The Commonwealth February-March 2010 by The Commonwealth Club of California

Thomas Frank & Frank Luntz pgs 8 & 9

Firoozeh Dumas: THE HUMAN SIDE pg 19

SUPER COOL OR SUPERFREAKS? pg 54

Dr. Gloria Duffy: Yes You Can pg 58

Commonwealth The

THE MAGAZINE OF THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB OF CALIFORNIA

February/March 2010

Captain Sully The Hudson Hero Speaks commonwealthclub.org

The Commonwealth Club of California’s

irit o f C

107th Anniversary and 22nd Annual Distinguished Citizen Award Dinner

o f i al

April 29, 2010 – Palace Hotel, San Francisco Distinguished Honorees Include: Jack O’Neill, Founder, O’Neill Wetsuits, Dr. Bill Rutter, Chairman and CEO, Synergenics, The Honorable George P. Shultz, Former Secretary of State & Charlotte Mailliard Shultz, Chief of Protocol for the State of California and the City of San Francisco Dinner Chairs: Maryles Casto & Brian D. Riley

For more information, please call (415) 869-5909 or visit commonwealthclub.org/annualdinner

Contents

Vo lu m e 104, N O . 02

f e b ru a ry / m a rc h 2010

54 Freakishly Clever “What if we really were in a jam, and we wanted to really cool the Earth in a hurry, and we didn’t want to wait 40 or 50 years – is there another option?” –Steve Levitt

Photo by Henry Navarro

Features

Departments

Events

29 Program Information 30 Eight Weeks Calendar

What Americans Really Want Conservative pollster Frank Luntz

10 Captain Sully: Flying Hero The Hudson Hero speaks

16 Paying the Toll Can California afford its transportation network?

Transported to a New Place

Remembering Bruce Mitchell

48 Health Security in

an Age of Pandemics

32 32 33 46

28 Letters Maine and Canada strike back

47 Climate One Greg Dalton

58 InSight

Programs by Region Language Classes Program Listings Late-breaking Events

About Our Cover: Captain Sully told a soldout Club crowd about his safe landing of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson. Photo by William F. Adams. Design by Steven Fromtling.

Dr. Gloria C. Duffy Yes You Can

19 The Human Side Firoozeh Dumas is a people person

Events from February 1 to April 14, 2010

The Commons

Julio Frenk on H1N1 and other health challenges

52 Rethinking the Economy Can it be sustainable? feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Photo by Steven Fromtling

Liberal writer Thomas Frank

Editor’s Note

Photo by Kara Iwahashi

What Americans Don’t Want

Commonwealth The

VP, MEDIA & EDITORIAL

Editor’s Note Transported to a New Place

John Zipperer jzipperer@commonwealthclub.org

MANAGING Editor

Amanda Leung aleung@commonwealthclub.org

John Zipperer

Associate Editor

Editorial Director

Sonya Abrams sabrams@commonwealthclub.org

dESIGNEr

Steven Fromtling sfromtling@commonwealthclub.org

Editorial Interns Andrew Harrison

Heather Mack

CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHERS

William F. Adams Beth Byrne

The Commonwealth (ISSN 0010-3349) magazine is published bimonthly (6 times a year) by The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-2805. PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID at San Francisco, CA. Subscription rate $34 per year included in annual membership dues. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Commonwealth, The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-2805. Printed on recycled paper using soy-based ink. Copyright © 2010 The Commonwealth Club of California. Tel: (415) 597-6700 Fax: (415) 597-6729 E-mail: feedback@commonwealthclub.org EDITORIAL POLICY FOR PROGRAM TRANSCRIPTS: The Commonwealth magazine seeks to cover a range of programs in each issue. Program transcripts and question and answer sessions are routinely condensed due to space limitations. Hear full-length recordings of events online at commonwealthclub.org/archive or contact Club offices to order a compact disc.

sk just about anyone to name the top five concerns for their community, state or nation, and you’re likely to get a series of topics ranging from taxes to crime to city hall politics, but I suspect few people will mention transportation. After all, transportation is infrastructure; it’s something we all expect to be there and to be reliably useful, so we don’t think of it as a special topic. But if you listen to what people talk about as they pour their morning coffee or gather around the water cooler, transportation is likely to be a more common topic than even the latest scandals on TMZ.com. BART was running late this morning. I nearly missed my bus. MUNI was so crowded. I was stuck on 880 for an hour because of that accident. Did they raise the bridge tolls yet? And so on. We’ll be thinking a lot more about it in the years ahead, as California faces the need to spend large sums of money just to keep its current aging infrastructure running, not to mention any improvements and expansions neccesary to deal with the millions of new residents expected to be added to the state’s population. Where will that money come from? Can private sources be given a cut of the business to encourage them to make the investments? Can gasoline taxes be reformulated to provide more cash? Those questions and more were explored in a very timely Club discussion in October, called “California Transportation: What Are the Funding Challenges?” You can read an excerpt beginning on page 16, which will either make you optimistic about the state’s ability to rise to the funding and planning challenges or it will make you scan Craigslist for work-at-home jobs.

ADVERtising information Mary Beth Cerjan Development Manager (415) 869-5919 mbcerjan@commonwealthclub.org

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Photo by Sonya Abrams

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Commons The

Talk of the Club

Photo courtesy of Kenny Ganz / Flickr

Make a Difference Have a skill that can help The Club? Volunteer.

Medical miracle or quid pro quo deal?

he fresh Libyan air must have amazing rejuvating qualities, or at least you would be forgiven for concluding that after noting the latest development in the case of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi. The former Libyan secret service agent, who was convicted of killing 270 people with a bomb aboard Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, was recently released from his prison in Scotland on “compassionate grounds,” due to prostate cancer that allegedly would take his life within three months. He was released in August 2009, and is reportedly still alive and kicking in early 2010. The decision to release him was widely criticized as having more to do with matters of bilateral trade between the UK and Libya than with al-Magrahi’s health diagnosis, which itself has been called into question by other doctors. He has reportedly been released from the Libyan hospital where he went after his release from Scotland, and is now living at his family’s villa. “The wrong ethical choice was made under the guise of humanitarianism, and financial interests may have intervened to further skew the outcome,” wrote Dr. Gloria Duffy, Club president and CEO, in her October column in The Commonwealth. The release continues to be a topic of heated debate in UK political circles.

San Francisco to Show off in China Expo presence to highlight city’s green credentials

f you’re going to be in China on business or pleasure in July, you might want to show a bit of parochial pride and visit San Francisco’s display at the Expo 2010 in Shanghai. The display, part of the Urban Best Practices Area at the Expo, will highlight the city’s green bona fides by featur-

Photo by Sonya Abrams

The Long Life of the Lockerbie Bomber

he Commonwealth Club’s best assets are its members, who are an unusually informed and involved cross section of the Bay Area community. Whether actively working or attending school or retired, Club members have a fascinating array of backgrounds and skills. Just in the past year, we’ve heard from members who are lawyers, airline pilots, ballroom singers, bankers, scientists, venture capitalists and more. With that depth of talent available, it only made sense to expand the ways for people to volunteer some of their time to help The Club grow and flourish. So we’re accepting inquiries for volunteer positions to help with new-member outreach, fundraising, guest services and more. Volunteer opportunities are reserved for Club members. For more information on Club volunteer opportunities, visit common wealthclub.org/about/jobs.

ing solar powered projects, energyconsumption measurement and control efforts, and green buildings. The Urban Best Practices Area features displays by cities from around the world, many with a green building theme. Shanghai is one of about 15 places with which San Francisco has a sister-city relationship. Others include Paris; Krakow, Poland; Zürich; and Haifa, Israel. San Francisco’s display will run for six days in July. The entire Expo is slated to run from May 1 through October 31, 2010. You can learn more about the expo at http://en.expo2010.cn/. feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Photo from The Club’s archives

In Memoriam

Bruce T. Mitchell Former Club president leaves legacy of service, engagement

The making of California’s dynamic

car culture

www.heydaybooks.com

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

he Club is saddened to announce the passing of Bruce T. Mitchell on December 10, 2009. Bruce has been a Club member since 1956, serving as an active volunteer for many years before being elected to the Club presidency in 1973. Bruce Mitchell embodied an archetypical Commonwealth Club member: an avid learner, fully engaged, with a zest for living and a spirit devoted to his family and community. One local executive who served with Mitchell on a Club committee described him as “truly a prince among princes and a wonderful human being.” The early 1970s was a tumultuous time in much of American politics and society, but Mitchell oversaw a peaceful and well-received change during his time at the helm of The Commonwealth Club: He was very proud to have been president when women were accepted as members for the first time in the organization’s then-70-year existence. Six years later, the Club also had its first female president, Renee Rubin.

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Mitchell remained an active member in The Club and of its Programming Committee until his death. He also was a member of The Club’s Legacy Circle, remembering The Commonwealth Club in his estate planning. In addition to his Club responsibilities, Bruce was active in Republican politics, including serving as an alternate delegate from California to the Republican National Convention in 1968, and then for six years he held the post of chairman of the San Mateo County Republican Central Committee. He was an arbitrator for the New York Stock Exchange and a supporter of St. Francis Hospital, Stanford University, the symphony, the San Francisco Junior Chamber of Commerce, opera, A.C.T. and other organizations. This Bay Area native also loved to travel widely, and he visited all seven continents, touring nearly every country on earth. A memorial service was held for Bruce Mitchell December 27 at the Congregational Church of San Mateo. Ω

Club Leadership

First Word Henry N. Pollack

OFFICERS of The Commonwealth Club of California Board Chair Dr. Mary G. F. Bitterman Vice Chair Maryles Casto Secretary William F. Adams Treasurer Anna W. M. Mok President and CEO Dr. Gloria C. Duffy

Ph.D., Professor of Geophysics, University of Michigan “A World Without Ice: Man’s Impact on Climate Change,” Climate One, 10/27/2009

BOARD OF GOVERNORS

Photo courtesy of Henry N. Pollack

ce is a sensitive and unambiguous indicator of climate change. Because the ice of the Earth is very close to its melting point, just a few degrees of temperature change can lead to significant changes in the distribution of ice on Earth. So when we watch ice in retreat, due to some modest increases in temperature over the globe, you can see how sensitive ice is to this equilibrium that it has with the Earth’s temperature. Ice is nature’s thermometer. You just need to watch ice to see climate change in action. The consequences of losing ice on Earth are very profound, in several different ways, but two are very prominent. One is the loss of mountaintop glaciers in the mid- and tropical latitudes. These glaciers – which reside in such places as Glacier National Park, on top of the high peaks of the Andes in South America, on many of the peaks in the Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau in Asia – are melting. They’re retreating; they’re losing their ice. These glaciers, along with the seasonal snowfall, provide the agricultural water and the domestic water for about a third of the Earth’s population. While the ice exists, there’s still an ample supply of water for those purposes. Once the glaciers are gone, the annual snowfall is inadequate to meet the consumption levels that are presently taking place. So I’m very concerned about the impact on large numbers of people. The other big impact is that as you melt ice on the continents, it gradually runs downhill and enters the ocean and provides new water that will raise sea levels. Now, melted ice is not the only reason sea levels rise. [They] also rise because the oceans themselves are warming, and thermal expansion of ocean water is a contributor to the rise of sea level. The net effect is that sea level is rising, both due to the warming and the addition of new water. And a meter of sea level rise will impact 100 million people around the globe. When you look at the number of people who live in various elevation bands above sea level, the lowest level – from sea level to one meter high – is home to 100 million people. It will lead to a very serious dislocation of the human population. Ω

Massey J. Bambara Hon. L. W. Lane, Jr. Hon. Shirley Temple Black* Don J. McGrath J. Dennis Bonney* Marcela C. Medina Noah Buffett-Kennedy Richard Otter* Joseph Perrelli* Helen A. Burt Hon. Barbara Pivnicka John Busterud* Hon. Richard Pivnicka Michael Carr Fr. Stephen A. Privett, S.J. Hon. Ming Chin* Dan C. Quigley Jeff Clarke Toni Rembe* Jack Cortis Victor Revenko* Mary B. Cranston** Skip Rhodes* Dr. Kerry P. Curtis Dr. Condoleezza Rice Evelyn S. Dilsaver Fred A. Rodriguez Timothy C. Draper Renée Rubin* Joseph I. Epstein* Robert Saldich** Rolando Esteverena Joseph W. Saunders Jeffrey A. Farber Connie Shapiro* Dr. Joseph R. Fink* Dr. Carol A. Fleming, Ph.D. Charlotte Mailliard Shultz Valari D. Staab Karen C. Francis James Strother Lisa Frazier Hon. Tad Taube William German* L. Jay Tenenbaum Dr. Charles Geschke Charles Travers Rose Guilbault** Thomas Vertin Jacquelyn Hadley Robert Walker Edie G. Heilman Eugene Herson* Nelson Weller* Hon. James C. Hormel Judith Wilbur* Mary Huss Dr. Colleen B. Wilcox Claude B. Hutchison Jr.* Dennis Wu* Dr. Julius Krevans* Russell M. Yarrow Lata Krishnan * Past President ** Past Chair ADVISORY BOARD Karin Helene Bauer Hon. William Bradley Dennise M. Carter Steven Falk Amy Gershoni Richard N. Goldman

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Heather M. Kitchen Amy McCombs Hon. William J. Perry Ray Taliaferro Nancy Thompson

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

What am don’t want Did Americans get a real taste of conservatism in the last three decades, or was it fakeconservatism? Frank weighs in. Excerpt from “Thomas Frank,” September 8, 2009. thomas frank Founding Editor, The Baffler; Author, What’s the Matter with Kansas? and The Wrecking

f you take a look at the headlines the last couple days and see what’s going on in the country, it’s clear that our current, furious political debate is also, to some degree, a debate over history. When our friends on the right scream that President Obama is a socialist, that he has these sort of special powers for indoctrinating young people; when they tell us that last year’s financial crisis was actually a result of government meddling in the economy – I saw this in The Washington Post just yesterday; when they say these things, I think they’re also advanc-

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

ing a particular understanding of the politics of the last 30 years, by which I mean an understanding in which they themselves had no role and deserve none of the blame. There was no conservative Congress, nor conservative Bush administration allowing bankers to do as they liked. Those people were, in fact, imposters, right? You’ve heard the theory. So when government failed, as it did so spectacularly in those years, most notably in the case of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, that wasn’t a reflection on the people who were running FEMA at the time. It was because government always fails. You hear this all the time as well. This is in the newspaper just about every day; this evasion of responsibility is one of the reasons I wrote The Wrecking Crew. The conservative revolution in this country began nearly 30 years ago, or 40, depending on whether you want to go all the way back to 1968. Conservatives have ruled, on and off, in Washington from 30 years ago basically up until earlier this year, and yet it’s extremely difficult to get from them a simple statement of what conservative governance is. It was in power for all these years, and yet it’s very difficult to just get to the bottom of it and figure out what it was. What is, or what was, the conservative state? But don’t ask conservatives, because they don’t know. As former House [majority leader] Tom Delay wrote last year in The Washington Times, “Conservatism hasn’t been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult and left untried.” So the thing is, there never was a conservative Congress. They never got a chance. Right? But of course there is a conservative philosophy of govern(Continued on page 22)

Photo courtesy of Thomas Frank, flag photo by Jonathon Colman / Flickr

Crew: How Conservatives Ruined Government, Enriched Themselves and Beggared the Nation

mericans

Really want Veteran GOP pollster Luntz knows what Americans tell him. Can they stand to tell each other? Excerpt from “Frank Luntz: What Americans Really Want… Really,” November 6, 2009. frank luntz Pollster; Political Consultant; Communications Expert; Author, What Americans Really

Want…Really

Photo courtesy of Frank Luntz

art of understanding why Barack Obama did so well in 2008 and why John McCain did so poorly in 2008 has to do with style, not just substance. In fact, I would argue that it had even more to do with style than with substance. Obama was so at ease; he could relate. His language was incredible. When he read from a teleprompter, the teleprompter disappeared and you heard him in his language. John McCain? Be honest: Stevie Wonder reads a teleprompter better than John McCain. He was an incredible war hero, had a great record as United States senator, but his language and his presentation were distant. In the Democratic Convention, Obama speaks at Mile High Stadium; I was there and it was absolutely incredible. I’m glad I went. I actually called a couple members of my family – managed to get them tickets – because I said, “This is going to be historic. You’ve got to be there.” I saw McCain. I was working for Fox News. At the convention, Obama’s speech was incredible. I go to McCain, and I’m watching what they’re doing that morning, and they have the podium sunk into the stage. I’m thinking that McCain, who’s been doing this now for 20 years, is going to get up and not read a speech, and basically begin his presentation with something like, “I’m not a new United States senator. I’ve been around for a while. I don’t need someone to write my words for me. They come from my head and my heart. So allow me to speak to you from the heart and from the soul.” Then let him do what he has done hundreds of times. No senator has held more town hall meetings than John McCain. No one was better prepared to forgo the teleprompter. When I saw the thing come up, I thought, It’s over. I say to you this: because communication really

does matter. I will admit that I’m a little bit nervous being here in San Francisco. What was not part of the introduction is that I worked with Newt Gingrich on the Contract with America. I worked for Rudy Giuliani in 1993 and 1997 in his two mayoral runs. I’ve done a lot of work in Israel for a number of prime ministers; I’ve worked all over the country. But someone who has a right-of-center outlook – I feel about as comfortable as Dr. Kevorkian does at an AARP meeting. But I also know, thanks to the foundation that sponsored this, which I appreciate, is that there are, at least in this room, probably all the conservatives in all of San Francisco. It’s been a year now since the election, and I’m still, to this day, impressed (Continued on page 25)

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Captain Sully: Flying Hero The pilot of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 explains what happened during the “Miracle on the Hudson,” and he describes the training and preparation beforehand that went into the making of that life-saving moment. Excerpt from “Captain Chesley ‘Sully’ Sullenberger,” November 30, 2009. Captain ChesLey “sully” sullenberger Bay Area Pilot; Author,

Highest Duty

in conversation with dan ashley Anchor, KGO TV – Moderator Ashley: Captain Sullenberger, great to see you again, and thank you for being part of The Commonwealth Club.

Ashley: It occurred to me as I read [your book] that you’ve had a number of memorable flights. But you’ve had two particularly memorable flights – that is, the roughly three minutes over the Hudson River, almost a year ago now, and then another three-minute flight you took, when you were just a 16-year-old young man. Your first solo flight. There is something about flying airplanes that, for those who do it, like you, captures your imagination in a way that many other professions may not. Tell me about that flight that day. What did it ignite in you as a young man? Sullenberger: Passion. I was fortunate, like many boys my age in that era,

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Photo by William F. Adams, Illustrations by Steven Fromtling

Sullenberger: This has been, as you might imagine, a year of many amazing firsts for me, and high on the list would be an appearance and the chance to speak at The Commonwealth Club.

I probably spent a little bit of time when I was four and a half wanting to be a policeman, than a fireman, as they were called then. But by the time I was five, my path was clear. it was obvious to me that I was going to spend my life flying airplanes. I was just fortunate enough to be able to do that. Finding one’s passion has a number of advantages, not only for yourself but for society. It makes you more willing to be diligent, to work hard, to become expert at it. It’s a source of much satisfaction. I know from first-hand experience how much fun it is to be particularly good at something that is difficult to do well. So it’s made me work hard at something I care about. Ashley: If you would, revisit part of that day in January, when you took off and suddenly hit that big flock of birds. You had told me previously that you had flown your entire career without an incident anywhere near that serious, and really never expected to encounter an incident that serious, because it really is uncommon. Sullenberger: It is [uncommon], especially now. Commercial aviation has become so ultra-safe, that it’s possible for an airline pilot to go through an entire career now and never experience the failure of even a single engine. That was the record I was on-track to achieve, before that day. Part of me expected that to continue. Even this flight was completely normal, it was unremarkable in every way – for the first 100 seconds. [Audience laughter] And then everything changed, in an instant. And I knew it, in an instant, I knew in seconds that this was going to be the most challenging day of my life, that we would be fighting for our lives. I had 208 seconds to solve the problem. Ashley: What altitude were you when you hit the birds? Sullenberger: We were just under 3,000 feet. We were in a nose-high climb attitude. As soon as the engines failed, the nose was still up, so our airspeed began to decay, but we began to coast upwards at just over 3,000 feet by the time the nose was lowered to obtain a glide speed. Ashley: I remember – it may have been you, but I think it was your copilot, Jeffrey Skiles, [who] said that, because it was such a shocking event, he fully expected the engines to restart, because that typically seems to be what happens. Was it a surprise that the engines just would not restart? Sullenberger: No. I never thought that they would, but I knew that we had to try. I should backtrack a moment: When the birds struck us, it was the enormity of the thumps and thuds that were nearly simultaneous all over the airplane, from wingtip to

wingtip, to the nose just below the cockpit windows, [and] of course in the engines. It was obvious to me from the things I heard, from the things I felt, and from – eventually, after a few seconds – what I smelled, that the birds had injured the engines, probably damaged them irreparably, and then within a few seconds after that, I had what I described as “sudden, complete, symmetrical” loss of thrust. It felt like the bottom had fallen out of our world, and I knew immediately that it was going to be the challenge of my life. Ashley: What could have happened if you were not successful in landing on the Hudson? If you couldn’t make it to the Hudson, what was likely to happen? There were three options, order, as I considered and individually rejected them, they were: returning to LaGuardia, going to Teterboro in New Jersey, or the Hudson. I rejected returning to LaGuardia as being problematic. I just wasn’t sure I could do it, and I had to be sure, because it would have been an irrevocable choice. Turning back toward the airport across the Bronx would have ruled out every other option. Missing it even by feet could well have been catastrophic not only for everyone on the airplane but for persons on the ground. To return to the runway would’ve required being able to lower the landing gear, and I did not know at that point if we would have been able to. It would’ve meant abandoning sooner the attempt to restart the engines and going to another checklist to lower by alternate means the landing gear. It would have meant configuring the airplane with the flaps and slats to be able to slow enough to a normal landing speed for the runway. It would’ve meant turning so as to be able to manage our speed, altitude and direction precisely enough to align the flight path with the runway, to have a survivable touchdown that was not too steep that it would damage the airplane on landing – break it open and cause a post-crash fire. It would have meant maintaining directional control to remain on the runway while attempting to stop. And it would have meant being able to use the wheel brakes, which I also did not know if I’d be able to do, to stop prior to departing the end of the runway. So for a variety of reasons, in many ways, it would have been more challenging, and the penalty for being wrong would have been quite severe. The alternative would have been attempting to reach Teterboro Airport across the Hudson in New Jersey. But after less than a minute of considering that, and having the air traffic controller, whose voice you’ve heard on the tapes, Patrick Harden, try to arrange that for us, I saw it rising in the windshield – a sure sign, to every pilot, that it’s too far, that it’s unattainable. So the only option, the only remaining choice for us,

Sullenberger: and, in

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

after impact, looked at one another. It must’ve been a surprise! the only place in the entire metropolitan area long enough, wide enough, smooth enough even to attempt landing a modern, large jet airliner, was the river. Ashley: In 208 seconds, you had to process an enormous amount of information. Most us have a hard time ordering lunch in that amount of time. Sullenberger: I spent more time describing that than it took to do it. Ashley: One of the things beyond training and controlling your space in that cockpit, I suppose, is controlling your emotions and controlling your mind. I know we have a saying in broadcasting that the mind is a magnificent tool; it starts working the moment you’re born and stops the second the red light comes on. I’ve been in those situations where it just stopped working at the wrong moment. I guess it’s all instinct – you don’t have time, really, to control your emotions. Do you just react reflexively, or is there something else? Sullenberger: It was not automatic. It was not instinctive. It was a conscious choice and it was difficult to do. I could

Sullenberger: We didn’t know what to expect – we had never landed an airliner in the river before. [Audience laughter.] That was one of the reasons I said the words I did, in that one announcement to the cabin, because I did not yet know how well I’d be able to trade some of our forward speed for a reduced rate of descent to cushion the landing. So I chose my words very carefully, and I probably extravagantly used some of those 208 seconds to take 3 or 4 seconds to choose my words, and I said, “This is the captain. Brace for impact.” I used the word brace because, in our airline, that has specific meaning. That triggers the flight attendants in the cabin to shout their commands. I used the word impact because I thought it would be a hard landing, and in fact it was – harder in the back than in the front. I wanted people to be bracing to avoid injury during the landing and not being up, moving around or reaching under the seat to get the life vest or something else. As soon as we did stop and landed in the river, and came to a rest, and it was obvious to at least those of us in the cockpit that the airplane was probably intact, that we were floating, and that everyone was probably still alive, Jeff and I took a couple of seconds before we began the evacuation duties, and looked at each other and almost in the same words and at the same time, said, “Well, that wasn’t as bad as I thought.” You know, we were in no mood, nor did we have time, to celelbrate, but it ws just a bit of a release of tension, because we had just solved the first and the biggest problem of the day. But we hadn’t solved the whole problem yet.

