Aging, Body and Mind

An Introspection

William Sundwick

As I approach my 72^nd anniversary on the planet, I’m beginning to feel old – ever so slightly. I have no physical infirmity that I can conveniently use as an excuse for it. There are no mobility issues, like those my mother suffered from Parkinsons in the last six or seven years of her life.

In fact, I feel rather fit, with my 160-minute per week cardio and core strength workout routine at the gym. I combine that with daily stretching, weights, and balance exercises at home. And I walk three miles per day, weather permitting. Only my feet seemingly keep me from running. My fighting weight is down to about 164 pounds, and I’ve shrunk only about an inch-and-a-half from my maximum height.

I don’t mind looking at myself in the mirror when I shower.

Yet, something has changed recently. Is it my face? I still have a full head of hair (and silver is often seen as distinguished, isn’t it?) I pay attention to grooming my beard, my eyebrows, and get haircuts regularly.

But when I’m at the gym, out and about in the neighborhood, running errands, or at church, I tend to look at other people. Many (most?) are younger. I can tell.

The Body in My Mind

I attribute these feelings to the “body in my mind.” It has undergone changes in the last few years. In some ways it is good, the middle-aged paunch has disappeared (thanks to my discovery of fitness after 60). But there is something else – something in my mind when I think about my body. Is it just the wrinkles and blotches on my face, and those heavier eyelids? Or, perhaps it’s the veil of self-deception dropping, the beginning of the reckoning.

Losing that veil is depressing. For instance, I wonder if I will ever be able to come on to a young, attractive woman again? It’s been at least three years since I sensed anybody noticing me that way. A small dose of flirting might be a palliative.

That body is only subject to decline from here on – the best I can do is arrest the decline, not stop it, certainly not reverse it!

My Mind in the World

It’s not all about my declining body, however. There is also “my mind in the world.” How do I relate to the world? When I look at others, many of them younger, I see their use of a language based on enthusiasm, noticeably lacking in my own verbal communication. You can tell who has that zest for life and who doesn’t, after talking with them only briefly. It’s their use of both verbal and body language. Written language is important when communicating across time and space. But for the flesh-pressing here-and-now, face-to-face verbal, inflection and body language are what count. And the here-and-now (IRL in social media) is the secret to feeling vital.

Whether it’s the automatic assumption on Harris-Teeter senior discount day that I deserve the 5% discount, without the checker asking, or other patronizing business encounters, the world makes me feel old.

Lately, I have convinced myself that it’s those millennials (not just my kids, but the whole cohort) who have the best orientation to the world. Their searching and struggles are compelling, as they were for me at that age. They are my favorite demographic group. It has to do with their focus on the future. I only have the present and regrets about the past. They are always reaching out. They seek community. Those I know are more extroverted than other generations, too. The world is their place.

Time flies …

“Time flies when you’re having fun!” Do we even want time to fly? There isn’t much of it left, after all! Having fun seems to require planning. Real plans need timelines (to guard against procrastination). Those fuzzy “I wish I could …” plans serve little purpose when you get older.

The present must be recognized and seized. You should organize your time in such a way as to increase the odds of taking advantage of opportunities when they arise. Thinking about my retirement decision five years ago, I remember the key drivers were: 1) little financial incentive to exceed the Civil Service Retirement System’s “maxing out” at 42 years seniority; 2) asking myself what it would take to keep me on the job; 3) likely organizational deterioration of my operation, regardless of what I did; 4) desire to get out while still healthy!

It was a slam-dunk by mid-2015.

Yes, there are losses in retirement. There’s social loss (collegial relationships), prestige loss (“what do you do?” “I’m retired”), and activity loss (don’t forget to invent replacement activities). Cutting those losses should be the prime objective. All are counteracted by good planning, optimism, and confidence in your legacy. That legacy may mean various things -- your organization, your family, or whatever audience you choose.

What comes next? It needn’t be scary. It may be slow (unfortunate, like my mother’s Parkinsons, or step-father’s Alzheimers) or fast (merciful, like my father’s coronary at 81, much later than he was expected to survive). It may be expected or unexpected. It may come as relief from pain, or as easily as dozing off for a nap. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter.

Sighs and Shrugs

Sighs and shrugs are the appropriate reaction to all this, I guess. None of us is immortal. We do what we can to postpone the inevitable, but it seems foolish to panic about undone deeds, unfinished projects. They’re always unfinished. Is the world a better place for me having been in it all these years? I hope so. But I don’t know about the fullness of time – the final judge. None of us does.

I planned a retirement party for myself after 42 years at the Library of Congress. There weren’t many such parties among my compatriots retiring then. I’m not sure why. I felt I deserved one. I wanted to give those that “survived” me a party; I didn’t need them to give me one. 

Was it a wake? It felt like one, but I was present!  

Grandpa and Mira, Dec. 2018

Green New Deal

Where Did it Come From? Where Is it Going?

