywater system.

Yesterday afternoon, after getting settled here, we decided to drive to the town of Banff.  It’s a cute touristy town with amazing scenery – mountains all around and a lovely river flowing through it. However, it’s sort of the worst of all tourism.

Sunday evening around 6, it was hard to walk down the street because it was so filled with tourists.  The cool part was that it was the most international place I’ve ever been – aside from the native French speakers and the Chinese who have moved to B.C., there were many other people from East and Central Asia and other parts of the globe.

It’s too bad they all were trying to walk on the same sidewalks at the same time.

Banff has lots of high-end chain stores. It also has some of the kitchiest tourist traps I’ve ever had the pleasure of seeing.  Talk about cultural appropriation (a term which Matt and I have been debating quite a bit). There’s an awful lot of First Nation-looking stuff that may not have been made in either Canada or the U.S., let alone by real First Nation people or Native Americans.  OK, that’s a whole other discussion.

Anyway, there’s a tremendous amount of crap here, along with some nice stuff.

The other thing that strikes us is that Banff, like many tourist towns, tries to pretend it’s somewhere else. There’s the Bavarian theme. . .ugh. Then there are lots of British themed stores.  And of course, Starbucks; McDonalds and Subway.

We took a walk by the river and stopped at a place called Coyote’s, where I had a great bowl of sweet potato and corn chowder.  Mostly, we tried to scope out what else was worth doing.

This morning, we got up early to get into town and catch a parking place.  We took a walk to Bow Falls – nice easy, and short walk from downtown.  We found a bicycle pump and tried to go on another nearby hike – but the parking area was so packed we thought better of it.

Turns out that some things you want to do in the whole national park of Banff is get there first thing in the morning.

Another thought – imagine a whole city inside a national park. How does the administration work?

After town, we came home and ate and napped. We are learning that you don’t have to stay out all day.

Then we went to Johnston Canyon, another place that had been packed when we passed it earlier in the day.

Johnston Canyon is about a 1.5 mile walk up a not-too-steep hill. The first waterfall is at about .5 miles, the second is around 1.5 miles. It’s possible to go farther to see some other scenic things, but we chose not to.

When we arrived, hundreds of people were coming down, and quite a few were still going up.  Things slowed down considerably after the first falls.

It’s quite a lovely and astonishing walk. But it’s unbelievable how many people took that walk – and must do so every day.

Our first friends

Our first night in this campground, a lovely man from Montreal stopped by to talk about the van.  He and partner had purchased a local transit shuttle bus which they are converting into a camper.  It is about one third wider than Creature, and seems super spacious, but it still is not a big vehicle. They had built in a sink and cabinets, and had put their own bed in the back – with room on either side to walk around.

Julien and Viviane are both engineering professors, and she is an electrical engineer, so they should be able to make something great out of it.

The nicest part was meeting some very engaging people – and starting to think about Montreal. Viviane came over after a bit to tell us how to get alerts about the Northern Lights . . . apparently there have been some recent solar flares, and the University of Alberta will send out emails to let you know when the lights are occurring.

Thoughts on environmental awareness in Banff and the Canadian Parks

Banff is going solar crazy.  We watched today as workers continued their work installing dozens of solar panels on a small sports arena.  All the publish washrooms in the city have solar on top, as do many other city buildings.  Somehow, the city’s use of solar reduces the cost of solar installations for private citizens.

The next thing we noticed is the bicycle pump/repair setup in a giant parking lot near a giant public bathroom.  It is a post with a tire pump attached, and a bunch of repair tolls dangling from the top.

Every public facility has bottle and can recycling. We noticed this particularly because the U.S. national parks and forest service campgrounds we stayed in had no recycling.  I must remember to write to my congressman.

Thoughts on women’s bathrooms

The Canadians really get it.  The women’s bathrooms are huge – lots and lots of stalls. It was really notable at that very busy tourist attraction, Johnston Canyon.  Despite the crowed of women coming off the trail, there was no waiting.  O’ Canada!!!!

Tuesday, June 27

Today was spectacular in a way we didn’t expect.  We weren’t sure what to do, but thought we would check out some of the close-in trails near the city of Banff, even though we didn’t want to hang out on the city streets.

Eventually (after a second trip to the bike shop to learn how to use the bike pump. . . even the sales guy had trouble figuring it out) we agreed to try the bike path around Vermillion Lakes.

And, my oh my, that’s got to be some of the most amazing scenery anywhere, even compared to what we’d already seen. The bike path continues from city streets and starts very close to downtown.  It’s not that long, but every inch is breath taking.

And what was perhaps most amazing was how few people we saw on it: a few pedestrians at the beginning; maybe a total of 30 other bicyclists and more cars . . . yes, it’s odd, cars are allowed on the path).  But there were times when we so no one else, and in late afternoon it was very quiet.

Considering how crowded the city streets are, it was truly amazing (and also somewhat disturbing that so few people took the time to see this amazing part of town).

On the ride home, we noticed cars slowing (and one person just sort of stopped in the middle of the road).

We looked where people were pointing – and saw a gorgeous caribou.

Last night in Castle Mountain Campground. Goodbye to the gurgling creek right next to the van.

Wednesday, June 28/Thursday, June 29

The phrase for Wednesday was Holy Mackerel.  The phrase for Thursday has been, “How can it keep getting better?”

Wednesday morning we headed to Boom Lake, yet another incredibly scenic spot surrounded by mountains. The hike started out a slow uphill for about a kilometer, then gradually evened out. Some spots were fairly muddy and took some negotiation, but all in all it was a pretty benign walk. . . mostly through forest, but with glimpses of mountains and little creeks along the way. It was 4.8 km each way.  A lovely walk – even with some rain – and quite the reward at the top.

Having packed up at Castle Mountain before our hike, we headed to Lake Louise Campground, where we had a reservation. We got our spot and headed to Lake Moraine, which we’d heard was spectacular.  We’d also heard that parking is limited, and sometimes they just don’t let people into the area. We left the campground around 4, hoping that people would have started leaving for the day.

And in fact, the huge parking area had started to empty by the time we got there. And we were so glad.

Of all the amazing scenery we’d observed so far, this one was the most awe inspiring.  Lake Moraine is as green as can be, and it’s surrounded by peaks, including a range called Ten Peaks.  I can’t describe what makes it so spectacular, but it truly is.

While people had started to leave by late afternoon, it was by no means a solitary experience.  Kids were running up and down paths, young people were perching on horrifyingly high places to take each others’ photos, people were pushing their way down stairways – we couldn’t imagine what it would be like at peak times. Nonetheless, it’s still breathtaking.