“I chose my words very carefully, ... and I said, ‘This is the captain. Brace for impact.’” feel my body’s natural, human, physiological response, my stress response, my adrenaline surge intensely at the moment it was happening. I was aware of it while it was happening. I could feel it intensely to my core. It was the most intense reaction of my life. But I knew I had to do my job in spite of it. I knew that I had to set it aside, to compartmentalize, and that’s something professional pilots are trained to do. It was difficult. It was distracting. But it didn’t keep us from doing what we had to do. My pulse, in the hospital hours later, it was still over 100, and it was that way for a week. My blood pressure was 160 over 100 for days, and it’s normally 110 over 70. I still remember distinctly not only when that began, seconds after the thrust loss, but I remember when it ended, and that was about four hours later as we were waiting in the hospital for news of what the final tally would be – and in fact, that finally we found out that all 155 people were found, accounted for and safe. About that time, I could feel my body – that shut-down, that stop, that stress reaction finally finish, or exhaust itself. Ashley: You and your copilot, Jeff Skiles, apparently, right

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Ashley: The biggest problem being getting the plane safely on the ground. Sullenberger: Yes. I was confident that, based upon my experience, I could find a way to deliver the aircraft to the surface intact, and I knew that if I did that, then the flight attendants could evacuate the aircraft and the rescue could begin. But it was a series of step-by-step problem-solving exercises, and we had solved the biggest one but we hadn’t gotten everybody safely out of the river yet. Ashley: Some of your story that has some lore to it because it was so courageous: You walked the cabin twice, and toward the back of the plane, when you got there, you’re now in waist-deep water, shouting to make sure that everyone came forward and everyone was off the plane. Even after that, you ran back into the cockpit to grab an overcoat and the maintenance log, is that right? Sullenberger: Yes, and I got the emergency locator transmitter from the cabin, which is also procedure. I had time to do all those things. I wanted to use the time to the greatest benefit. I sensed that the airplane was stable,

it was not going to suddenly sink. It was taking on water, but at rate that – you know, it was time to get everybody off, so I could leave no possibility of anyone being left behind. I felt like I’d gotten them this far, I certainly wasn’t going to stop now and leave somebody behind, when we’d gotten so close to getting everyone off. Ashley: When you found out that all 155 passengers and crew were safe, describe your sense of relief – because this part of it was very personal for you. You have said that had anyone not made it, you probably would not have accepted any or many of these various opportunities that have come your way.

My other concern is that much of what people are going through in general now – the last couple of years with this financial meltdown – airline employees have been living with for eight years or more, certainly since the September 2001 terror attacks: airline bankruptcies, draconian pay cuts, losing half your pay, all of your pension, longer work hours. It makes me wonder if, going forward, we’re still going to be able to attract the best and brightest, people who are willing to be passionate about something that matters, to care about it and to work very hard at becoming expert at it. Or will they choose some other approach? Will they choose law, finance or medicine instead? The other concern I have is that one of the ways, historically, that we’ve been able to make aviation so ultra-safe is that the airline companies have chosen to greatly exceed the regulatory minimums in almost every area – in maintenance,

Sullenberger: We couldn’t. As it was, we didn’t feel like celebrating that night. We were spent. We were used up. We’d been through a tramatic exercise. But had even one person not survived, we couldn’t have celebrated any of this. I couldn’t “We didn’t feel like celebrating that night. Had even one person not have.

survived, we couldn’t have celebrated any of this. I couldn’t have.”

Ashley: Can you share you share your thoughts on the overall safety of air travel? Are American airlines adequately preparing pilots and ensuring that they have skill sets for unforeseen crisis situations?

Sullenberger: Commercial aviation is ultra-safe. It’s safe and getting safer. If you travel on a major North American, European, Western Pacific carrier, you’re at the highest level you can be. The chances of being in an aircraft accident now as a passenger are astronomical. There are hundreds of thousands of people dedicated every day to do their best to keep it that way. I do have some concerns. One of the things I’m concerned about is that we do not rely upon the investments made by previous generations to keep aviation safe. We have to renew that investment. We have to make new investments going forward in order to keep aviation getting safer and safer. Those investments must be not only in technology, not only in the system in which we operate. They must be in people. People are the key ingredient. No airplane can fly itself, and there’s no substitute for fundamental skills that are well learned, for in-depth knowledge, not only of the flying of the airplane, but of its component systems. Especially now, in terms of high technology and automation – those skills must be learned on top of the basic flying skills and on top of the airplane systems. So, I think it’s doubly important that we make sure that the next generation of pilots has learned those skills and has the kind of judgment that can come only from long experience. There are ways to do that. I just hope that we choose to.

in training, in scheduling. I think now what we’re seeing with this intense cost pressure, at all the companies, is the tendency to cheapen everything as much as possible. My concern is that the people leading our companies are primarily trained in finance – and there’s certainly a need for that – but I think that if the decisions that they make are too far removed from the everyday, real-world consequences of the people using those tools and living with the effects of those decisions, then we may have in some way degraded these margins above the regulatory minimums that we’ve relied on for so many generations to keep aviation becoming better. We need to do two things: make sure that the regulatory minimums really are adequate, because historically we haven’t had to rely upon the minimums before; we’ve always had people willing to do more than that. And second, we need to be willing to make the investments it takes to maintain those margins. Ashley: What is your favorite kind of airplane to fly, and why? Sullenberger: I haven’t flown that many types, but I’d say, still, head and shoulders above all the rest in terms of my pure enjoyment of it, it had to be the F4-Phantom. It was a jet fighter. I was flying as a fighter pilot in the Air Force in the ’70s during the Cold War, so much of what we did was to practice flying in formation at ultralow altitudes, very high speeds, and it was exciting – it

feb r ua ry/MA feb r ua R Cry H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Photo by William F. Adams

Sullenberger: Well, we’re certainly brothers now. We and many of those who [were] on the airplane – I said, at one of the early meetings back in February, that “60 Minutes” had asked me to say a few words, and I said that we’re joined forever in our hearts and minds because of this event. But I think what that tells you, and people may not know about the airlines, is that if you work for a major airline, it’s not unusual at all to fly with somebody that you’ve not only not flown with but perhaps never met. The fact that we can do that and do it so seamlessly tells you to what a high professional standard we’re all trained, so that we’ve become essentially interchangeable. It would never be allowed now, especially Captain Sully (far right) stayed late into the evening signing books at The Commonwealth Club. since September 11th, for you to actually watch was something that was very challenging, it was difficult to us work, but if you could get a kitchen pass from the FAA do well, it was very satisfying, very rewarding to be able to administrator and sit in the jumpseat in the cockpit and watch do it. It was exciting. us, you couldn’t tell if I was flying with somebody for the first time, that we hadn’t been flying together for years. Ashley: What about the plane you would most wish to fly that you’ve never gotten to fly? Ashley: You testified before Congress about the airline industry. This [question] is from the audience: Do commercial Sullenberger: I would love to have flown the Concorde. It’s pilots in today’s industry get sufficient rest and time off? a shame there’s nothing like it out there now. Sullenberger: There are some cases where we don’t. That’s one Ashley: Will there be again, do you think? of the things that we need to fix. We’re living with decades-old rest rules, rules that were written generations ago, in a differSullenberger: That’s difficult to say – you’re asking the wrong ent world, at a different time, when, on the short-haul flying guy: my stock picks haven’t been that good, even. I hope so. end of the scale, pilots weren’t flying as many flights per day It seems like everything’s about the bottom line, everything’s as they do now; and on the long-haul end of the scale, the about the money. technology did not yet exist to have 15- or 16-hour nonstop flights to Mumbai. So at both ends of the spectrum, the Ashley: Here’s something that you and I had talked about rules are out of date. We have the science, we have the data, once before that surprised me and it may surprise this audi- we know what needs to be done. It’s time for us to act on it. ence. The relationship that you and Jeffrey Skiles had in the But just as with any other problem you have in a democracy, cockpit those few minutes during the crisis was one hand it requires two things: public awareness and political will to change it. So now we “[My copilot and I] are certainly brothers now. Many of those who were on the have a fairly new FAA administrator, Ranairplane ... are joined forever in our hearts and minds because of this event.” dy Babbitt, who is a retired airline pilot, knowing what the other was doing and a terrific cooperative who used to be the president of the Air Line Pilots Associaeffort. But you two had never met prior to that flight, is that tion, the largest pilot union in this country. So we’re hopeful right? Never flown together. that some of these issues will be addressed. But there are those out there who have other needs and desires and agendas, and Sullenberger: [Not] prior to that trip. We met three days they’re going to try to keep a lid on the cost side. before this happened. We had never flown together. I had To give you an example, we have some trips where you’ll never seen him before Monday of that week. have what we call a minimum overnight in it, and one of the nights you’ll have 9 hours 15 minutes off – and I say “off” in Ashley: Which is fascinating, because you worked together a loose way. That’s from the time you arrive at the gate in the in such a cooperative way and an instinctive way. My impres- evening at the end of your flying day until you’re required sion was, in the weeks afterward, that you guys were flying to depart from the gate the next morning. Now, if you do partners many times, and that was not the case. the math (and I have), and you factor how long it takes to de-plane an A321 that’s full – about 15, 20 minutes – and

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

then get your bags and walk to the curb – another 10 or 15 minutes – and then wait 20 minutes for the van to pick you up and take you 30 or 40 minutes to the hotel, and then you get to your room and maybe the key doesn’t work the first time, and you call home and you get something to eat and you go to bed and you get up in the morning, you’re getting 5 or 6 hours of sleep. It’s scheduled that way. And they know it is. So, what we’re all relying on is that, yeah, you’ll be tired, but maybe the next day you get some more sleep. What we’re also relying on is that, when a crew is particularly fatigued – if they’ve had a really long day and you’re more tired than usual – that the captain will say, OK, time out, we’re going to delay this flight or we’re going to do something else and we’re not going to leave that early. My point is that safety is too important to be managed by exception. It should be scheduled so people can get eight hours of sleep. Ashley: There was an interview years ago that Ted Koppel did with Bruce Springsteen. He said to Bruce Springsteen, “You know, when you go out onstage, people just go crazy over you. They’re enthralled, they’re overwhelmed. What is that like to experience?” His answer was, “Well, I suppose it makes you kind of tough to live with.” How has this – because you’re a grounded fellow, and you have a grounded family – changed you, or has it? Sullenberger: I think it has to, and as much as we try to be true to ourselves, I think it does. I certainly had to be more comfortable assuming this role. It’s like a new job. I had to get better at my new job. But I know it’s a good job, and it’s

an important job, and so if part of my new job is being the public face of something that makes people feel so hopeful, then that’s a worthwhile thing to do. But yeah, Lorrie will tell you – and she’s very good about keeping me grounded – that sometimes it is hard. I think what was especially hard – I’ve gotten a little bit better at it lately – is finding the right balance between family and everything else. Especially when now there’s so much “everything else.” There are some days, quite frankly, that I shouldn’t be Sully; I should simply be Kate’s dad, or Kelly’s dad, or Lori’s husband. I’m getting better now; just yesterday, as a matter of fact – by saying no more, and saying not now, this is family time, or maybe later at the end. Let me tell you a quick story. January 20th, the inauguration. Five days. Our heads are still spinning, we’re still in trauma. Five days after the emergency landing in the Hudson, we’re at the inauguration. The girls had to go shopping and buy dresses that were appropriate – they didn’t have any. I had to borrow a tux and an overcoat – I didn’t have one. I had one suit for weddings and funerals and it didn’t look good enough. We meet the president and first lady. It’s incredible. We’re told just to expect a quick dash and instead he’s very gracious and generous with his time, he’s there for 10 or 15 minutes. At one point [he] turns to my wife, and the president says, “So, you’re not letting all this go to his head, are you?” And being the good partner she is, she immediately and forthrightly responded, “People may think he’s a hero, but he still snores.” Ω This program was made possible by the generous support of the Travers Family Foundation.

Stay in The Know Your next issue of The Commonwealth magazine comes your way in late March. But don’t wait for that April/May issue to get caught up on all of the late-breaking Club events and news. Subscribe to our free weekly e-mail newsletter to get all of the latest updates and late-breaking program announcements. Go to commonwealthclub.org to sign up. And pick up our new Events Update flyer the next time you visit The Club’s San Francisco office for a two-week preview of events. We’ve got an action-packed winter and spring of great Commonwealth Club speakers, classes, travel and more to take advantage of. Don’t miss out on anything! feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

P aying the T oll An expert panel discusses some of the many challenges of funding California’s transportation needs. Can the state even afford just to maintain what it has? Excerpt from “California Transportation: What Are the Funding Challenges?” October 29, 2009. Steve Heminger Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Therese McMillan Deputy Director, USDOT, FTA norma ortega Interim Chief Financial Officer, Caltrans Asha weinstein agrawal Director, MTI’s National Transportation Finance Center - Moderator

Heminger: Wouldn’t that be nice? You know, here in the Bay Area, we have a long-range plan that goes out 25 years, spends $200 billion. Eighty percent of it we’re spending on maintenance of just the system we’ve already built, and we still come up about $40-plus billion short. We could spend all the money we have on maintenance and still not take care of the investment that’s been given to us. We’ve got both aging pains and growing pains that we’re dealing with here, and we can’t afford just to address the one. Now, we’ve clearly made the choice that we want to try to fix it first, but we can’t completely wipe out our expansion budget. McMillan: One of the interesting things at a national level is the depth that they extend to: Congress had commissioned a specific study that was presented spring of this year, looking at the seven largest urban rail systems in the country. But the interesting thing there was looking at this notion of state of good repair. [That] does not mean everything that’s

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

spanking new; it basically means that some significant portion of your overall infrastructure is within the band of its life cycle, which, for certain transit assets, can be roughly 12 years for buses and much longer for rail cars and the like. The point is that after looking in that study, and with this relatively conservative objective of getting just those seven systems in a state of good repair, it was $50 billion. Just for the seven largest rail systems in the country. That is a fairly sobering point. At the same time, I agree very much with [the] notion that this country continues to grow and there continue to be demands on what we need to provide. So the question again comes back to those notions of performance. What combination of investments really get you to the point of being able to achieve greater mobility and access or reduce congestion levels? Whatever metric you select, at some point you have to look at just the different packaging of what’s going to reach those performance objectives, and you’re not always, certainly, going to hit the top. Ortega: The funding needs are so great – whether it’s highways, local roads, transit – that putting all of our funds into just maintaining what we have right now would not be sufficient. Agrawal: Over the last decade or so, there’s been more and

Illustration by Steven Fromtling

Agrawal: If we didn’t try to make improvements, changes, add service, add capacity [to California’s transportation infrastructure], and we just focused all the revenue we have now and that we’re likely to have over the next, say, 10, 20 years on really good quality maintenance and operations, could we afford that?

more talk among transportation policymakers about publicprivate partnerships as perhaps not a way to maintain our system or to rehabilitate the existing infrastructure, but is this a viable way to create new infrastructure on any scale without having to put much or any public dollars into the projects? Or is that more wishful thinking, that the free lunch could just keep going on forever? Ortega: The Legislature and the governor passed legislation just this past spring that allows us to move forward with public-private partnerships here in California. We believe that “P3s” can help in providing some very needed transportation improvements. The California Transportation Commission recently adopted guidelines; the department is working closely with our regional partners to identify the right projects; there are some projects that could potentially be good P3 projects that are so large that that might be the only way to fund them. Heminger: I agree with Norma. I also believe, though, that they will play a fairly modest role, for a couple of reasons. One is, when you cut past all the jargon, public-private partnerships are a fancy way of borrowing money from somebody, and usually people expect to be paid back. So the private sector will invest capital in a new facility if they find a way to make a return, and that generally means tolls or fees paid by the users of those facilities, and tolls aren’t necessarily all that popular elsewhere in California; here in the Bay Area we’ve been paying them for a long time and don’t seem to mind them as much. The national congressional commission I served on estimated that about half of the investment shortfall facing the nation was composed of just the maintenance backlogs that we have. There’s nobody from Goldman Sachs who wants to help you pay for that. That’s going to have to be addressed with good old-fashioned public money. The remaining balance, about half the shortfall that we have for an expansion, quite a few of those facilities aren’t going to generate a positive cash-flow return. Most of our transit systems, when we build them, God love them, they don’t make money. They lose money on a daily basis in operation. Who’s going to invest in that? There are going to be places, especially in our freight sector, where fees and tolls will generate a return and where private capital will be attracted to go, and I say more power to them. But I fear that many of the advocates for public-private partnerships tend to use it as an alternative to public investment, and it is not a replacement. It is one additional tool in the toolbox, and it’s a pretty small little wrench compared to all the big hammers we need to beat this problem. Agrawal: If we have limited funds, what do we do? Could we do a better job than we already are at prioritizing where we’re spending money – getting more bang for each dollar spent? Both in terms of, Are there processes that our existing agencies could and perhaps should be using to better prioritize where money is spent; or, are there even new institutions that we

really need to develop that would be able to do a better job than our current system at prioritizing spending? Ortega: I think that, yes, prioritizing the limited dollars is something that we definitely have to be doing. We are doing it on the maintaining and operating of the existing system. There are so many needs out there. We are funding, primarily, emergency repairs, safety projects, pavement when we have the funds for it, mobility and other items we cannot fund; so there is some of that going on. On a broader level, the funding picture for California is such that a lot of the funding decisions are really made at a regional level, and it does make it more challenging from a statewide perspective because regions have a much stronger voice in determining the priorities for those particular regions. They may not be the highest priority for the entire state, but that is the process that we have in place now. Heminger: If I could maybe give you a topical example – you know, we’re all concerned about the economy. A lot of people are struggling. The Congress passed a very large stimulus bill and here in the Bay Area we anticipated that and, in fact, acted to allocate the funds from that bill that were in our control two weeks after the president signed the law. So, we were ready. What the Congress didn’t do is they didn’t change any of the rules or environmental processes or permitting processes that governed the expenditure of those funds. So, we’re sitting here today – what is it now, six months, seven months after February – and we’ve got 40 percent of that money out to contract, actually creating jobs, which was its original purpose. To me, that’s a crying shame. In fact, most of the stuff we picked, because we knew this was going to be a problem, we picked the meat-and-potatoes rehab jobs: just let’s pave the streets, let’s go buy buses, let’s do something simple – and that is taking forever. I firmly believe that the environmental and permitting process we have for infrastructure in our country is like public enemy number one in the expenditure of tax dollars. I am not advocating that we relax a single environmental standard – in fact, they probably, in some cases, ought to be strengthened in terms of how our infrastructure affects our environment and our communities – but we are so wrapped up in red tape now, and projects have to go through repetitive environmental reviews. Rail projects, transit projects, I mean, can’t we just grant that transit’s good for the environment and sort of give them a pass? We’re not stopping any projects from happening, and if the environmental process were doing that, I could sort of see the point; the purpose is to weed out the bad projects, so let’s stop them in their tracks. We’re not stopping anything; we’re just making it cost a lot more and take a lot longer, and I just don’t understand how that’s in anybody’s interest. McMillan: I’m going to take Steve’s first question that he posed as an example of why an answer to this question is extremely difficult. If we don’t know what we want to buy, feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

how can we set a priority? Your priorities are going to be set based on specific goals of something that you want to achieve. If you’re not clear on that, then what are you setting priorities against? You know, it’s an interesting question; I think you pose it on an assumption that there perhaps is a clear idea of what should be done as a first, second or third priority, and then how well are you matching up to that standard? Certainly, you know, in the federal funding realm, there’s always been a choice in terms of policies; there are certain funds that are pretty much handed back to locals to do with what they want – in other words, the local community can set its own priorities and we afford some level of flexibility for that purpose. There’s other fund sources that have many rules that are a competition where, sometimes, every new administration sets a slightly different part of the rulebook to try and get a different set of objectives out of whatever investment is there. So, I’m not sure there’s actually a very easy answer to your question, because I’m not sure that anyone in this room would naturally gravitate to the same level of expectations and how to set priorities against them. Agrawal: OK. It seems like there’s some agreement among the panel members that finding additional sources of revenue as we go forward would be desirable for various reasons. How do we do it? What are the most efficient or equitable or politically acceptable ways to increase revenue? We’ve had some questions about different options. One, of course, would be increasing the federal and state gas taxes. By the way, the gas tax is much cheaper today in what we pay per mile we drive than it would’ve been, say, in 1950, and I think to raise the California state gas tax back to what we paid per mile in the ’50s would be roughly the order of a 50-cent increase per gallon. I could be off a few cents, but it’s in that ballpark. What do you think? Is raising the gas tax a good alternative, either in the short, medium or long term, to help address our problems? Heminger: Well, since I got somebody working for a president and somebody working for a governor on either side of me, I bet I’m the only one who’s willing to say something about this. I’ll tell you, it’s easily one of the most frustrating things I deal with. The national commission I served on recommended an increase in the fuel tax. We spent two years looking for something else, and there isn’t anything else. The only thing else there really is – and this is a frightening thought – the only other funding source that’s big enough and robust enough is the general fund of the United States. I’m afraid that is the direction we’re headed. The Federal Highway Trust Fund has been bailed out twice now with general fund revenue; and remember, that revenue is not there – we’re borrowing that from our kids, and if that’s the path [toward which] we’re headed, I really think it’s the path to ruination. The user fee system works so well because

