PeterGlenshaw.com

The Hard Road Ahead

As I walked this evening in the falling darkness of mid-summer towards the Common of Lyme, NH -- just outfitted with a great many tents in anticipation of the 250th celebration of its founding -- it was not hard not to consider some of the dark clouds which gathered overhead as ominious signs for the future.

Three years after the start of the Great Recession, this great nation finds itself weak and struggling.  Employment remains at near historic levels.  Economic growth as measured by GDP has come at a virtual halt, and a double-dip recession seems entirely possible.  Our national and state politics lies hostage to ideologues who appear more intent on satisfying tests of near-theocratic purity rather than measuring the needs of the entire nation.  Wealth and power increasingly accumulate at the top-end of society.  Our children don't score well internationally in any subject, ranging from math to geography to foreign language.  Worse still, way too many of our kids are fat. And so are we, their parents.  

Add this sad fact: all of us increasingly want and encourage -- through our Facebook posts and Twitter tweets -- short, easy answers to complex problems.  We are more interested in celebrities than the environment, which gets hotter and more dangerous each year. 

Increasingly, it seems, we want what is easy and can be accessed from the comfort of a chair or coach. If it requires work, exercise, sweat and toil, or pushing our mind to consider facts we don't like but ought to consider, we surrender to the so-called reality shows which come over the HDTV. 

No wonder it's a nation in love with intelligent design, Jersey Shore, and Michelle Bachmann. We pursue the stupid like it means something, and we abandon the hard truth for simple tests that ask if you are liberal, conservative, socialist, Christian, and Muslim, tree-hugger, fiscally conservative, or feminist.  

Once upon a time, there were journalists and pundits who reflected upon the the news of the week or month, and then issued commentary that attempted to summarize what it all means. Now our pundits spout opinions faster than whales headed to the beach.  Everyone is hot and bothered, and going nowhere fast.  

Later this month, I will turn 47 years old. When I look in the mirror or (more often) the webcam today, I see a guy I can barely recognize.  Where there was once blond hair atop my head, I see a few strands of closely cropped gray hair.  My face is lined and tired.  Though I work awfully hard to keep fit, I feel the creaks of age settling into muscles and bones.  In meetings, I see the young staffers turn to me as if I know the answers to the dilemmas which lie ahead.  Nearly all of my children are teenagers, and my oldest son can easily wrestle me to the ground.  

It's a time of reckoning, but not just for me.  The nation as whole faces some awesome challenges.  The next 3-10 years are incredibly important.  We stand ready, I'm afraid, to throw in the towel of character and capability for the pittance of ideology.  If you read the emails I get from a conservative civic group in northern New Hampshire, you'd assume that Obama has laid havoc upon the nation. For this group, the answer lies in adhering to a pure conservative ideology that answers today's problems with yesterday's answers. On the other hand, if you travel 75 miles west into VT, I could show you a similar group who rails at President Obama for his so-called betrayal of progressives.  I don't believe either perspective is correct or, more importantly, representative of the kind of dialogue we need to be successfully on the long road ahead.

Hard facts, civic engagement, and a desire to resist the siren call of easy answers ought to be our calling card for the next decade.  There are no short-cuts ahead and here's why I know this:  as I age and train for various athletic events, it's absolutely clear to me that there is no substitute for hard work.  I must log enough miles running and biking hills.  I must swim enough in the open water.  Despite running consistently for more than 25 years, I can't forget to do it at least once a week while also training for the other sports. I must eat right -- vegetables, protein, some carbs.  I must get enough sleep. I must stretch and lift and, interestingly enough, rest at least one day per week. There are no short cuts on the long road ahead.

We, as a nation, must decide if we are ready for the same.  We must decide if this is the time we embrace the short-term comforts of ideological purity, or abandon them for the harder training road that lies ahead.  If we are to strengthen this nation's exports, if we are restore manufacturing to world-class levels, if our children are to compete with the best in terms of physics, biology, calculus, and the arts, and if we are to have infrastructure (roads, Internet, health care, and civic structures) that compete with the best of the world, then I suggest we should avoid the temptation of easy answers underscored by ideology as our answer.  

From my driveway, I walked this evening to the Lyme Common and saw the tents assembled in celebration of this small but wonderful town's 250 anniversary.  My town seen a great many challenges and will no doubt see more ahead.  I hope the nation has the same resilence and the same sense of perspective.  It's not embracing what seemingly right that makes us stronger, but our willingness to admit what needs improving and to do the hard work to get us there that ultimately secures the future we want for ourselves and the next generation.  Let's hope we have the courage to face this future and respond with strength.

What Happened to Democrats in Massachusetts Should Stay in Massachusetts if....