We drove into Lake Louise Village, which is mostly a little strip mall adjacent to some resorts and nice restaurants. We had a terrific meal at a place called the Outback, a pub-style restaurant which indeed is out back of one of the resorts. I say pub-style because it’s still expensive, but you could wear your hiking clothes and not get the same looks that we received from the snooty hotel staff when we walked in to ask directions.

We had heard that campgrounds would fill up this weekend, so we wanted to get an early start to Kicking Horse Campground in Yoho National Park (it’s the only one of four campgrounds with showers.) But first, we thought we should at least stop and look at Lake Louise . . . so we drove to the lake, only to find what Matt well described as a Disneyland like feeling – hundreds of people line up to look at the lake.

We stayed 10 minutes. We may try to go back when it’s less crowded. But it turned out to be a good thing that we left when we di, as we got the second to the last spot at this campground.

Which we love.  Even though we’re in the trailer section — which has no trees – we are happily surrounded by gorgeous peaks. And we have enough sun to make full use of the solar panels. (Continuing perplexipation from the battery charging system on the Sprinter, but no need to go into that here).

We took a short hike from the campground to look at an old railroad engine that was just abandoned in the middle of the forest after the narrow-gauge railroad was abandoned. Then we headed into the town of Golden, where we found a little health food story that seemed totally unappealing, and which we left in favor of the IGA.  We are happily provisioned for days to come.

Oh yeah, did I mention? Grocery stores have no beer or wine. You have to go to the liquor store. Fortunately, even the smallest towns have at least one of them.

Friday, June 30

The long days are delightful, and a little disconcerting.

We knew we’d be up here at the summer solstice, and that the days would be longer than normal because of the date and because we’d be so far north.

But daily, we are astounded by the time.  It feels like 7:30 or 8, when it’s really 10 p.m.  Yes, the northern thing really makes a difference.  It must be affecting us, because we don’t seem to be sleepy at the usual time.

Today, we visited Bow Glacier – a walk around Bow Lake, ending in a sharp ascent that took us close to a waterfall that is basically the source of the Bow River, which flows all the way to the town of Banff.

Bow Lake is on the Icefield Parkway, which is supposed to have the best scenery in the whole park system. From what we saw, that’s true.  And Bow Lake is smashing.

Thought for the day: Banff and Lake Louise have astounding scenery, but they became the center of the park system because the railroad went through early.  The railroad folks did everything they could to draw tourists to these mountain settings, so there are classic old buildings in both towns.  (Lake Louise isn’t nearly as built up as Banff, but it is a historic tourist attraction).

What we realized today is that if you have limited time – or limited patience with tourists – you could easily skip those two places and get as much Wowee-Zowee scenery farther north.

We only went up the Icefield Parkway about 40 Km, but we were enchanted the whole time. And Bow Lake is every bit as beautiful as Lake Moraine.  And while the tourist buses arrived at the lake, there was nowhere near the crowd that we’ve seen at other sites.  And after a few minutes, we saw only a couple dozen people for the rest of the walk.

For those considering this hike: The first half is very easy – just a walk around the gorgeous lake.

I found parts of it a little edgy making, as it required some walking over fairly small logs; had some narrow and rocky paths next to relatively sleep slopes; and ended with what was for me (who doesn’t do hills very well) a strenuous bit, including some wooden steps that felt like they were designed for Andre the Giant.

I think going later in the year will alleviate the need to walk over logs, etc. (it seemed like the lake was high from snow melt and lapping over the trail, but that this situation would go away during the summer).

Most people had little trouble on the trail – I just get easily winded and am, well, a little clutzy on uneven trails.

The top truly is fabulous: you are overlooking the headwaters of the Bow River in a stupendous canyon, and you are nearly eye level with the waterfall that starts it all. The glacier is out of site at that point, but at one point filled the whole canyon.

This is the place where the bugs nearly did me in, however. They descended on us like we were the only living things within miles. I could see 15 or 20 on Matt’s shirt at one time. Smear anti-bug stuff on before you reach the top.

After we came down, we decided to go a few miles farther up the parkway to the Bow Summit Overlook.  For some reason (possibly because there’s a view that just requires a 10-minute walk), this was another Grand Central Station meeting place, with tour buses and hundreds of people.  The view is another terrific one, but the crowd made it kind of uncomfortable.

We did learn that the glacier we could see from the lookout had receded by 2 km in the last 100 years.  This was perhaps the most profound example I have personally experience of global warming. In the middle of this immense natural beauty, we were left with a feeling of hopelessness and some guilt about possibly living at the peak of a civilization that was quickly declining.

Saturday, July 1

Canada Day! We drove to the little community of Field about five miles from our campground. The visitor center was holding lots of Canada day hoopla – lots of family stuff. They also have a very good selection of maps and knowledgeable staff who advised us about future activities.

The Burgess Shale, which was the source of thousands of fossils and filled in a lot of blanks about certain evolutionary stages, is visible from the front of the visitor center. In addition to lots of information about the findings from the shale, the center also has dozens of actual samples.  Someday, we’ll come back so Matt can take a tour of the fossil area.

We then went to Emerald Lake. That’s one of those places that is super busy at the parking lot, since it’s a gorgeous view, but it’s easy to get away from the crowds.  It’s an easy 3 mile walk around the lake and, as always, the scenery is breathtaking.

Sunday, July 2

Kicking Horse Campground is named after the Kicking Horse River, which is named because some poor railroad fellow got kicked in the chest by a horse while trying to find the best route for the trans-Canada trains. (He lived, but they had been planning his funeral before he regained consciousness.)

The campground is just below the confluence of the Yoho and Kicking Horse Rivers.

Up a road from the campground (there are some tight switchbacks, and trailers aren’t allowed. . . it was even tough for the Sprinter to take one of the curves), is Takakkaw Falls.  This is a pretty popular destination. You can drive right up to a view of the falls and walk just a ways to reach the falls. (Lesson: it’s always windy and wet close to these falls.)

Leaving our van at the Takkakaw Falls parking area, we started to hike up to a view of more waterfalls.  We took the road to Twin Falls, but we only went about half-way to the top. In the process, we viewed three waterfalls that were all quite lovely.

It’s a fairly moderate climb and about 3 or so miles to get to the third fall, then it gets harder and steeper to get to Twin Falls.

There are also other longer hikes, including some remote camping areas, that start from this trail.

Since Matt’s 60^th birthday was Monday, we decided to splurge on dinner Sunday evening at the Cathedral Mountain Lodge.  It’s a lovely fancy log cabin with a dining room complete with views of several mountains – and some of the best food I’ve ever eaten. A highlight was gourmet smores: berries; high quality chocolate; homemade marshmallows and delicate crust, not at all like graham crackers from a box. Matt said all that was missing was the charcoal.

