Twenty Thousand and Rising

What astounds me about what I am about to say is that the last time I posted to this blog was July 24, more than a month ago. There are reasons for that, but in the meantime, despite the lack of new articles, this blog continued to find new subscribers—and their numbers just yesterday crossed the 20,000 mark. Already, the numbers have exceeded that threshold by a few dozen. I would have expected the increase to decrease until I wrote something new. I can only assume that past writings have continued to propel interest despite my lack of activity. That fact is profoundly humbling.

I wrote twice in July. The other post occurred on the July 4 holiday. It detailed my cataract surgery in June and offered some medical history concerning the procedure. What followed, in addition to two trips to Colorado and one to Washington, D.C., between mid-July and early August, was a mad rush connected to a fall semester course I teach for the University of Iowa’s School of Urban and Regional Planning, as an adjunct assistant professor. But this year, the decision was made to move my class online, which meant a great deal of added work to make that change possible. And just to complicate matters, in mid-August, my laptop suffered a hard drive failure that delayed my timeline. I then worked to restore course-related files, an odyssey I will not detail here. It would be an overdose of minutiae.

I have been teaching in Iowa City since 2008. After the massive floods that struck much of eastern Iowa and some neighboring states in June of that year, the planning program began an urgent search for a way to add curriculum related to natural hazards and to make itself more relevant and useful to communities in Iowa needing assistance with flood recovery. It was easier to import such expertise than to develop it among existing faculty, apparently, because they soon made an offer for me to teach beginning that fall. I am an alumnus of the program, and they knew me well. At the time, I was already co-instructing such a course at the University of Illinois-Chicago with colleague Richard Roths, although that ended after the spring 2009 class the following year. But the arrangement with the University of Iowa has continued. The course has grown and evolved over time, naturally, just as the subject matter for “Planning for Disaster Mitigation and Recovery” has also changed. Every year is a new adventure and an exercise in updating teaching materials. As I like to say, it is hardly like teaching Shakespeare. The script is rewritten with each new major disaster. Recent years have added multiple exclamation points to that statement.

Thus, while the subscriber count was climbing yesterday, I was preparing for and then presiding over the first online class session for URP:6280 last night, with eleven students in attendance. I still have work to do in reformatting PowerPoint files from past years and recording lecture videos that used to be presented in a classroom. But I discovered yet again that, from the first class to the last, my students are inquisitive and thoughtful and have very good reasons for choosing this course as an elective in pursuit of their Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning. As before, some make clear that they see this as possibly the most important class they will take. Some past students are now in leadership roles in the field of hazard mitigation and disaster recovery planning. They are not deluded about the challenges that communities will face under the influence of climate change, demographic shifts, and other factors. They want to do the planning that matters.

Although I have not written much for this blog lately, that will change very soon. I had to keep my priorities straight, however; my students had to have their materials ready on the course website by Monday, August 26, as classes started, and it was my obligation to make that happen. After Labor Day, I can gradually shift some of my attention elsewhere. My recent travels, to San Francisco in April, Manitoba and Cleveland in May, and to Colorado and Washington in July and August have supplied me with excellent subject matter for at least several future posts. I relish the prospect of making up for lost time with subscribers both new and old. Thanks to everyone for their support and interest.

Jim Schwab

Gratitude on Parade #10

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
One of the finest assets of any city or region is its cultural organizations, particularly for the arts. I’ve long been a member and officer of the Society of Midland Authors, a Midwest home for authors that is based in Chicago. And I’ve learned that these organizations don’t just maintain themselves. Dedicated people do hard work to sustain them. In the case of SMA, such people have done this for nearly 105 years since the group’s founding in 1915 with the likes of Harriet Monroe, Sherwood Anderson, and others. What a legacy.

In the current day, Thomas Frisbie, like his father, Richard, before him, has invested years of his life and countless hours of time as president, newsletter editor, and membership secretary, among other posts, helping to sustain the success of the Midland Authors, which maintain a thriving annual book awards contest, hundreds of author members, and monthly programs to enrich the cultural scene of Chicago and the Midwest. The organization would not be the same without him.

Posted on Facebook 4/8/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE

#gratitudeonparade
In the tribute last night to Thomas Frisbie, I mentioned that the Midland Authors sponsor an annual book awards contest. For the last two years, I have been an adult nonfiction judge, and I have served on both adult nonfiction and biography panels in many years past. And sure enough, someone has to coordinate that whole operation, with 18 judges in six categories, an annual banquet to bestow the awards, and other duties, such as getting timely notice to publishers, tracking entry fees, seeing that plaques are made, etc. It’s a complex operation.

Several years ago, Marlene Targ Brill stepped into those shoes, seeking to rationalize the program and put it on a sounder financial footing. As the saying goes, she keeps the train running on time. She stares down challenges in lining up judges who can work together amicably to produce good decisions about winners and honorable mentions. She follows up with winning authors and their publishers. And she keeps smiling through it all, every hour of it volunteer work. Winners or not, the competing authors owe her a debt of gratitude, as do all of us in the organization. This is a major literary event for Chicago, and Marlene makes it work.

Posted on Facebook 4/9/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade

Just today, Greg Borzo sent out a complete list of dates for which he had lined up venues for programs for the 2019-2020 season for the Midland Authors. He’s on top of his job as the program coordinator for the Society. For the last two or three years, at least, he has been the indefatigable, cheerleading organizer of one provocative or fascinating program after another by authors and civic leaders with something to say and stories to tell. This function is part of what keeps the Midland Authors alive and thriving. Greg’s creativity in arranging these programs has been remarkable. For that, he earns our gratitude.

Want to find out? Check the schedule at midlandauthors.com and attend a program or two. You’ll be pleasantly surprised. And those photos below? Just a few of the engaging faces of tonight’s honoree for Gratitude on Parade.

Posted on Facebook 4/18/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
The capstone of this series of tributes to leaders of the Midland Authors concludes with someone who, unfortunately, is no longer here to read it. But who knows, maybe he can anyway. It would be fitting. Richard Frisbie certainly deserved to hear it.