1. Democrats offer better candidates than Martha Coakley.  

As brilliant and scheming as she was in securing the Democratic nomination, Coakley bombed in the general campaign.  She did not campaign the entire of month of December (shades of former MA governor and Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis taking Sundays off during the general election in 1988), brazenly confused Curt Schilling with Roger Clemens in calling the former a fan of the NY Yankees, and showed virtually no personal warmth or charisma.  

2. Incumbent Democrats offer coattails, not brooms, to fellow candidates.

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick was no help to Coakley.  His record as governor is better than it's perceived, but it ain't good enough to convince independents and conservative Dems that voting "D" is the right choice again.  Guess what?  Politics is a team sport, and when the top statewide office holder is struggling, everyone else on that team struggles, too.

3.  Democrats realize that Massachusetts is far more conservative than perceived.

While New Hampshire elected Democrat Jeanne Shaheen as Governor for three terms in the 1990s, guess which stated voted had a Republican Governor from 1990 thru 2006?  Give up?  Massachusetts!  You can count the number of truly progressive Democrats in Massachusetts at the state level in elected roles on a couple of hands. Most elected Democrats are conservative to moderate, which is why a group of high net-worth progressive Democrats formed a working group recently to improve their chances in electoral politics.

4.  Democrats realize that Obamamania is over.  

For a brief, shining moment, there was a sense one year ago that the country had become post-everything.  Post-racial, post-class, post-partisan, post-post.  'Fraid not.  It's a vision worthy of aspiration, but in the meantime, we have to deal with the reality of the right-wing attack machine (Fox, Rush, Sean, et. al.), but more importantly the genuine fear and concern people have about their economic futures.  As smart and as good as Obama is -- witness the strong endorsement he got from USA Today for his first year in office -- the fact remains that far too many people lack confidence about their economic future and are willing to find convenient targets on which to unload their concerns.  In that environment, the relentless drumbeat of Fox wins. 

5.  Democrats understand they must listen more, and preach less.

When Democrats get into living rooms and church halls to listen, explain, and bring people together, instead of prescribing changes from the halls of the Capitol that can be misperceived as arrogant, they generally succeed.  On the other hand, Republicans succeed when they unite voters based on a calculus of fear.  In uncertain economic and political times, it's far easier to divide the electorate based on fear than on facts.  Democrats need to be patient, persistent, and far more present (meaning, outside of DC) than they currently are.  

6.  Democratic state parties are better organized and less dysfunctional.

Tip O'Neill famously said all politics are local, and I'd suggest that the strength of a national political party rests significantly on the organization, financing, and human capital of its state party affiliates.  Money has not been a problem in Massachusetts for politicians, but the state party's unwillingness to embrace, nurture, and develop a farm team of new politicians -- call them 21st Century Dems -- has been a huge source of their electoral problems.  Voters are smart and recognize machine candidates like Coakley.  Guess what.  They don't like them.

7. Democrats become paranoid.

Just as Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, suggested that only the "paranoid in high tech" survive, so too should Democrats adopt the mindset that winning is nothing and that extinction lies around the corner.  If nothing else, the dominance of the right-wing extremists in the Republican Party has occurred because they have adopted a win-or-die mentality to their tactics and strategy.  Despite owning most of the media, think-tanks, and party infrastructure, Republicans generally have adopted a posture that communicates the possibility of annihilation to their base.  Without resorting to the strategy and tactics of fear in order to remain "in shape," Democrats need to find a way to keep voters and funders engaged from one election cycle to the next cycle.  This story in the Boston Globe today captures perfectly the complacency which weakens Democrats.

8. Democrats become funny.

Yup.  Gotta learn to laugh.  Are there any funny, off-the-cuff national Dems out there (aside from Obama, who I think can be pretty funny)?  For the most part, this party is far too serious (and maybe sanctimonious) for its own good.  Democrats need to realize that white paper policy positions are interesting...to maybe 10 people. Smile, relax, have a beer.  It's not just for the cameras.  It's also for your own sense of self and purpose in pursuing politics as a noble profession.  

And this...who is the number one Democrat in America today?  It's the same person who has been that number one Dem for the last six or more years?  Hint: it's not Obama.  It's been Jon Stewart. He may not carry the card of the Democratic National Committee in his wallet (who knows?), but if you look at the issues he has supported and the candidates he supports, there's no ambiguity about his political allegiances. But regardless of direct political affiliation, there's been no questioning his commitment to laughter.

Politics is a people business, and if you can't find a way to make people laugh, than maybe some Democrats ought to find a different calling.

Over Reaching Republicans

What a difference a year makes, yes?