Monday, July 3

On this day, we drove back north on Highway 1, The Icefield Parkway.  We were looking for last hikes in Banff and Yoho before heading down to the Columbia.

We ended up at Saskatchewan Crossing – which somehow reminded me of a rest stop on the Pennsylvania turnpike: tour buses and a huge gift shop and coffee shop.  But we were able to get directions to Warden Lake, which is what we were looking for.

A mile or two south of Saskatchewan Crossing is a ranger station on the east side of the road. Across from it is a little parking area.  Cross the road, and look for a little sign in a field south of the buildings, indicating a trail to Warden Lake.

This easy walk is most notable for following the headwaters of the Saskatchewan River and for giving a close-up view of a controlled burn.  The lake itself isn’t that spectacular, but once again, every time you look up you see some amazing peaks. A comfortable walk.

We thought we’d try for a peaceful and leisurely period at Moraine Lake before we left the area. Matt was hoping to be able to have some unlimited time to take photos without lots of people jockeying for views.

But although we got to the lake around 6, there was still a long line to get in. We did walk to the end of the lake, and we were able to see a little woodpecker sticking his tiny head out of a snag waiting for mom to come back and feed him.

While the water is still beautifully blue-green and the surrounding peaks are awesome, it’s crazy busy with people well into the evening.

Tuesday, July 4

This day was devoted to learning information that would prepare us for next year’s trip: the next phase of exploring the Columbia River.

So far, we had driven from Columbia Lake up to Radium Hot Springs. We had not explored the area from Radium Hot Springs to Kinbasket Lake, at which point the Columbia becomes a reservoir. One dilemma we’ve had has been how we could get around the reservoir (something we have left until next year).

From our campground in Yoho, we drove along the Trans Canada Highway, Highway 1 to Golden (on Highway 93). Then we drove north toward Kinbasket Lake to check out a “resort” at the south end of the reservoir.  We visited the resort, which is cabins and campgrounds and some canoe rentals. We talked to the owner, who talked to us about the limited road access along the lake.

After that, we drove around the south end of the lake to the northeast side, where we stopped at a public campground – which was lovely, but which I determined was intolerable based on the insects. Much discussion ensued about clothing that would make hiking and paddling tolerable, even if we agreed not to camp there.

We drove south on Highway 95 along the Columbia, which at that point is in the last stages of being an unbridled river.  We ended the day in Golden, where we camped at a municipal park along the Kicking Horse River.

After dinner, we walked along a bike path that took us to the confluence of the Kicking Horse and the Columbia. Very cool (with, again, the exception of mosquitos). From there, we walked into downtown to visit a brewery. (Matt’s review: too much Bavarian-style clove beer.)

The town recently built a lovely covered bridge over the Kicking Horse River, which connects the bike path to a sweet downtown square, where the town holds a great concert series and other events.

Golden seems to be recreating itself in a very nice way.

Wednesday, July 5

On Wednesday, we took ourselves to breakfast at the Big Bend Café – excellent, and visited Bacchus Books, where we got some very detailed maps of the region adjacent to the Columbia. Bacchus seems to be a central part of the Golden community, with used and new books and a café upstairs.

We drove from Golden south along the Columbia, back toward Radium Hot Springs. Much of the area is protected wetlands and wildlife habitat. We weren’t able to find any good viewing areas, but we will be back to explore next year.

We returned to our old stable campgrounds, Redstreak, for the night and for a last go at laundry.  When we drove into town, Matt pointed to something and said, “that isn’t a statue.” It was, in fact, a bighorn sheep that seemed to have wandered into downtown Golden. On the way up the hill, we saw three more sheep in the process of being photographed.

Thursday, July 6

This was our most earnest attempt to access the Columbia. From Radium Hot Streak, we retraced our steps toward Columbia Lake. We stopped into what’s left of the town of Canal Flats. At this point, more than 100 years ago, some well-meaning entrepreneur tried to build a canal between the Kootenay and Columbia Rivers.

For his trouble, a total of two sternwheelers used the canal, each one only once. Soon after, it was abandoned.

While the person at the visitor center told us the canal was no longer accessible, she gave us a map that showed us directly where to go.  So we got to see this little stagnant, useless canal and think about the past.

Although she was ignorant of the canal, this person did let us know that it’s possible and easy to find the exact point the Columbia begins.

So we drove through some city streets and followed signs to a little walking path.  The path leads through some marshy areas to a bridge. On one side of the bridge is marshland. On the other, the water is more free flowing – in fact, the very beginning of the Columbia River that flows to Astoria.

Apparently, the marsh is fed from water seeping underground from the Kootenay River.  While the Kootenay and Columbia nearly meet at this point (and would have, with the help of the canal), these major rivers actually flow hundreds of miles in opposite directions – one going north, then west; the other going south all the way to Montana before flowing north and east again – until they actually meet in southern B.C.

Having seen several of the rivers that form the Columbia, we are more excited than ever to continue our journey next year and in the future.

By this time, we were heading for the barn, and Matt drove us back into the states, through Spokane and all the way to Walla Walla. This was our goal, because we had fallen in love with a restaurant called the Saffron Mediterranean Restaurant.  It was a good incentive to keep going  — that, and it was 100 degrees for most of the trip.

We were happy to enjoy a terrific meal in air conditioning. We are now camped out at the Motel 6, where the AC, while noisy, doesn’t appear to be doing much good.

Final travel day

We left Walla Walla and drove home along Highway 14 on the Washington side. A fitting end to the journey, through the amazing Columbia Gorge, which had inspired our trip.
Already looking forward to next year.

 

A good (conservative) friend recently wrote that his conservative friends claim it’s impossible to talk to a liberal with the liberal getting upset, yelling, etc.

And I keep reading on the internet that when Obama took over, the right wing didn’t scream, cry, complain or throw things.

So I just really, really wanted to answer this.  I know my friends on the left already have said it better than I can, and my uber-conservative friends will continue to think I’m an unrealistic, spoiled snowflake blah blah blah. But I wanted to say it anyway.

Here’s why I find myself cursing a lot more and crying a lot more.

First, to say the right wing accepted Obama gracefully is so offensively not true it hardly deserves acknowledgment. But I will respond, anyway.

They made up stuff about his birthplace and his religion.

They announced before the inauguration that they would not cooperate with Obama in any way. And they did not.

They have called him corrupt, with no evidence, no hints, no nothing to back it up.