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

it connects the users directly with the benefit they receive, and it also sends the users back a price signal about how much to consume what they’ve purchased; and the general fund doesn’t do that at all. And now that, especially, it’s intergenerational, and there’s no price signal we’re sending to ourselves – we’re sending the price signal and the check to future generations. When you think about it, gas prices change all the time. Gas prices vary sometimes by 5 or 10 cents per weekend, yet if an elected official talks about a nickel or a dime, he’s ridden out of town on a rail. And that’s just nuts to me. Who gets the benefit of that price increase? Right now that money goes somewhere else. That money goes abroad, a lot of it; a lot of it goes to regimes that aren’t too friendly with our country. I don’t know why someone can’t figure this out – some smart political consultant can’t figure out the fact that investing that money in infrastructure in the United States is a better idea than sending it abroad to do God knows what. I don’t know why we can’t figure that out in our politics, because it sure makes sense to me. Agrawal: I’m trying to take into account the fact that we do have some appointed officials here. Let me pose, 10 years from know, when we’ll have a change in political office and such, do you think that 10 years from now, what we need to be doing is thinking about raising the gas tax, as Mr. Heminger has just pointed out quite eloquently? Or do we need to think about shifting to some other major source of revenue, such as a mileage fee that maybe is paid for every mile you drive; or putting tolls on a large percentage of the facilities that people drive on; or some other system that you think is where we should be going? Ortega: I think the needs are so great that we have to put all options on the table and see which ones we would be able to move forward with. McMillan: You know, one of the few things, I think, that has been [an] axiom just in funding, no matter whether it’s transportation or your own personal budgets, is that a diverse portfolio is a hedge against a lot of uncertainty, and without obviously ascribing what fund source to what governmental entity, there will always be a partnership involved in dealing with the mobility challenges and needs of America; providing the infrastructure, maintaining the infrastructure, operating that infrastructure in some way is going to involve different combinations and perhaps one of the key questions will be, Do we need to somehow, within the structure of that partnership, achieve a more diverse portfolio that allows us to weather the storms that we see? I think it matches along with Norma’s [statement] that there’s no single silver bullet in any of this. I think we need to obviously keep our options open. Ω This program was made possible by the generous support of the Mineta Transportation Institute.

Photo courtesy of Firoozeh Dumas

The human side

The Iranian-American author focuses on the humor and not the politics. But she says she wouldn’t mind seeing a garden planted on an infamous Iranian prison site. Excerpt from “Firoozeh Dumas in Conversation” September 10, 2009. firoozeh Dumas Author, Funny in Farsi and Laughing Without an Accent in conversation with jaleh daie Moderator Daie: In your book, the message that comes across very, very clearly is that you obviously cherish your Persian Iranian heritage. At the same time, you appreciate the American lifestyle you have, the new country you have adopted for yourself. And, of course, you are married to a Frenchman. So tell me: How much are you Iranian, how much are you American, and how much French is in you? Dumas: In certain areas, I’m very Iranian. I love to feed people. If you come to my house, you have to eat a meal with us. I always make way too much food, so that part is very Iranian. The part of me that’s very American is [that] I really believe in speaking up and being counted and voting. If I’m somewhere where there’s great service, I’ll write a letter of praise. I really think my voice counts, so I think that is a very American part of me. It always surprises me when people don’t vote or don’t get involved in something. I say, You have so much more power than you think. The part of me that’s French, well, let’s see. I do love detail, and I think France is a

culture that’s all about the detail. And there’s a lot of subtlety in the French culture, you know, the food’s never too salty, it’s not too sweet. I like that about them a lot. Daie: Give us one [example] from the Iranian culture and one from the American culture that, to this day, bug you. Dumas: The thing that bugs me about Iranian culture is people are incredibly nosy. [They are] too nosy, too gossipy. But then, what bugs me about American culture is I think people can be too isolated. Like, I feel like your neighbor could die and no one will know. So, maybe we could bring those two cultures halfway. Daie: In a recent article [from] April 2009, you wrote, “Hey Americans, Appreciate Your Freedom of Speech.” It definitely seems like you don’t have any plans to go back to Iran any time soon. You are concerned about what is going on and so you are trying to convey to Americans to cherish more their feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

freedom of speech. I haven’t been to Iran for many years as well. Does it make you sad? Would you like to go? Dumas: I’d love to go. It makes me very, very sad that I can’t go. I have relatives there that I haven’t seen in 30 years. I would love to be able to go, but if I go, I’m sure I’d be thrown in prison. As much as I want to be on CNN, it’s not because I was put in prison. Daie: Why would you be thrown in prison?

speaking at a school – that a lot of kids, this sort of post-September-11 generation, equate the Middle East with terrorism and not much else. That was sort of my “A-ha” moment, and I thought I need to go and speak to every single American. That’s what I’m trying to do. It’s interesting; I don’t get any attention from the media, because if you’re a Middle Easterner and you want to get attention from the media, you have to hate somebody. When you’re talking about shared humanity, you’re completely left alone.

“I have a best-selling book in a country where, A, I can’t visit and, B, I get no royalty. I’m one hell of a businesswoman.” Dumas: Funny in Farsi – the Persian version – has done remarkably well in Iran. It’s done better in Iran than it has in the United States, and the government’s written against me and I’m also somebody who writes pieces for NPR all the time and I fit the stereotype for what they would consider Idon’t-know-what; I’m sure they would put some label on me. That’s the odd thing: When you’re an Iranian and you speak up about anything – I’ve read things about me on the Internet that say I’m working for the American government, I’ve read things that say I’m a monarchist, I’ve read things that say I’m working for the Iranian government. I think, My God, I can’t even get my kids to make their beds – this is the truth. All these labels are put on me. It’s very sad, when you’re Iranian and you say anything, there’s always this suspicion: Who’s she working for? I’m working for me, but that’s too simple an answer and people always think there’s something else. I don’t make a cent from the sales in Iran, because it’s not part of international copyright laws. So, any book can be translated and sold there. I have a best-selling book in a country where, A, I can’t visit and, B, I get no royalty. I’m one hell of a businesswoman. Daie: It seems to me you should go back just to claim your royalties. Dumas: No! Even though I don’t get anything from the sales of the book, I have to say, it’s been so gratifying for me to receive e-mails from Iranians who tell me that – and I get so many of these – they had never heard their mother laugh until they read this book. I receive a lot of e-mails from Iranians telling me that in the evenings their family gets together and they read stories out loud from the book. That’s worth more to me than any royalty check. Daie: What is your next book, or is it a different project? Are you working on another endeavor or a third book? Dumas: What I’m spending a lot of time on right now is the lecture circuit; I travel the country talking about shared humanity. I use humor to talk about shared humanity, so I go all over the country. I discovered a few years ago – I was

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Daie: What has struck me as I have read your books was that even though politics lends itself to humor, you seem to be proactively avoiding politics. Why?

Dumas: Because politics is the only thing that gets attention when it has to do with Iran. How many times have you seen anything on the news in America that has something to do other than politicians? I wanted to just bring the average Iranian to light. I just thought the politics is in the background and the average person, which is like my father, is going to be in the foreground. I very purposefully wanted to show readers what an average Iranian family is like. They don’t need for me to describe Ahmadinejad to them. They’ve already seen enough images. Daie: Your parents must be absolutely proud of what you’ve accomplished. Give us a little bit of an example and a flavor of when you go to some big event, how would your parents talk about you and express their pride in you? Dumas: Because we live in different cities, we don’t often go to events together. But one thing that they do – and I’ve asked them repeatedly not to do this – [is] give my phone number out to people all the time. I get calls from people and they’ll say, “Hi, I’m so-and-so, and your mother gave me your phone number….” They just want to talk to me. I have three kids so I don’t have a lot of time on my hands. So I call my mother and I say, “Mom, can you please not give my phone number out to people?” She says, “Do you know who that was? When we lived in Abadan, this was the doctor of your cousin!” So, every couple of weeks I get a phone call from some Iranian who has gotten my number from my parents. They’re proud, and I kind of feel like they are pimping me out. But I take that as a sign of pride. Daie: How does the Iranian community react to your success? Dumas: The younger generation as a whole, they embrace what I am trying to do and they understand that I am trying to change the image that the media always portrays of Iranians. I can always count on them to be my fans. The older generation, not always. Of my parents’ generation – most have never read the book – they feel like maybe I’m making fun of my family, and that’s very taboo in our culture. A lot

of times, too, when someone will say, “Well, I just read one story,” I say you have to read the whole book. They tend to be the people who are most critical, [those] who haven’t read the book.

Daie: Since June, and for a while at least, Iran was on the news quite a bit. There continue to be pressures and tensions – political and otherwise. How do you feel about talk of the U.S. doing something in Iran to impact this political process?

Daie: ABC has optioned Funny in Farsi. Can you tell us anything?

Dumas: Do I think the U.S. should get involved? No, because I hope that Iran has a government someday soon that allows freedom of speech, that respects human rights. I want Evin Prison torn down and a garden built instead. But do I think a U.S. invasion is going to get there? No.

Dumas: They are actually working on a sitcom based on Funny in Farsi; we’ll see if it actually happens. It takes courage for a network to have a show with an Iranian character that’s not a terrorist. This would be a first. I hope that ABC goes ahead and does this. We’ll see. They started having auditions, and I started getting e-mails on Facebook from actors and they were saying, “Thank you! For once I’m auditioning for something that’s not Poor Afghani Villager or Terrorist.” One thing they did, though, for the pilot is they changed my husband from being French to being American, because they thought it’s too much. You can’t have an Iranian woman and a French husband, you know; who’s going to believe that? Daie: Since the publication of your first book, how has your life changed?

Daie: Not necessarily invasion, but some sort of proactive activity, something to nudge the process in the direction in the will of the people? Dumas: I just don’t know what that would be. If such a thing were possible, I would say, Yes. But I have no idea what could be done. In a situation like this, like what’s going on in Iran right now, nobody knows, and this is the truth. People will come and say, “This is what needs to be done,” but nobody knows. All I can say is I want the long-term goal to be a country that respects human rights.

Daie: There are some Iranian things that are so peculiar to Dumas: The biggest difference is that people now listen to Iranians that Americans have no notion of what it is, and what I have to say. Seriously, people are far kinder to me than I’d like Americans to get a sense of some of our weirdness, they used to be! I would make a comment earlier and people such as Taarof. would say, Whatever. But now that I’m a published author, when I say something, people go, God, that’s so true. So there’s Dumas: [We] Iranians, we’re really into hospitality, genuinely. a lot more profoundness to everything that I say and do. But we always have to invite you in for tea or dinner or lunch The other difference is I travel a lot. I never, ever used to or “Please, come and stay,” and sometimes we don’t mean it, travel, so I’ve seen the United States. It’s been so interesting but we have to say it. This is Taarof, but that’s the ugly side to me, because I’ve gone to all these places I would never go of Taarof, but the beautiful side of it is we really do love to to normally, like rural Maine and all parts of the Midwest. feed people, so, chances are, 9 times out of 10, if somebody I’ve lived in California my whole life, and I thought, This invites you to stay, they really do mean it. is America. Well, it’s really not. It’s not until you go into these “Do I think the U.S. should get involved? No, because small towns in the Midwest and you really start to understand that America is a very diverse country. I hope that Iran has a government someday soon that All types of people. I hate the traveling part, though, because I’m not one of those authors – you know, allows freedom of speech, that respects human rights.” I’m not going first class. I’m center seat, Delta coach. But I love going and meeting people. There are good people Daie: If you have a dinner party, what do you serve – Iranian, all over this country. French, American? Daie: You go to a lot of different places. You go to universities, schools, churches and synagogues. Who is your favorite audience? Dumas: My favorite groups are the ones that are intelligent, because then they understand the nuances of everything that I say and I don’t have that awkward situation where I say something that is funny and people look at me like, Hmm.… But I have to say, I have not had a single bad speaking experience. Every audience I’ve ever spoken to has gotten the gist of what I’m trying to say.

Dumas: I’m a big fan of the local farmer’s market, I really believe in eating locally. I don’t want to sound like the stereotypically Northern California person – I’m really not – but I really love supporting the farmer’s market. … I don’t serve Iranian food to my family because they’re all better cooks than I am, and they’re very blunt. I serve them things that they don’t know how to make, and they don’t know what it’s supposed to taste like. Ω This program was made possible by the generous support of The Bernard Osher Foundation. feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

over to the market? The short answer, as we all learned back in the Bush years, is, of course, lousy government, with health and safety codes unenforced, labor laws basically completely gone, incompetence on a heroic scale, catastrophic occupation of Iraq, and the self-destruction of the deregulated and largely unsupervised financial industry. Governments like the last one routinely appoint industry lobbyists to run the regulatory departments that oversee those industries, and they routinely put people hostile to some particular branch of government – say, the “When conservatives are in opposition, they see Social Security Administration – in charge of that branch of government. Now, you used to be able to government failure everywhere. When conservatives find examples of this sort of thing all the time; they were in the newspaper just about every day. It wasn’t are in charge of government, they make it fail.” just a matter of banking regulators utterly missing So, conservatism is to a great degree about government the crisis in mortgage debt; that was just part of the pattern. failure. When conservatives are in opposition, as they are There’s dozens of other examples. Remember how the Fedtoday, they see government failure everywhere. When conser- eral Aviation Administration used to regard the airlines, not vatives are in charge of government, they make it fail. Now, the public but the airlines, as their customers – and that was not deliberately, mind you – they don’t do this on purpose, actually the term that they would use – and they would, of and they don’t do it in every circumstance. But definitely in course, then go easy on them when time came to inspect their the departments and the agencies and things like that that airplanes. Or, how there was a branch of the Department of they don’t approve of. Of course, when conservatives come the Interior, in the Bush years, that became so cozy with big back into opposition, they tell you that all of that just hap- oil that they were actually physically getting it on with these pened because, look, that’s just the way it goes. The guys guys. You know, in Washington we often say that regulators who bungled the job weren’t real conservatives, and besides are in bed with industry and we mean that figuratively, but – government always fails. I was on the radio this morning in this particular case it was literal, it was really happening. and a caller phoned in and told me that George W. Bush was, You can pile up dozens, if not hundreds, of similar examples in fact, a liberal. Not just a liberal, he was very liberal. concerning the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture and the poor old Environmental Dangerously successful Protection Agency. government that works, some conservatives fear, is danOne of the most interesting things that I found while I was gerous stuff. It gives people ideas. Universal health care researching The Wrecking Crew was a 1928 interview with the isn’t just a bad thing for their pals in the insurance industry, it’s president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which was then, a gateway drug to broader state involvement in the economy as it still is today, one of the great powers of conservative D.C. and hence a possible doomsday scenario for conservatism In the interview, the dude made the following proclamation: itself. On the other hand, government fails constantly when The best public servant is the worst one. conservatives run it because making it work would be, for a When I first read this, I thought, man, that is peculiar – the lot of those conservatives, to traduce the very laws of nature. best public servant is the worst one – but in fact, as I did my Besides, as we can now see, bungling the Katrina recovery pays research, this turned out to be a theme that you find repeated conservatives huge dividends later on down the road. It gives over and over and over again in the history of the conservathem potent ammunition to use when the liberals have come tive movement, this idea that you have to keep the best and back and are proposing another one of their grand schemes the brightest out of public service. The ideal public servant, to reform health care or something like that. according to the conservative movement, is of course a moveSo, what do conservatives believe in when it comes to ment loyalist. That’s who you want running government running the state? Well, we know the answer. It’s the market, agencies. That’s who you want in charge of, say, the Securities right? The market is real democracy. and Exchange Commission, or the panel that makes sure that Now, guys who merely win elections on the other hand kids’ toys are safe, right? A movement loyalist. – those guys are tyrants, dictators, socialists, that sort of The most direct statement of this principle came from thing. The market is real democracy. The market is the only Grover Norquist; he’s one of the most brilliant strategists on legitimate ruler. If conservatives have a grand theory of gov- the Washington Right, and this is what he said in a speech that ernment, it is this: Government should be market-based, as he gave way back in 1986: “First, we want to remove liberal George W. Bush said back in 2001. Now, what did he mean personnel from the political process. Then, we want to capture when he said that? “Government should be market-based.” It’s those positions of power and influence for conservatives.” an interesting thought. What does it mean to put government Stalin taught the importance of this principle. He was on a market-based footing, to turn the functions of the state running the personnel department while Trotsky was fight-

Thomas Frank (Continued from page 8) ment, and it proceeds directly from the time-honored faith of chambers of commerce everywhere – that government is the problem, as Ronald Reagan once said. That government is a force of unique malevolence. That government’s offending functions must be hacked apart, shut down, starved to death, drowned in a bathtub; outsourced, privatized and otherwise rendered harmless.

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Q&A

Terry Christensen, professor of political science, San Jose State University; co-author, Local Politics: Governing at the Grassroots, Moderator: I want to take you back a little and talk about conservatism before the conservative movement you’ve described. There is a form of conservatism that actually tries to conserve good things about society and tries to conserve tradition, right? Frank: By the way, I’m sure I don’t sound like it when I mouth off like this, [but] I have a lot of sympathy for that. That’s the kind of person that I am. I am, in some ways, very traditional. However, one of the things that I realized when I was younger, and I even used to identify as a conservative back in the 1980s – one of the things that I came to discover, and I guess everybody does at some point, is that I’m something of a cultural conservative. The capitalist system that we live under is profoundly disruptive of tradition in the cultural field. Things zoom by a mile a minute. It’s the most culturally destructive – what’s the term for it? – creative destruction, Schumpeter’s term. I don’t like that. But I have a warm spot in my heart for that sort of traditional, Norman Rockwell, Frank Capra conservatism. I love that stuff. I’m a total sucker for that stuff. That’s one of the reasons I used to like Ronald Reagan, that kind of Reader’s Digest, sunshiny world that he would talk about. But it’s his system that wrecked that world. Christensen: One of the other things that really struck me about the book is how, for this strain of conservatism, corruption is actually a good thing. Not only because they often profit from it, but because it proves government can’t work. Frank: That’s right. It gives you an object lesson. Jack Abramoff himself has said that; Jack Abramoff is one of the main characters in the book. He fascinates me for a lot of different reasons. One of them is that, even while his name has become synonymous with corruption, even while he was doing all this stuff, the man remains something of an idealist, a real believer in the conservative cause, and the story of his career showed me that in conservative Washington, you can be a corruptionist and an idealist at the same time, that the two don’t necessarily conflict. Because he was practicing his conservatism through the activities that you and I consider to be corrupt. I went a little deeper, so I started looking into all of the different people who were implicated in his scandal. A lot of them have written books, have written articles, done interviews, and many of them are corruption theorists themselves. They’ve written about corruption, they’ve denounced corruption, they think they’re experts

on corruption. One of the guys involved in the payola pundit business – you know, the pundits for hire – wrote a whole book about how corrupt Washington liberalism was. He was an expert on corruption. Michael Scanlon, who was Abramoff’s right-hand man in a lot of the kickback schemes and that sort of thing, got an M.A. degree at a university near Washington, and his thesis was about political corruption. These guys were both theorists of corruption and practitioners of corruption at the same time. It was a fascinating story. So then I started looking into conservative theory about corruption, and when you start to dig, these very same people that imagine themselves to be great theorists of corruption say, Well, other things that we consider illegal shouldn’t be illegal at all. Like price fixing. That shouldn’t be illegal. Restraint of trade. Or price gouging, another one. Why is that illegal? And they go on down the line. Even bribery. There are even people – none of Abramoff’s, nobody in his circle, of course – but I was able to find professional economists that say, Hey, in a lot of circumstances bribery is a good thing. It is the way the market operates; the market speaks through bribery. It’s market-based government. Christensen: “Bribery is just the market acting in self-defense.” The quote from your text. Frank: Yes. It was shocking when I found this stuff, so I’m trying to convey a little bit of that to you. I did not expect to find people standing up for corruption. Christensen: One of the things all this achieves is to reduce trust in government. Frank: And that’s a good thing, by their lights. Christensen: Explain that. Frank: Because if government is visibly just given over to the people who can afford it, to the people who can buy it, then your trust in government diminishes, and the conservatives have won. Abramoff had a way of putting it – he said it in an interview with Vanity Fair. He didn’t make that particular point, but he made a different point, that the only way to stop people like him was to do away with big government altogether. That was the only way. Otherwise, people like him would always get through and, you know, they would do what he was doing. In this way of seeing it, and again I’m paraphrasing – that’s not even close to being an exact quote – but in this way of seeing things, what he was doing was teaching us a lesson in why government is futile. So, it was idealism and corruption at the same time. Fascinating stuff. Ω

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Photo by Kara Iwahashi

“The greatest example of market-based government in action was in the financial sector, where our regulatory agencies napped right through the building crisis.” ing the White Army. When push came to shove for control of the Soviet Union, Stalin won. His people were in place, and Trotsky’s were not. With this principle in mind, conservatives must do all they can to make sure that they get jobs in Washington. With that principle in mind, handed down from Uncle Joe.