After all, in 2009, Republican candidates win gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, and gay marriage is overturned in Maine.  What's not to like if you are a conservative? Coupled with coverage in most leading media that suggests a gap exists in the electorate for Democrats, and you have to imagine Republicans find themselves happily and unexpectedly sitting pretty tonight.

Perfect.

That's just where we what the opposition to think.

The flaw in their thinking?

Let's start with the strength of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates in NJ and VA, which I would call tepid, at best.  

The New Jersey Governor, Jon Corzine, was a disaster.  By the end of his first term, he polled in the low 30s in terms of favorability.  He continued to believe that money, not political skills or personal charm, could bring success in politics.   Like a hamster, he went round-and-round on the political wheel, but one never sensed him growing in the job as a leader or political figure. New Jersey is as Democratic a state as you will find, and it takes a pretty terrible Democratic incumbent to lose it. 

And in Virginia, a state whose politics I know reasonably well, it's fair to say Creigh Deeds was no Tim Kaine and certainly no Mark Warner or Jim Webb.  Let's face it -- Democrats with a moderate disposition who executed well throughout their campaign tend to win in this bellwether southern state.  It voted for Obama; it has two Democratic Senators, and Democrats seemed to own the corner office in the state house for the last decade.  Creigh Deeds was a nice guy who waffled on taxes, waffled on his support for Obama, and had only a 20-year old thesis to distinguish him from his opponent.  Not exactly the Right Stuff.

And Maine?  Hey, let's be clear: gay rights are not protected and endorsed by the majority of voters.  That's no surprise.  Some 31 states have voted against gay marriage when it appears on the ballot.  Would the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 been approved by most states at that time?

So, Republicans are encouraged by the fact that they can beat weak Democratic candidates and continue a tradition wherein two-thirds of most states oppose gay marriage at the ballot box. 

Terrific.  

The bottom line is this for Democrats:  most voters like and support Obama.  At the same time, they are worried about the economy, about their own jobs, and about the future.  They like this White House, but they need to see their own lives improving if they are going to vote Democratic in 2012.

As for the 2010 elections, I expect Obama and the Dems to make plenty of decisions that are short-term unpopular (meaning 2010), but medium-term popular (meaning 2012 and beyond). Most economists predict terrible unemployment thru next year's mid-term elections, and that cannot help the incumbent party.  

The good news for Democrats lies in places like Claremont, NH.  This city on the western part of the Granite state, once one of the most conservative places in New Hampshire, failed to endorse a conservative insurrection that arose regarding caps on spending.  Instead of embracing what might seen as a tried-and-true, anti-incumbent initiative, Claremont voters overwhelmingly supported candidates who supported economic growth and ongoing investment in their community.  If Democrats can demonstrate the progress that is the explicit promise in the progressive ideology, coupled with sound candidates for office, they will win. 

And if not -- if they waffle and fail to execute -- they will lose.

Sure, Republicans should not over-reach based on the election results from a few states in 2009.  But Democrats must also pay heed and understand that results, not ideology, wins elections.

The Yankee Republican Returns

Just when a person thought things could not improve for the Republican Party – reeling as it was from the philandering of Senator Ensign and Governor Sanford, as well as the bizarre behavior of Governor Palin (if you want to read a semi-illiterate missive from the Alaskan governor, click here ) – two old-fashioned Yankee Republicans in New England stepped forward to begin reclaiming their party.

Yesterday, it was New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, who announced her resignation later this month to explore a run for the New Hampshire Senate seat in 2010 (Republican Judd Gregg currently holds the seat and has announced he won’t run again). 

Today it was Charlie Baker, the Massachusetts wunderkid who served in two of the biggest jobs in the Bay State -- Secretary of Health and Human Services and later as Secretary of Finance and Administration – and who announced he was going to run for Governor of the Commonwealth in 2010.

Just like that, the species of Yankee Republican – thought to be dead, done, and gone – has returned like a phoenix. 

Here’s what we know both of them share.

• Managerial competence

Baker has far more stripes on his uniform, both in government and in business (where he served as CEO for two large, very complex organizations, Harvard Vanguard and Harvard Pilgrim), but both Ayotte and Baker have solid reputations as straight-shooters who consider facts first, and then think about ideology.

• Fiscal conservatism 

We don’t know as much about Ayotte in this regard, but Baker’s record is clear on this issue and my suspicion is that Ayotte will be very similarly tight-fisted.  Both candidates are banking on spending and stewardship of tax dollars to be the number one issue for voters in 2010.  They will argue that Lynch, Patrick, and Obama have been spending tax dollars recklessly and inefficiently.

