One way to vote your conscience

Hand with ballot and boxBy Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

You know how you’re always told that if you vote for a third party, you’re taking a vote from the major party candidate you’d otherwise support? Sam Husseini, a D.C.-based writer and activist, has a simple solution for that conundrum, “Vote Pact,” but it’s going to require a civil conversation with someone with whom you disagree politically.

The idea, basically, is to swap votes. Say you lean Republican but don’t want to vote for Donald Trump. You’re considering voting for the Libertarian, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, or independent candidate Evan McMullin, but you’re afraid not voting for Trump helps Hillary Clinton. Using the Vote Pact strategy, you team up with someone who feels pressured to vote for Clinton but would rather vote for the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein. Then you can both vote your conscience. Instead of voting for someone you don’t support, your Vote Pact took a vote from someone you completely oppose.

A group supporting Johnson is making the same argument and has created a structure, Balanced Rebellion, that will pair a Republican and a Democrat who both want to vote for Johnson.

Husseini starting pushing the idea in 2000, when the race between George Bush and Al Gore also featured two well-known third party candidates, Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader. It didn’t gain much traction then. In later elections, the major parties produced relatively acceptable candidates while third parties didn’t produce many credible alternatives.

This year, Trump and Clinton have historically high unfavorable ratings, and some Americans are looking elsewhere. In Arkansas, six other candidates are on the ballot. But Husseini said voters are trapped by their own fears into voting for the lesser of two evils.

The idea resonates more in swing states than in Arkansas, where Trump seems all but certain to win the state’s six Electoral College votes.

Still, it’s not inconceivable that the race could at least become interesting here. Clinton, Arkansas’ former first lady, is competitive in some surprising states, including Georgia and Arizona. Evan McMullin, a traditional Republican, qualified for the Arkansas ballot Aug. 24 as the Better for America candidate, and he’ll pull votes from Trump, as will Johnson, who also pulls from Clinton. Two of the other candidates, the Constitution Party’s Darrell Castle and America’s Party co-founder Tom Hoefling, are also more conservative than Trump and could attract unhappy Republicans.

Nahh, Trump will win here.

Here’s the thing about the Vote Pact strategy: It requires participants to step out of their comfort zones. You know that old saying, “Never talk about politics in polite company”? Unfortunately, these days it’s, “Never talk about politics unless you’re sure the other person agrees with you, and then talk a lot about it.”

The structures of American society are sowing a lot of division these days. We have significant ideological, political, religious and regional differences anyway. These are heightened by the fact that we tend to live near, work alongside, and socialize with people who look like us, believe like us, and make roughly the same amount of money. Regardless of our political beliefs, it’s easy to find media outlets to reinforce our persuasions and paint others as foolish and ill-intentioned. Others therefore become aliens.

When we express our political opinions, it’s often in completely safe situations, or online, where old rules about civility and respect don’t seem to apply. There, political arguments are so ugly and pointless that we end up “unfriending” those with whom we disagree.

This creates a destructive cycle that entrenches our beliefs and makes us more extreme. Within a cocoon of like-minded individuals, in one conversation President Obama can go from being too liberal to being a communist to purposely helping the terrorists to win, with no one ever backtracking to him just being too liberal. In somebody else’s cocoon, Republicans become the mortal enemy.

Vote Pact creates an opportunity for civil discourse and transforms opponents into allies. The other voter is no longer part of the Left or Right. They’re just a fellow human being trying to vote their conscience. And we’re going to help them do that, while they help us.

Vote Pact won’t change this election’s outcome. But elections aren’t just about picking the winner in a two-person beauty contest, or “less ugly” contest. They’re about letting voters express their beliefs. The two-party, winner-take-all system pressures voters to compromise. With Vote Pact, they can vote with no regrets while bridging the gap with someone with different beliefs but the same desire for their vote to count.

Isn’t that better than another pointless online argument?

Teaching students to look behind the screens

Ella Beth Wengel, Gov. Asa Hutchinson's granddaughter, right, introduces Mattie Brawner to coding at an event at the Clinton Library.

Ella Beth Wengel, Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s granddaughter, introduces Mattie Brawner to coding at an event at the Clinton Library.

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson stood before the assembled students at the Benton High School auditorium and asked for a show of hands: How many were interested in a career in computer coding? What he described as a “smattering” raised their hands.