Richard Frisbie was twice president of the Society of Midland Authors, and in between and beyond was a constant presence on the board of directors, at its awards banquets, and at many of its programs and functions. His humor, long memory, and perspective contributed greatly to the organizations’ progress and good judgment as it renewed itself for a brighter future in serving the Chicago and Midwestern literary community. He had successful careers in both journalism and advertising.

Like the rest of us, since we are all authors in SMA, he also wrote books. His brought fun into people’s lives, such as “It’s a Wise Woodsman Who Knows What’s Biting Him,” a guide to practical outdoor adventures. Along the way, Richard raised several children, one of whom, Tom, remains a key figure among the Midland Authors, while others are key players in civic and environmental enterprises across the Chicago area, such as Friends of the Chicago River. He and his departed wife, Margery, must have known what they were doing. They left quite a legacy. So here’s to you, Richard, watching over the rest of us, hopefully with pride.

Posted on Facebook 4/22/2019

Jim Schwab

Reacting to Terror in Christchurch

New Zealand is a nation that counts its annual totals of gun homicides in single digits, as a friend of mine who just returned from a visit Down Under accurately notes. It is, by comparison to most of the world, an incredibly peaceful, peace-loving country. Yet two days ago, on Friday, March 15, an Australian white nationalist allegedly killed 50 people and wounded 39 others in a mass shooting at two mosques in Christchurch, the largest city on the South Island. This same city lost 185 people in a series of earthquakes in 2011, but that was a natural disaster. While it delivered painful lessons about building standards and preparedness, it did not hang the specter of evil over the city or the nation. Brenton Harrison Tarrant is alleged to have done exactly that. Christchurch is a city in shock and mourning.

I don’t ordinarily use this blog to discuss mass shootings, bombings, and terrorist incidents. For one thing, they have become too common in some parts of the world, including, sadly, the United States, and I prefer to spend my limited time trying to use my special expertise to make the world a better place to whatever extent I can. That expertise lies largely in urban planning and natural hazards, not in terrorism or crime, but readers will notice that I also discuss more pleasant topics like travel and books and the arts. I write a blog because I am also a professional writer.

But some events become more personal. In 2008, at the invitation of the Centre for Advanced Engineering in New Zealand (CAENZ) at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, I accepted a three-week Visiting Fellowship to work with CAENZ on land-use policy for addressing natural hazards in New Zealand. In late July and the first half of August of that year, I traveled the country with Kristin Hoskin, then a member of the CAENZ staff and currently an emergency management consultant who lives in Christchurch. I delivered seven lectures and seminars in those three weeks, visiting several cities on a tour that ended in Christchurch, which did not experience its earthquakes until more than two years later. In the course of much advance reading and a great deal of inquisitive conversation and exchange with Kristin and others, I learned a great deal about the country. When I left, I was aware that, while it faces challenges and problems like any other nation, it generally does so through remarkably civil debate and politics. While I realize that New Zealand benefits, in that regard, from its relatively small size—about two-thirds the area of California and a population of roughly 4.2 million—I still must say, as an American, that my own country could easily learn something about civil behavior from the Kiwis. Far too much of our own current political debate is not only over the top, but downright crude and thoughtless.

And so I reacted, when I learned of the shootings in Christchurch, like someone who had, on an emotional level, been stabbed in the heart. It was hard even to picture the scene that was being painted on the news. I tried to imagine the horror felt by people like Kristin, and George Hooper, the executive director of CAENZ when I was visiting, or others I had met around the country. I will admit it brought tears to my eyes thinking about it. How could it happen?

I first got the urge to write about it on Saturday but did nothing about it. I labored to produce a title, then sat there, staring at the screen. Mind you, I am not one who ordinarily wrestles with writer’s block. The words often come pouring out, and the challenge is simply to edit and refine them. But this time, I could not get started. Two or three times, I stared at the screen but wrote nothing. It was too hard. More than ever, I am filled with admiration for the young people from Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, who found their voice after the mass shooting there, or others who have similarly taken action after violent tragedies. It is not easy. But it is extremely important. And if New Zealanders respond positively to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s promise to tighten gun laws, then they are far ahead of the tortured American politics that have stood in the way of gun reform in the U.S.

I would also note that I am spurred by some of what I have read today in the Chicago Tribune. One article recites the story of Abdul Aziz, 48, a father of four sons and a member of the Linwood mosque, who shouted, “Come here!” to lure the gunman away from the mosque, risking his own life, and who stunned the man by throwing a credit card machine, which he said was the first thing he could find, at the shooter’s car, shattering the window. Other stories of courage will probably emerge in coming days, but it is a reminder to all of us that such courage is not tied to any one religion, race, or nationality. It reflects depth of character.

That is the saddest part of it all. There are those among us, and they hide within a wide variety of identities, whether it is Islamic extremism, white nationalism, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, or Hindu tribalism, or some other perceived affiliation that somehow fosters hatred instead of a common love of humanity, who fill the void in their own emotional and intellectual development with a fear of others that causes them to fail to see our common humanity. The justifications vary, but one common thread is paranoia and a painful, even crippling, inability to reach out and open their hearts to those different from themselves, whether in language, skin color, national origin, gender, religious belief, or some other supposedly defining characteristic.

And every so often, that sense of separateness and need for a feeling of superiority erupts in an attack against people who are simply living their own lives, worshiping as they believe they should, but have done nothing to the perpetrator(s). In the case of Dylann Roof in Charleston, members of the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church welcomed him into a Bible study before he unexpectedly opened fire on them and killed nine people. Welcome was greeted with murder.

The real miracle of God is when his worshipers responded to such violence by insisting that more love is the answer. The Charleston survivors chose to forgive Dylann Roof. People suffering such attacks are certainly entitled to ask, “Why?” Even, and most certainly, “Why us?” That is a vital part of the grieving process. But don’t be surprised if New Zealanders, and the Muslims of Christchurch in particular, insist that love is the only path forward.

Because it is.

