Our Purpose About Us Meditation Newsletters About the Artist Publications Upcoming Events Links Contact Us

A Larger View A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership Volume VIII Edition 4 July/August 2003 Big Government: Size or Methods?      Big government, we are accustomed to thinking, is government that runs big programs and lots of them. In fact, the size of government is a fundamental disagreement in American political life, with Democrats said to favor big government and Republicans striving for something much smaller. The issue is typically around money, meaning taxes and spending. But is big government to be defined solely by the narrow interests of political parties, or simply on monetary terms? Government does have certain responsibilities and we as citizens have certain expectations. In a civilized society, government is the institution we either designate or expect, to study and approve new drugs, to safeguard the environment, to address the HIV epidemic, to keep SARS from our shores, to give us safe roads, safe meat, efficient ways to get our passports, to keep terrorists out, to arrest criminals or to make sure the stock market is an even playing field. The list is long indeed because increasingly our needs cannot be answered by any other institution. We need Headstart, for example, along with social security or special funds for education. The more complex our societies become, the more there is for the government to do if we are to expect a modicum of order in our lives. The idea currently in vogue defining big government in terms of how many things it does looks to be a red herring. That is not what makes it big. What ought to prompt us to call government big are the intrusions and incursions into our lives there where we ought to be the ones to decide. How can we forget that Monica Lewinsky's mother was forced to testify against her? And how about laws about abortion, pro or con? Is it the duty of government to legislate morality or simply to curb its abuses for the benefit of the whole? What makes big government is the imposition of the vision of a few. Both political parties have or are doing this. Right now the political right is far better organized than the left and so is the one we need to be more wary of. But regardless of which side does it the practice makes a mockery of the democratic process. Several journalists have now reported on a plan by Carl Rove, the political consultant to the President, to reshape much of the government along Republican ideals and do so in a way that would be difficult to reverse. Mr. Rove is not elected and were he to act on behalf of an elected official, the secrecy of the agenda makes it difficult for ordinary citizens to ask necessary questions, to decide for themselves and to have the option to participate. Recently, the American Patriot Act makes it possible for the FBI and other agencies to go to a book store and ask for purchase records, to libraries and ask for what books were checked out, and to go to other vendors and shops where someone may have carried out ordinary acts of living for whatever information is available, and all this with no more than a suspicion. We also have the FCC which under its charter is to be the guardian of the airwaves for the public, but which a few weeks ago made it that much easier for already large media conglomerates to legally own even more news outlets. And what of the detainees in Guantanamo, there for over 2 years without representation, without being formally charged, and without any public accounting. Under these conditions big government has, in addition, led to the creation of large deficits, whose debt service in the near future will no doubt impinge upon the government's ability to engage in its more vital functions. Critics might point out that it was big government that passed civil right legislation and which sustained anti-discrimination laws, but that would be forgetting that in those instances a certain percentage of the population was being harmed by existing laws and the government had a duty to find redress. What is also an issue of concern is that we are now in an era where big government can no longer engage in the system of checks and balances and where the three branches may have lost their independence. The fear to voice objections to the war, or any popular program, makes Congress servants of the executive, and the political undertones of the judiciary make us question how independent it now is. In fact its decision about the 2000 presidential election has every earmark that in that instance it engaged in its own ideological agenda. Next time we are exposed to rhetoric or pronouncements for or against what has been called big government, let us stop and think. Let us ponder the need, the democratic process and the constitutional guarantees of independence, lest a government of the people, by the people and for the people-a most spiritual goal-cease to be a reality. Our Responsibility to Iraq      Some may call it Karma, but it really means responsibility. By whatever name, we are responsible for what is going on in Iraq, for the rebuilding of what we destroyed, for the aftermath of a war we initiated, for the consequences of policies we are implementing. The administration tells us Iraq is in shambles because Saddam Hussein abused his people. There may be no doubt he was a dictator, did not believe in democracy and was behind the killing of thousands. But there's equally no doubt that our bombs destroyed lives and property, that we are now occupying the country, and that our motives then as now may be more than policymakers admit. The many who opposed the war said that oil interests played a role, that the need to finish what George Bush Sr. did not do fueled decision makers' resolve and that intelligence and data about WMD and links to Al Queda were skewed. Even assuming that these factors were not at the top of the list, it's difficult to see how they did not play a role. They were each sufficiently present to make a difference as to whether the motives of the United States were to serve its self