Wall Street strikes out

he greatest example of market-based government in action, of course, was in the financial sector, where our various regulatory agencies napped right through the building crisis. Now, why was that? Why did it happen? I think it’s at least partially because of the kind of people that were chosen for the job. They were asleep at the switch because they were supposed to be. It was as though they had been hired for their extraordinary powers of drowsiness. The reason for that is simple. It turns out there are powerful institutions in America – this is going to be news to you guys – that don’t like being regulated. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but regulation cuts into their profits and interferes with their business, so they have used the political process over the years to sabotage, control, redirect, defund or undo the regulatory state, basically ever since the regulatory state was first invented back in the 1880s. Now, we’ll skip all the history and come straight up to the present. In the Bush administration, this strategy was elevated to a sort of snickering, sarcastic art form. An FDA that sometimes looked as if it was basically taking its orders from Big Pharma. An EPA that could never rouse itself from the La-Z-Boy. An energy policy that might as well have been dictated by Enron. And of course, banking regulators who posed for pictures with banking lobbyists while holding

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

a chainsaw to a pile of regulations in red tape. Hey, smiles all around, right? Let those good fellas at IndyMac do just whatever the hell they want. Or take the Securities and Exchange Commission, the famous top cop on Wall Street, who so famously missed the grandest Ponzi scheme in history despite numerous attempts to bring it to the SEC’s attention – here it is, guys! But they missed it, again and again and again. Why did they fail? To find out the answer, you’ve got to go all the way back to the 1980s, when we started changing the nature of the SEC, drawing the people who managed it from Wall Street instead of promoting them from within. One of these guys said, back in 1984 – this is a quote from one of their officers – “The best of all worlds is the termination of federal regulation.” Over the course of the Bush years, prosecutions of SEC cases fell by 87 percent. In 2008, the year when all financial hell broke loose, the SEC brought the fewest prosecutions it had since 1991. So this is how it works when you’ve got conservatives at the helm. You starve government agencies of resources, you keep their employees’ pay well below their private-sector counterparts’, you make sure that they know what we think of them while they wait for their turn at the photocopier. Then we demand that they protect us when there’s a problem with extremely complex financial instruments – instruments whose designers are protected by some of the best-paid lawyers in the world. When these regulators inevitably fail, we declare that the problem begins and ends with them. I believe it was Darrell Issa who said that. Our ancestors understood that capitalism requires supervision, and when you take that supervision away, or when you defund the supervisors, or when you make them answer to the supervised, or when you replace them with a voluntary compliance program, suddenly you’ve got diseased factories shipping salmonella-laced peanut butter throughout the country. You’ve got worthless mortgage-backed securities rated AAA, backed up by useless appraisals issued by defunct banks. You’ve got these toxic securities sickening financial institutions from San Diego to Budapest. You’ve got the world’s greatest Ponzi scheme spreading its gift of bankruptcy throughout the land. Thus did the conservative movement keep its appointment with destiny. Free-market techniques secured for it a world of free markets. Criminal techniques gave us a land in which crime was triumphant. With their eyes fixed firmly on their 19th-century utopia, its armies of privatizers, pressure boys, packmen, political entrepreneurs and professional victims made the world safe for predation. Now, as the rest of us struggle, they tell us that the problem with the old system was that there was any regulation at all – that government has been the problem all along. That the real solution is to put conservatives back in government, to let them finally have a try. As Tom Delay told us, they never did really get a try in the first place, but let them finish the wrecking job that their predecessors began. Ω This program was made possible by the generous support of Sierra Steel Trading.

Frank Luntz breeds. And in New York [congressional district] 23, which (Continued from page 9) has voted Republican for 100 years? Because the GOP got with what the president has done in getting to where he is split, a Democrat gets elected, for the first time. right now. Hillary Clinton was supposed to be the next presiWe’re all angry, and by the way, it makes it tough for what dent. She was absolutely preordained. She had the money, I do, because in my focus groups, people no longer treat she had the political support. I remember her pollster made a each other with respect. They yell at each other, they’ll hear comment – we were both at an AARP meeting, for real – and something they disagree with, and they’ll lean over and say, her pollster says, “Well, I’m going to be gone now for about “What are you, an idiot?” the next six or seven months, but I’ll check in before the I like that on television, because it makes good TV; but convention, and I’ll check back in before the election.” I don’t like that in real life. We’ve lost the ability to be civil. The arrogance among the people supporting Hillary Clin- When I tell John McCain jokes, everybody laughs, including ton I’ve never seen before. There’s a lesson there, because it’s people who voted for him. If I tell a Hillary Clinton joke, at the same arrogance that I hear from Wall Street CEOs. It’s least half a dozen women will hiss. So why is it okay to make the same arrogance that I hear very often from Washington, fun of John McCain, a legitimate war hero, but you can’t make by the way, from both political parties. fun of Hillary Clinton? We’ve lost our sense of humor. We’ve The American people are mad, and they expect that lost our civility. We’ve lost our ability to talk to each other. I Washington and Wall Street will pay much more attention feel like I’m in ground zero of much of that. I was given an to them, will work much harder for them, will be focused on opportunity back a year and a half ago when Fox hired me, your needs, rather than theirs. and they said, “Tell it like it is.” I’m going to tell those of you Seventy-two percent of Americans say they’re mad as hell who voted for Obama are surprised – those of you who don’t and they’re not going to take it anymore. We started asking like Fox News. All three of my presidential debates that you that question in 1992; it was one out of three Americans. A may have seen on the air, all three of them Barack Obama majority of every segment of American society, with the ex- won. In each one of them, they gave me more time, and more ception of 18- to 29-year-olds, expresses this. White, African time, and more time to talk about why Obama won, on the American, Latino, people in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s and older. air, live. These are to audiences of seven, eight, nine million Republican, Democrat, independent, liberal, conservative. people; these are all-time records for cable news. Do you really We’re all an angry nation, and we’re angry because we don’t think that MSNBC would have allowed anything positive on feel that our institutions are working, we don’t feel that our John McCain, within a month of the election? schools are teaching our kids, we don’t feel that Washington is We can’t just watch news to affirm what we already believe. spending money wisely, we don’t feel that Wall Street respects We have to watch news to inform us. We have to take the us, we see no accountability in government. By the way, those time to hear other perspectives. We have to at least try to are the two worlds that we’re looking from. I realize in this find a way to agree on the evidence on what is happening, presentation that I’m going to make everyone, Republican even if we will so strongly disagree on the results, on the and Democrat, angry at least one third of “We can’t just watch news to affirm what we already believe. We have to watch the time. But that’s news to inform us. We have to take the time to hear other perspectives.” the way it should be. Because the American people think that Wall Street failed them. To be defenders of solution, on what we do afterward. I say this as much to the capitalism as it existed up through 2008 is rejecting what we San Francisco progressives as to the San Francisco tea party all know now – that capitalism almost sunk this country. I’m activists. Yelling and screaming get you on television, but it a capitalist, and I say that to you. doesn’t solve anything, and we should be looking for soluWashington completely failed this country and it is failing tions. Particularly right now. them right now, which is the reason why a Republican won for When I do these focus groups, it bothers me a lot, because governor in New Jersey. It was totally unexpected. New Jersey I hear the frustration that people have. It’s not just anger. is a left-of-center state. The last time it voted for a Republican for Senate is never. Virginia: Barack Obama won Virginia by The principles that matter most nother reason why Barack Obama won in 2008 is that the 6 points in 2008. Know what the Republican [governor] won Democratic campaign used to be about fairness. That’s by? 18. As you look across [the country], there’s statewide elections in Pennsylvania that went Republican for the first what Gore ran on in 2000, it’s what John Kerry ran [on] in time. Republicans picked up Westchester County, Nassau 2004. Obama turned it around. He talked about justice. This County. As you look across the country, there was a rejection was economically based; justice is overall society, and he was of what’s going on. Mike Bloomberg, who spent more money able to bring in independents that otherwise may not have than everyone in this room has ever spent on anything in voted for him. Anyway, how many of you supported John their lifetime, the guy only won by 5 percent – 51-46. There Kerry in 2004? With all due respect, there was no way that is a hostility that that represents toward politicians of all Americans were going to vote for someone that looked just

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

like the tree that threw apples at Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz. John Kerry would not have done this kind of presentation. Remember, he got trapped in the “I voted for the $87 billion right up to the moment that I voted against it”? He had this great speech at a college in Florida. This is before the 2008 election. And some kid is heckling him. Remember when the kid yells out, “Don’t taze me, bro!” as the security guy was coming, and the guy still stuck him? The kid went straight down? First person ever electrified from a John Kerry speech. We asked a question [in our polling], in understanding communication. How many of you can name the Three Stooges, and how many can name three Supreme Court justices? Sixty-seven percent [could name] the Stooges. Thirteen

No matter what political philosophy you hold or what state you call home, you have the right to expect that your government can deliver results. When there’s a crime or a fire, you expect that police and firefighters have the tools to respond. When there’s a natural disaster, you expect a well-managed response. When you send your children to school, you expect them to be prepared for success. And you have a right to expect government to be fiscally responsible, pay the bills and live within its means. Anyone want to guess who said this? Not Thomas Jefferson. Is this a Republican? Is this a Democrat? Who in this room think a Democrat said this? Who in this room think a Republican said this? So it’s overwhelming, you think a Republican said it. It was spoken by Tim Kaine, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, in his response to “Nobody wants to relax environmental standards. But if you talk about President Bush in 2006. relaxing environmental regulations, by three-to-one, the public says, Yes.” The single best response to a State of the Union percent [could name] the justices. More people can name all address that we have ever tested. But the fact that still, you five stooges than can name three Supreme Court [justices], don’t know who said it, a Republican or Democrat – this is and the Stooges have been dead now for 40 years. the philosophy that the American people want. We are so much more likely to know stuff that doesn’t matIn terms of the language that they want, it’s right here. I’m ter to us, that is completely irrelevant, than we are to know going to go through a few of these words, then I’m going to about things that have an impact. By almost two-to-one, more take the questions from you all. people think UFOs exist than think Social Security will exist, We want peace of mind. Not security. Security means that and this is not a poll of West Virginia. We have lost faith. We there’s something out there that we need to build tall fences believe that the government is making promises to us that around. It means that there’s still a threat. Peace of mind alit cannot keep. So it makes us angry that Social Security is lows you to breathe easier knowing that there is no threat, coming out of our check every two weeks, and we’re not sure there is no fear. if we’re ever going to see that money again. How many of you own a used car, raise your hands? Well I’m going to give you another example of hostility toward they’re not used anymore. They’re certified pre-owned. They’re government. You [know] that more people would rather be certifying that someone beat the crap out of your car, but, mugged than audited by the IRS? And 5 percent volunteered hey! Here’s your certification, so now you can have it. Indithat it’s exactly the same? We don’t want to be afraid of insti- vidualize, personalize, humanize – this is what I keep telling tutions. All of this stuff is in What Americans Really Want… people when you talk about health care. Nobody wants to Really, but this book was meant to be a different take on the talk about health-care policy. They want to talk about health country, and not your right wing or left wing. It was meant to care. It’s not about what they do in Washington, it’s about be all-wing. It was meant to be nonpartisan and nonpolitical [how] it affects you here in San Francisco or Seattle or L.A. rather than bipartisan. or wherever you are, across the country. The politicians have forgotten, because they’re so focused on 1,900 pages of legWords matter islation, which I will tell you is what people are complaining ow, the way that you phrase language – and this, for the most about. some of you, I know, makes you angry with me – but if If something is 1,900 pages, I’m scared. you call them environmental standards, by three-to-two they oppose you. Nobody wants to relax environmental standards. Question & answer session with Joseph Tuman, proBut if you talk about relaxing environmental regulations, by fessor of political and legal communications, San three-to-one, the public says yes. I focus on language, I focus Francisco State University; Political Analyst, CBS5 News on words; it’s what my trade is. and KCBS Radio By two-to-one, they think we spend too much money on welfare. By seven-to-one, they think we spend too little money Tuman: “Your first book,” one of the listeners writes, “shows on assistance to the poor. What the heck is welfare? We hate how different language leads to different responses.” Your the program, but we believe in what it does. second seems to say, “What Americans really think, almost This is the best language that we’ve ever tested, and I will as if they way you ask them doesn’t matter.” Is that a conread it for the people who’re listening on the radio: tradiction?

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Luntz: There’s some things about our beliefs where it doesn’t matter how you frame the question. I’m best known for the death tax vs. the estate tax, and every time I appear on NPR, I have to go through a fight on that. I believe that if the tax is brought on by the fact that you die – or your parents die or some relative dies – then it’s legitimate to call it a death tax. But there’s some things about life, such as the direction of the country, your priorities, that have nothing to do with language and everything to do with how you think and how you feel. How many of you in this room would define yourselves as “mad as hell”? Raise your hands. Less than half of you. Do you now understand why you are out of touch with America? Okay, you’re not angry here. I’ll tell you, in focus groups, San Francisco is one of the toughest markets I ever do work in. I mean, people really argue here. You think that, because you’re progressive, everyone’s nice to each other. It’s not that way. Come to my focus groups and I’ll see two progressives – and I’m not calling them liberals – I’ll see two progressives just beat the hell out of each other. If I went down to Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia, everyone’s nice and respectful. No one yells. No one talks over each other. They may disagree, and they do disagree. But they do so nicely. San Francisco, it’s much tougher. It’s fun for a short amount of time, but it’s difficult in the long term, and it’s not good for the political system. Tuman: This [audience member] writes, A friend said she was first disappointed, and then disgusted, by President Obama and his czars, but presently she feels actual physical fear. How often do you hear that in your studies? Luntz: I hear it in certain communities across the country. I don’t have fear and I don’t have hate, because I’ve done work now in 24 countries across the globe; actually been there and worked and focus-grouped and polled. After doing that in 24 countries, there’s no place I’d rather be. I don’t care if I’m in San Francisco or Seattle. I don’t care if it’s Maine or Florida – actually, I do care, I don’t want to be in Maine. The worst focus-group participants are in Maine. Tuman: I thought you said it was San Francisco? Luntz: You’re the toughest. But I’m going to get great television out of you because you’re going to yell and scream, and some of you might even stand up and hit me. And by the way, if you actually want to participate, if you want to be recruited, if you’ll give me your name, a phone number, and an e-mail address so we can figure out a way to do it, we’ll do it at the book signing over there. I’ll pay you, to participate in this. Maine, they answer every question yes and no. I’m on live television, and they’re not giving me anything. Yes. No. I finally asked them, “Do you answer every question yes or no?”

“Yes.” Would you please help me, on live television, by not doing that? “No.” Nightmare. Tuman: Can I stay with Maine, just for a moment? They considered an issue that does matter to people in San Francisco – it’s been on the ballot here as well. Marriage equality. And they had a measure that was similarly curiously written, like Proposition 8 was, where if you voted for it, you were against same-sex marriage, and if you were against it…. Luntz: Only in politics would you do crap like that. Tuman: I know, it’s a little confusing. On Tuesday, they voted that in, which meant rejecting what the legislature had done. Question about Maine: it’s perceived that that’s more of a libertarian, live-and-let-live sort of community. What did Tuesday’s results say about that? Luntz: Vermont is San Francisco, add ice cream. At least give me credit for the attempt… Tuman: Ba-da-dum, chhh. Luntz: Yeah. Maine is Vermont, without the fun. Go up there. What was that movie, The Shining? Not that that’s Maine, cause now I’m not going to ever be able to go up there. But Maine is just – if you really don’t want to hang out with people, and you really don’t want to talk to people, Maine’s a great place to go. If you want to resolve this issue in a way that some of you want to resolve it, take out the word marriage. If I were advising those on the Left who want equality in marriage as they define it, then don’t say the word marriage, and you will get it, because the American people believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and that’s what they think. But. They are hostile, openly hostile, to discrimination. They believe that people should be able to live as they want to live. Young people, 18 to 29, they actually don’t define marriage that way, as people 30 and older. If you want to get the rights and the benefits and all of that, then it’s civil union or any other word, but once you use the word marriage, it changes the dynamic of how the public looks at it. My issue with those on the far Right and those on the far Left is that, you don’t want to win, you just want to shout, and you never get anything through as a result. California never should have had that initiative, because people were stupid in how they played it politically. They wanted to make a point rather than change a policy. Honestly, I don’t want to make a point. I want unity, I want civility, I want decency, and I want to move this country forward. I want to be successful. I don’t just want to be heard. Ω This program was made possible by the generous support of the Koret Foundation. feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Letters Luntz Flops in Maine

On December 14, Maine Public Radio broadcast a presentation to your Club by pollster Frank Luntz. Although I have come to not expect much from Mr. Luntz, I have come to expect much more from The Commonwealth Club. So I was surprised to be treated to a rather extended ad hominem attack on the entire population of the state of Maine. According to Mr. Luntz, Maine is a place you repair to if you don’t want contact with other humans. Allegedly, Maine people appear capable of only ever providing monosyllabic replies to his very best efforts to promote his version of dialogue with us. I have a different paradigm to suggest. Mr. Luntz confuses being social with being friendly. Maine people are, on average, pretty shrewd judges of character. Further, many of us don’t like people “in our faces,” a style Mr. Luntz seems to epitomize. We know that the cold shoulder is often the best way to deal with someone who really doesn’t care what you think, but is just trying to mine data for his business. He is partially right about one thing. We are visited by millions of people “from away” every year. Not all of them are, as we would say, “keepers.” I am glad that he personally got that message. Gail Marshall Mount Desert, ME

Fixing the Budget

Of the options for fixing the state budget mentioned in “California Budget Crisis” [The Commonwealth, Nov/Dec 2009], only a rewrite of the state constitution offers any hope of making a real difference. California needs a system of participatory democracy, where citizens of all political stripes have a meaningful voice in and control over tax and spending decisions, feel heard and have an opportunity and incentive to hear others, have confidence in the fairness and inclusiveness of the process, and are thus more likely to accept decisions that may not always go their way. A bottom-up participatory democracy process for California could be crafted, tested (for example, in next year’s inevitable

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

budget “crisis”), refined and then built into the new state constitution. In fact, it could be used in preparing for the constitutional convention itself. Many methods of dialogue and deliberation have proven to be effective and scalable in practice. Examples include appreciative inquiry, wisdom councils, world cafés and polarity management. A win-win solution-seeking process could be composed of a combination of such methods along with decision criteria other than majority or even super-majority voting (which only guarantee bitter losers). This grassroots participatory process could be a regular part of the annual legislative cycle, preceding, feeding into and even providing constitutionally fairly binding parameters for subsequent legislative and administrative statutory action (“fairly binding” meaning very difficult for the Legislature or governor to override). The public part of the process would set priorities for the Legislature’s and governor’s annual budget decisions (both spending and revenues) as well as direction for needed constitutional amendments and statutory action. It could even be adapted and applied to state Assembly, state Senate and congressional redistricting. Mike Abkin San Mateo, CA

Canada Strikes Back

I’m an avid listener to The Commonwealth Club’s broadcasts. Last week, I heard a speaker named Sally Pipes, talking about health care. She was introduced as a former Canadian, now living in the United States. She was obviously a conservative. The picture she painted of the Canadian health-care system was very negative. She is one of many Americans, public figures as well as private, who have spoken out about Canadian health care, going back to the recent presidential campaign and coming up to the present. I can tell you that Canadians are at once laughing at and angry at the misconceptions and outright lies that were tossed out by public figures during the recent presidential campaign, and now during the debate over health-care reform. My American wife received excellent

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

care in this country [Canada]. And she suffered from every major disease except diabetes. Her health required endless doctors visits, hospital stays and consultations with specialists. Not once did we receive a letter from the government telling us that her care would be rationed. My American friends have told me numerous stories of relatives and friends whose private insurance companies have denied them coverage for whatever reason. If that is not rationing, then someone would have to explain to me why not. Not once did we wait for long periods of time for a doctor’s appointment. Yes, there are waiting lists, but again, my American friends tell me they have had to wait for a doctors appointment, or a test. If we had been living in the United States, a private insurance company would have cut my wife off years before she died. We would probably have had to file for bankruptcy protection. Through all of her health ordeals, we never once had to concern ourselves with how we would pay for her care. We were never denied care. My wife died 10 years ago, not for lack of care, not because she was denied care, but because her heart and her body simply gave out under the pressure of so much sickness. I have never heard of any major forum – The Commonwealth Club, the Cleveland Free Speech Forum or the National Press Club – bringing down a Canadian government official totally familiar with the health-care system, to put the record straight. Why don’t you invite an official from Canada to speak about the system? Your listeners at least would hear about the Canadian system from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, not one-liners from ill-informed Americans, or former Canadians with a conservative bias. Donald Coakley City not provided The Commonwealth magazine welcomes letters to the editor. Include your name and address. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. feedback@commonwealthclub.org

Programs

For up-to-date information on programs, and to subscribe to our weekly newsletter, go to commonwealthclub.org

OVERVIEW

TICKETs

The Commonwealth Club organizes more than 450 events every year – on politics, the arts, media, literature, business and sports. Programs are held throughout the Bay Area.