Jim Schwab

Gratitude on Parade #5

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
Along with John Erickson, Maryanne Salcetti played a key role in my early journalistic development. As the co-editor with her husband of the weekly news, a regional newspaper in Iowa City, she took me on as a part-time cub reporter while I was still in graduate school. That gave me some valuable early experience in local news reporting, mostly about small town government in the area. But she also knew and could see I had larger ambitions, and she encouraged them.

Later, after she had moved on to become an instructor in journalism at John Carroll University in east suburban Cleveland, she remained supportive when Raising Less Corn and More Hell came out from University of Illinois Press, and at one point had me speak to her class. A few years later, after my second book, Deeper Shades of Green, was released by Sierra Club Books, she secured a lecture invitation for me at John Carroll, supported by a team of three female students whom she engaged for promotion of the visit.

Unfortunately, I have not heard from him and have not been able to locate information, but heard at one point that she was very ill. I do not appear to have any photos from back then, at least any that I can access. But that does not reduce her impact. She was a fierce advocate of journalism as a profession and helped instill that and high standards. I treasure the memory as a result.

Posted on Facebook 1/27/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade

One person who was remarkably influential in helping shape my perspective on the way through graduate school at the University of Iowa in the early 1980s was not even at the university, though he worked nearby. The Rev. Roy Wingate at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church in Iowa City, just blocks from the campus, provided a welcome mat for unorthodox, creative thinkers like me who needed to reestablish their relationship with the church. This was not new for him. In the late 1960s, he had at one point, when seeing students arrested for protesting the Vietnam War, insisted that he be arrested too in order to support their right to free speech.

When I heard that, I knew he was my kind of preacher. Having grown up in a more conservative, suburban Lutheran congregation in Cleveland, I was not sure where I fit into the Lutheran tradition until I met people in Iowa who felt that challenging war and injustice was a part of their faith. It’s not that I thought everyone had to agree, but that they at least should allow space for that perspective–which allowed space for me too. That was Roy’s approach. He was a Big Tent Lutheran. That allowed me to find a home at a crucial turning point in my life.

Unfortunately, not long after I had married my wife in Omaha and we decamped for my new job in Chicago, Roy Wingate had a huge retirement celebration at which he announced that doctors had given him a diagnosis of prostate cancer. A year and a half later, he died. Just a few years ago, after a fusion biopsy detected a minute amount of cancerous prostate tissue, I could feel some solidarity. But fortunately for me, subsequent biopsies have never found it again. I guess I’m luckier. But I still appreciate Roy’s role in helping me find a new place in the church that I had not perceived earlier. And we will meet again.

Posted on Facebook 1/30/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE

#gratitudeonparade

I do not have a photo at this distance in years, but I have discovered that Richard Wentworth is still in Illinois, though he retired as director of the University of Illinois Press in 2004. The path of a first-time book author into print is generally a challenging one, and I was busy making my way through this briar patch when Dick learned of my manuscript and agreed that it should find a home at the University of Illinois Press. Like books of most new authors, mine required some nurturing, but his editorial staff stuck with me until we saw a book into print and into reviews, including the New York Times, in the fall of 1988. They hosted me in Champaign at the beginning of a promotional tour that took me through Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, and Iowa and taught me a great deal about relationships with broadcast and print media for a new author. Until you take this journey, you don’t’ know how valuable an ally a publisher can be. I trust he is enjoying his well-earned retirement.

Posted on Facebook 2/1/2019

Jim Schwab

Gratitude on Parade #4

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
I am devoting much of this week to people who contributed in significant ways to my early publishing career. For the last 35 years or more, I have mixed journalism and writing skills with technical and professional knowledge to fulfill my aspirations. Many people helped make that possible.

One of them was my advisor for the master’s program in journalism at the University of Iowa, John Erickson. I have no photo to offer from way back then or more recently. He is now emeritus professor, and I hope enjoying a well-earned retirement, but I have not heard from him in a long while.

Nonetheless, way back in early 1984, when I needed to decide on a master’s project to complete my degree requirements, I met with him to state that I wanted to turn my project into a published book when I was through. We had the choice of a practical journalistic project or an academic investigation on some subject related to mass communications. I chose the former, in the form of an oral history project concerning a major issue in Iowa at the time–the growing farm credit crisis.

Completely unfazed by my audacity, John quickly wrote out two titles of books he thought would help me think through my strategy. Both concerned oral history and interviewing techniques. I ordered the books, went to work, and began networking across the Midwest to find farmers to interview on the subject, eventually taping interviews with more than 70. When I had about 140 pages of a book completed, John insisted that was enough for the project and I should turn them in–and complete the book later. Three years after earning my degree, Raising Less Corn and More Hell was released by University of Illinois Press. Only after that, for fear of jinxing success, did he tell me it was the first master’s project in the school’s history, at least to his knowledge, to achieve commercial publication. But he provided steady encouragement all along the way and always seemed to know I could pull it off. Call him my chief enabler. I never gave him nearly enough credit, so this is my feeble partial payment. Thanks, John, wherever you are.

Posted on Facebook 1/22/19

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
Two days ago, I noted the important role played by Professor John Erickson in the development of my first book. As i roamed the Midwest collecting the interviews that were at the core of Raising Less Corn and More Hell, there were many people who were helpful, but some were especially supportive of my project from the moment we first met.

Among those people were Gary and Mary Beth Janssen. Gary went through tough times as a farmer in northern Iowa, and he and Mary Beth eventually moved to Emporia, Kansas, after she studied to become a teacher. In Kansas, Gary began to grow organic vegetables and provided fresh produce to local schools for school lunches.

But in the 1980s, while I was researching and writing my book, Gary provided numerous contacts and referrals within the farming community to make my work possible. We grew close enough that he and Mary Beth drove to Omaha for our wedding in June 1985. After the book was published, Gary was an enthusiastic grass roots promoter. Without him, much of it might never have happened.

Unfortunately, Gary died of complications from colon and liver cancer in September 2013. Mary Beth has survived him, and I am still grateful to both of them.