William Sundwick

The Green New Deal was not invented by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Although it was introduced by her and Sen. Ed Markey as a pair of resolutions in the 116^th Congress, the origins of the concept (and the name) go back at least ten years.

Thomas Friedman used the term in a New York Times column in 2007. He was discussing the need to institute major structural reforms of the American (and world) economy if there were to be any hope of “greening” the future. He saw it mostly concerning the electric grid, but still made the case that it couldn’t happen without a massive public investment comparable to the project of the New Deal 75 years earlier.

In 2012, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein promoted the same name, using it for the party’s platform. That platform also called for major structural reforms in all western economies, combined with an “economic bill of rights” for the large number of workers who would likely be displaced. It claimed to owe its origins to other “Green New Deal” programs of European Green Parties.

These earlier proponents, like Ocasio-Cortez, believed that the power of established corporate elites in local and national institutions was so great that the force of law (as well as incentive) was needed to counteract it. More moderate carbon-trading schemes, and free market pressures, could not begin to deal with the scope of the problem.

The scope of the problem is reflected in the current GND proposal. Its three pillars introduced in early 2019, and further elaborated by the new think tank, Data for Progress, are:

1)      decarbonization

2)      jobs

3)      justice.

The latest IPCC report from the United Nations now says that serious decarbonization worldwide is necessary over the next twelve years, or global warming above 1.5 degrees Celsius will be unavoidable. Catastrophic climate effects would result (more violent storms, sea level rise, drought, famine, fires). Research into decarbonization technology needs a significant boost, quickly, to help. And, carbon taxes, incentives for renewables, all are required -- even investment in nuclear energy.

 The challenge also entails displacement of jobs for everybody who earns their living in the fossil fuel and factory farming sectors. Thus, job creation and retraining must be a significant part of any GND program, including a jobs guarantee to get the necessary political support for the disruption.

Finally, justice must be served by ensuring maximum equitability for impacts of climate change. The bad effects shouldn’t fall disproportionately on marginalized, poor communities.

While there are definite technological challenges facing decarbonization, most critics agree that the greatest challenge is political. And, the core of the political opposition seems to be either fear of who will be hurt, or fear that we just can’t afford to pay for decarbonization. The jobs and justice components of GND are meant to address the first fear, and a new economic theory catching fire among left-oriented economists at many institutions called Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is meant to address the second fear – “how do we pay for it?”

The basic idea behind MMT is that our government (at least the U.S.) prints its own money! There is NOT a finite supply of money. National debt is a myth, and the sole purpose of national accounts statistics is to measure social benefit. Most supporters of the GND are also supporters of MMT. But, even without reliance on the still controversial economic theory, there is accounting based on opportunity costs – what does it cost society to do nothing?

So, Green New Deal proponents have a battalion of economists, social theorists, climate scientists, and historians of 20^th century America, to support their program. But do they have people in leadership roles in Congress (or the Executive Branch)? Right now, that seems to be a major tactical hurdle. Famously, Sen. Diane Feinstein (a very senior Democrat, who thinks she knows best) harangued a gathering of school children representing the Sunrise Movement (Ocasio-Cortez’ youth movement promoting the GND) outside her office. And, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked what her position would be on the formation of a Select Committee on the Green New Deal, disparagingly referred to the “Green Whatever,” saying she would not support such a committee.

We all know what the White House position on climate change is -- denial. Indeed, the Republican Party is now almost uniformly falling in line behind the White House position. Markey’s resolution failed in a 57-0 vote in the Senate.

What is the way forward? Certainly, elections must count for something. And, public enthusiasm is clearly on the pro-GND side. But the opposition will not go away. Grass roots lobbying of Members must be a nationwide activity. They should want to be on the right side of history. And, their constituents have children and grandchildren who will be on the receiving end of the worst climate effects. It should not be necessary to rely on children, themselves, to make the case. (I’m sure the Sunrise Movement, with some justification, thought the kids would be sympathetic for media coverage at Feinstein’s office).

Part of the opposition to the Green New Deal Resolution is the obvious guiding role played by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (with Bernie Sanders as an early co-sponsor). She has ties to Democratic Socialists of America (DSA); i.e., like Bernie, an avowed socialist. This is still problematical in American politics – across party lines. Is the whole plan really nothing more than a roadmap to socialism? Does that make it a scam, invented solely for that purpose? Many of its supporters have indicated, explicitly or implicitly, that yes, it is just that! Capitalism and the future of the planet are simply incompatible, they assert.

Final question, then: what does all this portend for the future of the program, after 2020? Does the “socialist” label matter that much? Whatever you may think of the merits of the specific Ocasio-Cortez/Markey resolutions, it comes down to being, intentionally or not, a referendum on the role of socialism, of radical government activism, in American democracy.