Prepayment is required. Unless otherwise indicated, all Club programs – including “Members Free” events – require tickets. Programs often sell out, so we strongly encourage you to purchase tickets in advance. Tickets are available at will call. Due to heavy call volume, we urge you to purchase tickets online at commonwealthclub.org; or call (415) 597-6705. Please note: All ticket sales are final. Please arrive at least 10 minutes prior to any program. If a program is sold out and your tickets are not claimed at our box office by the program start time, they will be released to our stand-by list. Select events include premium seating; premium refers to the first several rows of seating.

STANDARD PROGRAMS Typically one hour long, these speeches cover a variety of topics and are followed by a question and answer session. Most evening programs include a wine and cheese reception.

PROGRAM SERIES FOOD LIT showcases pre-eminent chefs and cookbook authors and often includes a mouth-watering meal or tasting. GOOD LIT features both established literary luminaries and upand-coming writers in conversation.

RADIO, Video and podcasts

INFORUM is for and by people in their 20s and 30s, although events are open to people of all ages.

Hear Club programs on more than 200 public and commercial radio stations throughout the United States. For the latest schedule, visit commonwealthclub.org/broadcast. In the San Francisco Bay Area, tune in to: KQED (88.5 FM) Fridays at 8 p.m. and Saturdays at 2 a.m. KALW (91.7 FM) Inforum programs on select Tuesdays at 7 p.m. KOIT (96.5 FM and 1260 AM) Sundays at 6 a.m. KLIV (1590 AM) Thursdays at 7 p.m. KSAN (107.7 FM) Sundays at 5 a.m. KNBR (680 and 1050 AM) Sundays at 5 a.m. KFOG (104.5 and 97.7 FM) Sundays at 5 a.m. XM satellite radio (station 133) broadcasts programs on Saturdays at 11 p.m. PST and on the web at xmradio.com. Go to News, then click XM Public Radio. Subscription required.

MEMBER–LED FORUMS (MLF) Volunteer-driven programs focus on particular fields. Most evening programs include a wine reception. Member-Led Forums Chair Dr. Carol Fleming carol.fleming@speechtraining com FORUM CHAIRS 2009 ARTS Anne W. Smith asmith@ggu.edu Lynn Curtis lynnwcurtis@comcast.net ASIA–PACIFIC AFFAIRS Cynthia Miyashita cmiyashita@hotmail.com BAY GOURMET Cathy Curtis cathy_curtis2@pacbell.net SF BOOK DISCUSSION Howard Crane cranehow@aol.com BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP Kevin O’Malley kevin@techtalkstudio.com ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES Kerry Curtis kcurtis@ggu.edu Marcia Sitcoske msitcosk@yahoo.com GROWNUPS John Milford jmilford@ehf.org

Health & Medicine William B. Grant wbgrant@infionline.net HUMANITIES George C. Hammond george@pythpress.com INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Norma Walden norwalden@aol.com LGBT Stephen Seewer stephenseewer@gmail.com Julian Chang julianclchang@gmail.com MIDDLE EAST Celia Menczel celiamenczel@sbcglobal.net PERSONAL GROWTH Dr. David K Olkkola david@thedreammasters.com PSYCHOLOGY Patrick O’Reilly oreillyphd@hotmail.com science & technology Chisako Ress chisakoress@gmail.com

Watch Club programs on KGO-DT Plus channel 7.2 or Comcast 194 from 4 – 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Visit abclocal.go.com/kgo for the latest schedule. View streaming video of Club programs at fora.tv.

Subscribe to our free podcasting service to automatically download a new program recording to your personal computer each week: commonwealthclub.org/podcast.

HARD OF HEARING? To request an assistive listening device, please e-mail Ricardo Esway at resway@commonwealthclub.org or call (415) 869-5911 seven working days before the event. feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Eight Weeks Calendar February 01 – March 28 M on

Tue

Wed

Feb 01

5:30 p.m. Reading Like a Writer FE 6:00 p.m. Does Evil Exist? FM 6:30 p.m. Undercover Journalism FM

6:00 p.m. Eyewitness Accounts 6:00 p.m. After Copenhagen

Noon California: A State of Turmoil 5:30 p.m. New Member Reception FE

6:00 p.m. Lawler Kang FM 6:00 p.m. Janice Mirikitani FM

6:00 p.m. Danger to Self 7:00 p.m. Will Durst

6:00 p.m. Azerbaijan

6:00 p.m. Portrait of Bhutan FE 6:30 p.m. Eve Ensler 6:30 p.m. Meg Whitman

5:15 p.m. Baby Boomers 6:30 p.m. Same-Sex Marriage

6:00 p.m. Joseph Stiglitz FM 6:00 p.m. Socially Engaged Art FM

6:00 p.m. Geo-Engineering 6:00 p.m. Free Speech, Private Speech, Government Speech 7:00 p.m. Jill Tarter

6:00 p.m. Dirty Rotten Strategies 6:00 p.m. International Criminal Court

Mar 01

6:00 p.m. Snow FE 6:00 p.m. Music FM 6:00 p.m. “Six” FE

6:00 p.m. A Taste of Brazil

5:15 p.m. Aama’s Jouney 6:30 p.m. Crowdsourcing

6:00 p.m. Governance in California FM 6:00 p.m. Timothy Ferris FM

6:00 p.m. Chasing Molecules

6:00 p.m. Shari’a and Shari’a Law 7:00 p.m. Seth Shostak

6:00 p.m. China 20/20 FM

6:00 p.m. Renovating from Old to Green 6:00 p.m. James A. Baker III 7:00 p.m. Holding on to Happiness

6:00 p.m. Middle East Peacemaking

Noon Extended Reaches of Mind FM 6:00 Sarah B. Nelson FM

6:00 Peripheral Artery Disease

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Legend

San Francisco

Free program for members

East Bay

Free program for everyone

Silicon Valley

Members–only program

Thu

Fri

S at

Sun

6:00 p.m. Alexandria Salon 6:00 p.m. The Extra-Constitutional Executive

Noon Free to Love, Free to Heal FM Noon Bargaining with the Devil FM

6:00 p.m. Alexandria and Beyond

6:00 p.m. Bob Barr 6:00 p.m. Total Recall

Noon California Media in Crisis FM Noon Hilda Robinson FM

6:00 p.m. Amartya Sen 6:00 p.m. Chinese Medicine 7:00 p.m. Noah Alper

04 6:00 p.m. How Successful Women Lead

11 Noon Apocalypse Never FM 6:00 p.m. Shari’a and Shari’a Law 7:00 p.m. Seth Shostak

1:00 p.m. Jamie Hyneman and Adam Saveage

6:00 Preventing and Transforming Conflicts

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Index By Region

FM FE MO

February 01 – March 31

Free program for members Free program for everyone Members–only program

San Francisco February

Fri 19 Noon Noon

FM Hilda Robinson in Conversation FM California Media in Crisis FM Joseph Stiglitz FM Socially Engaged Art

mon 01 6:00 p.m.

FM Does Evil Exist?

mon 01 6:30 p.m.

FM Undercover Journalism

mon 22 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

After Copenhagen: What Now? Eyewitness Accounts

tue 23 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

Geo-engineering David Bisno

wed 24 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

Dirty Rotten Strategies International Criminal Court

THU 25 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

Amartya Sen Chinese Medicine

tue 02 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. wed 03 5:30 p.m.

FE New Member Reception

thu 04 6:00 p.m. Alexandria and Beyond mon 08 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

FM Lawler Kang FM Janice Mirikitani

TUE 09 6:00 p.m.

FM Danger to Self

WED 10 6:00 p.m.

Azerbaijan

thu 11 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

Alexandria Salon Garry Wills

FRI 12 Noon Noon

FM Bargaining with the Devil FM Free to Love, Free to Heal

TUE 16 6:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m.

March

FE Portrait of Bhutan Eve Ensler

wed 17 5:15 p.m. Baby Boomers 6:30 p.m. Same-Sex Marriage: State vs. Fed THU 18 6:00 p.m. Bob Barr 6:00 p.m. Total Recall

MON 01 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

FM Music FE “Six”

WED 03 5:15 p.m. 6:30 p.m.

Aama’s Jouney Crowdsourcing

THU 04 6:00 p.m.

How Successful Women Lead

MON 08 6:00 6:00

FM Governance in California FM Timothy Ferris

WED 10 6:00 p.m.

Chasing Molecules

THU 11 6:00 p.m. FRI 12 Noon

Shari’a and Shari’a law FM Apocalypse Never

MON 15 6:00 p.m.

FM China 20/20

Tue 16 6:00 p.m. Renovating from Old to Green 6:00 p.m. James A. Baker III WED 17 6:00 p.m.

State of Middle East Peacemaking

mon 22 Noon. 6:00 p.m.

FM Extended Reaches of Mind FM Surefire Communication Tools

tue 23 6:00 p.m.

Peripheral Artery Disease

thu 25 6:00 p.m.

Conflicts

mon 29 6:00 p.m.

FM Medical School Education

wed 31 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m.

Enabling a Smart Grid Keeping CA’s Schools Competitive

Silicon Valley February wed 03 Noon

California: A State of Turmoil

tue 09 7:00 p.m.

Will Durst

tue 23 7:00 p.m.

Jill Tarter

thu 25 7:00 p.m.

Noah Alper

March

Foreign Language Groups Free for members. Location: San Francisco Club Office FRENCH, Intermediate Class Thursdays, noon Pierrette Spetz, Graziella Danieli, danieli@sfsu.edu FRENCH, Advanced Conversation Tuesdays, noon Gary Lawrence, (925) 932-2458

TUE 02 6:00 p.m.

A Taste of Brazil

THU 11 7:00 p.m.

Seth Shostak

SAT 13 1:00 p.m.

Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage

TUE 16 7:00 p.m.

Holding on to Happiness

GERMAN, Int./Advanced Conversation Wednesdays, noon Uta Wagner, (650) 697-3004 ITALIAN, Intermediate Class Mondays, noon Ebe Sapone, (415) 564-6789 RUSSIAN, Int./Advanced Conversation Mondays, 2 p.m. Rita Sobolev, (925) 376-7889

East Bay

SPANISH, Intermediate Conversation Tuesdays, noon Isabel Heredia, isabelth@comcast.net

February

SPANISH, Advanced (fluent only) Thursdays, noon Luis Salvago-Toledo (925) 376-7830

tue 16 6:30 p.m.

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Meg Whitman

February 01–02 jan 0 7 – M A R 0 5

mon 0 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

M O N 01 | San Francisco

I Just Sit Down and Remember: The Artwork of Hilda Robinson

Reading Like a Writer

Does Evil Exist?

We’ll discuss Francine Prose’s widely praised primer for both aspiring writers and dedicated readers who wish to increase their sensitivity to and appreciation of the writer’s craft. The book is laced with passages from authors as diverse as James Joyce, Philip Roth, Flannery O’Connor and John Le Carre, and is a must-read for book-discussion afficionados. Please note that this is a discussion only; the author will not be present.

Matt Cantor, Columnist, Berkeley Daily Planet

In conjunction with the Art of Living Black (TAOLB), an exhibition featuring the work of Hilda Robinson will be on display in the Club office until March 5th. TAOLB is a yearly celebration of the artistic talent of the Bay Area African-American community. Using the radiant colors of oil pastels, Robinson gives us a personal look at her urban neighborhood and the vibrant life of her African-American community. Robinson will speak at The Club on Friday, February 19, at noon. MLF: Arts Location: SF Club Office Time: Mon-Fri, regular Club business hours Cost: FREE Program Organizer: Lynn Curtis

MLF: San Francisco Book Discussion Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. program Cost: FREE Program Organizer: Howard Crane

M on 0 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 02 | San Francisco

Undercover Journalism

After Copenhagen: What Now?

James O’Keefe, Journalist; Filmmaker

Meet the man who thrust ACORN into controversy. With a cheap video camera (and a cheaper chinchilla coat), O’Keefe captured footage of employees of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now apparently advising a pimp and prostitute (O’Keefe and an ally, undercover) to evade taxes, conceal illegal money and traffic in underage girls. O’Keefe reveals the work, tactics and philosophy of a video provocateur. Location: SF Club Office Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program, 7:30 p.m. networking reception Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $18 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

Monday Night Philosophy explores the ancient question about what evil truly is. Why do people do bad things? Is there an objective “bad”? Could there even be an external force that provokes undesirable actions? Cantor will present his opinions and make his arguments, followed by a Socratic dialogue with Hammond and an open discussion with the audience. MLF: Humanities Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

Emily Adler, Partnership Director, Alliance for Climate Education Louis Blumberg, Director, California Climate Change, The Nature Conservancy Tony Brunello, Deputy Secretary for Climate Change and Energy, California Natural Resources Agency Leslie Durschinger, Managing Partner, Terra Global Capital Caitlin Grey, Student, Alameda High School Dan Jacobson, Executive Director, Environment California AG Kawamura, Secretary, California Department of Food and Agriculture Sally Osberg, President and CEO, The Skoll Foundation Bruce Klafter, Head, Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability, Applied Materials Amy Luers, Environment Manager, Google.org Nancy Skinner, Chair, Natural Resources Committee, California State Assembly

What are the prospects for a global climate treaty in 2010? We convene experts who attended the UN climate summit in Copenhagen. We’ll have firsthand reports and backroom insights. Panelists will also address the possibility of U.S. domestic climate legislation. Location: SF Club Office Time: 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. networking reception, 8 p.m. migrate to SF Green Drinks at 111 Minna Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members, students free (with valid ID) Also know: Attendees of COP 15 may register free with Copenhagen photo ID. Attendees of COP 15 may register as students and bring Copenhagen ID to registration desk at program for free ticket.

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

February 02–11 tue 0 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

W E D 03 | San Francisco

Eyewitness Accounts: The Prague Spring and Russian Occupation of 1968

New Member Reception, Open House and Club Anniversary

Petr Palecek, International Management Consultant Robert Koran, Director, Business and Management Department, UC Berkeley Extension Alois Strnad, Venture Capitalist and Fund Manager John Connelly, Associate Professor of History, UC Berkeley Richard Pivnicka, Honorary Consul General of the Czech Republic – Moderator

In one of the most remarkable periods of Eastern European history, liberalization blossomed during the few short months of the Prague Spring, followed by the dramatic repression of the Soviet occupation. Our panelists, including academic specialists and former Czech citizens who lived through the events, will discuss the historic significance of that time, including the kidnapping of the leaders of the Prague Spring by the Soviet Communist Party’s Politburo to force their signatures to the Moscow Protocol. This presentation is in conjunction with The Club’s exhibit of Prague 1968 photos by Paul Goldsmith documenting the Soviet invasion. MLF: International Relations Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Norma Walden

Enjoy hors d’oeuvres, wine and the company of fellow Club members, volunteers and staff as we celebrate The Club’s 107th birthday! Are you new to The Club? Come and meet other new members. Are you a longtime member? Come and see how we’ve grown. Learn more about all The Club has to offer – from volunteer opportunities, travel destinations and free languages to the high-quality programs you expect from us. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30–7:30 p.m. with brief remarks and Q&A at 6:30 p.m. Cost: FREE (with reservation)

W E D 0 3 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

T H U 04 | San Francisco

M O N 08 | San Francisco

California: A State of Turmoil

The Cultural Policies of the Early Ptolemies: Alexandria and Beyond

Bringing the Power of Emotional Engagement to Work

Dan Walters, Political Columnist, Sacramento Bee

According to veteran columnist Walters, California is suffering from an unparalleled social and economic complexity that has collided with an antiquated and pitfall-laden political system. What does the future hold? Will our next governor be able to make a difference? Walters reveals how to make government functional again. Location: National Semiconductor, 2900 Semiconductor Dr., Building E Conference Center, Santa Clara Time: 11:30 a.m. lunch, noon program Cost: $15 members, $20 non-members Also know: In association with National Semiconductor

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

William Greenwalt, Professor of Classics, Santa Clara University

As Alexander’s empire dissolved and the Ptolemies established their control over Egypt and outlying areas, they were faced with a challenge: establishing their dynastic legitimacy among different domestic constituencies while simultaneously facing international challenges. Greenwalt will discuss the strategies used by the early Ptolemies and their ramifications. MLF: Humanities Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Lawler Kang, CEO, Ingage; Author, Passion at Work

A leading force in helping teams identify their emotional triggers and then aligning them with their work and life, Kang will argue for the need, impact and benefits of emotional engagement. He’ll walk participants through tools developed to identify personal missions, passions, values, talents, experiences, priorities and dreams – and synchronize them in organizational contexts. MLF: BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley

M O N 08 | San Francisco

&Nothwen

And Yet, We Are Not Broken: The &Now then Journey of Recovery &Now then

Janice Mirikitani, Cofounder/Founding President, Glide Foundation; San Francisco’s 2nd Poet Laureate

Mirikitani speaks about recovery of her life from a childhood history of incest, abuse, violence and internment of her family in WWII camps. She has worked for 43 years in partnership with the Rev. Cecil Williams. She shares her journey to recover her own voice and to create programs where other women, men, and young people have recovered theirs.

tue 0 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 0 9 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

Danger to Self: Life on the Front Line with an ER Psychiatrist

Will Durst

Paul Linde, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, UCSF School of Medicine

What happens behind closed doors in an urban psychiatric ER? What medical, psychiatric and social problems does a front line psychiatrist confront? Linde sheds light on this place, highlighting the history, politics, finance and ethics of society’s current involuntary commitment laws. Find out why psychiatrists are the only medical specialists who don’t admit their patients to the hospital based on illness severity, and discover the difficulty of predicting the behavior of unpredictable people.

Political Satirist; Author, The All-American Sport of Bipartisan Bashing

Durst has spent his career jabbing at our elected officials from both the right and the left. Former co-host of “The Will and Willie Show” with Willie Brown, Durst has humored audiences around the nation. His one-man show, “The AllAmerican Sport of Bipartisan Bashing,” received rave reviews, as has his book of the same name. Enjoy commonsense rantings from this raging moderate. Location: Historic Hoover Theatre, 1635 Park Ave., San Jose Time: 6:30 p.m. check-in, 7 p.m. program, 8 p.m. book signing Cost: $10 members, $15 non-members Also know: In association with BAYMEC

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Karen Keefer

MLF: Health & Medicine Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Bill Grant

Wed 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T H U 11 | San Francisco

Azerbaijan: Central Asia’s NonOPEC Energy Option

Alexandria Salon

Garry Wills: The Extra-Constitutional Executive

Elin Suleymanov, Azerbaijan Consul General, Western United States

Azerbaijan, a secular, modern, majorityMuslim nation, has an important geographic position. It is a significant producer of oil and natural gas, distributing energy to Europe and other regions through its huge BTC Pipeline, a non-OPEC source of oil terminating in NATO-allied Turkey and the open Mediterranean. Azerbaijan is also an important hub for transit of Eastern Caspian oil and gas. Suleymanov will explain the global significance of this Central Asian country. MLF: Asia-Pacific Affairs Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Cynthia Miyashita

Join us for a follow-up to re-address the themes and ideas presented during the “Alexander/Alexandria: The Flowering of Hellenistic Culture,” event, presented at the Herbst Theatre in San Francisco on February 5 and 6. Share your thoughts on how Greek literature, learning and art intermingled with Egyptian, Persian, Babylonian and Hebrew cultures. Flex your intellect with fellow fans of the humanities. MLF: Humanities Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

Author, The Modern Presidency and the National Security State

Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Wills argues that the atomic bomb paved the way for presidential authority that has “enfeebled” Congress and the courts and that reached its apex with George W. Bush. Wills will frame the postwar period in a new light in his aim to sound an alarm about a continued threat to our Constitution and the balance of power. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. book signing Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members, $7 students w/ valid ID Also know: Part of the U.S. Constitution in the 21st Century Series. Underwriter: Charles Geschke Family.

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

February 12–19 F ri 1 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

F ri 1 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Free to Love, Free to Heal

Bargaining with the Devil: Negotiating Life’s Most Challenging Conflicts

David Simon, M.D., Author; Neurologist; Director, the Chopra Center

Robert Mnookin, Professor, Harvard University Law School

Mind-body healing pioneer Simon will discuss the deep connection between stored emotional pain and physical illness answer questions and sign his latest book, Free to Love, Free to Heal. Simon is a board-certified neurologist and pioneer in the medical field. His personal mission is to facilitate the integration of complementary and conventional medicine in the 21st century. MLF: Health & Medicine Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Bill Grant

One of the country’s most eminent practitioners of the art and science of negotiation addresses some of life’s most challenging conflicts - those with an adversary you don’t trust, someone who has harmed you in the past or appears willing to do so in the future, or an enemy you may even feel is evil. In such disputes, a critical decision must be made: do you try to negotiate a deal, or do you resist? Mnookin explains how to meet the challenge of making wise decisions in such conflicts.

Lights, Camera, Action! (But first: Does my hair look good?) More and more Commonwealth Club events are being videotaped for television and Internet broadcast. Please be aware that if you are in the audience,

you might be on camera.

Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

T ue 1 6 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T ue 1 6 | E a s t B a y

T ue 1 6 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Portrait of Bhutan: A Club Travel Program

Meg Whitman: From Running eBay to Running California

Eve Ensler

Seize this extraordinary opportunity to go inside one of the most mysterious and beautiful places on earth. As one of the most isolated nations in the world, Bhutan has long remained a dream destination for even the most intrepid of travelers. It has balanced modernization with its ancient culture and traditions under the guiding philosophy of Gross National Happiness. The government takes great measures to preserve the nation’s traditional culture, identity and environment. This spring The Club will travel to this Himalayan kingdom turned democracy. If you are interested in learning more about this trip and Bhutan in general, we invite you to join us! Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: FREE

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Can the woman who launched eBay to success help turn around California’s flailing economy? Whitman has a different idea about what California needs to return to its golden days. She sees her background in business as a gubernatorial asset, one that can help her lead California into the future just as she led eBay. Whitman will share her successes, setbacks and values, and she will discuss how the same determination can help to transform California. Location: Lafayette Veterans Memorial Hall, 3780 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Author, I Am an Emotional Creature; Playwright, “The Vagina Monologues”

Since creating her groundbreaking first work, “The Vagina Monologues,” Ensler and the performers she inspired have grown into nothing less than a global movement. A best-selling author, award-winning playwright and antiviolence activist, Ensler has been a voice for women and girls across the globe for over a decade. She will reveal the daily struggles faced by modern women around the world. Location: SF Club Office Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program, 7:30 p.m. book signing and networking reception Cost: $12 members, $20 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

W E D 17 | San Francisco

w ed 1 7 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T hu 1 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

What Baby Boomers Need To Know about Long-Term Care Insurance

Same-Sex Marriage: State vs. Fed

Bob Barr: James Madison and the Original Federalists: Where Are They When We Need Them?