So then the 65-year-old governor proceeded to tell the teenagers why computers are important. Farmers use software to determine how much to water their crops, he said. Manufacturing is now done by robots controlled by computers. When he was an undersecretary at the Department of Homeland Security, computers predicted potential terrorist attacks at ports so millions of containers didn’t have to be searched one at a time. He also showed the students a code.org video featuring a bunch of old guys, including Bill Gates, 60, and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, 32, talking about coding. When he asked for another show of hands at the end of his presentation, more hands were raised.

Benton High was the first stop among several where the governor is encouraging students to take the computer science classes he and legislators now require schools to offer. He said afterwards that he is trying to help students understand “the connection between their technology that they live by, and how that technology comes about.”

Arkansas is the first state to teach computer science in every public high school, leading “Wired” magazine to publish an online article headlined, “So, Arkansas is leading the learn to code movement.” The idea came when Hutchinson was running for governor in 2014 and his 11-year-old granddaughter built a smartphone application for his campaign. Hutchinson pledged to require every high school in Arkansas to teach computer science and then signed it into law in 2015 after he was elected. Students taking the course receive a core math or science credit.

During the past school year, about 4,000 students took computer coding classes, many of them through the state’s online Virtual Academy because so few teachers were trained in coding. Meanwhile, the state spent $5 million partly to train teachers to give in-person instruction. At Benton High, 28 students are taking the class this year under teacher Lauren Roseberry, compared to the 15 who took the course last year online.

Meanwhile, Arkansas is on pace to be one of three states where every public school is connected to high-speed internet by July 2017.

At one time, Arkansas’ economic development strategy might best be described as “Come to the home of everyday low wages.” The state has attracted manufacturers because it doesn’t have much of a union presence. In the past, empty spec buildings were built so companies would have a place to land. And, of course, like all states Arkansas still generously pays companies to locate here through taxpayer-financed subsidies and tax credits.

Globalization and automation make all of that much less effective. At first, there was always someone overseas willing to work cheaper. Now, the factories are starting to come back to America, but not so many of the jobs; the people have been replaced by robots.

A coding job, meanwhile, requires only a computer, a high-speed internet connection (still a problem in some places in Arkansas), and a place to sit down – be that in an office, a coffee shop or a spare bedroom. State and local governments don’t have to build roads or rail spurs or worry about permits from the Environmental Protection Agency. Many startups get off the ground without requiring taxpayer-financed incentives.

Software developers earned a median wage of $100,690 in May 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. According to code.org, there are currently 526,000 computing jobs open – 1,701 in Arkansas.

That’s where the jobs are – or a lot of them, anyway – not the 1950s factory work that’s never coming back no matter which presidential candidate Americans elect to re-negotiate those “unfair trade deals.”

Arkansas is a cheap place to live, and it has some nice scenery. The jobs will come here or, better yet, be created here, as long as the talent is available. How to create that talent? Encourage students to stop merely looking at their screens, and start exploring what’s behind them.

Battle of the deep pockets

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

When you read about a lawsuit against a nursing home, do you usually assume that the alleged victim was mistreated and the nursing home should be punished, or that some lawyer is looking for a jackpot verdict?

Deep-pocketed supporters and opponents of a proposed amendment will try to encourage those assumptions in their favor between now and November.

“An Amendment to Limit Attorney Contingency Fees and Non-Economic Damages in Medical Lawsuits” would direct the Arkansas Legislature to limit pain and suffering damages to at least $250,000. (Please note the words “at least,” my fellow reporters who keep omitting those words.) Trial lawyer contingency fees would be limited to 33 1/3 percent after expenses. There would be no limits for other types of damages.

Where’s this debate headed? In politics, always follow the money.

Health Care Access for Arkansans, the group supporting the amendment, raised $871,088.50 in May, June and July, according to campaign finance reports. Of that, $580,000 came from the Arkansas Health Care Association, the group that represents nursing homes, and much of the rest has come from nursing homes and associated entities. Medical groups and providers have not been as active, but they will become involved, said David Wroten with the Arkansas Medical Society.

Those are some deep pockets. Expect to see ads about predatory lawyers as the election nears.