•  Refusal to embrace conservative social issues  

Other than endorsing a strong law-and-order perspective, I don’t expect either Ayotte or Baker to bear-hug conservative social issues significantly.  While we will see what each candidate says and does on the campaign trail (see below), and while I expect each candidate will mouth support for conservative positions like so-called traditional marriage, immigration, and abortion, I also expect neither candidate will adopt a call to overturn existing laws or judicial rulings in their respective states.  I think it’s reasonable to expect them to endorse charter schools, but look for a libertarian-to-moderate social conservatism from both candidates.  And expect both to be pro-environment. 

•  Likeability  

It’s hard to deny that both candidates offer a lot to like – they’re smart, earnest, hard-working, pleasant on the eyes, and not ideologically paralyzed. We will learn a lot more about them on the campaign trail, but on paper and in person (so far), both Baker and Ayotte have a lot going for them.

• Inexperience  

Neither Baker nor Ayotte has run for statewide office before.  We have no idea how well they will do, either in terms of connecting with a huge swath of voters or in terms of managing a campaign enterprise. 

One of Obama’s secret assets during the 2008 campaign was how well he managed his own team – it showed he had the managerial chops to run the federal government.   The nod here has to go to Baker in terms of delivering the goods, if only because he has far more work experience than Ayotte.  On the other hand, running a statewide campaign in New Hampshire is far easier than in Massachusetts. 

Aside from the managerial demands, I think the great unknown is how they each do in front of crowds, big and small.  In this YouTube age, when every comment can and will be recorded, it’s not at all clear that they will be as good in the public square as they are in the governmental office.  It’s true that Deval Patrick had none of this experience when he ran, and it’s probably true, too, that John Lynch won three gubernatorial elections without mastering the art of a public presentation, but Ayotte and Baker must still present (day after day) in forums other than their own choosing for months and months if they are to be successful in November 2010. 

So, who will fare best some 15 months from now, Ayotte or Baker?  I’d have to give the nod to Baker.  He’s got more government experience, a deeper rolodex for fundraising, proven managerial skills, and an electorate happy to elect Republican Governors to counter the strangle-hold that the corrupt Massachusetts Democratic Party has over statehouse politics.  Ayotte faces a real uphill battle, despite polling numbers that whisper otherwise like a siren.  Though a solid public servant, she will struggle from a variety of issues (no support from John Lynch, a modest rolodex, and no experience in retail politics), but none will be so damning as her swim against the demographic stream in the Granite State.  As Andy Smith of UNH and others have demonstrated, the New Hampshire electorate has swung Democratic.  They outnumber Republicans in terms of voter registration, and if you add independent voters to the mix, the advantage clearly belongs to the Dems.  I predict that Hodes will beat Ayotte so long as Obama’s popularity remains above 55% in New Hampshire in November 2010 (which would be about ten points below where the President polls today), and he makes no major mistakes on the campaign trail.    

Regardless of who wins in November 2010, the events of the past two days signal an important moment for the Republican Party nationally, one which Democrats ought to notice.  First, the Obama cool – in managing, consideration of world events, and style – can be co-opted by the other party.  Democrats also ought to notice that spending (and its twin, the deficit) will be the policy issues upon which Republicans run in 2010.  Democrats will not only have to defend their choices, but hope that the economy shows sustainable signs of recovery by the next mid-term election if they are to retain their advantage in Congress and among governorships.  

Quick Thoughts on Michael Jackson

On a night when I could write about a host of topics -- the sudden warm weather in New Hampshire, the wobbly economy, or the joy and sadness which comes with seeing your children grow  -- I thought it might do something completely different with this blog and comment on a person with popularity.

The news today that Michael Jackson unexpectedly died will no doubt receive an significant amount of attention in the coming days, weeks, and months. Towards that end, I don't pretend to offer much.  First, I wasn't a huge MJ fan, to be honest, though I was also not blind (or deaf) to the obvious.

What was the obvious?

Talented -- of course.  Insanely talented.

Breakthrough artist -- absolutely.  He defied categories in the early 1970s with the Jackson 5 and again as a solo artist in the early 1980s. 

Weird, and maybe even a criminal, person?  All of the evidence was circumstantial, as far as I could tell, but there's no question this was not a person operating on the same cylinders as you and me.

So, with that mixed bag before us, let me simply share two brief, positive, and indelible memories of Michael Jackson.

First, the Motown 25th anniversary special, which aired in the spring of 1983.  I remember reading a very positive review from Tom Shales in The Washington Post of the TV special, and spent that evening watching most of the broadcast.  Michael was simply electrifying.  After appearing with this brothers for a reunion of songs, he appeared unadorned on stage to sing "Billie Jean."  It was crazy.  The audience reaction was insane and I remember thinking, especially after he moonwalked, that it was one of the greatest live performances I had ever seen. 