They refuse to accept the fact that he saved the auto industry; that he stabilized the banking system; and that he ushered in 75 consecutive months of employment growth.

(Oh, right. Those were made up figures.  It’s only in the 76th month of growth that it’s real figures.)

And they can’t accept that if growth was slower than they thought it should be it was because a) when he took over, our economy hadn’t been in such bad shape since the Depression; and b) the Republicans refused to go along with a more aggressive stimulus package, despite the advice of most respected economists.

They made horrible comments about the president’s wife, comments that should not be said about anyone, but totally deny the wisdom, grace and fun she brought to the White House.

Ugh, it’s so absurd.

Yes, people shouldn’t break stuff and throw stuff when they demonstrate. But that’s what happens when young people get mobilized. There’s always a tiny percentage of kids there to see what they can get away with.  Considering the hundreds of thousands of people who have been out on the street, we have a darn good record of peaceful demonstrations.

But more to the point, here’s why we may be more upset than the right was eight years ago.

That’s because lives are at stake. Many lives. Of real, already-born people.

When Obama took office, people worried that their taxes might increase, or that they wouldn’t have such easy access to guns.  I don’t think they worried that his administration would cause people to die.

But that’s what it’s looking like to us under the new regime. The trade off? Some people get lower taxes and corporations get fewer regulations. We get sicker and die earlier.

It looks to me like:

People will sicken and die faster if they don’t have health care coverage.

People will sicken and die if we pull back on air and water quality regulations. Think smog. Think asthma. Think Love Canal. Think about what industry gets away with when no one is watching.

People will sicken and die if there’s a roll back of health and safety regulations. They’ve already tossed the coal workers out with the coal dust. (Have you read that black lung cases are growing in number while at the same time the industry is refusing to give retired employees the health benefits promised to them?) So who’s next to be sacrificed?

People will sicken and die if they make good their threat of cracking down on legal marijuana. Do you know that a recent study found that opiate abuse is 25 percent lower in states where pot use is legal?

Who knows what will happen to undocumented workers who are returned to their countries of origin — which they fled to escape hunger, poverty and violence. Can we expect them to  fare any better when they return?  What are their lives worth?

And what happens to the children left behind here with one parent?  Family values. Right.

And, oh yeah. I get that people already are dying in wars in which we are involved.  But the likelihood of more international chaos is so much greater under our current president than under the previous one. President Obama thought things through. Maybe he didn’t make always make great decisions, if, indeed, anybody knows what a good decision would be with respect to the Middle East.

But already, we have seen the results of applying the new president’s Twitter-length attention span to military planning. I just heard about what really occurred during the recent raid in Yemen, where we never should have been in the first place. That action was disastrous in every conceivable way.

More of our young men and women are going to die in wars. Their civilians and a lot of little kids will die from bombs, starvation, increased disease.  And, oh yeah, don’t think you can come here just because your home town has been destroyed in some war that has nothing to do with you. Sorry kid, try Jordan.

Without even getting into the inconceivable losses that can face us by refusing to acknowledge, let alone try to slow, global warming, there are another couple deaths that can’t be overlooked.

One is the death of a functioning government, built slowly, carefully and after much struggle and debate over the last 240 years.

The other is our collective faith in our democratic traditions.

And they wonder why we’re upset.

 

 

I really, honestly, am trying to be less political on Facebook.

So I’m going to use this blog to put in writing some things that have been bouncing around in my head.

I spend a lot of time thinking about how differently we perceive things. I’m often getting an idea that I think clearly reveals the difference between the thinking of liberals and conservatives (and Trump supporters, who may not fall into either camp). These ideas change pretty often.

Here are my latest ones, which mostly focus on those who supported Clinton and those who didn’t vote; voted for a third-party candidate; or who voted for and continue to support the current president.

CURRENT THEORY NUMBER ONE: The difference between Clinton supporters and all the others mentioned above is whether or not they believe the U.S. was in better shape at the end of 2016 than it was in January 2009.

From what I understand about Trump supporters and others, they believe that our nation has become a worse place under the Obama administration. Many, as I understand it, also believe that the Republicans have let them down, for different reasons, and that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have the intention or ability to improve things.

If I can take the liberty to sum up the thinking of those of us who supported Clinton (and are frankly horrified by some of the policies coming out of both Congress and the White House today), we think we are in many essential ways better off that we were in 2009. This is in large part owing to the action of the president and efforts taken in the first two years of his administration, when there was a Democratic majority in Congress.

To be fair, I think that some of the actions taken early (bailing out the car industry; certain parts of the stimulus package) had bipartisan support. But I also think that had Obama had a stronger Democratic majority he would have done what many economists urged: created a stronger stimulus package that would have spurred private sector job growth (private construction contractors, engineers, etc. plus secondary jobs like those in retail and quick revenue increases to state and local governments).

I think quick action by Obama and Congress saved the U.S. auto industry; gave investors some confidence that we wouldn’t have a repeat of the banking crisis; and set the country on the path to recovery.

While I know some people’s health insurance costs were negatively affected by the Affordable Care Act, the result still is that millions of people were able to have health insurance for the first time; others saw their premiums drop quite a bit; and the industry feels that after some major price adjustments at the end of 2016, costs were about to even out if the program continued.

Most of us on the left agree, I think, that the additional costs we all may pay immediately as a result of greater environmental regulation are worth saving lives; protecting wildlife; preventing, or at least forestalling, further human-caused climate change; and more. Regulations can be onerous and daunting, but cannot we agree that if they save lives they benefit us all?

I really like the idea of keeping coal dust out of waterways. Sorry if some coal companies feel it’s a burden: maybe they could hire some people to help keep our rivers clean. But, oh yeah, we don’t have to worry about that regulation any more. It just got revoked.

As far as international events: I don’t agree with everything President Obama did — and I think you can find arguments on both sides for greater or less intervention in Syria; use of drones as execution devices; pulling out of Iraq when we did.  

Nonetheless, I think the makings of a mess in the Middle East were sown well before Obama took office. And from what I’m reading, U.S. allies have made major inroads against ISIS. As a result of ISIS losing control of land, they are also losing revenue, which should have a great cyclical effect on that organization’s ability to continue its fight.

And I don’t for a second believe that President Obama exacerbated racial problems or by his actions made the U.S. a more divided nation. He rarely brought up the issue (to much criticism from some Black politicians), and certainly never acted angry, offended or tried to induce guilt in any way around issues of race.

If racism increased during his tenure, it was not because he incited it. He and his whole family behaved with almost unparalleled dignity and decorum during his eight years in office, and we could all do well to emulate his thoughtful, respectful attitude toward all people and all issues.