Those lawyers also have deep pockets. A group opposing the amendment, the Committee to Protect AR Families, formed July 12. In less than three weeks, it raised $420,430 from 18 lawyers and law firms, including Fort Smith attorney Joey McCutchen and the McDaniel Law Firm in Little Rock, both of which gave $100,000, and an Illinois law firm, Simmons Hanly and Conroy, which gave $75,000.

There are a lot more lawyers in and out of this state, so expect that pot to grow. That means you’ll be seeing ads about nursing home victims.

You can look at this cynically: Everyone’s just trying to make sure their pockets remain deep. The lawyers want to be able to sue for millions of dollars. The nursing homes want to protect their you-know-whats.

The two sides will accuse their opponents of behaving cynically while describing themselves idealistically – that nursing homes are just trying to serve patients and families, while lawyers are trying to protect victims and prevent victimhood.

As in most campaigns, to get to the truth, voters will have to advance past cynicism but stop short of idealism. In other words, they’ll have to be realistic.

The realistic view is that of course everybody is trying to benefit their own financial situations.

At the same time, nursing homes provide an indispensable daily service to a vulnerable population amidst often grim and difficult situations. Bad things would happen even if humans never made mistakes, which they do. Nursing homes must provide a service while making a profit at a price families and society can afford. That being the case, society’s expectations of nursing homes ought be in line with the resources it provides them. They can’t be perfect.

However, while human error is inevitable, negligence is unacceptable. If a nursing home can’t figure out how to make a profit and provide good care, then it shouldn’t be in business. Providers must be forced to remain vigilant, and one way to do that is through painful financial consequences. That’s why we have lawsuits, and to have lawsuits, we must have lawyers.

All of us, including supporters and opponents of the amendment, can all agree that the old and infirm must be given dignified care – if necessary, in a nursing home. We can all agree that the care must be affordable. And we can all agree that there must be consequences when standards aren’t met.

Achieving those three, all at the same time, is a difficult balance. Voters will decide if limiting non-economic damages and lawyers’ fees is the best way to reach that balance, even while various groups with deep pockets naturally will want to tip it in their favor.

Would you rather rank your choices?

Hand with ballot and boxBy Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Are you dissatisfied with the candidates but uncomfortable voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Maine may have a solution: ranking your choices.

Mainers will vote this November on implementing ranked choice voting, where in a multi-candidate race they would mark their first, second and third choices. If no candidate receives a majority, then the candidate with the fewest first place votes is eliminated. Their votes are awarded to their voters’ second choice candidates. If there’s still no majority winner, the process continues until one candidate has a majority.

Such a system is uncommon but not unheard of. In Arkansas, military and overseas voters rank their choices because there isn’t time to mail them a ballot if there is a runoff. According to FairVote, an election reform supporter, 11 cities elect their city officials using ranked choice voting. It’s how Ireland chooses its president and Australians their Parliament.

Supporters say such a system, otherwise known as instant runoff voting, ensures winning candidates have majority support. Under the current system, when there are multiple choices, the favorite candidate of a minority can be elected over several candidates with broad appeal who split the vote. Party primaries below the presidency solve that problem with runoffs, which are costly and often attract a low turnout. But general elections are winner take all, which, through the Electoral College, is how Bill Clinton became president in 1992 with 43 percent of the vote.

A ranked choice system also makes it easier for voters to vote their conscience. Voters are forever being told they must vote for the major party candidate they fear least lest they help the more objectionable candidate win. Voters in a ranked choice system can support the candidate who reflects their values, giving him or her a fighting chance, while their second choice votes will go to their preferred – or less unpreferred – major party candidate.

Supporters say a ranked choice system forces candidates to try to appeal to a broader slice of the electorate and to run a more positive campaign. Current campaigns are won by firing up the base by pitting Americans against each other. In a ranked choice system, second choice voters may provide the margin of victory, so candidates have an incentive not to alienate them.

Ranked choice voting really is no different than how we make decisions elsewhere in life. Sometimes the doughnut shop is out of our favorite, so we pick our second favorite from among a wide selection. Under the current system, voters often have only two doughnuts from which to choose, both of which they may dislike – or there may be a third that’s in the back that no one tells them about.

The negatives? Ranked choice voting is more complicated, would require investing in new voting technology, and may not make much of a difference in Arkansas.

Maine has a history of multi-candidate elections where the governor is elected by a minority – less than 40 percent in five of its last 11 elections. One of its U.S. senators, Angus King, is an independent.