Posted on Facebook 1/24/2019

GRATITUDE ON PARADE
#gratitudeonparade
I have discovered that my biggest obstacle to completing one of these tributes every day is not writing; that part is very easy for me. I barely know what writer’s block is. It is the fact that, Facebook being what it is, I prefer to find photos of the people for whom I am expressing thanks, and when, as I did this week, I reach into the more distant past, sometimes finding those photos is a challenge. For many people involved in helping me see my first book to completion, it just takes a while. Many photos I had in the 1980s preceded my ownership of a computer and have never been digitized, if I even had a photo in the first place. It is turning out to be a major undertaking with major competition for my time. I have had to compromise. Some photos are still on their way from sources I had to track down.

While I figure that out, I want to honor someone else of more recent vintage. At the end of 2013, a year in which I took 23 trips on APA business, five more teaching at the University of Iowa, and some personal trips, I realized I needed to do something serious to stay resilient. I enrolled in a new health club (X Sport Fitness) and arranged for a trainer just before New Years’ Day. I was about to undertake the new routine when I had to delay it because of a pinched nerve in my shoulder that occurred on that holiday. A few weeks later, I began my new routine with a good trainer, but he left abruptly a year later.

Then came Mike Caldwell, one of the most talented, thoughtful, creative, and dedicated personal trainers I am likely to encounter in that business. He pays very close attention to my development and ensures the routines are well attuned to my current situation. I have learned a great deal about fitness techniques and achieved things, now at 69, that I never did when I was much younger. I could not ask for more and have no regrets. Particularly at my age, fitness matters, and good advice in that arena matters even more. So here’s to Mike, a true pro at what he does.

Posted on Facebook 1/26/2019

Jim Schwab

Prisoners of Profit

Cover photo provided by Random House

It is hard to know where to start in describing why the privatization of prisons is a terrible idea. The effective abandonment of public responsibility for the fate and welfare of people sentenced to incarceration after being convicted of various crimes—some of whom, in recent years, have been exonerated because of revelations of sloppy or corrupt police work—should speak deeply to the conscience. Apparently, in some legislative circles, however, money counts for more. The lobby for private prisons has made headway over time at both the federal and state levels.

To find out whether and how private prisons are particularly dysfunctional, Shane Bauer, a senior reporter for Mother Jones, went undercover at Winn Prison in Louisiana, an operation of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) under contract with the state. Not totally undercover, mind you. He used his own name, and had CCA checked him out as he applied for a $9-per-hour job as a corrections officer, they might have wondered why someone with his background would want to work there. But CCA has a problem. Guards working just above minimum wage tend not to last long, and CCA needs bodies in uniforms, so the hiring process appears less than diligent. He was hired easily and worked at Winn for four months before it was time to leave. But more on that later.

For the record: Guards at public prisons in Louisiana, Bauer reports, started at $12.50 an hour. Not a lot, but almost 40 percent more than CCA was paying. Undoubtedly with better benefits.

Let me state at the outset that the resulting book, American Prison (Penguin Press, 2018), which follows his reporting in Mother Jones, is not my normal reading. Regular followers of this blog can figure out what I like to read, for the most part. But I am currently a judge in adult nonfiction for a book awards contest for the Society of Midland Authors, so this and many others arrived at my doorstep, day after day, until the deadline arrived earlier this month. Prisons, correctional policy, and the business of punishment are well outside my areas of expertise, and I am glad of that, but I know a book that demands public attention when I see one. This one will be an eye-opening experience even for some cynics. It will also be heart-wrenching for anyone with a moral core or a sense of human decency.

Before I delve into the details, I must express my admiration for Bauer’s courage in even undertaking this project. For one thing, he had prior experience with prisons—as an inmate. Several years ago, while Bauer was covering the Middle East, he and two friends, Josh Fattal and Sarah Shourd, went hiking and wandered too close to the Iranian border in Kurdish Iraq. All three were arrested. He was taken to the notorious Evin prison, where he spent considerable time in isolation before his eventual release. Shourd was released after about a year in a separate prison. That experience might very justifiably have kept most other people from even considering working in a prison, but Bauer has instead developed a commitment to prison reform. Meanwhile, the CEO of CCA, Damon Hininger, earned $4 million in 2018, according to Bauer, 20 times the salary of the director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Just sayin’.

Bauer does not simply relate his experiences at Winn Prison. He has done his homework on the history of making money from prisons and prison labor. He points out that many immigrants to the American colonies were convicts exported from England as indentured servants. Many fortunes in the United States, sometimes vast fortunes, have been built on free (meaning forced) labor from slaves and convicts. But the business of prison labor being used for profit took wing mostly after the Civil War, when the 13th Amendment abolished slavery with one loophole: “except as punishment for a crime.” The opportunity to convict multitudes of African-Americans, as well as a fair number of hapless poor whites, for even minor crimes, opened the door for leasing convict labor. That, in turn, led to horrific conditions as legislatures, especially in the South, sought ways to reduce the costs of penitentiaries by making them profitable—thus, the institution of the prison farm, and later, chain gangs.

That conditions were often horrid on plantations and chain gangs is beyond dispute. Bauer provides ample statistics and documentation including large percentages of deaths in places like Alabama. But individual stories sometimes often serve better to illustrate the moral degradation of prisons for profit. Bauer supplies us with the once infamous case of Martin Tabert, a white, 22-year-old middle-class kid from North Dakota who in 1921 set out to tour the country as a personal adventure. He ran out of money in Florida, between odd jobs along the way, and was arrested and pulled off a train by the sheriff for not having a ticket. Tabert wired his family for money, but before it arrived, he was sold off to the Putnam Lumber Company for three months of work in a turpentine camp. He worked all day in swamp water in “tattered shoes that didn’t fit.” When he had an aching groin and lagged behind other convicts, the “whipping boss” made him lie on the ground for thirty lashes in front of the other convicts. After additional beating and being hit over the head with a strap, he died the following night. The company sent a note to his family saying he died of fever. Not satisfied with the explanation, the family convinced the North Dakota state attorney to go to Florida to investigate. His findings, including the company’s agreement to pay the sheriff $20 for each prisoner he sent to them, produced a major scandal, a lawsuit, and an investigation by the Florida legislature.