Panelists TBA Denise Michaud, CLTC

Baby Boomers are living longer, and it is more likely that they will be needing some kind of long-term care. But when care is needed, it doesn’t just happen to them. It affects the entire family. Come learn about how long-term care insurance policies work, how to compare them, what is happening with insurance companies, trends in coverage, and how to ensure that your benefits are paid when you need the care.

Six years ago, the eyes of the nation were focused on San Francisco when Mayor Newsom granted almost 4,000 same-sex couples marriage licenses. But the battle was far from over. With the passage of Prop. 8 in 2008, only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in California; this year, after protests, lawsuits and campaigns, the courts are deciding the constitutional validity of the law. Experts will take a closer look at how individual states and the federal government are battling it out.

Former U.S. Congressman and Former Libertarian Party Candidate for President

Barr argues that a tremendous and dangerous growth of government has taken place in recent decades. He points to what he says is the unprecedented power of the executive branch, the growth of federal laws and regulations, and the massive levels of federal spending, all as evidence that it’s time for the country to look back on the writings of James Madison and the original Federalists and to benefit from their wisdom.

MLF: Grownups Location: SF Club Office Time: 4:45 p.m. networking reception, 5:15 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: John Milford

Location: SF Club Office Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program, 7:30 p.m. book signing and reception Cost: $12 members, $20 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

T H U 18 | San Francisco

F ri 1 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Total Recall: How the E-Memory Revolution Will Change Everything

California Media In Crisis: Who Will Hold California Institutions Accountable?

Gordon Bell, Principal Researcher, Microsoft Corp.; Co-author, Total Recall Jim Gemmell, Senior Researcher, Microsoft Corp.; Co-author, Total Recall

Pioneering computer scientists Bell and Gemmell will unveil how the emerging transformation in electronic memory is driven by three converging streams of technology – recording, storage and retrieval – and how it will have profound impacts on business, health, personal relationships, family history and education. MLF: Science & Technology Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. book signing Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Barbara Massey

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members

Sandy Close, Executive Director, New America Media Stuart Drown, Executive Director, Little Hoover Commission Mark Katches, Editorial Director, California Watch Martin Reynolds, Editor, Oakland Tribune Davan Maharaj, Managing Editor, Los Angeles Times Louis Freedberg, Director, California Watch – Moderator

At precisely the time California is experiencing its worst budget and governance crisis in decades, the California media is also in crisis. As newsrooms around the state reel from declining revenues and widespread layoffs, they are also competing for the attention of Californians from cable talk shows, bloggers and the Internet. The downsizing of the news media, which is happening most acutely at a state and regional level, raises profound questions about the democratic process. In this panel discussion, to be moderated by veteran journalist Freedberg, director of California Watch, a division of the Center for Investigative Reporting in Berkeley, we look at the issue of who will hold California institutions – both public and private – accountable and what are some of the new journalism models that are emerging on the transformed media landscape. Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

February 19–25 F R I 19 | San Francisco

mon 2 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

M O N 22 | San Francisco

I Just Sit Down and Remember: Artist Hilda Robinson in Conversation

Middle East Discussion Group

Joseph Stiglitz

Make your voice heard in an enriching, provocative and fun discussion with fellow Club members as you weigh in on events shaping the Middle East. Each month the Middle East Member-Led Forum hosts an informal roundtable discussion on a topic drawn from recent headlines. After a brief introduction, the floor will be open for discussion. All interested members are encouraged to attend. There will also be a short planning meeting.

Winner, 2001 Nobel Prize Winner for Economics; Author, Freefall

Hilda Robinson, Artist Jeff Kunkel, Artist; Writer; Minister; Collaborator with Robinson on an upcoming book about her life

Movement, music, color, light, inspiration. The neighborhood of her memories comes alive on the walls, and in her words. Hear artist Robinson speak of her life, her work and the vibrant community from which she derives inspiration. An exhibition of her artwork is on view in The Club’s Gold Room until March 5th. MLF: THE ARTS Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Lynn Curtis

MLF: MIDDLE EAST Location: Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. program Cost: FREE Program Organizer: David Schmit

In conversation with Andrew Leonard, Senior Technology and Business Writer, Salon

Stiglitz argues that America exported bad economics, bad policies and bad behavior to the rest of the world. Stiglitz outlines a way forward building on ideas that he has championed his entire career: restoring the balance between markets and government; addressing the inequalities of the global financial system; and demanding more good ideas (and less ideology) from economists. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. book signing Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $18 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

M O N 22 | San Francisco

T U E 23 | San Francisco

Socially Engaged Art and Global Politics

Geo-engineering: Global Salvation or Ruin? Ken Caldeira, Professor, Global Ecology, Stanford University Albert Lin, Professor, UC Davis School of Law David Whelan, Chief Scientist, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems

Favianna Rodriguez, Political Artist; Activist

“There has never been a movement for social change without the arts, posters in particular, being central to that movement,” says artist-entrepreneur Rodriguez, who has helped foster a resurgence in political arts. Through posters, prints and new media, she takes on issues such as war, immigration and globalization. She will display some of her dynamic creations, alive with crackling colors and a don’t-mess-with-us spirit. MLF: International Relations/Arts Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students Program Organizer: Norma Walden

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Should humans address man-made rising temperatures and sea levels by tinkering further with Mother Nature? A lively debate about such geo-engineering burst into the mainstream recently with reference to Caldeira’s work in the final chapter of the popular book SuperFreakonomics. Now this panel takes a measured look at the good, bad and ugly of what could and should be done. What is technically feasible? How could such tactics be tested? What are the risks? How would such a program be governed? Does the mere mention of geo-engineering take the steam out of efforts to reduce carbon pollution and create a moral hazard? Our three panelists share distinct perspectives on the passionate discussion about geo-engineering. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members, students free (with valid ID)

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

T ue 2 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 2 3 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

W E D 24 | San Francisco

Free Speech, Private Speech, Government Speech

Jill Tarter

Dirty Rotten Strategies: How We Trick Ourselves and Others into Solving the Wrong Problems Precisely

David Bisno, M.D., Constitutional Law Scholar

Who is speaking when our government accepts the donation of a monument from a private group for placement in a public park? Or issues license plates with a message favored by one group but not by another? May the state require a citizen to carry the government’s message? Or look at it? Are the restrictions on government speech different than those on private speech? Join us to discuss these thorny and provocative questions. MLF: Humanities Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

Director, Center for SETI Research

As the recipient of the 2009 TED prize, Tarter hopes to empower a new generation of SETI enthusiasts. She will discuss her plans to assemble a group of engineers to advise, create and facilitate a system of mass collaboration over the web and incorporate innovative data processing methods. Through this system, Tarter predicts that we will be able to globalize the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence. MLF: SCIENCE & TECHnology Location: Silicon Valley Bank, 3005 Tasman Dr., Santa Clara Time: 6:30 p.m. check-in, 7 p.m. program Cost: $9 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Lorna Phillipson

Ian Mitroff, Professor, Alliant International U.; Author, Why Some Companies Emerge Stronger and Better from a Crisis

How can people or groups tell whether others are deliberately steering us down faulty paths? Mitroff delves into how organizations and interest groups lure us into solving the “wrong problems” with intricate but inaccurate solutions that are based on faulty and erroneous assumptions – and offers strategies and solutions. MLF: BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members, $7 students Program organizer: Kevin O’Malley

W E D 24 | San Francisco

w ed 2 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T hu 2 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

International Criminal Court: How’s It Doing? Should the U.S. Join?

LGBT Planning Meeting

Amartya Sen: The Search for Justice

William H. Taft, IV, Professor of International Law and Diplomacy, Stanford Law School

The International Criminal Court is almost 10 years old, but the Obama administration has yet to decide if the U.S. will join. Fear that it would be a politicized institution likely to prosecute American soldiers have not been realized, nor has it been effective in prosecuting persons responsible for war crimes. In recent years the U.S. has moderated its hostility to the court, but where do we go from here? MLF: International Relations Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Karen Keefer Also know: In assn. with the NorCal Peace Corps Association and Stanford Club of SF.

The Commonwealth Club is a great place to discuss topics of importance to the LGBT community. Come discuss ideas for programming and meet other people who are engaged in everything from marriage equality to queer spirituality. We want to hear from you! MLF: LGBT Location: Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. program Cost: FREE Program Organizer: Stephen Seewer

Professor of Economics and Philosophy, Harvard U.; Author, Reducing Injustice on Earth

Nobel Laureate Sen has been called the “Mother Teresa of economics” for his work on famine, human development theory and welfare economics. He argues that social justice is more than intellectual discourse, and that the idea of justice influences how – and how well – people live. Sen offers a critique of the mainstream theories of justice that, despite their many specific achievements, he argues, have taken us in the wrong direction. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

February 25 – March 08 T hu 2 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T H U 2 5 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

M on 0 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Chinese Medicine: A Vital Partner in American Health Care

Noah Alper

Music: Can Philosophical Concepts Be Expressed Without Words?

Efrem Korngold, O.M.D., LA.c., Chinese Medicine Works; Co-author, Between Heaven and Earth

Acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine have expanded into many corners of our health-care system, meeting an everincreasing demand from people who want more than conventional medical care. Korngold will discuss the history of Chinese medicine in the U.S. and its contribution.

Founder, Noah’s Bagels; Author, Business Mensch

As a successful entrepreneur, Alper grew Noah’s Bagels from a one-store location in Berkeley to a $100 million public offering phenomenon in just six years. Now, with over 35 years of business and nonprofit experience, Alper offers accessible and practical strategies for achieving personal and professional success.

Steven Machtinger, Attorney; Violist, the San Joaquin Quintet

Monday Night Philosophy presents both words and music to investigate whether music can express concepts without words. Machtinger and the San Joaquin Quintet will explore this question through the chamber music of Mozart, particularly the clarinet quintet he wrote late in his life. Machtinger’s theory and the Quintet’s performance will be followed by a Socratic dialogue with Hammond and an open discussion with the audience.

MLF: Health & Medicine Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Bill Grant

Location: Schultz Cultural Hall, 3921 Fabian Way, Palo Alto Time: 6:30 p.m. check-in, 7 p.m. program, 8 p.m. book signing Cost: $10 members, $15 non-members Also know: Co-presented by Oshman Family JCC

M on 0 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Magic Theatre Martha Heasley Cox Raw Play Series: “Six”

Snow

Nuclear Tipping Point?

We will discuss Snow, a novel by Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk, about the clash between radical Islam and Western ideals in a remote corner of the author’s native Turkey. As a reminder, this is a discussion group. The author will not be present.

Join us for a panel discussion and short film screening presented by The Club and the Ploughshares Fund. Former Secretary of State George Shultz and Former Secretary of Defense William Perry (invited), in conversation with Club President and CEO Dr. Gloria Duffy, will have a candid talk about the prospects for a global effort to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons and prevent their spread into potentially dangerous hands. A short film by the Nuclear Threat Initiative will be shown. As the nuclear threat intensifies, what needs to be done, and how?

Come enjoy a script-in-hand play reading! In Zohar Tirosh-Polk’s heartbreaking comedy “Six,” an Israeli woman takes her American boyfriend home to meet her family. She’s a Jew; he is Jew-ish. Amidst the Dead Sea, Lake Kinneret, the ruins of Caesarea, the West Bank, the Wailing Wall and the cafés of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, the lovers experience all the humor, tumult and cultural confusion common to those who belong to two countries. Zohar Tirosh-Polk has written, performed and directed plays in Tel Aviv, Berlin and the United States.

MLF: Book Discussion Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. program Cost: FREE Program Organizer: Howard Crane

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6-8:30 p.m. program Cost: FREE, $12 donation requested

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

MLF: Humanities/Arts Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

Location: Cowell Theater, Fort Mason Center Time: 6 pm wine and hors d’oeuvres reception, 6:30-8 p.m. program Cost: Free for Club members. RSVP required: Must call (415) 775-2244 to register. Also know: Parking available at Fort Mason

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

T ue 0 2 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y

Wed 0 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

w ed 0 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

A Taste of Brazil

Aama’s Journey: A Pilgrimage Between Continents and Cultures

Crowdsourcing

Broughton Coburn, Author; 20-Year Himalayan Veteran

Coburn takes us on an illustrated, 12,000mile odyssey across America with Aama, his 84-year-old adoptive Nepalese mother, in search of the soul of our country. Coburn paints a portrait of the cosmology, philosophy, hopes and humor of a woman with no previous exposure to the West. Aama is a universal spirit, says Coburn, singular in her discovery of the vitality and sacredness that surround us.

Since Jeff Howe coined the phrase “crowdsourcing” in 2006, the idea of tapping into the power of the human cloud has brought both innovation and controversy. From building a peoplepowered online encyclopedia to algorithm contests, crowdsourcing might be the world’s largest real-time workforce. But questions remain: Can you trust the crowd to give high-quality information? Will this movement allow a whole new way to work for the disenfranchised? Will it change the world?

MLF: Grownups Location: SF Club Office Time: 4:45 p.m. networking, 5:15 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: John Milford

Location: SF Club Office Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program, 7:30 p.m. networking reception Cost: $12 members, $20 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

T hu 0 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

M ar 0 8 – M ay 0 6

M on 0 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

How Successful Women Lead

Taking a Closer Look: Pages from the Journals of John Muir Laws

Governance in California: From Greatness to Gridlock in 50 Years

The flavors of Brazil come alive at the Bay Area’s very first Rodizio-style restaurant, where several different cuts of succulent, premium-quality beef, lamb, chicken, pork and seafood are spit-roasted on large skewers. The churrascaria experience is like no other: Carvers clad in traditional gaucho outfits circulate the room dispensing endless cuts of meat. The Brazilian décor, perfectly complemented by the laid-back atmosphere, makes for a unique and memorable dining experience. Dinner will include salad bar, hot dish buffet and seven different cuts of meat. MLF: Bay Gourmet Location: Espetus Churrascaria, 710 South B St., San Mateo Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. dinner Cost: $58 members, $68 non-members Program Organizer: Cathy Curtis

Joanna Barsh and Susie Cranston, Executives, McKinsey and Company; Authors, How Remarkable Women Lead: The Breakthrough Model for Work and Life

Business executives Barsh and Cranston will share insights on how successful women lead, based on their five-year study of leadership. Both women were educated at top business schools and have spent decades designing development strategies for leadership. They will distill research and share compelling stories from top women leaders around the world. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:15 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. wine and hors d’oeuvres reception Cost: Regular: $12 members, $18 non-members. With copy of book: $25 members, $30 non-members

Lukas Biewald, CEO, CrowdFlower Additional Panelists TBA

John Muir Laws spent more than six years compiling an indepth guide to the wildlife of the Sierra Nevada. His watercolors of more than 1,700 species cover a range not available elsewhere. Original watercolors from The Laws Field Guide to the Sierra Nevada will be on view in the San Francisco Club Office from March 8 to May 6. MLF: Arts Location: SF Club Office Time: Regular Club business hours Cost: FREE Program Organizer: Lynn Curtis

William T. Bagley, Former California Assemblyman and UC Regent; Author, California’s Golden Years

Tracing what he sees as the downfall of the art of governance, Bagley describes the causes and effects of gridlock in Sacramento. He’ll detail personal participatory knowledge of the creation of California’s golden era, before “political reform,” when non-ideological legislators produced what might be the state’s most significant gains in education, civil rights, infrastructure, environmental protection and more. MLF: Business & Leadership Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

March 08–22 M on 0 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Wed 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T hu 1 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

How Science Inspired Democracy in the Modern World

Chasing Molecules: The Promise of Green Chemistry

What Is Shari’a and Shari’a law in Islam?

Elizabeth Grossman, Author, Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry

Sumbul Ali-Karamali, Author, The Muslim Next Door

There is substantial evidence that environmental conditions and environmental pollutants – among them synthetic chemicals in consumer products – have a profound effect on human health. Grossman illustrates the potential for green chemistry to revolutionize the materials we make, how they’re used, and the possible benefits to our health and environment.

Join Sumbul Ali-Karamali, an attorney with a graduate degree in Islamic law and author of The Muslim Next Door: The Qur’an, the Media, and that Veil Thing, as she demystifies commonly used Islamic terms like “shari’a” and “shari’a law” and discusses how the rules of Islam were developed and have been implemented, with examples regarding women, finance and criminal law.

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $18 non-members, $7 students (with ID) Also know: In association with The Club’s Science & Technology and Humanities MemberLed Forums

MLF: Environment & Natural Resources Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Kerry Curtis Also know: In association with Earthjustice

MLF: Middle East/Asia-Pacific Affairs Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Celia Menczel

T H U 1 1 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

F ri 1 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

S AT 1 3 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y

Seth Shostak

Apocalypse Never: The Global Governance Architecture of a Nuclear-Weapon-Free World

Jamie Hyneman & Adam Savage

Timothy Ferris, Former Editor, Rolling Stone; Professor Emeritus, U.C. Berkeley

Ferris argues that just as the scientific revolution rescued billions from poverty, fear, hunger and disease, the Enlightenment values it inspired have swelled the number of persons living in free democratic societies from fewer than 1 percent of the world population in 1600 to over a third today.

Senior Astronomer, SETI Institute; Author, Confessions of an Alien Hunter

Are we alone in the universe? Shostak has been searching for years to find out, and has been at the center of the sometimes admired, sometimes dismissed effort to pick up extraterrestrial radio communication. He will explain the challenges of trying to detect alien communications using ever more sophisticated methods and explaining why the almost 50-year effort has so far yielded nothing. MLF: Science & Technology Location: Menlo Park City Council Chambers, 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park Time: 6:30 p.m. check-in, 7 p.m. program Cost: $9 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Lorna Phillipson

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

Tad Daley, Ph.D., Writing Fellow, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War; Author, Apocalypse Never

Daley shares not only why we must abolish nuclear weapons, but also how he believes we can, and what the world will look like after we do. He argues that the nuclear double standard is both morally indefensible and politically unsustainable. MLF: International Relations Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: John O. Sutter Also know: In association with Democratic World Federalists

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Jamie Hyneman, Cohost, “MythBusters” Adam Savage, Co-host, “MythBusters”

Are elephants truly scared of mice? Can trousers really spontaneously combust? Is it movie magic, or can a person actually hold on to the hood of a speeding car? Learn how urban legends and illusions are debunked as special effects experts Hyneman and Savage share their secrets, discuss how to separate fact from fiction, and reveal what is behind the scenes of their extremely popular science program. Location: Cubberley Community Theatre, 4000 Middlefield Dr., Palo Alto Time: 12:30 p.m. check-in, 1 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members, $7 students (18 and under)

M on 1 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 1 6 | S i l i co n Va l l e y

T U E 16 | San Francisco

China 20/20: How Western Business Can and Should Influence Social and Political Change in China

Holding on to Happiness: Three Steps That Transform Challenge into Opportunity

Renovating from Old to Green: A Homeowner’s Fable

Laura Delizonna, Ph.D. Michael Santoro, Associate Professor, Business Ethics, Rutgers Business School

Drawing on personal interviews, documentary sources and almost two decades of visits to China, Santoro assesses the role of multinational corporations in China’s social and political development. Hear how moral integrity (or lack of it) by Western business is having a profound impact on whether economic privatization and growth usher in greater democracy and respect for human rights in China. MLF: Asia-Pacific Affairs Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Pamela Yatsko

Is it possible to create happiness during tough times? Delizonna will present her number-one secret to happiness and success, revealed by decades of study. Learn the three steps that she believes will help you apply this secret to your own pursuit of happiness and success. Delizonna will share real-life examples from the workshops she conducts at Stanford University and her own quest for happiness. MLF: Personal Growth Location: Palo Alto Arts Center, 1313 Newell Rd., Palo Alto Time: 6:30 p.m. networking, 7 p.m. program Cost: $10 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: David K. Olkkola

Robert Emery Smith, Director of Technology Services, Human Sciences and Technologies Advanced Research Institute, Stanford; Video Engineer

Smith’s dreams of turning an old cabin into a green home provide a grounded theory application in evaluating and using the new sustainable technologies for home ownership, improvement and renovation. Smith tells us what he learned, frustrations and outcomes of the home-based green technologies on the market today. His visual documentary is a “cradle to cradle” story of going home green. MLF: Environment & Natural Resources Location: SF Club Office Tome: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Ann Clark

tue 1 6 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

W E D 17 | San Francisco

M O N 22 | San Francisco

Ethical Imperative of America’s Involvement in the World

State of Middle East Peacemaking

Extended Reaches of Mind

Akiva Tor, Consul General for Israel, Pacific Northwest Region

Marilyn Schlitz, Ph.D., CEO and President, Institute of Noetic Sciences

The man who played a crucial role in crafting U.S. policy over the last four decades returns to the spotlight for a discussion of the ethical concerns that must guide U.S. foreign policy. James A. Baker III draws on the lessons of his extraordinary career in a hard-hitting exploration of what we must do in order to develop an effective and secure foreign policy.

Harvard graduate Tor has written extensively on Jewish values in the foreign policy of Israel and on ethical considerations in international relations. He will discuss the current state of peacemaking between the Palestinians and Israelis, and posits that with determined national leadership we can move toward a just settlement while achieving security, peace and economic well-being for both peoples.

Certain people worldwide assert they have capacities to use their minds to reach out in ways that extend beyond the known senses. Seeing at a distance, healing through intention, harnessing intuition for practical use – all have been described through anecdotal reports, ethnographic descriptions and survey studies. Schlitz will examine ways in which basic science and clinical research address these claims, developing reliable methods for distinguishing fact from fiction.