Arkansas does not have a strong third party presence or a history of independent candidates, though it did vote for independent George Wallace for president in 1968. There lately haven’t been a lot of races with multiple credible candidates for major offices, or a lot of runoffs in party primaries.

Maine’s proposal does not apply to the presidential race, which is governed by both state law and party rules. Arkansas would have had to work with the national parties to implement ranked choice voting before this year’s primaries, and who knows how that would have turned out. But there would be no problem changing the law for the general election.

It’s clear that Americans are unhappy with their democracy. Typically they respond by trying to change people, which is why Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders, two candidates very different from the norm, won so much support. But attempting change through people is often disappointing because the system keeps one person from having too much power, thank goodness. To make lasting change, change the system.

Is ranked choice voting the best way to do that? I’m willing to try this doughnut, or at least let Mainers do it and ask them how they like it.

Letting boys be boys in school

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Every year before students have taken their standardized tests, former principal Terri McCann, now a district administrator, has walked into the third grade all-girls’ classroom at West Memphis Bragg Elementary, told students what to expect, and reminded them to sharpen their pencils. It’s always been very calm and encouraging. Then she’s walked to the all-boys’ classroom, closed the door behind her, and shouted, like a football coach, “Are you going to let those girls beat you again?!”

“No!” they’d yell like they were ready to run out of a locker room and run over an Ole Miss Rebel.

Those motivational techniques are just one of many ways third grade boys and girls are taught differently at Bragg Elementary, and it all started when McCann and other school leaders looked at test results and realized that girls were outscoring boys just about everywhere in every grade.

Those problems mirror what’s happening throughout the rest of society. Academically, girls are outperforming boys and have been for a long time and in many countries, according to a 2014 study by the American Psychological Association. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, females made up 57 percent of all college students in the fall of 2015.

Of course, the educators at Bragg Elementary aren’t responsible for the performance of America’s youth. They’re responsible for their kids. So they asked themselves a hard question: At Bragg Elementary, how are we failing boys, and how can we help all students?

They decided to offer parents the choice of a boys’, girls’ or mixed-gender classroom. They trained with specialists who taught them about different learning styles. And then they implemented those ideas.

The differences in the boys’ and girls’ classrooms start with how they are arranged. In the girls’ classroom, desks face each other in neat, small clusters. In the boys’ classroom, desks are arranged shoulder-to-shoulder. Carpet is glued beneath the boys’ desks so they can rub their hands back and forth and release energy while they are listening.

Movement, in fact, is one of the keys to success in the boys’ room. While the girls typically work well at their desks, the boys are allowed to do workbook problems standing and pressing their paper against a wall, or they go outside and toss a ball while doing math problems. Teachers walk back and forth and expressively use their hands to keep students’ attention, and they skip from topic to topic.

Other communication and teaching styles differ. Boys are given simple instructions and then dive into the lessons, while girls, who are better hearers from birth, are given a much more thorough explanation. The boys’ room has a lot more competition, and because boys learn better under stress, they have many timed activities. Girls, on the other hand, compete less and are given more time. In math, boys use fewer math manipulatives, which become distractions and, inevitably, projectiles. The girls tend to learn better using those hands-on, concrete objects.

The results? In 2005 four years before the change, only 55 percent of third grade students were proficient in literacy and 78 percent in math. In 2014, it was 87 percent and 96 percent. The biggest recent gain has been in boys’ literacy – from 53 percent proficient in 2009, the first year of the change, to 87 percent in 2014.

True, test scores generally have increased throughout Arkansas. But McCann and her fellow educators are confident their methods have made a difference and have seen other successes, such as improved discipline. Moreover, students with special needs are mainstreamed into these classrooms rather than housed in special ed. Educators and parents alike have noticed that the students, particularly the boys in the all-boys’ classroom, rally around those classmates and make them feel part of the team.

Interestingly, Bragg Elementary didn’t see the same success with mixed classrooms in the sixth grade, so only the third grade offers gender-based classrooms. Still, the lessons learned have been incorporated in all grades.

To some, the model probably sounds politically incorrect, especially when society is debating the notion of gender these days.

But left and right ought to be able to agree that classrooms should fit the student rather than the other way around. This is how Bragg Elementary is doing it: by taking into account gender learning styles, giving parents a choice and, when appropriate, letting boys be boys.

Related: How two sisters and a cup of coffee changed a school