The second is a bit more obscure -- a 20/20 ABC News story on Michael, right around the time of "Rock With You," and it was about how this child star was emerging into an artist in his own right.  The piece featured this funky thing called a video of "Don't Stop," and all I can remember is feeling (in that pre-teen body of mine) that this was some funky stuff.  Not deep funky, mind you, but an everlasting, cross-the-galaxy funky.  The kind of thing which was deep and light and forever.

In both instances, Jackson stands in my mind as a someone who could shatter a person's understanding of popular music.  I will always regard John Coltrane and Miles Davis (and maybe others, like Stevie Wonder) before Michael Jackson in terms of overall importance in American music, but there's a special place for him nonetheless.

Maybe it's right here.

On dark nights in Winter, when we finish dinner early and the kids grab the iPod, there are two artists who get Mom, Dad, and all three kids dancing around the kitchen:  the Bee-Gees are one, but it's always, always, always Michael who gets everyone out of their seat.  Dishes are ignored, hips start to shake, and there is abandon in the air when that dudu-dat-dudu-dat drum bit comes a'tremblin' and that wompa-deh-wompa-deh-wompa bass line hits the speakers from "Billy Jean." Suddenly the madness of the world is far, far away and we are nothing but funky people, grooving to that-can't-resist rhythm that came from a young man born in Gary, Indiana many years ago.

Three Cheers for Marriage

The news today that the New Hampshire State Senate passed a bill legalizing gay marriage -- after plenty of hints that this esteemed body would do otherwise -- brought an incredible smile to my face and warm feeling to my heart.

I support marriage.  It's one of the hardest things anyone can undertake.  Any legislation which welcomes more people to this awesome responsibility and joy has my support.

(On a purely political note, I'm thrilled that New Hampshire State Senator Deb Reynolds reversed her earlier position, and voted this afternoon in favor of the gay marriage bill.)

The only apparent impediment to the bill's final adoption lies with the governor of New Hampshire, John Lynch, who has said he supports "traditional marriage."

In his lexicon, Governor Lynch says "traditional marriage" means "between a man and a woman."

Really?

I thought traditional marriage was something much harder and complex than simply a guy and a gal getting together.  I also support "traditional marriage," but I thought it was something like this: fidelity in good times and bad.  Sickness and health.  I thought marriage was akin to embarking a forever journey, the likes of which will demand more and give more than either person could possibly imagine at its start.

I should know.  I failed at marriage the first time I tried.  I got married almost immediately after graduating from college, and fell almost immediately on my face in light of its responsibilities.  I was simply not ready and within about a year, the marriage was over.

Fast forward nearly twenty-five years later, and a slightly different picture emerges.  Elizabeth and I will have been married for 18 years this June.  We have three incredible children.  We've owned three different homes, and shared an uncountable number of experiences together -- good, bad, sad, and happy.

I don't pretend to know the secrets of what makes marriage work, but the practice we've fallen is pretty simple:  we get married everyday.  Sure, we had a great and wonderful wedding.  But the most important thing I've found is to wake-up each day and get married again.  Day by day, week by week, we get stronger and resilient and better at this really demanding institution.

Many years ago, my mother passed this gem to me about marriage: it's much easier to stay single.  Marriage asks for more.  It asks for what is not given easily.  As time progresses, as our bodies age, as bad habits become entrenched, as the grass looks greener (always) somewhere else, marriage can seem as attractive as an evening spent flossing one's teeth.

There isn't a married person out there who hasn't wondered, I suppose, is this all there is? 

What happened to the sweet wedding cake, the fancy dress, and party invitations? 

Long after the wedding music has ended and guests leave, marriage rears its head and asks us to consider something far more complex, rich, and mysterious.  

And yet there are these moments, too, with marriage that defy simple explanation and exceed any other joy we might know.  The quiet cusp of two hands in the middle in the night.  A shared knowing look as children talk and laugh and sing.  That feeling, suddenly, that the person you married 1,001 years ago is hot, again.

I believe traditional marriage means embracing all of the contradictions and simple pleasures that come with commitment.  I believe it means supporting fewer out-of-wedlock births.  I believe it means supporting community-based and faith-based programs that help married people, young and old, navigate this journey.  I believe traditional marriage means having to say sometimes that you're sorry, sometimes that you're not sorry, and that always that you love, cherish, and remain faithful to the one you married.  

Traditional marriage is about embracing an instituion that welcomes the complex union of two strong individuals.  And while no piece of legislation can describe such a complex arc completely, I believe these so-called gay marriage bills do much more than extend this right to the rest of us.  In fact, I think the real genius of these bills lies in the subtle way they remind us of this complex journey. 