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:15 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members. Premium: $35 members, $45 non-members Also know: Part of the Charles & Louise Travers Series on Ethics and Accountability

MLF: Middle East Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Celia Menczel

MLF: PERSONAL GROWTH Location: SF Club Office Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program, 1 p.m. book signing Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: David K. Olkkola

James A. Baker III, Former U.S. Secretary of State

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

March 22 – April 05 M on 2 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 23 | San Francisco

T H U 25 | San Francisco

Ten Surefire Communication Tools for Designers and Beyond

Peripheral Artery Disease: The New Cardiovascular Epidemic

Preventing and Transforming Conflicts in 20 Countries

Michael S. Conte, M.D., Professor and Chief, Division of Vascular Surgery, UCSF

Sarah B. Nelson, Principal, User Experience, Hot Studio, Inc.

Many potentially wonderful experiences disappoint due to ineffective communication. For designers, effective communication with others is 50 percent of the job but often 0 percent of one’s training. Nelson shares 10 techniques to help you successfully create and advocate for the best user experience in your organization. MLF: Business & Leadership Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley

Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) is a result of blocked arteries in the legs, and affects 8 -12 million Americans. Patients with PAD have 3 times the risk of a heart attack or stroke and PAD can cause severe disabilities, including potential amputation. Risk factors include hypertension, diabetes, smoking, age and menopause. This disease is under-diagnosed and under-treated. A concerted effort is needed to educate the public, and to accelerate research to develop new treatments.

John Marks, President and Founder, Search for Common Ground

Join us for a multimedia presentation on the “common ground approach” to conflict transformation. A successful social entrepreneur, Marks will demonstrate how popular culture, including TV and radio soap opera, can be used to prevent violence and promote positive social change. His remarks will be interspersed with short video clips.

MLF: HEALTH & MEDICINE Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Bill Grant

MLF: International Relations Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Norma Walden

M O N 29 | San Francisco

mon 2 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Wed 3 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Is It Time to Reform Medical School Education?

Middle East Discussion Group

Electric Transmission: Enabling a Smart Grid

Amin Azzam, M.D., M.A., Department of Psychiatry, UCSF

While the debate on health-care reform has been actively raging in the national news, there has been a parallel and much quieter process of transformation in medical education in the United States. Azzam has had experience in the education of both medical students and early career physicians. He will present an overview of the existing structures in medical school and the emerging models for shaping the next generation of medical students. MLF: Psychology Location: SF Club Office Time: 4:45 p.m. networking, 5:15 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Patrick O’Reilly

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Mason Willrich, Board Chair, California Independent System Operator; Director, California Clean Energy Fund; Senior Advisor, MIT Energy Innovation Project

As the U.S. continues to develop clean, non-carbon-based electricity, our century-old electric grid is emerging as a major bottleneck. Meanwhile, public-policy oversight of electric power is a hodgepodge of 50 different states’ approaches to regulation. Willrich illustrates the problem, with special insight into California’s situation, and lays out a program for developing a 21st-century system. MLF: Environment & Natural Resources Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Kerry Curtis

W E D 31 | San Francisco

w ed 3 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

M on 0 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Keeping California’s Schools Competitive: Can Today’s Students Become Tomorrow’s Leaders?

LGBT Planning Meeting

Extinction or Emigration: The Human Future in Space

Part of the Chevron Innovation in California Series Wendy Kopp, Founder, Teach for America Other panelists TBA

With school budgets in crisis and critics decrying the quality of public education, what does this bode for California’s future? Can the state remain smart and competitive? Ultimately, will we have qualified leaders to carry forth the mantle of our cutting-edge technology and other businesses necessary for success?

George Elias, Author, Breakout into Space

Monday Night Philosophy explores whether homo sapiens can avoid extinction by expanding the biosphere to encompass the entire solar system. Elias, who is currently working on New Genesis: A Modern Creation Story for Those Leaving Earth, advances reasons why we will become a space-faring species. He will present his arguments, followed by a Socratic dialogue with George Hammond and an open discussion with the audience. MLF: Humanities Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members Program Organizer: George Hammond

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:15 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $12 members, $18 non-members, $7 students (with ID)

Self-Publishing: Tutorials from the trenches Book publishing is undergoing a sea change. Come and participate in our dynamic and interactive three-part series covering all aspects of self-publishing, taught by front-line experts who have done it themselves – and succeeded. Attend one or all sessions of these in-depth seminars.

Tuesday April 6: Self-Publishing – Options, Directions and Resources

Monday April 12: Self-Publishing – The Nuts and Bolts of Making Books

Lisa Alpine, Publisher, Good to Go Media; Co-author, Self-Publishing Boot Camp Workbook Peter Beren, Literary Agent; Publishing Consultant; Author, The Writer’s Legal Companion Carla King, Publisher, Good to Go Media; Social Media Consultant; Author, Miss Adventuring Series Paula Hendricks, Founder and Book Designer, Cinnabar Bridge Communications; Author, September in Corrales – Moderator

Lee Foster, Owner, Foster Travel Publishing; Author, The Photographer’s Guide to San Francisco Joel Friedlander, Proprietor, Marin Bookworks; Blogger, TheBookDesigner.com V. Vale, Publisher, RE/Search Publications; Founder, Search and Destroy Paula Hendricks, Founder and Book Designer, Cinnabar Bridge Communications; Author, September in Corrales – Moderator

What does it take to publish a book, and how do you choose which route to follow? Discover your options – from traditional to cooperative to true self-publishing – with industry experts who’ve done it themselves. Get a clear direction and insider tips on the variety of strategies, resources and tools available.

What goes into making a book truly a book? What are the essentials of editing and page layout – and how can they make or break you? Learn from an insider panel of experts about the critical design and production of your book and the ins and outs of available formats, from traditional to e-books and apps. Find out how typesetting can be sexy, and how to create covers that will sell.

Location: SF Club Office • Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley

Location: SF Club Office • Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley

Check our web site or the April/May Commonwealth magazine for information on the third program in this series, “Book Sales and Marketing,” happening on Monday, April 19, at the SF Club Office.

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

April 05–14 M on 0 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Wed 0 7 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T ue 1 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Recession or Reset? The Way Forward

Face to Face: How to Work Any Room

2048 Project: Humanity’s Agreement to Live Together

John Hope Bryant, Founder, Chairman and CEO, Operation HOPE; Vice Chair, U.S. President’s Advisory Council on Financial Literacy; Author, Love Leadership

Susan RoAne, Author, Face to Face: How to Reclaim Personal Touch in a Digital World

J. Kirk Boyd, Executive Director of the 2048 Project, UC Berkeley School of Law

Have you ever walked into an event and felt uncomfortable? You’re not alone; 93 percent of adults feel the same way. RoAne will share her strategies, tips and secrets on how to successfully socialize, converse and connect face to face – and how to transform events into opportunities to make new contacts, easily meet clients and colleagues in person, and establish lasting connections.

In 1948, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Because its provisions are not enforceable, its promise has not been fulfilled. The 2048 Project sets out an audacious, but achievable, goal: drafting an enforceable international agreement that will allow the people of the world to create a social order based upon human rights and the rule of law.

Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $18 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID)

MLF: Business & Leadership Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: MEMBERS FREE, $15 non-members, $7 students (with valid ID) Program Organizer: Kevin O’Malley Also know: Note new date (was Feb. 3)

MLF: International Relations Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Paul Clarke Also know: In assn. with the Truman National Security Project Educational Institute

W E D 14 | San Francisco

J ust added ! W e d A p r 0 7

J ust added ! T h u M a r 1 8

Eye of the Whale

Gavin Newsom

The Genius in All of Us

Douglas Abrams, Marine Expert; Author, Eye of the Whale

San Francisco’s Mayor In Conversation with Commonwealth Club President and CEO, Dr. Gloria Duffy

David Shenk, Author, The Forgetting, Data Smog and The Immortal Game

Dynamic philanthropic entrepreneur and businessman Bryant shows how leading with love and respect creates empowerment and success in business. Bryant has raised more than $500 million from the private sector in the pursuit of educating, assisting and inspiring the next generation of global stakeholders in financial literacy, economic empowerment and “silver rights.” Bryant will share his five fundamental rules for love-based leading.

Fact-based fiction author Abrams discusses his research and novel Eye of the Whale, which vividly depicts the serious challenges facing whales today – toxic pollution, destructive fishing and the farreaching effects of climate change. MLF: Environment & Natural Resources Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: $8 members, $15 non-members Program Organizer: Ann Clark

See Club web site for more information on this late-breaking program. Location: SF Club Office Time: 5:15 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program Cost: Regular: $12 members, $18 non-members. Premium (seating in the first few rows): $35 members, $45 nonmembers Also know: In association with INFORUM

See Club web site for more information on this late-breaking program.

J ust added ! T h u M a r 1 8

Our Energy Future: Forecast or Invent? Vinod Khosla, Founder, Khosla Ventures; Former CEO, Sun Microsystems

See Club web site for more information on this late-breaking program.

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Climate One Smaller Is Better Greg Dalton

s I strolled into the main atrium of the Bella Conference Center in Copenhagen, I wondered why so many people were clustered

house gas emissions. Including countries at all stages of economic development in a global compact on how to power our future is a noble notion, especially when it is structured so small and poor have a say in a consensus-driven process. But getting 193 countries to agree on anything meaningful in just a few short years is hallucinatory. And the climate around large television screens. crisis requires prompt and bold action. It’s time for a Peering over the heads of a few dozen people, I gazed smaller group of countries to step up and take collective at the images on the screen: a line of helmeted riot police action based on their enlightened self-interest. squaring off with a phalanx of protesThat’s the point that Caio Kochtors. Behind the police were dogs that Weser, vice chair of Deutsche Bank looked like they meant business. and former deputy finance minister From news reports earlier that of Germany, made at a Climate One day and chatter in the hallways I program in Copenhagen. “I think knew there were tens of thousands of the G20 succeeding the G7 or G8 is demonstrators in the streets who had about the right compromise between descended from around the world legitimacy and efficiency,” he said. on Copenhagen that cold Decem“With 20 finance ministers or heads ber weekend to express their views of state in the room, you can get on how the world should deal with more results and you can be more severe climate change. While most effective than if you have 190.” street protestors at international C a l i f o r n i a Gove r n o r A r n o l d gatherings want to slow or stop the Schwarzenegger and Rajendra action being considered in the corPachauri, chair of the UN Intergovridors of power, in Copenhagen it ernmental Panel on Climate Change, was the opposite. They wanted the both told the Climate One audience Schwarzenegger and Pachauri at the that subnational actors – one of people inside the cavernous convenClimate One event in Copenhagen tion hall to cut an aggressive deal and the top buzz phrases of Copenhamove quickly. gen – need to move forward on the It’s time for a smaller Alas, the Copenhagen process municipal and regional level. “We collapsed in failure, though the group of countries to step are not going to wait any longer for Un i t e d St a t e s , C h i n a , In d i a , national governments” to come up up and take collective Brazil and South Africa cooked with national policies or internaaction based on their up the face-saving and flimsy tional treaties, Schwarzenegger said. enlightened self-interest. It is “embarrassing” that the United Copenhagen Accord. Anyone who was paying attenStates doesn’t have a national climate tion and wasn’t delusional saw this coming. The Obama policy, he believes, and to the extent it does have an enadministration started lowering expectations for the ergy policy it fluctuates too much. conference about six weeks before it started. There was Dr. Pachauri agreed, adding: “I have now come a flicker of hope among environmentalists a couple of around to the view and I firmly believe that the nation weeks before the meeting when the United States and state by itself cannot solve this problem. You certainly then China announced some goals for reducing green- need grassroots movements.” Ω Photo courtesy of Christian Nordkvist

Photo by William F. Adams

Vice President, The Commonwealth Club; Founder, Climate One

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

HEALTH SECURITY IN AN AGE OF

PANDEMICS Do the economic crisis and the flu pandemic make healthcare reform attempts more or less likely to be successful? Frenk argues for seizing the initiative today. Excerpt from “Health Reform in an Era of Pandemics: Toward Comprehensive Health Security,” September 30, 2009. julio frenk Dean, Harvard School of Public Health; Former

Minister of Health, Mexico; Former Executive Director for Policy, WHO

t is really a pleasure to be here at this forum devoted to the promotion of open discussion around issues of public concern. I want to thank The Commonwealth Club of California for the invitation to address this distinguished audience, and my good friend Haile Debas for his very kind words of introduction. I’ve been asked to discuss the topic of health-care reform in an era of pandemics, and I’d like to do that by addressing the need to develop a comprehensive concept of health security. This is a topic of utmost importance: the impact of the H1N1 pandemic on global security. This pandemic is clearly showing us that in health matters, the world has become a single neighborhood, and that the consequences of actions that take place far away show up, literally, at our doorsteps. But we need to place this awareness in a broader context, not the least because the current pandemic, interestingly, coincides in time with an intense debate on health-care reform, and also with the deepest global recession in decades. I will argue that a comprehensive concept of health security can help to better understand and meet the challenges posed by this unique moment in history.

et me start with the good news: It is encouraging to acknowledge that the first wave of the pandemic is basically under control, and that the global health community has gathered enough information and experience from different parts of the world to reasonably confront the second wave. The development of this contingency, however, has had its share of surprises, and a sense of uneasiness still haunts the planet. This following flu season is going to be particularly stressful, says Tara Parker-Pope in

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Photo courtesy of Julio Frenk

Confronting H1N1

a recent New York Times report, and I quote, “Every sniffle but unknown, this is expected and known. This will change and every cough is going to be scrutinized, awakening fears public expectations. The population is aware that health auof the ominously named swine flu virus.” thorities can limit the dissemination of the infection through Since at least 2005, the world has been aware of the danger the use of the new vaccine and other public-health measures, of an influenza pandemic, but we didn’t know where and and that health services have at their disposal a reasonable when it would start, and we knew practically nothing about arsenal of clinical devices to treat cases. So, the population the type of virus that would be involved. We were dealing is now anxious and demanding. In a matter of months, we with an expected but unknown event. People also understood have moved from an environment of high public attention, that there was a limited number of things that health au- low scientific certainty and low social exigency to an environthorities could do to prevent such an event from happening, ment of still high public attention but now with relatively and that we had only a handful of measures at our disposal high scientific certainty and, consequently, very high social to control the immediate consequences of an outbreak. The exigency, and that will lead to a situation where there will population was worried but tolerant. As I argued in a New be little tolerance to mistakes or to missed opportunities to York Times op-ed published very shortly after the pandemic control the spread of this virus. began, considering the complexities of dealing with the first occurrence of a novel threat, the initial response was quite Mexico’s experience llow me to put this in a local perspective, using an competent, though certainly not perfect. example of my own country, which was the first one We now know a lot of things about the pandemic virus, and how the second wave could evolve in the months to come. affected by this global pandemic. Like many other nations, Mexico had been preparing for an outbreak like this. The Let me mention some of the things we know. First, the H1N1 pandemic virus has become the dominant deadly 2003 epidemic of SARS and the 2005 outbreak of avian flu taught the world to expect that another microbial influenza strain almost everywhere. Second, there are no signs that this virus has mutated to agent from animals would one day again infect humans. Over the past six years, Mexico bolstered its disease surveillance a more virulent or lethal form. Three, most patients with pandemic influenza suffer a systems, built up public-health laboratories, cooperated in moderate illness and the number of severe cases of this is developing international networks for information-sharing, and devised response plans. Since the 1980s, Mexico had still very small. Four, despite the administration of millions of treatment been strengthening its epidemiologic intelligence servicing courses of antiviral drugs, oseltamivir remains effective and cooperation with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and very few pandemic viruses resistant to this “The H1N1 pandemic virus has become the dominant drug have been detected. Five, while there are reasons to be optiinfluenza strain almost everywhere. [But] there are no signs mistic, many people remain susceptible to the infection, so the impact of the pandemic that this virus has mutated to a more virulent or lethal form.” could worsen in the second wave as a larger Prevention. Hundreds, literally hundreds, of Mexican doctors number of persons becomes infected. Six, pregnant women, obese individuals, people with and other health professionals received advanced training in asthma, cardiovascular disease and diabetes and the immuno- epidemiology. After 9/11 and the anthrax scare that followed a few months later in 2001, the Mexican health authorities suppressed are particularly vulnerable. Seven, the most urgent burden on health services is likely also worked with their counterparts in the G7 to establish an to be the increased number of patients with respiratory failure instance that was called the Global Health Security Action requiring intensive care, especially in developing nations. This Group, a tight communications network and coordinating demand could overwhelm intensive care units and disrupt mechanism, which actually carried out simulation exercises exactly to deal with the kind of contingency that finally broke the provision of hospital care for other diseases. Eighth and final, sanitary authorities have now licensed out earlier this year. When the news of the appearance of a new influenza vivaccines against the pandemic virus in Australia, China, Hungary and the U.S., soon to be followed by Japan and rus in the Mexican territory broke out in late April, Mexico several European countries. The first doses are expected to be moved with local authorities, alerting international health ready for use in the month of October [2009], but a critical agencies, and introduced vigorous measures of social distancchallenge will be to secure access to the vaccine for all in need ing. The president of the country himself led the response, underlining the seriousness of the situation. Fortunately, these throughout the world. The accumulation of knowledge about the H1N1 virus – measures rendered the expected results, and by the end of its dissemination and the way to confront it – has changed our May the influenza epidemic was under control. Despite the perception of the influenza pandemic. During the coming fall dire economic consequences of the control measures, most and winter seasons, we will be facing an expected and known citizens approved of the performance of the health authority event. So, contrary to the first wave, when it was expected and considered the adoptive measures as necessary.

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

However, a certain level of social tension has remained, and media coverage will continue to be thorough as the population is expecting major public-health efforts and the implementation, in cases of disease, of immediate and effective responses. The situation in other countries is similar, and the levels of anxiety will probably increase as the number of cases and deaths continues to rise in the Northern Hemisphere throughout the flu season that is just getting underway. SARS, bio-terrorism and influenza are largely responsible for the growing attention and resources being directed toward global health. Indeed, during the past few years, health has

beyond this limited usage and propose a comprehensive definition, which may serve to anchor our efforts to improve global public health. Let me therefore suggest three main dimensions of health security. The first dimension can be called epidemiological security, and it comprises the more traditional definition of health security since it refers to the protection against specific risks of disease or injury though biological and chemical agents. Whether those microbes appear as a result of natural evolution like H1N1 or as a result as a delivered act of terrorism, it’s very important, but “Health has increasingly been recognized as a key element of global security in terms of the need to prepare and respond, and also of sustainable economic growth and democratic governance.” the measures are very, very similar. So, that’s increasingly been recognized as a key element of global secu- the first dimension, what I would call epidemiological security and also of sustainable economic growth and democratic rity. governance. The health agenda has moved from the exclusive In contrast, the second dimension deals with personal domain of experts to take center stage in the most pressing services, and I would call it health-care security. This was the global issues of our times: global security, sustainable eco- usage introduced by President Clinton in his health-reform nomic development and democratic governance. In foreign initiative of 1993, which, as you remember, was named prepolicy terms, health has moved from the realm of low politics cisely the Health Security Act. Addressing Congress, President to that of high politics. Clinton defined his dimension as follows: “Security means Its relevance to health concerns has become so obvious that those who do not have health care will have it, and for that the term “health security” has recently gained currency. those that have it, it will never be taken away.” There is no doubt that investments in epidemiologic surveilSo this is security of access – a very important aspect to lance and response contribute to the control of threats fac- know that if we get sick, we will be covered. However, I ing nation-states such as pandemics and biological warfare. would suggest that we also need to include security regarding However, we need to go beyond the traditional conception quality of care, specifically with regard to patient safety from of national security – the security of the nation-state – and iatrogenic harm [i.e., problems caused by or during medical realize that investments in the protection of individuals from administration]. We want a health system where you know threats that endanger their health would also make the world that if you actually end up going to the doctor and having aca safer place. This idea lies at the core of the concept of hu- cess, no harm is going to result from that. [A] second [aspect] man security as opposed to national security, which, according is effectiveness, that you will be treated with effective treatto the United Nations Development Programme, includes ments, and – very important – that you will have a responsive economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community health system that respects the dignity of patients. So this is and political security. part of this second dimension of health-care security. The third and final dimension is financial security, which Securities and insecurity refers to protection against the economic consequences of oined by the [Palme] Commission in 1982, the concept disease, especially against the risk of catastrophic expenditure of human security has evolved through several phases to as a result of paying for care. This is protection against the reach its present comprehensive content. A culminating point risk of going broke for getting sick. came with the work of the Commission on Human Security, It is interesting to note that these three dimensions of established in 2001, which was co-chaired by Madame Sadako health security are consistent with the guiding principles Ogata and Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen. According to the of the health-care reform initiative that, as we meet here, is report of this commission, human security means – and I being hotly debated in the U.S. Congress and indeed in the quote – “protecting people from critical and pervasive threats U.S. society. These principles include, first, protecting families and situations, building on their strengths and aspirations.” from bankruptcy or debt because of health-care costs; that’s It also means, “creating systems that give people the building the concept of financial security. Second, improving patient blocks of survival, dignity and livelihood.” safety and quality of care; that’s health-care security. Third, The notion of the health aspects of human security brings investing in prevention and wellness, which of course has together these two strands of thought by identifying the risks a direct relationship to the public health measures that can that challenge the health of individuals and populations. protect the population from epidemics. Until recently, this term has been identified with a protecThe topic of security becomes particularly relevant given tion against external threats. I believe that we should move the critical situation the world is going through right now.