And if the country is more divided now than it was 10 years ago, can we lay any blame on the Congressional Republicans who announced immediately that their purpose in Congress was to prevent the new president from accomplishing anything? What kind of leadership is that?  

CURRENT THEORY NUMBER TWO: The world can be divided into people who believe some things are no-brainers and those who don’t believe there is such a thing as a no-brainer.

For example, I just was reading a FB argument on Current Theory Number One, resulting from the president’s statement that he was left a mess.

Someone had posted a list of economic indicators in which, by and large, the U.S. was doing better than it had been in 2009. As is the way of good journalism, it was filled with caveats and explanations, because nothing is simple.

One of the anti-liberal people in this discussion, who is usually relatively thoughtful, wrote, “Well, what about all those “buts”?

He wanted (or purported to want) a clear cut, all-or-nothing, “better or worse.”

It will never, ever happen that way.

Yeah, the world isn’t 100 percent better in every way than it was in 2009.  Everything is complicated.  Every action has unintended consequences.  The president has to deal with a Congress which tried to stalemate him.  Things take time. Many, many factors affect any system, be it economic, social or military.

The U.S. economy doesn’t operate in a vacuum. Europe was experiencing great economic uncertainty during this period which may have been affected by the U.S. recession, but which was lengthened and exaggerated by troubles within the E.U.

You can’t just remove environmental regulations and expect the coal industry to come back — unless you somehow convince or coerce the rest of the energy industry to stop pulling natural gas out of the ground and convince mine operators to go back to more labor-intensive ways of extracting coal.

Does anybody really know what to do in the Middle East?  More bombing? Less bombing? Support Assad? Take out Assad? And what the heck are we doing in Yemen?

If anybody really had an idea to thwart Putin; ensure Europe the energy and economic security it needs; solve ethnic problems, etc., somebody would be coming up with a coherent strategy.  No such strategies came through in the Republican debates.  Democrats are as divided as Republicans.

“Obvious solutions” to domestic problems like requiring drug tests for food stamp eligibility; locking people up for non-violent crimes; etc., often don’t work. I’m sure there are as many “no-brainer” examples on the left, too.

So let me say that I’m totally in the “There’s no such thing as a no-brainer” camp.

Despite the current president’s approach (raise tariffs; keep out immigrants; send people without papers back home; repeal the Affordable Care Act) there are no simple, obvious solutions. People who vote for any candidate based on that hope are going to be disappointed and frustrated.

CURRENT SPECULATIVE ASIDE:  OK, this is totally intuitive, but I’m going to say it (and maybe somebody will set me straight. This addresses criticisms that job growth was too slow during the last eight years.

But here’s what this looks like to me:

If the stock market increased steadily over the second half of the Obama administration, that meant businesses were doing well, right?

So, they weren’t suffering under Obama, right?

So, if they weren’t hiring, it wasn’t because they couldn’t afford it, but rather because they preferred to keep their stock prices really high rather than re-investing in their operations, right.  That’s my current theory number two.

I know other things come into play: automation requiring fewer people; the changing nature of businesses, etc., but these, too, are out of the hands of the government.

And unemployment has been under 5 percent, which is really good, right?

So what’s the complaint?

I would love it if people would let me know their reactions to this. There’s a comment section on this blog, for those who would prefer to keep it all off Facebook.

 

I was a high school senior in 1968.

I approached the end of school with as much optimism as anyone who ever approached graduation.

Enthusiastically, I went door to door being “Neat and Clean for Gene” (McCarthy); was passionately against the Vietnam War, which I naively thought was a one-time mistake in our country’s history; and I believed that things would continue to get better once the rest of the country caught on to what was really important.

Then, in April of that year, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.

In June of that year, we lost Bobby Kennedy.

Hate seemed to be winning.

Later that month I graduated from high school. Welcome to the rest of your life, and what happened to all that exuberant optimism?

So what happened next to me was Music from the Big Pink, the Band’s first album.

It’s hard to explain to a non-believer what it was about the Band. In fact, a few months ago I overheard some professional musicians trying to put it into words, and everyone failed.

I found a review of the Big Pink album by Al Kooper, my hero from the Blues Project days. He describes the music as “honest and unaffected.”  All else is commentary.

It’s pretty raw, and sometimes it’s pretty obscure, and it’s also real and insightful and funny and offensive. At 18, I didn’t really know what I was listening to or why it moved me so much. I just know that it was all I wanted to listen to.

And I know that in the fall of 1968, after our friends faced off with police in downtown Chicago and we wondered at our own naivete, the Band became some sort of beacon.

Not of hope, but of the beauty of reality.

What brings this to mind? On the 40th anniversary of the Last Waltz, the Band’s final concert, I got to see some of Portland’s best musicians perform at “The Next Waltz.” It’s an annual tribute to the musicians and the songs from that iconic concert and the Martin Scorsese film that memorialized it.

The musicians played their hearts out, with ultimate respect to the Band and all the other guest artists.  And all of us aging and aged hipsters remembered and rejoiced. And we fell in love with each of them, including Anita Lee Elliott, who doubles on harp/guitar and electric lead guitar; the amazing Steve Kerin who does, among other things, a tremendous Dr. John cover (turns out, Dr. John was one of Steve’s major influences); and the fabulous Kris Deelane, who apparently is the Hardest Working Woman in music.

And then Lewi Longmire  sang Dylan’s “Forever Young.” Beautifully. Soulfully. And as a young man singing to his older listeners.

A reminder that physically, we aren’t.  The possibility of making a difference to the world no longer seems infinite.

And, in the aftermath of the 2016 election, the hopeful legacy we always assumed we would leave seemed no more substantial than ashes from that awful pot we were smoking back then.

Yet all of us in that theater were united by something more than nostalgia and regret.

One of the few Shakespeare quotes I know is this: If music be the food of love, play on. And how they fed us that night.

At that moment, we were united in love — of the music; of musicians past and present; of memories of optimism and the hope that after all, love really does trump hate.

I know the Millennials think we screwed up. Perhaps we did. I’ll always have my regrets about not doing more. But the generation that brought them Dylan and the Band can’t have been all bad.

 

 

The acoustic music world is filled with stunning talent flying gracefully, if often sadly, under the radar of the commercial music industry.

It’s great for us, because we get to see tremendous musicians in small venues at reasonable prices. And it’s awful, because these phenomenal artists aren’t getting the recognition — or compensation — of many less-talented musicians who sing other people’s songs, don’t play their own instruments well, or at all, and are stuck in the rut dictated by something other than their own muse. (OK, this is an issue for a different post.)