Do you want to get married?  Really?

If so, welcome to the club.

A Cruel, Cruel April?

T.S. Eliot famously wrote in 1922 that "April is the cruellest month, breeding Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing Memory and desire, stirring Dull roots with spring rain."

Eight-seven years later, I find myself wondering if Eliot's remarks will seem like prophecy. 

Sure, we're experiencing a delightful bull run in a bear market, and signs of an economic spring appear here and there.  Best Buy sales, up 10%.  Consumer spending, up.  Housing starts, up. 

Local merchants and business owners in the Upper Valley tell me similar tales after a frozen Winter that all wish to forget.  A job here and there appears.  A slight increase in customers occurs.  People start to dine and purchase again.

I'm cheered by these observations, but also remain wary. 

First, it's hard to imagine anything other than terrible first-quarter earnings numbers from most companies in the Dow, S&P 500, and Nasdaq.  These reports will be made public between now and mid-April, and if most are as bad as I expect, this news will depress the market further.

Second, broader economic data suggests we're not thru this recession.  Despite a decline in housing construction, housing inventories remain high and prices for homes continue to drop.  The latest figures suggest 10-12 months of housing inventory still exist. 

Third, for now at least, lending standards remain very, very high.  In that light, I support Treasury Secretary Geithner's plan to bail out toxic assets, but also agree (with his own assessment) that it is risky and success not certain.  Short of nationalization, it's the best alternative.  What's clear is that something must get lending and credit flowing again in the economy.  Without it, we're drifting for months, years, and maybe longer in an economic morass.

Fourth, oil prices remain low, but at the first sustained signs of an economic spring, expect gas prices at the pump in the US to quickly reach $3.00 per gallon and maybe higher.  Such a move will pyschologically (and negatively) affect consumer confidence, and thus flatten any return to normalcy. 

A host of thoughtful experts and practictioners in the economy -- everyone from Jeff Immelt to Ben Bernake -- suggest that true and sustainable signs of recovery will occur by late 2009 and clearly exists in 2010. 

I hope so.  My own sense is that the rest of Spring of 2009 could be very difficult indeed.  It will try our patience significantly.

Economic Mud Season

Imagine This:

Come home at the end of the day, pet the dog, kiss the kids, un-shoulder bags and coats, and head straight for the deck outside. 

Why?

To answer the question.

The Question?

How much snow has melted?

The Next Question:

Has Mud Season arrived, and when will I get the chance to throw the ball against the pitch-back for my dog, Bear, again?

A triumphant, affirmative answer came three nights ago, when enough snow disappeared to create a small landing strip for the baseball wobbling against the pitch-back.  By tonight, a semi-field existed of yellow, frozen-crusted grass and dirt, enough for me to rear-back like Randy Johnson and thrown a hard fastball from 30 yards away.  My black Labrador dog, Bear -- now soft and out-of-shape after three-plus months of gentle walks from our house around the Lyme Common, all due to the frozen and deep snow which lay in our backyard this Winter -- panted again and again as I threw the ball. 

This is hope.  This is the real thing.  A dark sky, a million stars, and the thrill of pitching a scuffed baseball again and again and again into the night at an aging pitch-back device. 

A look-ahead at the weather forecast suggests Winter might be done for good.  Like last year, the snow is receding very quickly.  The Dartmouth Green is almost completely worn of snow.  The Dartmouth Skiway has precious few trails remaining in operation, barely enough to meet this weekend's festivities.  Cross-country skiing is finished, even though the woods surrender their snow last.

On days like this, the mornings arrive brisk and solid as ice, but by 11am, it's nearly 50 degrees Fahrenheit.  Jackets fall away, hats are doffed, and almost everyone seems to have an extra bounce in their step and gait. 

Mud season is everywhere.  Regardless of where people live -- be it China or India, London or New York, Washington or Moscow -- they seek signs which suggest some thaw in the economic deep freeze which has gripped the nation and the world since at least the Fall of 2007. 

This afternoon at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College, Jeff Immelt of General Electric described the situation in candid terms that were as worrying as optimistic.  We're living in historic times, he said, the likes of which he never could have predicted seeing in his lifetime.  Immelt recalled that in mid-September 2008, he received a phone call from then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson (a fellow Dartmouth alumnus) who suggested that it was entirely possible that the Federal Reserve window for borrowing might not open the next day, and that GE ought to do everything it can to prepare for that possibility.  Immelt described how he and a team at General Electric stayed up the entire night that evening preparing for that possibility. 

