BSU football

I know, BSU football doesn't seem like an appropriate topic for a political blog, but 1) I don't care, and 2) BSU standings in the BCS race is all about politics.

The Automatic BCS Qualifying conferences don't want to see BSU (or TCU) get a shot at a national title, and the damn sure don't want either team to play and beat an undefeated team from one of the AQ conferences. One thing you'll hear, over and over, if you pay attention to the debate is, "If BSU had to play in an AQ conference every week, they wouldn't be undefeated."

Well, 1) who's to say, really? and 2), using similar (flawed) logic, if BSU had to play in an AQ conference, it'd have AQ money and AQ recruits. The entire argument is specious, and I'm weary of hearing it.

When I was in Reno in July, I put $5 on Boise to win the national title, at 10 to 1 odds. If they do, I get my $5 back, plus another $50. As it stands now, the biggest obstacle to my winning isn't BSU's performance, it's the politics of football.

Oh, and one more thing. To say that BSU isn't worthy because of strength of schedule is also specious. AT THIS POINT IN THE SEASON, Boise has played tougher teams than #1 Ohio State. In other words, if strength of schedule is key, Boise should currently be ranked above Ohio State.

Liberal liberal liberal, booga booga booga

Walt Minnick has a piece in Tuesday's Statesman responding to criticisms of his ads attacking Raul Labrador. In it, he writes:

Some in the media and liberal blogs don’t like the straightforward, tough look at Raul’s own record and background, the two things he specifically points to as his main qualifications for office.

Liberal. Nice. Walt is not only voting like a Republican much of the time, he has now adopted their language.

What's next? Is he going to start referring to the "Democrat Party."

Update: Well, wait. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. There are some liberal blogs, depending on your view. I sure don't see many in Idaho. Morialekafa has been pretty liberal, but lately has tended more toward cerebralism than liberalism. I don't consider my blog as particularly liberal, nor Fort Boise. The Mountain Goat Report, progressive, not real liberal, and lately focused on giving Minnick a hard time. Daily Kos; progressive, not liberal.

What is liberal? Well, advocating returning to heavily progressive tax rates (50% or more for the very wealthy) in order to fund social programs would qualify as a liberal position. Hmm. I guess since I'm having a difficult time identifing "liberal" causes, that probably says something about where I stand.

Progressive is advocating for issues that help the middle class and working people. A small deficit and a reasonably balanced budget is a progressive position. Investing in infrastructure is progressive. Funding food stamp programs and expanding Pell grants; progressive.

Nuthin to say

John Prine sings a song, "Angel from Montgomery," and part of the lyrics are:

how the hell can a person
go to work in the morning
come home in the evening
and have nothing to say?

Well, to spin off that, I wonder:

How the hell can a blogger
in the midst of a campaign season
with crazy tea party politics around him
have nothing to say?

Just kind of checked out from the process right now. Probably part of a general ennui and feeling that my vote and my voice are meaningless and powerless to have any positive effect on the political process. Even if I gave campaign donations until it bankrupted me, I'd still not have any meaningful influence. Not in Idaho, and certainly not nationally.

My only observation I'd offer is that in Idaho politics it's more important to look like a cowboy than to offer policies that might help the middle class.

Minnick a deficit hawk? Um, not so much

One-note Walt Minnick, who's always carping about the deficit being too high, has now signed a letter urging Democratic House Leadership to continue the tax cuts that benefit the wealthy. Extending tax cuts for the wealthy is estimated to cost around $700 billion over the next decade. The deficit is "OMFG WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE," unless it's to help rich folks like Walt avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Enthusiasm gap

We've been hearing a lot about a so-called "enthusiasm gap" between Republican and Democratic voters. Rs are enthused, so the story goes, and Ds are demoralized.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I'll admit to a fair amount of demoralization. I think that is a big reason for the lack of posting here.

I'm suffering from a failure of expectation management. I expected that President Obama and Congress could and would deliver some real reforms and change. Sure they got health care reform, and some financial regulatory reform, and a consumer protection agency. And that's all good. The problem is, health care reform is so weak, distant and ineffective that I don't see much good from it, and the others are weak sauce also. Just earlier this week, an NPR reporter closed a story about effects of health care reform on people who currently have health care by saying (I paraphrase) "expect to pay more and get less." Great.

And what really torques me is the way that fool Max Bauchus let the Republicans play him; water down the provisions to try to reach compromise, then get zero votes. And even more demoralizing; the public started out in favor of health care reform. But, given the way Bauchus and other Dems dithered and dinked around, and gave time for the Rs to demagogue it last August, with Palin and her "death panels" lies, Dems totally blew it. Total failure of politics. Ineffectual clowns, we Dems.

Rs can't govern, and Dems won't.

C'mon, throw us a bone. Recess appoint Elizabeth Warren to the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. Hang tough on not extending tax cuts for the rich. Start naming names and calling out the obstructionism of the Rs. (Yesterday's naming of John Boehner 8 times is a good start.) Also, please start calling out the lies the opponents tell.

Give us something to get excited about. I'd like to start blogging frequently again.

The beginning of the end?

The University of Idaho announced that they received a $1 million grant from the Laura Moore Cunningham Foundation, to help start a U of I Law School in Boise. In the near future, the third year can be taken in Boise at classes held in the Idaho Water Center, but apparently they want to work toward a full three year program here.