All of that highlights the fact that, for decades, some states wavered between episodes of investigation and reform and a desire to limit the prison budget and make the penal system earn money. One might think that, in more enlightened times, we might get past that sort of moral cowardice and come to terms with public responsibilities to provide opportunities for at least the less violent or nonviolent prisoners to make amends, acquire skills, and rehabilitate themselves for participation in what we might hope would become a less dangerous society.

But private prisons, and major problems even at public prisons, persist because America has not yet moved beyond moral indifference and hard-nosed, but short-sighted notions like “throw away the key.” I do not say that to minimize the very real challenges involved in incarcerating felons in the first place. Bauer himself, as he details his experiences as a corrections officer at Winn, confronts much of the moral ambivalence of handling such responsibilities, including the head games and manipulation in which prisoners often engaged at his expense. The moral turmoil of maintaining control of a potentially violent setting is significant, but it also serves to underscore the moral turpitude of trying to do so in a private prison staffed by guards who are earning barely above the minimum wage. That, of course, cuts costs, as does minimizing medical care for inmates and many other short cuts. Bauer plies us with statistics including comparisons of suicide rates between public and private prisons. But again, a personal story highlights a major problem. Bauer tells of one inmate, Damien Coestly, who hangs himself. His suicide is not reported by CCA, he tells us, because he died in the hospital, not at the prison. Never mind that the scenario played out at the prison. Just get the guy out of our prison before he dies on our watch. Good grief.

Now, at some point, you know this whole undercover operation must end. I will not spoil the story for you, nor even share how he got so much information out of the prison on a daily basis. But the epilogue details how and when he decided the time had come to pack up and leave, reporting his resignation by phone from the safety of neighboring Texas. Just read it. It is high drama, making Bauer’s subsequent arrival at the annual shareholders meeting of CCA in Nashville almost anticlimactic, but revealing, nonetheless. If this book does not affect your outlook on the whole subject of incarceration for profit, I swear, there is something wrong with you.

Jim Schwab

Gift to the World

As a New Year arrives, perhaps it was the gift-giving season and the story of Christmas that prompted this blog post. Or, perhaps, it was simply lurking in my subconscious mind, awaiting the appropriate opportunity to emerge into the light of conscious deliberation. These are not, of course, mutually exclusive possibilities. Almost any experienced writer can attest that ideas have a way of burrowing into our minds and fermenting through periodic reflection and creative thinking. This one, I confess, has had an especially long period of germination, but I am finally prepared to shape it and share it. (I have no apology for my mixed metaphors.)

In my twenties and early thirties, I traveled what I would now consider a rather tortuous route to finding a definitive purpose in life. Many people would not regard that as unusual. Finding a purpose is not easy, and it often evolves considerably. After bouncing through some unsatisfactory jobs, and then a very satisfying one that paid very modestly, I decided that my next move was to apply to graduate school, which led me into a double Master of Arts degree program in Journalism and Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Iowa, beginning in January 1982. Despite a mid-year entry into this customized arrangement (I learned I was the only UI student doing it), I gained a financial life raft when Professor John Fuller in the planning program offered a half-time research assistant position. Typically, these were offered only at the beginning of an academic year.

When I decided to return to school after more than a six-year gap, I was not sure what to expect or how to make ends meet. I had been told to expect lower entrance exam scores after such a hiatus from academia. I took the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) and ordered the transcripts and then patiently awaited the results, which back then took several weeks. One day, my notice arrived with the GRE scores: 740 Verbal, 680 Math, 660 Analytical. To me, it was like winning the trifecta for graduate admissions, much better than I had allowed myself to imagine. It apparently caught professorial attention, which helped prompt the offer. I have rarely shared these numbers since then, but they are relevant to this story. They were within the top one percent for those taking the test.

I have not shared those scores much over the past 36 years in part because I don’t think they prove much, certainly not as much as some people thought at the time. Yes, they show aptitude in those three categories, and particularly for verbal and math skills, my highest and the basics of the original GRE. But those are only partial ingredients for success in life. People can also have high aptitudes for music, have outstanding natural athletic talent, or in my father’s case, mechanical skills. Intelligence comes in many forms. Some people show amazing relational skills in dealing with other people, as is often the case with excellent teachers. The best politicians also have outstanding people skills, although often focused differently toward amassing power or achieving policy goals. My gifts, at least at that time, simply happened to be those that college admissions tests were designed to measure. But that at least promised a good start toward academic achievement, at least if I were willing to use those skills aggressively. Not everything was as easy as this might make it seem. There were times when I had to work very hard and fight for my grades. That was a good thing; it meant that I had to learn persistence, patience, and determination.

I have had and still have plenty of weak points, and I have had to learn how to exploit the strengths and shore up the shortcomings as needed, to use teamwork, and to spend my time and talents wisely. None of that was tested on the GRE, in my estimation. Tests are blunt instruments for self-assessment, and we often need sharper tools that are honed through experience. The most valuable experience, in turn, is often gained through courage and honesty and a willingness to test one’s limits. At times, experience breeds humility, which often becomes its own kind of strength.

In that first semester, however, those scores attracted the attention of Mensa, an international society designed to serve the needs of those deemed to be exceptionally bright, which invited me to join. The combined basic GRE score of 1420, I was told, automatically qualified me for membership in this exclusive club. Always willing to pursue options that might open doors, I accepted the invitation and attended some local meetings in Iowa City.

Any group that aims to include only those in the 99th percentile on IQ tests is not going to be huge, even in a college town. I don’t remember a meeting with more than maybe 20 people, but I won’t swear that my memory is entirely accurate. Given the transitory nature of university students at any level, the group was undoubtedly fluid from year to year. However, the entire group was noticeably lacking in faculty, or in anybody much beyond 30 years old, as I recall. Being what I now call a compulsive extrovert, I tried to engage my fellow Mensans in conversation. That was not hard. But I quickly learned that some lived at home with parents, not clear on what they wanted from life, and others had a disappointing sense of their own destiny. What they mainly seemed to share was an artificially generated awareness of being unusually intelligent. There may well have been other members who were too busy to attend, but those I met often seemed satisfied with this status without feeling any compelling obligation to any greater good.