I’m used to listening to excellent musicians at house concerts — mine or other peoples’ — and at the few venues in Portland that host these folks.

But I’m not used to dropping my jaw at astonishing talent. But I did the other evening, when I got to hear the Matt Flinner Trio.

So the expected part. Matt Flinner is an extraordinary mandolin player. I’ve known this for a long time, as I watched him when he was quite young and have loosely followed his career for 20-some years.

Bassist Eric Thorin and guitarist Ross Martin are equally skilled, versatile and entertaining.

But here’s the part I didn’t know about.

When they tour, they impose on themselves the requirement of “Song de Jour.”

Each of them must compose a song for that evening’s performance. They have to write it; score it for the others; and become proficient in their own as well as their band mates’ new works. All between 12:01 a.m. that day and the time of the concert.

And if they are playing with guest artists, as they are doing on their entire West Coast tour, they try to write something that complements the style of their fourth player. Since their usual style leans toward jazz, with a lot of dissonance and unusual chording, this can be a stretch.

When they performed with clawhammer banjo player Bob Carlin, they created tunes with an old-time feel. When playing with Tony Furtado, they incorporated traditional-sounding melodies reminiscent of Tony’s earliest solo banjo albums. All they while, they inserted their own styles — including Eric’s bass-driven syncopation, including lots of rests requiring precision stops interspersed with complicated rhythms.

I’d love to be there when they perform with Mike Compton, whose mandolin playing reflects Bill Monroe’s more than any other contemporary picker.

Some of their stuff is a little way out for this old bluegrasser’s taste. But a lot of it is very melodic and beautifully musical.

Their blend of three instruments, or four with a guest, is remarkably full and satisfying. Their timing, as always demonstrated on Eric’s tunes, is stunning.

And the whole effect really is jaw-dropping.

It’s great to be totally astonished in a happy way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I recently saw the film Iron Lady on the library shelf, and since it was something I’d been meaning to watch for a long time, I took it home and watched it.

The story of Margaret Thatcher, played so movingly by Meryl Streep, brought together several themes that had been bouncing around in my head.

First, I’ve been thinking about Angela Merkel and Theresa May. They are the leaders of two of the world’s most powerful nations. Soon, I hope, another woman will join them.

I have done a little bit of fantasizing about what a summit meeting would look like with three female heads of state.

Will they be as no-nonsense together as Margaret Thatcher was dealing with Parliament, the opposition and Argentina? Will it be important to them all to appear steely and focused and forego the kind of interaction that we associate with women’s get-togethers?

Maybe they will spend some time talking about spouses, shoes, hair coloring and their favorite sports (apparently all three of them follow certain teams avidly).

And will they take some time to talk about the special challenges they face as women who have worked so hard for so long to achieve the top positions in their nations? Will they form an international support network for women with the loneliest jobs in the world?

I wonder if Merkel and May get scrutinized as closely for their hair and their clothing. Does the European press talk about how much they pay their hairdressers and how much their jackets cost?

According to the film, Margaret Thatcher was criticized early on for being shrill, and she studied how to modulate her voice and speak in a more measured, but forceful, way. At the same time, the men in Parliament were jumping up and down, frothing at the mouth and screeching.

We know things haven’t changed for Hillary Clinton. We know she’s too . . . .whatever. Shrill; uninspired; bold; tired; effusive; well-dressed; poorly-dressed, etc. There are so many lists of the conflicting criticisms she receives daily.

Would anyone dare to tell Angela Merkel that her voice is too shrill? Is Theresa May surrounded, as Thatcher was, with male advisors who tell her how to dress and speak?

I guess she’s got a thing for shoes. I wonder how her cabinet feels about that, or if they care. Does the British public warm to her because she wears colorful footwear?  Has any previous prime minister made the pages of Footwear News?

So these random thoughts bring me to Meryl Streep portraying Margaret Thatcher. First, what a performance. And second, Meryl Streep has informed my understanding of Hillary Clinton better than almost any other source (I’m a little ashamed to say).

I’ve known of Clinton’s record of fighting for poor children and families every since she got her law degree. I know that she has been a strong advocate for women’s rights here in the United States, and that she has spoken out fearlessly around the world since her days as first lady.

But I didn’t realize all she had done for women’s rights internationally until I first read excerpts of an introduction Meryl Streep gave.  Now, I go back to it over and over to remind myself how one person can make a difference.

I love this speech. I love hearing about the personal advocacy Hillary Clinton has shown for brave women around the world. I love the admiration that one strong female role model shows for another. I love the human-ness and the commitment and the hopefulness.

Watching this is like taking a spiritual bath, washing away some of the hatred and the sniping and the nastiness that seems to have embedded itself in our POTUS campaigns since the first Clinton ran for president. It reminds us that people are working on each others’ behalf all over the world, and that the United States is still looked upon as a leader on behalf of human rights.

I love this speech. I think I’ll watch it again after dinner.

I started this blog several months ago, not knowing where it would go. Recently, it seemed that this would be a good opportunity for me to interview some of the interesting people I know – or would like to know – about their lives and their passions.

I started with my neighbor and friend, Margaret Bax. This interview focuses on her perspective of Portland housing issues over the years and the role she has played in them.

Throughout the interview, Margaret listed names of many people who were important in her education and in progressive housing policies. I may have left out some: if I did, it’s my fault, not Margaret’s, who emphasizes that Portland’s collaborative nature is what makes change possible.

 Margaret with some of the Zambian families that receive goat milk from the organization she and Casey started.

Portland recently remembered the flood that washed away Vanport – the North Portland community that housed most of Portland’s recently arrived African American residents during the 1940s.

Vanport is most noted for the flood. But it also reminds us of another legacy: lack of affordable housing. Henry Kaiser built Vanport for shipyard workers to reside in at a time when the City of Portland refused to subsidize needed housing.

The struggle to house low-income and working Portlanders has never abated.  For much of the last 30 years, Margaret Bax has pushed the city to acknowledge the problem – and to do something about it. With her mentor and friend Gretchen Kafoury, Margaret successfully cajoled, encouraged and nagged the city to recognize the many Portlanders who can’t afford market rate housing.

When Irvington was filled with kids.  Margaret grew up in Portland’s Irvington neighborhood when many of the houses were filled by large Catholic families. “The neighborhood was teeming with kids.” Margaret remembers neighborhood softball games pitting Madeleine School students against those from public schools.

“There often weren’t enough public school kids to make a team. Sometimes the Catholic kids had to join the other side to make the teams even.  You didn’t really want to change sides, but you did it to have a game.”