The plan is to eventually be housed in a remodeled Ada County Courthouse, and to be co-located with the Idaho Supreme Court Library. They still need to raise another $6 million to achieve that dream.

I dunno about all this, though I'm not sure the U of I has much choice. If they don't get a Boise presence, the new Concordia Law School is going to siphon off a bunch of their students. And if they do get a three year Boise program, it will pull students from the Moscow campus. Either way, it's difficult to see how the Moscow law school stays viable, or at least, stays in anything like its current configuration. This will be interesting to watch.

The other part of this story that I really don't get is the law library issue. Really? A state law library? For what purpose? The Supremes will still be blocks away, and they don't go to the library anyway. They, like more and more lawyers, use Westlaw or Lexis for legal research. It really seems like the law library is an unnecessary expense that, if it accomplishes any purpose, subsidizes lawyers. To give you an idea of its usefulness, its hours are Monday - Friday, 10 AM to 4 PM.

If the library has some archival function, why not shift that over the the State Historical Society? The state is casting around to save money; this seems like an opportunity.

But, I suspect it's sort of a backroom deal. See, one of the key factors in rating a law school is the size of its library. The more books, the higher rating. So, co-locating the law school with the law library will allow the law school to get accreditation easier, and will help it gain credibility (assuming the proper deal between the school and the law library for use of and access to the books).

Wind story exposes a lot of hot air

From a story in the Statesman today about a large wind turbine project being built in south central Idaho.

First, note what Otter said of the project:

Otter said the development of the wind industry is the newest chapter in Idaho's long history of creating its own power using renewable sources, starting with the Swan Falls Dam on the Snake River, Idaho Power's first hydroelectric dam.

"The renewable energy industry is breathing new life into the Idaho frontier," said Otter.

The developer of the wind project said

"This project wouldn't exist save for the federal grant," Urquhart said.

Otter

acknowledged that without government help, Idaho would not have the energy system it has today.

It's nice to see the anti-government Governor admit that government can help, and can in fact breathe new life into the Idaho frontier.

Man, am I glad he's gone

Bryan Fischer, now spreading his special brand of lies and hatred on a national stage.

Update: More on Fischer's wackiness here.

Peak wingnuttia?

Nah, not even close, I suspect, but we've exceeded the wingnut capacity that I was expecting. Republicans are now seriously talking about repealing another constitutional amendment. First they took aim at the 17th Amendment (direct election of Senators) and now they want to repeal the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment provides important due process protections and requires states to abide by them. The wingers are unhappy with the amendment because it allows folks born on US soil to be US citizens.

Seriously, is there nothing these clowns won't stoop to in order to pander to the tea baggers? Do they have no sense of shame or embarrassment?

BSU vs. U of I

The Statesman has a front page story today quoting BSU President Bob Kustra as saying that he doesn't care is BSU football ever plays U of I football again, because "it's a culture that's nasty [and] inebriated." Ouch.

I'm sure that UI fans are feeling kind of bruised about their rivalry with BSU these days. For many years, it was the leading university in the state. Many of the best programs, largest enrollment, best sports teams, and had the law school. Its graduates populated most of the most influential jobs, including many seats in the legislature. But now, that's changing.

BSU's football team is clearly the marquee team in Idaho, completely eclipsing UI's team. BSU now has the largest enrollment, it's growing and expanding its campus, its research grant money is flowing in faster and faster, and it looks poised to assume the mantle of the premiere university in the state. Of course, all the UI fans in influential positions will continue to try to hinder that and to promote UI, but it seems inevitable (to me, at least).

Another thing that appears inevitable (to me) is that the UI law school is essentially doomed, unless UI wises up and moves it to Boise or somewhere in the Treasure Valley. Concordia is opening a law school soon here in Boise, and once that gets up and running and accredited (assuming it does), it will start to siphon off students that are now going to UI.

Moscow is a pretty place and all, but the expense of moving there, and the relative lack of law-related employment opportunities in Moscow versus the Treasure Valley, makes it almost a no brainer that many students will choose Concordia over UI. UI law school is a good school and turns out fine lawyers, but it's a third-tier law school and doesn't really have any particular reason to draw students there, once there is an alternative. It shouldn't take Concordia too long to get at least ranked in the third tier, along with the UI law school, thus evening out any academic distinction between the two.

Concordia will be able to access leading lawyers in the state to serve as adjunct professors, its students will have the Supreme Court library about 6 blocks away, and the students will have many, many more chances to work in a legal position while in school. It's a location advantage that Moscow will never be able to match.

I talked to UI legal intern (he was in his 3rd year), and the guy said that he had to give up his business to move to Moscow, couldn't find a part time job, and his wife couldn't find a very decent paying job in the area, either. A huge economic hit. He'd have signed up at Concordia in a heartbeat, if he'd have had the option.

Once UI law-related enrollment dips, it could sink into sort of a death spiral (not that it will die, just shrink substantially). Less $$ to support it, fewer and fewer students, harder and harder to get the good professors. And over time (decades) as Concordia's grads work into influential positions, and into the legislature, one of UIs advantages (influence) will be offset and diminished.

Maybe the latter point is too distant and pie in the sky, but I do think that UI's salad days are soon to be over.