Amazon Comes to Arlington

Giddiness vs. Foreboding

William Sundwick

The initial local reaction to Amazon’s HQ2 selection was giddiness. Our community would stand to garner a windfall estimated at $4.6B over twenty years. Bring 25,000 high paying jobs into the area, and everybody would benefit, right? Not necessarily.

I’ve lived in Arlington for 46 years, making me an “almost native.” I have no desire to leave. The community has been good to me and my kids. But I know that many are struggling here. In recent years, the public schools have been bursting at the seams with exploding enrollments. Many people who make the county a great place to live (teachers, police, firefighters, service workers) must commute from outside the county, since they can’t afford any available housing here.

How Arlington Works

Arlington’s five-member County Board is elected at large for staggered four-year terms. The chair is rotated annually among the members. They are elected by people like me. People who make the county work, but live outside it, have no say. And, although ground has yet to be broken in the new “National Landing” neighborhood (straddling the Arlington/Alexandria border) designated for the Amazon HQs, already-inflated house prices are still headed north.

The Amazon giddiness, then, comes from a promise of new wealth for the people who already live here, or of higher paying jobs for younger workers which might allow them to move here. Some local businesses will also benefit (restaurants, retail, etc.), but others (tech start-ups) see Amazon as a powerful competitor for needed talent, forcing up labor costs.

While trusting our local officials (or the less responsive General Assembly in Richmond) with the kind of commitments our county needs may be appealing to the lazy, it is not effective. All politics involves pressure. Justice requires giving voice to the voiceless. If Arlington will truly benefit from the coming of Amazon, we must begin agitating now for those commitments. It is not, as some have said, “pushing on an open door” – the challenge is to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Those at Risk

While some will benefit from Amazon’s HQs, those at risk include established communities of color in the immediate vicinity, like the Arlandria neighborhood.  Here, there are many small retailers, bodegas, etc. – and lower income rental housing – that are too easily sacrificed for the greater corporate good with Amazon.

Besides threatened communities in the immediate geographic vicinity, there are the already overburdened infrastructures in Arlington and Alexandria for transportation and public schools. Metro cannot keep up with track maintenance now without shutting down late night service. Increased ridership might break its back unless new commitments of revenue can be secured. It can come from Amazon’s windfall. Even Richmond, in a Dillon Rule state (where the state can override local jurisdictions on infrastructure funding), has now allowed for that. We need to make sure the local authorities follow through.

Public schools in the area expect to see even greater enrollment pressure in the coming years as new young families settle in the county with their high-paying Amazon tech jobs. Some of that revenue windfall from Amazon needs to be earmarked for teacher salaries, school-based mental health counseling, and physical plant. To ensure that happens, someone inside needs to speak for those on the outside.

It's All on Us Now

With the collapse of the Long Island City site from Amazon’s plans, the entire HQ2 thrust will be here. Northern Virginia is not NYC. There is no organized opposition to Amazon coming as there was in the heavily unionized, politicized metropolis up there. Yes, we’re friendlier to corporate interests down here these days. And, the Crystal City neighborhood of Arlington has lots of vacant office space since the federal government has largely abandoned it – ripe for refurbishing or teardown! This neighborhood and the adjoining Alexandria Potomac Yards neighborhood (still partially undeveloped) will comprise the new “National Landing.”

While there may be no organized opposition, there are many interested organizations supporting guarantees from the Arlington County Board, the Alexandria mayor and city council, and the local delegations to the General Assembly,  of new affordable housing units – changing some NIMBYs to YIMBYs. There should be scholarship funds created for local students to attend the promised higher education expansion in the area from VT and GMU. Metro must accelerate its track maintenance efforts.

Statewide, there will be blood bath elections this November, with implications for Richmond’s role in Amazon’s plans. Both the House of Delegates and Senate are up for grabs. Tight races dominate in both houses. Community organizing needs to extend to these races, even if it means reaching outside the immediate NoVa region.

VOICE and the Faith-based Sector

Among the interested parties with some experience in mobilizing community strengths for local political action are faith-based groups like VOICE in Northern Virginia (Virginians Organized for Interfaith Community Engagement). VOICE is currently planning a June 2 forum with Christian Dorsey, the chair of the Arlington County Board, and Mayor Justin Wilson of Alexandria. VOICE’s power comes from its ability to bring people together from many different faith traditions to engage local political leaders and win commitments from them (moral AND material). By the time of the June 2 forum, there will be specific requests prepared – numbers, percentages, timelines. This is the VOICE way. Expect hundreds of attendees from the nearly 50 different congregations represented – Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, both white and non-white, citizen and non-voting immigrant, rich and poor.

All the faith traditions represented share a common theology regarding social justice: there is an important divide between power with and power over.  Power with is what community organizing is all about – it is power close to God. Power over is the flip side, and what social justice movements are always trying to counteract.

Update from CR on new EVs (BEVs) for sale next year -- but, sadly, not nationwide -- YET!