interests or those of the Iraqi people. That may be business as usual, may be the way things are done in foreign affairs for now, but still does not alter the underlying spiritual issues. Of course, if the motives of the United States were to liberate the Iraqi people, such a spiritual responsibility would not exist. It would in fact be the reverse where Iraq would be spiritually indebted to the United States. In that case the consent of the Iraqi people would first have had to be enlisted. We know this was not so. Since the U.S. like any country is made up of its people, it is a responsibility that each citizen bears. Fair or not or having opposed the war does not immunize one against the collective responsibility we each must now assume. In fact it sharpens our duty to work towards making that responsibility more generally accepted and honored. The Flexible Workplace      The world of the future always seems to begin in the present. According to the research firm of Cahners In-Stat/MicroDesign Resources, 32 million people telecommuted full or part time last year, two millions more than the previous year in 2001. Sun Microsystems is a leader in taking telecommuting to the next level and perhaps pushing it to its limit. The Menlo Park, California, firm initiated iWork, a program behind what it calls workforce mobility. The program aids companies to streamline their in- house workforces and Sun has been pitching it at industry conferences. iWork is a program based on the notion that not every employee, few in fact, need file cabinets, bookshelves, and often full time desks. Information, for example, can be stored on secure servers that anyone with a "smart card" can use at thousands of workstations throughout the country, including some in the company's cafeteria. Numerous banks, government agencies and universities have bought the program. One reason may be that it is cost efficient. With a large company such as Sun it can save millions in office space, rent, building and equipment. The company estimates it saved $50 million last year and projects that in the future the savings will go to $140 million. Some jobs, however, cannot qualify as part of the workforce mobility. Product testers, for example, must still fulfill their task in house. While the program has many advocates it also has predictable critics. The main objection is summarized by David I. Levine, professor of organizational behavior at UC, Berkeley, "Humans were designed to communicate and be affectionate and break bread together. It's going to take a long time to figure out how to break bread over the Internet," he says. From our standpoint, the absence of a 9 to 5 routine is humanizing, the flexibility inherent in workforce mobility makes it that much easier for workers to be free of certain physical constraints. For most at least, that freedom can be translated into a freedom of thought and being that is conducive to spiritual growth. Education for Inmates - A reaction      So far at least, inmates are allowed to pursue an education while incarcerated. They can enroll in certain programs while the state pays the tuition. In California, the cost is $750 per year. Given the $30 billion shortfall the state is grappling with, talk is to cut out the program. There are those who believe inmates should not get an education at state expense. There are others who point to education as a means to reduce recidivism, equip inmates to find a job and be in a better position to keep it. For that they say $750 a year is a bargain, a fraction of the yearly cost of incarceration. Were the program to be cut, the total saved would be $210,000 out of a yearly budget for corrections totaling some $5 billion. Opponents of the proposed cut also point out that other measures proposed to meet the shortfall not only make more sense but would save larger amounts; for example paroling ill, elderly and nonviolent inmates or moving them to more appropriate settings such as geriatric hospitals or drug hospitals, where for many, Medicare would then carry the costs. In an era where good feelings towards prisoners are short and rare, news that the program was being cut brought a flurry of letters mostly pointing to the shortcoming-and possibly folly-of a program that has all the features of being needed, useful, successful and cost efficient. In doing so it couldn't help but underline that compassion and common sense are alive and well. Web Site of Interest: www.peterpanchildrensfund.org More than a birthday party      This site is a fun way for children to learn about giving and start practicing what it means. It's the legacy of James M. Barry, author of Peter Pan, and was created to benefit hospitals throughout the U.S and the U.K. (36 children's hospitals in 17 states thus far). The Peter Pan Birthday Club sends out respective kits for children under 12 and for teens to hold birthday parties that are also fundraisers for the hospitals of their choice. Instead of presents, the children make donations to the organization, and the birthday child then sends them in. To Ponder On Tammie Willis, age 34, taught herself to play several percussion and string instruments following being beaten by a robber in 1994 and loosing her hearing. This Spring she received a Master's degree in music from Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. As part of her master's program she composed a 12-person percussion ensemble. Tourists can now visit the world's slums in the same way they visit Disneyland. Habitat for Humanity, known for building housing for the poor, is opening a kind of theme park in Americus, Georgia, so that tourists may now have a better sense of the world's worst slums. A Larger View is published by the Inner\Outer Partnership, a tax-exempt educational organization addressing issues of higher values. We are funded through donations. Please send yours-as well as any comments-to P.O.Box 1293, Pac. Pal. CA 90272-1293. Also contact us by email at innerouter@earthlink.net or call 310-8367710 or visit our web site at www.innerouterpartnership.org To un-subscribe, send an email to innerouter@earthlink.net