Margaret now lives just blocks from the house she was raised in.

“It’s sad to see these great big houses with so few people living in them. They’re more like trophy homes. The emphasis on preserving their historic value is wonderful, but bigger families can’t afford to live here anymore.”

First contact with Portland’s homeless.  Margaret studied nursing at Portland Community College and went to work at Holladay Park Hospital, a small facility near Lloyd Center.  It was the place where the police would bring homeless people who needed emergency medical care.

Working in the Emergency Room, Margaret treated a lot of street people. But when it came to discharging them, she remembers thinking how absurd were the regular set of instructions for follow-up: “Keep the dressing clean and dry; change it every few days; and visit your regular physician soon.  It was impossible for street people to do any of these.”

Within a few years, Margaret started studying political science at Portland State. Her classes, internships and volunteer work led to her public policy career. And her medical background continued to fuel her interest in housing. “It is very hard to stay healthy without a place to live. It’s almost impossible to get well if you are sick and homeless.”

As the first volunteer with Wallace Medical Concern, she visited shelters and SRO’s (single room occupancy dwellings) in downtown Portland. She and Dr. Jim Reuler from the VA outpatient clinic sought out and served people who needed medical care but who were unlikely to go to a clinic or hospital.

“We made house calls to SRO rooms in the old hotels and shelters.  Building managers would identify people who were sick or whom they were worried about. We would knock on their door and ask if we could come in and help.  Most of the buildings and rooms were pretty funky, but we found these amazing communities where people looked after each other.”

But some memories are shocking: “Like a person lying on a cot, covered with bugs. People in icy cold apartments with no central heat huddled around a small wood stove.” She once walked into a room to find the body of someone who had frozen to death.

Portland pays attention.  The surprise election of Mayor Bud Clark in 1984 focused the city’s attention on homelessness and housing needs.  “It was the first official recognition that homelessness existed in Portland – and that we could do something about it.”

At the time, Margaret was staff assistant to Gretchen Kafoury, then a Multnomah County commissioner. Bud Clark had a host of allies in city and county government who helped him take the lead on issues of homelessness.

Under Bud’s leadership, a 12-point plan was drafted. Margaret was among many city and county staffers charged with creating an action plan.

Solutions ranged from creating new shelters with partners like Transition Projects to buying buildings for affordable apartments, renovating old buildings, and enforcing health and safety codes. Complementary programs included mental health and addiction services, like the creation of the CHIERS van and Hooper Detox Center.

Most important, Margaret said, “For the first time, the plan gave the community a framework for talking about homelessness.”

Over the years, parts of the plan were completed, including the first safe places for women experiencing homelessness.

Policy maker. When Gretchen earned a seat on Portland City Council in the early 1990s, Margaret moved from Multnomah County with her. Gretchen became the first City Housing Commissioner with the job of coordinating all city housing policy and budgeting.  A couple of years later, Margaret accepted a position at the Portland Development Commission. With Gretchen as her ally on City Council, they continued the momentum on housing issues.

Portland had come through an intense period of focusing on homeless. But old problems were replaced by new ones on a massive scale.

Ronald Reagan-era policies resulted in huge reductions to affordable housing funding for lower-income working people.  State policies meant formerly institutionalized people with mental illnesses were now on the street, and promised funding for less restrictive housing never materialized. The country’s failure – and the Veterans’ Affairs Department’s inability – to deal with the long-term toll of military service created additional needs for housing and mental health care.

Wages were stagnating, and more and more families just weren’t making it. They were living in cars and church basements. Domestic violence and other ills associated with homelessness were rising.

The City of Portland allocated $30 million in general fund dollars to a new Housing Investment Fund. Gretchen insisted that the first allocation fund housing for large, low-income families, including those below the 30 percent median income level. This was the first time Portland earmarked general fund money for housing for families outside the central city. Other populations housed were seniors and people with disabilities.

Margaret notes the many people who supported this approach and devised policies to make it work, including Steve Rudman, Denny West, Helen Barney and Erik Sten.

“We were most successful when we worked collaboratively with a wide range of community and government partners; non-profit housing and social service providers; for-profit developers; Housing Authority; PDC; the city, the county, the state and the federal government. Some examples are New Columbia, Iris Court, River District and preserving hundreds of very low-income units downtown.”

The other element, Margaret said, was strong political leadership as demonstrated by Gretchen, Bud Clark, Erik Sten and Vera Katz.

Affordable housing in urban renewable districts.  In the 1990s, Portland was studying ways to build out large urban parcels that had particular development challenges. Two major areas, the River District (usually called the Pearl District) and North Macadam, were close to downtown. They would be designed for public transit and pedestrian access with the goal of connecting people to jobs without the need for private cars.

But without a lot of effort, the bank and retail clerks, the legal assistants, the teachers and others who make up the bulk of Portland’s work force would be priced out of the new housing. As Housing Policy Manager at the PDC, Margaret wanted to make sure the city lived up to its goals of inclusivity by planning for affordable housing.

During her four years in this role, she was successful in establishing affordable housing goals for every urban renewal district in the city. The targets reflected income levels for the city as a whole.

So how’d that work out? Very well. And poorly.

Affordable housing was one of many negotiating areas for building out the River District.  Private developers agreed to increase density over expected market levels; leave pedestrian walkways and meet other city proposals in exchange for streetcar construction, parks and other infrastructure changes.

Developers, led by Hoyt Street Properties, worked willingly with the city. Some of the first projects finished in the area were designated for income levels ranging from 30 to 80 percent of median income. Annual monitoring demonstrates that the River District generally has met its affordable housing goals. Today, the district holds more than 2,000 units of affordable housing.

Then there’s North Macadam.  North Macadam is the collection of high rise apartments, condos and Oregon Health Sciences University Buildings between the Willamette River and I-5 just south of downtown. In the center is the east end of the tram that connects to OHSU’s hilltop location.

Both Margaret and Gretchen had been out of public service for years when they refocused on North Macadam. What got their attention was a 2014 notice from the city stating that it wasn’t going to meet its affordable housing goals in the new district.  So, the city proposed simply to lower the already-low targets.

 Gretchen, a few days before her death, with Margaret.

“We were appalled that the city would walk away from targets in what was becoming the most desirable neighborhood in the central city.  At a time when homelessness was increasing and service sector workers were having to move farther and farther away from their work, it was unconscionable.”

Margaret also was outraged to learn that OHSU had backed out of a deal to build affordable housing on a site in North Macadam that was designated for 400 affordable units.  The city also failed to recover at least $2 million of the $6 million it had contributed for building housing on the site.