At the few meetings I attended, that bothered me. It had not really occurred to me before that it was possible to let IQ scores feed a low-grade narcissism. In the blue-collar world from which I had emerged, achievement was everything, and aptitude was merely an advantage, albeit one that needed to be exploited. I was attracted to urban planning in part because one professor, Michael Sheehan, who knew of my environmental activism at local and state levels, suggested I apply because “we love people like you.” He convinced me that urban planning was a way to develop and apply skills that would produce the progressive change that had energized my life in recent years. In other words, he was promising that the program would help me fulfill my own sense of purpose. Yet, I was meeting people for whom mere proof of intellectual aptitude seemed sufficient to sustain their self-esteem. I have always felt that I needed to be contributing something. I did not always need to succeed, though that helps, because I could always learn a great deal from failure. Learning to overcome obstacles is only partly a function of intelligence, and mostly a function of grit and creativity.

That grit and creativity, seasoned with perspective and a sense of humor, has been the larger part of what led to the high points in my own career, which in my opinion are connected less with titles and positions than with outcomes, such as influencing the role of natural hazards in the urban planning profession, seeing students from my University of Iowa classes make a difference, and being able to move audiences because of the ideas I espouse and my ability to articulate them in a way that conveys genuine concern for others. Smug satisfaction that I was somehow smarter than other people would have smothered and strangled those accomplishments in their cradles.

It took only a few months for me to abandon those meetings and focus my precious time and energy on those goals, and on learning everything I could within the two programs that had adopted me. I bear no ill will toward Mensa; its membership undoubtedly has included some wonderful people. But my experience was that it fostered what I deemed some morally skewed priorities. The emphasis on the importance of high IQ breeds a sense that brilliant people need and deserve special attention that perhaps would be better focused on learning to help others instead. I also learned that helping others is an opportunity to learn from others, if undertaken in the right spirit. It is an opportunity to learn that most people in this world have some sort of gift that needs to be nurtured, whether or not it is recognized by some organization with lofty claims. My wife, for instance, like most teachers, has better gifts than I for relating to and working with children, some of whom have later attributed at least some part of their fondness for learning to their experience with her as their teacher. I lack musical skills, in part for lack of opportunity at an early age, but I can appreciate what others contribute to my life because of their talents. I never excelled athletically, but I have learned the value of physical fitness. I would never claim to be in the 99th percentile of moral leadership, but I am a better person for knowing those who are, or for reading about the examples of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Mother Theresa, and Mohandas Gandhi, among many others. I could go on in this vein, but I suspect you get the idea.

Contributions need not be big or visible to matter greatly in the lives of others.

My bottom line is this: Either you contribute something meaningful to the greater good of humanity, or you don’t. It need not even be noticed by anyone important. It can just matter to the people who benefit. Not everything is about who is the smartest, the swiftest, the strongest, or the most talented. You can move the needle ever so modestly, ever so slowly, but move the needle. And trust that your contribution matters.

Jim Schwab

Why I Agree with Mother Jones

Personally, I would rather be learning or teaching than shouting on any given day.

Last night, I read one of those publisher columns that are often boring and laborious, but this one nailed it. Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein recounted a conversation with a veteran editor she admires who inquired about the partisan bias he perceived in the monthly magazine. Unquestionably, the magazine is known for a left-wing tilt, but it should be better known for its investigative reporting and willingness to ask hard questions. Over the years, after all, Mother Jones has not gone out of its way to spare Democrats, but it certainly is riding herd on President Donald Trump.

And for good reason, although Trump is a symptom of a problem and not its origin. He is exploiting deep divisions and tribal instincts in a nation that seems unsure what it wants, but much of which is troubled by the extent of the deception, corruption, and amorality of the current administration. Bauerlein insists that the media can “stand for something” while remaining fair and accurate in its reporting, and I agree. She also notes that trying to report from the middle while merely relaying contrasting statements from “both sides” of the political spectrum is really reporting from nowhere because it lacks a moral anchor. There are multiple reasons for asking tough questions and engaging in investigative reporting, but two stand out: 1) Public officials often, but not always, cut corners, lie, or shade the truth to advance their own ambitions or protect the tribe; and 2) such questions are the ingredients of serious analysis that gets to the bottom of a problem and advances the quality of our national dialogue. Surely, the latter has been hitting new lows in recent years.

So, my title for this post does not mean that I always agree with everything I find in Mother Jones, nor does it mean that the magazine expects that all its readers will do so all the time. The real point is to advance the quality of the dialogue. And in that respect, I think publications like Mother Jones are essential to the survival of American democracy.

The subject of the purpose of the news media has always intrigued me, in part because, in addition to my M.A. in urban and regional planning from the University of Iowa, I also earned a second M.A. in journalism, way back in 1985. I recall a class conversation with one local newspaper editor. He clearly adhered to a school of thought that held that reporters need to be objectively neutral at all times. When someone asked him about news coverage of third parties, he noted that they got little coverage because they had such limited followings, so the focus was on the “two sides”—the Republicans and Democrats. When that person followed up by asking how third parties would ever get a hearing if all the news media followed that logic, he had no good answer. What we heard was mostly pre-Internet circular logic. We will cover such movements when they matter, and they won’t matter until we cover them. The shallowness of the paradigm of “two sides” immediately struck me: The media seeing itself as impartial mediator was an inadequate framework for finding the truth, which is not always or necessarily located in the middle. (Anyone still believe in slavery?) As Bauerlein observes, the middle moves, depending on how the two sides are defined. It matters whether the right is John McCain or Steve Bannon, whether the left is Nancy Pelosi or the Socialist Workers Party. And no, they are not the same. Where was the middle in Hitler’s Germany? Where was the middle in the segregated, Jim Crow South? Where is the middle when voter rights are being suppressed, so that some less privileged citizens are denied a voice through the ballot box? Whose voice matters (or should)?