Mud Season resets the calendar for those of us who live in northern New England.  Suddenly our skin is not so dry and itchy.  Suddenly our driveways are clear of snow and ice.  Suddenly the snow drifts don't hover near the tree branches. 

Immelt said this economic crisis is as deep and fundemental a reset as any in the last 100 or more years.  It's the mud season to end all mud seasons.  Immelt, a staunch Republican who said he has never voted for a Democrat, declared this afternoon that "we're all Democrats now."  Government spending is the only answer, and a resetting of expectations around compensation, regulation, and social values is critical for businesses who hope to succeed in this new environment. 

The market rally -- is it that? -- of the last few weeks appears to be a kissin-cousin of the optimism I bring every night to my back porch.  I seek an end to the snow and ice in my backyard.  Everyone else is asking, has housing hit bottom?  Will durable good orders increase?  Is there a bottom there, please?  When does this horrible movie end?

Politicians assure us the end, if not in clear sight, will appear soon.  Even Jeff Immelt said today that an end to this economic calamity will come.  No one is entirely sure when, but if there's any parallel with mud season, it surely lies in the fact that time, place, and season to all things in this world.

Mud season does arrive.  Spring follows, and Summer not long afterwards.  Will the economy behave similarly?

I hope so.  Everyone hopes so.

Economic Frost Heaves Ahead

It's been a while since I posted to my blog, owing more to the insane schedule that defines Winter for my family than anything else. 

In the 15 weeks since Thanksgiving, we've balanced 12 public meetings on the Lyme School budget, almost weekly Lyme budget committee meetings, four-days-a-week of ski-race instruction (including travel to mountains several hours away from our home), twice-a-week basketball practice or games which I coached for 10 weeks, and twice-a-week work or volunteer commitments in the evening for both myself and Elizabeth.

Plus visitors on weekends.  Oh, and plus work for both of us.

Mud season approaches, and a gentle cheer erupts from everyone in the Glenshaw household.  It means on weekends we can get up after 5:30am.  It means we eat dinner together for four or more nights of the week.  It means a return to a normal schedule as a family.

Alas, since November (more like September), there has been no normal in terms of the economy.  And in fact, since January, what had been a good-to-bad situation has grown far, far worse.  Indeed last week, as I listened to two podcasts from Business Week and The New Yorker about the economic crisis, I heard the word "depression" mentioned several times as term most appropriate for describing the economic conditions we face.

We can quibble about whether the term is appropriate, but there is no mistaking the dire situation ahead.  For instance, when my employer made the decision to reduce 150 positions through a combination of attrition, layoffs, and early retirement, the Dow stood at approximately 9,000.  A week ago the Dow was at 6,500 and today nothing much more than a sheer desire for optimism has the index nudging just north of 7,200. 

I was one of those affected.  Although I was not laid-off, my hours and pay have been reduced by 20%.  Add the extra cost for health benefits in this situation, and the impact is more like 25%.

The economic road ahead is not just rocky and hard to navigate.  It's frankly dangerous. 

Consider the fundamental industries in near or complete collapse today: finance, housing, and automobile.  Previous recessions saw high-tech or energy alone as the primary drivers of economic recession.  You don't need a doctorate in economics to understand that multiple pillars of the economy in economic distress -- coupled with global interdependency and the volatility which accompanies Internet-age communication -- makes for a destabilizing financial system that will require a significant amount of time for complete recovery. 

Maybe this is what a 21st century Depression looks like.

I also find myself deeply concerned with the lack of national unity on this issue.  Sure, everyone knows there is an economic crisis at hand, but there seems to be a distinctive lack of national commitment to solving the problem together.  Warren Buffett compared this moment to Pearl Harbor, yet I sense no response that compares with that historical moment.  Instead it feels like a pack of ducks or geese dominates the headlines.  We seem more committed to pecking on the shortfalls in prescriptions made by others than on navigating the road ahead together.

So, in the spirit of national unity, here is my prescription for the next few months. 

1. Patience plus.  These days, it takes much longer than I would like to travel from my home to the Dartmouth Skiway because of the many frost heaves between here and there.  Go too fast, and the transmission on your car will get ripped out.  Go too slow, and you risk angering everyone behind your too-slow-car.  Let's assume the same pace with the development of economic policy.  Not too fast, not too slow -- middlin' is just fine.
2. Breathe deeply.  When things seem tough, remain calm.  When good news appears (two months of profit at Citi!!!!!!!!), remain calm.  In other words, be cool.  Yes, three fundamental pillars of the US and perhaps global economy are in trouble, but there are a lot of sectors with promise ahead.   No less than IBM shows tremendous strength ahead.  GE is sure to be winner, too.  A week ago, when I began this post, GE was at about $6 per share.  Today it is nearly $10 per share.  Hang in there.
3. Re-balance, and move ahead.  The next winners will be those companies, organizations, and individuals who adjust their operating plans to the new economic reality without losing sight of their fundamental mission or goal or customer.  The losers will be those who become near-sighted, and wonder how will I/We/Us survive.  Wrong question.  The right question is, how do we grow?  Make no mistake -- even in times like this, some organizations, companies, and individuals soar.  Are you going to belong to this elite club, or are you going to be a wannabe?