The city and OHSU built the tram to connect new medical facilities with those on Pill Hill.  Margaret saw forsaking affordable housing goals in the area as a giant missed opportunity.

“OHSU is a huge employer.” The hospitals, clinics and research facilities need housekeepers, custodians, nurses’ aides, administrative support staff, clinical technicians and thousands of other workers at all income levels.

Where better than North Macadam to provide housing that these employees can afford?

Gretchen and Margaret, along with other housing advocates, decided it was time for action.  Their lobbying and ability to focus media attention on these issues resulted in getting the city to change its position.

Ultimately, the city did not roll back the affordable housing goals, and subsequently it invited proposals for affordable housing in North Macadam. In addition, as a result of their efforts, the city agreed to identify other sites that should hold housing for a range of income levels.

Farewell to a dear friend. One spring day in 2015, Margaret and Gretchen were scheduled to appear before Portland City Council to discuss affordable housing. Just before she left the house, Margaret received an email from Gretchen saying, “Flu. I’m a no go.”

Margaret testified alone, and throughout the day she tried contacting Gretchen, without success.

The next day, Margaret got the news. Gretchen had died of a heart attack at age 72.

One of Gretchen’s last acts on behalf of the city was to remind the mayor and commissioners of their obligations to working people.  Affordable housing in North Macadam will be one part of Gretchen’s immense legacy.

Gretchen’s legacy. But Margaret is herself a part of Gretchen’s living legacy.

Margaret’s retired, and she has plenty of ongoing commitments: mentoring members of a goat-raising co-op she and her husband started in Zambia; babysitting great nephews; maintaining a 40-year-old poker game; keeping up close relations with two grown daughters, an extended family and many long-time friends; and working with a group to replace the old Taft Hotel, home to more than 60 extremely poor seniors and people with multiple disabilities.

Housing is never far from her mind.  As always, it starts with her neighborhood.

When she and her colleagues pushed for homeowners to be able to build accessory dwelling units throughout the city, including in Northeast Portland, they were thinking about students, seniors and entry-level workers who needed affordable housing in safe neighborhoods.  “I didn’t think these would turn into short-term rentals, making them unavailable for people who need housing and further driving up housing prices.”

But she also sees good things coming.

“I am encouraged by current comprehensive plan changes to allow two, three and four-plexes in traditional single family neighborhoods to increase the supply of smaller and more affordable units as well as density in areas with good schools and existing infrastructure.

“I am also feeling more hopeful this last year with the city and county working more closely to address homelessness and housing. The amount of resources being directed at housing has increased significantly, and if they stay the course and maintain commitment, we will see real progress.

“The housing bond being discussed for the fall ballot could make a huge difference. The state also has made significant contributions in terms of dollars and policies to address housing.

“Unfortunately, housing is complicated and requires a long-term view and actions on multiple fronts. That is what makes it so hard. People want one solution that will fix it now. That’s just not possible.”

 

 

 

 

There’s little to add to what’s been said already about the events of this week. All I can say is that I could not be any sadder for this country. And I know this isn’t the last we will see of race-induced murder.

But I want to tell you about an experience I had today that helped offset the grief for me.

In a way, it was sort of a mess. In another way, it was delightful.

I recently started volunteering for SOAR: Sponsored Organized to Assist Refugees.  It’s a great volunteer gig. Once a week or so, I get an email from a nice young man named Jacob who doubles as receptionist and volunteer coordinator.

He lists a bunch of tasks that need to be done — mostly driving new refugees to appointments or picking them up at the airport — and asks us if we can take any on.

Today was my third assignment. It was to drive folks from IRCO, a refugee service organization, to a community center to celebrate World Refugee Day.

Well, when you think of it, that’s a weird thing to celebrate, since it’s not exactly a whoo-hooo situation that more than 21 million people are considered refugees, and another 40 million have been physically displaced from their homes.

But here in Portland, IRCO, Soar and other agencies are working hard to welcome families from around the world.

So I was sitting in a classroom at IRCO, where the people waiting for rides were supposed to gather.

In the language department: I have vague memories of high school Spanish, and the other person in the room was a young woman from Burma who speaks English fairly well. Her other language is her native dialect (which I just learned is not Burmese, but I couldn’t tell you what it was).

No one was showing up, until a young man with no English at all came in and, through sign language and loud Ukrainian, inquired about the rides.

We indicated our car keys, and we followed him outside. There we found about 15 people from three continents waiting for rides. Their collective English was “no” in response to the question, “Does anybody speak English?”

Hand gestures are wonderfully useful. I squeezed one large person of unknown origin, one thin Thai and two skinny Ukrainians into my Scion. The other woman was able to get the rest into a van.  Apparently, everybody got to the community center OK, because no one was waiting when I came back for a second trip.

So, in my uptight American/Anglo perspective, it was a bit of a fiasco. Why didn’t the system work the way it was supposed to? Did we let anybody down? Doesn’t anybody follow instructions?

On the other hand — what a hoot.  A whole little United Nations of people hanging out together in a parking lot, almost none of them able to talk to each other. And all smiling happily about the possibility of a going to a party with other refugees from dozens of nations.

The man in the front seat even helped me navigate.

So here I am, a person who boasts that she only travels more than three miles from her comfortable home under duress, driving people who have traveled thousands of miles fleeing repression; poverty; possibly incarceration and torture.

I try to imagine what circumstances would force someone to give up everything they’ve known to relocate so far from home — often at great risk — to meet an uncertain future.

In my brief experience with refugee services, things don’t always move efficiently, by American standards. There’s lots of waiting around in long lines or waiting rooms, lots of uncertainty, too few translators and, as we saw, a lot of miscommunication.

Yet to a person, they are grateful: for rides; for English lessons, for help at the immigration office. A couple weeks ago, I watched a young Burmese man try to get through a federal security station. The officers told him in English (and then in Spanish) to empty his pockets. All the time he was being patted down and the officers were pulling coins from his pockets, he smiled graciously, as if this process meant he was a real American.

If you hang out at IRCO, it’s easy to believe that we are a nation of open-hearted people who aren’t angry at our leaders; at each other; at people who don’t look like us or speak our language.

It’s also a great reminder of my grandparents, who came here in 1914 without knowing any English. My sisters, cousins and I carry on their legacy through our family’s shared sense of humor (my grandmother’s) and our ability to sew on a button really well (taught to our fathers by their father, the tailor).

I wish I could have told the the people from Ukraine my grandparents came from there, too. Maybe I will learn one phrase in Ukrainian.

So, yeah, it’s been a crappy week. But my Friday’s been a great one.

Happy World Refugee Day to all of us.