Ultimately, it is not partisan to insist on accuracy, truth, human decency, and honesty. It is simply good for democracy and good for society. It is not helpful, on the other hand, simply to accept undocumented Twitter-fed nonsense from a President, a Congressman, or any other public figure without subjecting it to some standards of accuracy, which is why the Washington Post has maintained its inventory of more than 5,000 false or misleading statements by Trump since he took office. It may not be feasible for the Post alone to maintain such an inventory for everyone in a prominent political position, but he is the President, after all, and there are other Internet platforms for tracking political honesty among lower candidates and office holders of all parties at the federal, state, and local levels. These are not partisan sites, for the most part, but they are important tools for voters and activists who want to assess the accuracy of what they hear and read.

One reason I chose to react to Bauerlein’s comments is that they also touched upon  much of my own philosophy regarding this blog. When I launched “Home of the Brave” in April 2013, I had no idea who would be reading it, or how many, but now there are nearly 19,000 subscribers, and probably some smaller number of regular visitors who have not yet chosen to register a subscription. I get virtually nothing out of the enterprise except the deep satisfaction of sharing knowledge and perspectives, but being a veteran planning professional as well as a trained journalist, the quality and reputation of what I publish is central to my identity. I also recognize special responsibilities once a readership grows to that size. While I certainly have a point of view on numerous topics, I have sought to emphasize research and analysis over advocacy. Indeed, given my penchant for taking readers deep into the subject matter in my own areas of expertise, while insistently using plain English, I have been pleasantly surprised at how many people have chosen to read this blog on a regular basis. I would rather slake a popular appetite for truth than simply express opinions. If I get something wrong, and someone can prove it, I want to hear from them. To that end, my reading diet is aggressive, and I try to share what I learn when I think I have discovered something that matters. I am always open to recommendations regarding new books and research reports. All the best journalists I have ever known have been equally ravenous readers. It is their best defense against “fake news.” They are not only not the enemy of the people; they are vital resources for a thoughtful public.

If only we could retrain more of America to step outside its current groupthink and exercise their mental muscles to question, not just react, to be open to new information, and to value independent thought, we might get past our current bumper-sticker debates and engage in some serious, rational conversation. And we might learn to show more mutual respect for what we all have to offer.

Jim Schwab

Standards of Public Behavior

Like John McCain’s assuredly final book, The Restless Wave, I read Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence, by James R. Clapper, in large part because my wife bought it for me. The usual pathway to my desk for books I discuss in this blog is that they get sent as review copies from a publisher.

Not so in this case. Jean follows much more news in her retirement, hears about books by current and former public officials, and occasionally chooses to bring one to my attention by buying it. She knows that I am likely to read it, though it may take a while if I get bogged down with other business. I am also unlikely to read the entire spate of such books in this age of Trump because I don’t have enough time. They seem to be multiplying like rabbits.

Clapper is quite clear that he never envisioned writing such a book until he retired, in large part because, as a largely nonpolitical intelligence officer, his accustomed role was to lie low and avoid publicity. At the peak of his career, as the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) under President Barack Obama, he says, he saw his mission as “speaking truth to power.” Like any other high-ranking administration official, Clapper had better and worse days, agreements and disagreements, with the President, but retained a deep respect for the occupant of the office both because of the importance of that office and the dignity of the individual performing the job. Any individual who has ever held a responsible position in business or in public life knows well the profound difference between disagreement and disrespect. In the end, the boss calls the shots. Moreover, Clapper makes clear that, as first a military officer, and then a civilian intelligence professional following his retirement from the Air Force, he served under successive administrations of both parties and retained the same respect for those above him.

He spends most of the book laying the groundwork for the final chapters about life at or near the top of the system. He details his childhood, in which he once managed inadvertently to hack through his family’s television into the communications system of the Philadelphia police, into college and the Air Force and training as a military intelligence officer. Like most public servants, he did not perform his job in his early years with any expectation of someday becoming the nation’s chief intelligence officer. He simply grew into a role that eventually put him repeatedly in front of congressional committees, testifying at hearings about everything from Benghazi to budgets to Russian meddling in the 2016 election. The time he invests in illuminating a background that has otherwise been largely out of the limelight helps us to understand the journey he has made from a lowly son of another itinerant military professional to someone with deep insights into where the nation has lately gone astray.

It is almost surely the unnerving experience of watching Donald Trump become president, even as the evidence of Russian meddling in the U.S. election system was mushrooming—much of which he was at times unable to discuss because the information was classified, or the investigation was underway and under the purview of the FBI, not the DNI—that seems to have dislodged any reservations he once had about sharing this story in a memoir. Like McCain, he uses the aid of a speechwriter, but neither man ever set out to be a professional writer. Still, it is perfectly clear that it is Clapper who assembled the facts for this intriguing book. The insights are clearly his own.

What troubles Clapper is hardly surprising, once one understands the philosophy that has guided his career, one commonly shared among lifelong public servants. There are certain expectations of loyalty to the nation, of the dignity of public service, and of public decency that seem to drive Clapper. No doubt, these motivations also affect many others on the growing list of critics whom President Donald Trump has recently targeted for loss of their security clearances. The sheer amateurishness of this dangerously autocratic move on Trump’s part, already applied to former CIA Director John Brennan, is apparent from the fact that several people on the announced list of those targeted for such scrutiny no longer have security clearances anyway. Would someone explain to Trump the Petulant that you can’t strip a security clearance that does not exist?