While I still have enormous faith in our national and international economy to recover, I also believe that we are entering a period of enormous economic distress that will require a solid year or more, not months, before recovery will occur. 

This time of year, as the snow and ice recede in New Hampshire, the detritus of Winter becomes apparent.  Fallen tree limbs, sleds, clothing, and all manner of leave-behinds from family pets appear.  In a few months, the tired grass will appear bright green in my backyard, but tonight the few patches of earth which emerge appear sick, yellow, and mangled -- crushed by the weight of four months of heavy snow and ice. 

Will I have the patience to wait for the ice to recede and the green grass to return before heading into the backyard to practice pitching? 

Will I have the patience to ride-out these economic frost heaves before returning to my mission as a husband, dad, and professional?

A lyric from the title title of Bruce Springsteen's newest album captures my sentiments completely in these contradictory times:  "I'm workin' on a dream, though sometimes it feels so far away." 

The Test

We are in the early stages of a genuine worldwide economic crisis.  The stock market continues to crash, unemployment figures increase month after month, banks and major industries (e.g., automobiles) are failing, and Washington seems unprepared to respond (at least until the third week of January 2009).

It's less than a week before Thanksgiving, and it seems all too easy to say there's not a lot for which to be thankful on this holiday.

Perhaps.

Here's what I say.

This crisis is a test.

It's not the test we wanted. 

It's not the test we deserve. 

It's not coming at an opportune time. 

It's going to be a hard test, too.  Maybe, in fact, it will be one of the hardest tests we face in our lifetime.

But let's face facts: this test is here, and we cannot avoid it. 

We can moan and whine and complain, but at the end of the day -- even on a day like today, which in northern New Hampshire was cold and windy and harsh -- we have to face this test with everything we got.

When I was a young boy, I feared most tests and I especially feared tests like the one before all of us.  Had I studied enough?  Was I ready to perform?  Could I stand the pressure?

Later, as time matured me and settled nerves, I learned not to fear tests.  In fact, tests became an occasion.  Tests became a chance to show teachers (and maybe myself) what I was capable of doing. 

I won't kid you and act like I learned to love tests, but the time came when I was no longer worried about them.  Bring 'em on.  I was smart and experienced to believe that under most circumstances, I would do well in a test.

And frankly, it's that kind of thinking we need in America today.  I see it almost everyday in Barack Obama.  He's got the quiet confidence of someone who has faced test after test after test, and emerged better and stronger for the challenge.

Here's what I know, too.  In times like this, when a test occurs under extreme conditions, some people and some organizations and some entities not only survive, but they actually thrive.  Cast ahead to 2012.  Read the headlines then, and my guess is that you will see some nations, banks, companies, non-profits, and individuals actually get ahead despite the turmoil.

Will we be one of them?

The answer depends a great deal on our ability to understand the challenge ahead.  Is it a test, or is it a doomsday scenario?  Is it a chance to make necessary changes, or the occasion to hunker-down in hopes that the storm passes? 

Tomorrow I will enter a 10K race that should, by all measures, go badly.  A year ago I ran this same race in a frankly surprising strong fashion.  I finished 29th out of some 170 racers with a time of 40 minutes, and some 30 seconds -- a pace of 6 minutes, 30 seconds per mile.  This was not just a personal best, but unheard time and pace for me (why didn't I run this fast in high school?). 

I don't recall the exact weather a year ago, but my memory suggests it was nowhere near what is predicted for tomorrow's race: temperatures in the mid-20s, and a slight breeze. 

In fact, I think the race tomorrow will be the coldest I've ever run.  On days like this, at least for me, even on a training run, I start slow.  My lungs need to get warm, and it takes at least a mile or so before I am ready to pickup the pace.  Last year, in this race, when it was a lot warmer, I remember starting fast from the beginning.  Not tomorrow.

It's not the race I want.  I've not been able to train like I want, either, for this race.  I got sick a few weeks ago, and work has been busy, so I've not had the time to train as I did last year.  I'm not really ready for tomorrow. 

But, like this economic crisis, it's the test I face.  Will I do as well last year?  Almost certainly not.  But will it be a complete disaster? 

Check back here to see how I did.