This appalling ignorance of history, law, and policy, and the consistent refusal to listen to advisers, certainly the refusal to accept the value of truth spoken to power, all appear to have played a role in driving Clapper, who is on Trump’s list, to construct his memoir and share his fears of the direction in which current events are leading the nation. There is a moment when respect for the office of the presidency is overshadowed by concerns about the abuse of power, as was the case under Richard Nixon. But this week’s events are beginning to suggest that even Watergate may not stand as the worst abuse of presidential power in American history. We cannot be afraid to say so. Clapper, who has made the round of news shows in recent months, states frankly near the end of his book:

I don’t believe our democracy can function for long on lies, particularly when inconvenient and difficult facts spoken by the practitioners of truth are dismissed as “fake news.” I know that the Intelligence Community cannot serve our nation if facts are negotiable. Just in the past few years, I’ve seen our country become polarized because people live in separate realities in which everyone has his or her own set of facts—some of which are lies knowingly distributed by a foreign adversary. This was not something I could idly stand by and watch happen to the country I love.

And so, he quotes General George Patton about how to move forward:

                “The time to take counsel of your fears is before you make an important battle decision. That’s the time to listen to every fear you can imagine. When you have collected all the facts and fears and made your decision, turn off all your fears and go ahead.”

And hence the book’s title. It is an intelligent choice. Like Clapper with the presidents and superior officers he served in a five-decade career, I could probably question or object to some points he makes, but his larger points are impeccable. They are about honor and truth and service and honesty. Either you believe these ideals exist and matter, or you don’t. America must decide.

Jim Schwab

When Denial Is Not an Option

Wildlife in the Louisiana wetlands. All images in this post by and courtesy of Kristina Peterson.

It has always amazed me how much time and energy has been wasted, particularly in the U.S., on the denial of climate change in the face of so much scientific evidence. Sea level rise is a directly measurable phenomenon. So are changes in precipitation patterns over time. The fallback denial position, once the data are made clear, is that we do not know what is causing the change that we see, and therefore it is pointless to point to human influence on the environment. This, too, is of course nonsense because the theory behind the impact of greenhouse gases on warming temperatures has been with us for more than a century and has been validated for several decades. Yet, in the world of politics, the silliness goes on. And on.

One intriguing aspect of this denial is that distance from the problem seems to lend itself to a greater disposition toward denial. It is easier to ignore a problem that does not confront you visibly and directly. This distance need not be geographic; it can also be social and economic. Those near the seacoast with greater wealth and the ability to protect their property may not feel the pain of increased flooding and sea level rise nearly as much as poor homeowners who have fewer options to move or rebuild. For the same reason, if one can avoid loaded political language and discuss practicalities, it is possible to get many farmers to observe that growing seasons have grown longer, droughts have grown drier, and that something has surely changed in recent decades. As the saying goes, it is what it is.

Elizabeth Rush will not let us forget what is. In Rising: Dispatches from the New American Shore, she gently but firmly seizes our attention to lead us through coastal communities that are already experiencing the ravages of sea level rise. She does not focus on projected damages or what may happen in three generations. She speaks powerfully, poetically, lyrically about what happens to people in communities that have depended on coastal ecosystems for generations but now must face the prospect of relocating or abandoning the places to which they belong, of which they have been an organic part. We visit communities in Florida, Louisiana, San Francisco Bay, and New England that are witnessing permanent change in their shorelines and the loss of neighborhoods and towns that are no longer viable. She takes us on hikes through forests and wetlands that are already changing or have changed permanently, where scientists are documenting the adaptation of plant and animal species to changing weather and higher water.

Albert Naquin (in Santa Claus pose)

Rush is not a scientist but a scientifically literate environmental journalist with poetry in her bones and empathy in her manner. She sits down with Isle de Jean Charles Indians in the Louisiana bayou to discuss their removal from a once robust island that has shrunk from 55 square miles to less than one square mile in the past century, a place where few can still live and many have left already. Albert Naquin talks in poignant terms about his tribe’s struggle to reassemble a homeland further inland on higher ground in the face of numerous bureaucratic obstacles at both the federal and state level. Rush allows many other actors, in places from Maine to Staten Island to Pensacola, to speak in their own voices and tell us firsthand of the wrenching experience of loss and relocation. This is not a book about those with the means to choose their homesite. This is about people who have known and adapted to one place for a long time and have no options left. The book reminds us vividly that the issue of climate change is as much about people as it is about abstract scientific concepts.

Members of the Isle de Jean Charles community.

Over the years, with the hurricanes and the land loss and flooding, many people have been displaced. It got to the point that if something wasn’t done eventually there would be no Native community, no more people of the Isle de Jean Charles. Many of those that left, it looks like they’re going to be included too, and I think for them especially this relocation can do some good. The island is already a skeleton of its former self and that’s what’s happening inside the community as well. When we relocate to higher ground we will at least be able to hold on to each other. I mean if we can stay together, then we haven’t lost as much.

. . . . I mean really we are talking about having to choose to move away from our ancestral home. I know a lot of people figure we would be celebrating, to be moving to firmer ground and all. But it’s not like I threw a party when I heard about the relocation. I’ll be leaving a place that has been home to my family for right under two hundred years.

Chris Brunet

Of course, many others have experienced the pain and mixed feelings of forced relocation. Coastal storms and inland flooding have led to the buyouts and relocations of thousands of Americans in recent decades, and the toll climbs with every Hurricane Katrina, Harvey, Irma, or Maria. The toll will continue and grow.

Nolia Naquin, Albert’s sister.

Still, Rush’s book is not the typical call to action of a climate change activist. Rush is engaged more clearly and subtly in attempting to adjust our mindset, showing us in real terms the impacts of a history of environmental racism in which the least fortunate live in the most vulnerable neighborhoods, less by choice than because of a historic lack of options. She is raising our awareness of our historic ignorance about the ecological value of wetlands, which has caused us to compromise their protective functions and make shorelines more vulnerable. She is introducing us to the powerful sense of place of traditional communities, a sense that is generally lacking in affluent vacation homes by the sea. She is sensitizing us to a sense of doom in some communities and the lost opportunity felt by the departing residents. In short, she wants us not just to know but to feel the immediate loss produced by sea level rise today.

There are many volumes of studies and reports where one can acquire detailed scientific data about climate change. I have cited many for readers of this blog, and they are important. But it is also important to understand this crisis on its most human level. Helping us do that is Rush’s forte. Rising is a great introduction to the human cost of our global environmental neglect.

Jim Schwab