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

As I said before, we are in the midst of a unique coincidence [so] we should not attempt major health improvements, it of events. The best chance for health reform since the New is exactly the opposite; I would argue that this is the time to Deal, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression make the health system be most responsive. In fact, I would and the appearance of a pandemic that conjures images of even argue further that, if well crafted, health reform could what was called the Great Influenza of 1918. These historical be itself a key ingredient of economic recovery. A major part landmarks are either called either the Great something – the of the rationale for fixing the U.S. health system has been Great Depression, the Great Influenza – or the Big something precisely to prevent the major cause of business and famor the New something – the New Deal – so we have this ily bankruptcy, which is, of course, paying for health care. confluence that is really a historically unique moment. The Indeed, a major rationale for the health reform has been to highest likelihood that there’s ever been – we don’t know if restore the competitive capacity of the American economy. it will come to pass – for health reform, but coinciding with What is at stake, though, is more than economics. It is this deep global recession and the appearance exactly at this also our entire ethical perspective for our globalized world. moment of the influenza pandemic. We were preparing for Indeed, our concern for global security must be grounded influenza, but no one predicted it would happen, exactly, to coincide “Many of the most enlightened social protection measures in history with the global recession and a have been crafted precisely at times of economic or political crisis.” new administration that would push the health-reform agenda as on a renewed ethic: the ethic of human rights, so that every vigorously as the Obama administration is. Now, one could think that such an explosive mixture human being may have the same opportunity to achieve his would make this the worst possible time to attempt something or her potential as stated by the Commission on Human as ambitious as health-care reform. But history teaches us that Security. The concept of health security brings together a many of the most enlightened social protection measures in human rights perspective with the imperative of human history have been crafted precisely at times of economic or development. Through this comprehensive concept of hupolitical crisis, as exemplified here in the United States by man security, improved health can contribute to the stability the New Deal or by the birth of the National Health Service and prosperity of nations, which in turn nourish our global freedom from harm. in Great Britain. I began my remarks by referring to the uneasiness that The experience of my own country underscores this point: the financial meltdown of 1995 in Mexico created the con- marks these times of crisis. I would like to end by invoking the ditions for excess mortality that was actually documented wise words of Amartya Sen at the International Symposium among children and the elderly, as well as for a huge increase on Human Security held in Tokyo in the year 2000: “We live in catastrophic expenditures among the uninsured poor. Partly in a world that is not only full of dangers and threats, but also in response to such evidence, Mexico introduced three major one where the nature of the adversities is better understood, policy initiatives. First, [there were] conditional cash transfers the scientific advances are more firm and the economic and that create incentives for poor families to invest in the human social assets that can counter these menaces are more extencapital of their children through education, health care and sive. Not only do we have more problems to face, we also nutrition. Second, universal health insurance through a new have more opportunities to deal with them.” Let this keen awareness of challenges, tempered by the public and voluntary scheme to provide access for 50 million previously uninsured persons. And third, the creation realistic optimism offered by current opportunities, inspire of a new public-health agency charged with protecting the our efforts to move forward. The initial control of the inpopulation against major health risks. Among other measures, fluenza pandemic bought us time to tune up national and these three policy innovations may explain why the economic global surveillance systems, design brisk communication crisis of 1995 was short-lived, and most important, why the campaigns, rebuild strategic reserves of drugs, and strengthen three dimensions of health security have improved so much health-care units. This is also the time to enact the structural reforms that will in Mexico during the past decade. ensure the long-term sustainability of the American health No time like the present system and, in doing so, generate greater economic prosperhe conclusion is clear: guaranteeing health security be- ity and enhance global security. In the words of President comes even more urgent in times of economic upheaval. Obama, this is a future we should not fear, but with the help Let us not forget that economic shocks are often short-term, of scientific knowledge, work together to shape. Our generabut health shocks invariably leave enduring scars. The excess tion has no task more urgent or important than to achieve mortality that has been documented in many economic crises comprehensive health-care security for all. – the children who died, the elderly people who died – they Thank you very much. Ω don’t come back after the crisis has been superseded. Health This program was made possible by the generous support of scars are permanent, while economic crises are transient. When people say this is a time of economic recession Deloitte & Touche.

feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

RETHINKING THE ECONOMY Should the economy be reprogrammed to focus on sustainability? Can it? A panel explores a liberal case for rethinking what’s considered a healthy economy. Excerpt from Inforum’s “What’s the Economy for Anyway?” September 21, 2009. annie leonard Documentarian, The Story of Stuff colin beavan Author, No Impact Man

david batker Executive Director, Earth Economics Chip Giller Founder and President, Grist – Moderator

Giller: Annie, some reviewers have referred to your video as sort of an anti-capitalist critique. Are you anti-capitalist?

Batker: I think we’ll always have markets; we’ll always have trading, so I don’t think it’s quite a choice of just capitalism or non-capitalism. But what produces the goods and services that make us better off? Gifford Pinchot said, in 1908, “The economy should be to produce the greatest good for the greatest number over the longest run.” And that makes a lot of sense to me. But it also means that, as Annie said, a market economy falls short in many places. Take a look at Katrina and what happened there. We lost 1.2 million acres of wetlands between 1930 and when Katrina occurred – the hurricane; 1,400 people lost their lives. For every 2.5 miles of wetlands, you take off one foot off a storm surge. So, even though Katrina packed a 29-foot storm surge, it hit New Orleans with 16 feet. Still demolished the city, but the wetlands reduced it. That counts as zero. Because it’s not traded, or there are no goods or services traded, etc. It’s just nature’s free goods and services, and we’ve depreciated that capital, sadly. The economy resides within natural systems. That’s not what we’re taught in graduate school, in economics or anywhere else. It is a foundation for the health of our economy, and if we don’t encapsulate that, we’re going to be in big trouble. Currently with the way we practice economics and our production and consumption of goods, we don’t count that.

Leonard: It’s so funny, because when I made this film, I was not setting out to critique capitalism. I was setting out to really show people where all their stuff comes from and where it goes. That was literally my only goal. Then all of a sudden, Fox News is calling me “Marx with a ponytail”? So I got out my old books on capitalism and dusted them off, and I said, “Oh my God, I am anti-capitalist!” At one point my mother called me up and said, “They’re calling you anti-capitalist.” I said, “Mom, I realized I am anti-capitalist.” Because the way that we’re running capitalism right now is fundamentally incompatible with ecological sustainability. We have this total hyper-growth, more-more-more capitalism, and we’re on a finite planet. The Global Footprint Network measures something really interesting: how many resources we use each year compared to how many the planet produces. Right now, globally, we’re using 1.4 planets’ worth of resources each year, and I was at a presentation recently where people started debating, It’s 1.1! It’s 1.6! I said, “Look, buddies, anything over 1 is a problem. We have one planet. We’re using 1.4 resources.” This year, global overshoot day is September 25th. That means from September 25th on, we are consuming into the natural capital, into the natural stock of the planet and eating into the planet’s ability to produce next year. We’ve used up the entire year’s worth of resources by September 25th, and I’d make a strong case that a hyper-growth, profit-maniac capitalist system is driving that consumption. And we’ve only got one planet, so we simply have got to figure out a different way to run it. Giller: Do you subscribe to that too, Dave? I mean, do we have to leave capitalism behind?

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Giller: So Colin, how do you think we should get from here to there? Beavan: First of all, by believing that we can all make a difference. Sometimes, if we’re not careful, we get in a conversation like this and we become overwhelmed – like, what are we supposed to do as people about externalities? People come to me all the time and ask, Well, what can I do? Basically I [say], What would you like to do? What do

you think your skills and talents are? Don’t wait. We have to take collective action. One of the organizations I work with on climate is 1sky.org. They help you, no matter what side of the aisle you’re on – politically, they help you to get in touch with your Congress people. That’s action that you can take. The idea that we should wait until three years from now to the next presidential election to make our voices heard is not so correct. I would argue that actually we can turn, as individuals, to the problems, and that it’s our responsibility. More important, it actually improves your life, because it’s not fun to feel like a victim. Giller: Dave, are there examples on the ground where we’re seeing new economic models emerge that have been successful?

community; I have an electric car and compost, I have worms and all that. I’m all for living green. But I think the danger comes if we mistake that for political activism. There’s a lot of reasons to live green, to consume less, to consume more consciously – bringing less toxins into your home protects yourself and the workers; buying locally supports the local economy. The number-one benefit of implementing these lifestyle changes is bringing into greater congruency your values and your actions. It’s from that place of greater integrity, or greater congruence, that you can engage as a community member and as a citizen for the deeper structural change. Absolutely I’m in favor of the individual change. But it’s not the same thing as political action for changing the rules of the game.

Batker: We are, and it’s very exciting. In fact, you could take Audience Member: A lot of talk has been at a macroeconomic a look at San Francisco public utilities. There are six public level looking at government, in particular the United States. utilities in the west here that filter their water through natu- I come from Venezuela, which is a country that has been one ral systems – the forests and natural areas. That means San of the most aggressive in promoting radical, deep change, Francisco avoids about a $300 million filtration plant. In structural, and criticizing capitalism, and sadly I think that these six utilities – Seattle, Tacoma, Vancouver and such – in what has happened in Venezuela has been the creation of a the past, they’ve looked at their assets, and this is the way we system that is not sustainable in an economic or social sense. look at all of our assets, as just our built capital – the pipes, What examples of countries have you found that you think the vehicles and the buildings. are moving toward the direction that you would like to see Now we’re saying, Wait a minute, it’s the watershed that the United States go toward? produces the water and filters it. That’s our real capital asset. What they’ve run into is the problem of how to do the Batker: I think you’re correct. accounting. So now these six utilities have gotten together, A good example is Costa Rica, which ranked almost the and they’ve said, We need a new accounting system; that highest on happiness and quality-of-life scale, and they’ve way, we can actually justify greater investment in the water- implemented some very creative policies. For example, in shed and provide greater service – cleaner water at a greater 1996, the country was 21 percent deforested, they were abundance. having more flooding, you could only turn on the tap for There are many cases like this, and I agree that actually the water 12 hours a day in San José and other cities. They were root of them is citizenship, because almost in every case it running out of water, and it was because cattle ranching was was citizens who came forward and said, This is the way we expanding – very marginal, actually, economically, but they should approach the issue. In Louisiana, it’s the same thing. cut down the timber and put in farms. Very interesting, looking at sort of a utility structure for So the government instituted what they call a payment for restoration of the wetlands. If you pay in for insurance, we ecosystem services program. Part of it was a national tax on all share the potential catastrophe “There are six public utilities in the west here that filter their water cost, but we don’t do anything to prevent it. But a utility that actually rebuilds wetlands and puts water through natural systems – the forests and natural areas. That means and sediment back out actually San Francisco avoids about a $300 million filtration plant.” – Batker provides hurricane protection benefits. So just like you pay for a water utility, you can pay for a gasoline and fossil fuels to cut down on carbon emissions, hurricane protection utility. Whether it’s credit cooperatives and then they reimbursed that to landowners who replanted or a variety of other things, there are a lot of cases on the and kept native forests and such. It was a hugely successful ground, and it really is, as always in the U.S., it comes from program; one of the only countries in the world that has been local to the national. reforested, to a large extent. They’re about 42 percent forested, now. This is the most popular tax in the country; 80 percent Giller: By encouraging people to change their lifestyles for of the people support it. their own benefit and the benefit for the environment, might There are a lot of solutions like that. We were just with the we also be creating an on-ramp for the masses into politics? National Academy of Science in China, and they’re reimbursing 40,000 farmers for flood protection benefits they provide. Leonard: Absolutely. I live in a great kind of co-housing We need to look at those successes. Ω feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

FREAKISHLY The pop economists discuss drunk walking, making economics sexy, and the climate-change controversy. Excerpt from Inforum’s “Superfreakonomics’ Steve Levitt and Stephen Dubner: Next 21st Century Visionary Award,” November 4, 2009. Steve Levitt Economics Professor, U. of Chicago; Blogger, New York Times; Co-author, Freakonomics and

SuperFreakonomics

Stephen Dubner Journalist; Blogger, New York Times; Co-author, Freakonomics and SuperFreakonomics alan murray Deputy Managing Editor, The Wall Street Journal – Moderator

Levitt: We actually heard of someone graduating from college – that’s how long Freakonomics has been out, that people’ve actually been able to read Freakonomics, decide to be economists, and graduate from college, and –

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

febr ua ry/MA R C H 2010

Dubner: And be jobless. But they could’ve been journalists. Levitt: – and I can’t imagine how many people are now cursing us, because what we do and what you learn in the four years of economics in college are two totally different things, and it’s probably a very unkind bait-and-switch that we’ve offered to these young people who followed. But we did, and what do we do? We take the basic tools

Photo by Camille Koué

Murray: People think differently about economics – people at large feel differently about economics having read Freakonomics and the way you use the discipline.

of economics, the idea that incentives matter – not just financial incentives, but also other kinds of incentives: caring about what other people think of you and whatnot. Put that together with a careful analysis of data and pay attention to correlation versus causality – causality is what we care about, correlation is what we easily observe in the world – and put that together with storytelling. I guess the other piece is, you’re sort of stripping away the moralism. Most people, when you think about a topic like abortion, we think it through a lens of a moral and ethical perspective. Nothing wrong with that, it makes a lot of sense to do it, but what we do is strip that away and say, If you just look at it from an economic perspective, you know, like an efficiency perspective, say, what are you left with? It often leaves you with an uncomfortable feeling, and that’s true probably when you read about prostitutes, it’s true when you think about environmental issues, and that I think is kind of our calling card – we’re equal-opportunity offenders, and we don’t do it with malice. We do it with the goal of taking a purely economic perspective and seeing where that leads you. Murray: Which is more dangerous? Driving while drunk, or walking while drunk? Levitt: Let me start by saying that I have done research on drunk driving. Drunk driving is extremely dangerous relative to driving sober. My analysis suggests that drunk drivers are 13 times more likely to cause fatal crashes than sober drivers, which is very much in line with what other people have found. We’ve been told for 25 years, 30 years – longer – about the dangers of drunk driving. There’ve been tremendous strides made in that dimension. Still, of course, a lot of people drive drunk. There are a million arrests a year for drunk driving, and it’s estimated that about 1 out of every 140 miles driven is driven by a drunk driver. It’s really an amazing statistic. But I’ve never heard anyone talk, mention, think about drunk walking. But when you look at the data, you get a different perspective. There are a thousand pedestrians, each year, killed walking drunk. Dubner: Out of 13,000. Levitt: There are only 13,000 people who are killed in drunk driving crashes. A thousand people are [killed] drunk walking. The key thing is, you’ve got to get the denominator, you’ve got to figure out how many miles are driven drunk and how many miles are walked drunk, and we’ve laid out some assumptions. Turns out there just aren’t a lot of miles walked drunk in this country. It’s a lot of work to walk drunk, people don’t do it so much. If we then start to make some reasonable estimates, we come up with the number that, per mile walked, drunk walking is eight times as dangerous as drunk driving – for the individual. It’s hard to kill other people while walking drunk, so you have to factor that in. When you do that, it turns out, in total deaths, there are five times as many deaths per mile walked, drunk, as there are driven drunk.

I want to make completely clear that we’re not advocating drunk driving, we’re not advocating drunk walking – Murray: Drunk sleeping is probably the safest thing. Levitt: We start the book with that example, and what I love about that example is, anybody could have done it. It took about five minutes on the Internet, you know, trying to figure out what some of the statistics were, and once you think about it, it kind of makes sense – and you can even maybe remember back to some of your own more drunken walking episodes and think that maybe I could’ve been killed. Yet no one has ever talked about or thought about it. That’s kind of the power of ideas. Not big ideas, not like string theory or the theory of relativity, but little ideas, in ways of thinking about the world differently that we’re so much trying to cultivate with our approach to economics. Murray: Okay, let’s get to global warming, global cooling. This has been the main source of controversy since the book came out. You’ve been accused of giving comfort to the global warming deniers – like the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, that sort of thing. If you could do it over again, would you do it differently? Dubner: I don’t think so…. Levitt: Before we answer that question, though, we should just say what we did, for people who don’t know. Briefly, what we really set out to do in this chapter, as in other chapters, is to take an economic look at something which is usually not looked at in a very economic way, and to strip away any ideas about kind of what’s right or wrong, what we owe to the next generation, etc., and really answer a simpler, kind of more of an engineering question, which is: We know that the Earth has gotten hotter, we expect it will get hotter still, and the usual solution which is offered for cooling the Earth is to produce less carbon. We say that we don’t think that is a very good solution to the particular problem of lowering the temperature of the Earth for three reasons. The first reason is that, even if we were to cut carbon emissions dramatically now, because carbon dioxide stays in the air, half-life of something like 100 years, it’ll be many, many decades before we feel the effects of the cooling. So, in essence, the planet will continue to warm for another 40 or 50 years. If you had another option, you wouldn’t want to wait that long. The second is how in the world we’re actually going to get the kind of consensus and the behavior change that will lead to dramatic reductions of carbon. It’s a very, very thorny question, one that economists think about a lot and think that this kind of collective action is very, very difficult. The third one is the cost. That the people who try to estimate the costs of this kind of carbon mitigation come up with numbers like it will cost a trillion dollars per year essentially to the end of time to do this kind of mitigation. A trillion feb r ua ry/MA R C H 2010

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

dollars doesn’t seem like that much anymore, but when you really start thinking about it, it is a lot of money. So, we try to say to the question, Well, what if we really were in a jam, and we wanted to really cool the Earth in a hurry, and we didn’t want to wait 40 or 50 years – is there another option? We explore scientific solutions kind of under the rubric of geoengineering, where the science is pretty well understood, and there are three we talk about.

resented, and one quote in particular, that carbon is not the right villain, was a misquote.

Dubner: Well, that would be a bit like blaming the heart surgeon for rescuing the guy who behaved badly. Would you like it to have not gotten to that point where he needed heart surgery? Yes. Were there risk factors that were of his own making and some that were entirely self-induced? Yes. Would a geoengineering solution create what you’d call an “excuse to pollute,” which we address in the book? Quite possibly yes. That’s not a reason to not entertain it as a solution, if warming is the problem that you’re trying to address. So the thing is, I think why some people – especially [those] who hadn’t read the book and were kind of predisposed to be very distraught about these kinds of solutions – what they felt when they did read the book is that, well, we did actually address a lot of the reservations about potential unintended consequences, about the excuse to pollute and so on.

Dubner: Yeah, this is a rabbit hole to go down, so if anyone really wants to go down the rabbit hole, they can start at our blog, which is freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com, where actually just today, I posted what might be kind of the final word from Ken Caldeira and whether he was misrepresented or not. The short answer I would give is, essentially, “no.” What we wrote about Ken – just so you know, we worked in concert with Ken Caldeira, who is a climate scientist at Stanford, and others who are part of this group called Intellectual Ventures – and we did something that we felt was the only thing to do and the responsible thing to do, which was, after we had a draft of the chapter, run it past them all. There’s a lot of science in it, a lot of opinion in it, and so on, and Ken Caldeira read the chapter, made many comments on the chapter; his comments were incorporated. We ran it past him again, another draft, and there was a line that Ken admits that he really doesn’t like and should’ve taken stronger action on it and/or should have read more carefully and didn’t. We’ve decided we’re going to amend that line in the book in future printings, and it’s honestly not a very drastic amendment to what exists now, so we talked a lot about Ken’s different work in carbon mitigation and identification of problems like ocean acidification and so on, but if you’re looking for a black or white judgment on whether anyone’s scientific research was represented in SuperFreakonomics or, to get back to your original question, would we change it? The answer is, essentially, No. Ω

Murray: One of the people you quote in the book is Ken Caldeira, who has subsequently said his views were misrep-

This program was made possible by the generous support of Chevron.

Murray: Steven, a lot of people say that by even raising those issues, you have suggested there’s a low-cost way to deal with this problem and drained what political will there is for addressing carbon emissions.

The Right Villains When Steve Levitt and Stephen Dubner walked into the offices of Nathan Myhrvold’s Intellectual Ventures (I.V.) in early 2008, they couldn’t have expected their daylong research foray would eventually culminate in a climate debate firestorm following the release of their new book, SuperFreakonomics, in October 2009. The I.V. field day, during which the co-authors engaged scientists and inventors in a climate-change brainstorming session, resulted in a handful of radical, rationalized solutions to global warming. These solutions – perhaps specious, perhaps feasible – have led to a furor among leading climate-change activists, who quickly and loudly decried them on all fronts: as unsound, as

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

irresponsible, as providing humankind further “excuse to pollute.” Their fundamental fear is that, under the theoretical aegis of solutions similar to those proposed by Levitt and Dubner, our collective incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will be severely diminished. There might be something to that. As Levitt himself recently summarized to a standing-room-only Commonwealth Club audience, incentives matter. Therein lies the crux of the debate. Are we talking climate-change science? Or are we talking human motives? In the middle of the fray is Ken Caldeira, a respected scientist in climate modeling and global ecology, who met Levitt and Dubner during their visit to I.V. Caldeira’s professional stance was

ry/MA rR ch C H 2010 febr ua ry/Ma

then described in SuperFreakonomics: “[Caldeira’s] research tells him that carbon dioxide is not the right villain in the fight.” An incendiary allegation, to be sure – and even before the book’s release, Joe Romm of climatechange.org broke his own heated story in which Caldeira more-or-less formally abandons SuperFreakonomics’ position on climate change. With the Copenhagen climate summit fast approaching, media on both sides began adding fuel to the fire, until co-author Dubner released a comprehensive explanation on the New York Times-sponsored Freakonomics blog. In it, Caldeira is quoted as saying, “I believe the authors have worked in good faith. They draw different conclusions than I draw from the same

Mendocino and Anderson Valley: A Bay Gourmet Get-Away

Join Cathy Curtis, Bay Gourmet Member-Led Forum Chair, for a food and wine adventure in Mendocino and Anderson Valley.

April 9-11, 2010

This exclusive trip is limited to 24 people – reserve your space now! • Spend two nights at the charming MacCallum House in the heart of Mendocino’s downtown • Savor the wines of Anderson Valley during private tastings with winemakers, and visit local organic farms

$899 per person, double occupancy. Includes: Transportation for 3 full days (from San Francisco and Marin pick-up points) * Two nights at the MacCallum House including breakfast * Most meals * All tours, special visits and tastings * Gratuities for group events * Tour leader

• Enjoy gallery visits and discussions with local artists • Meet with Dory Kwan, a food and wine consultant, for a palate development and food & wine pairing workshop © (clockwise) nathanphoto / iStockphoto.com, Feverpitch / iStockphoto.com, John Birchard

CST# 2074630-40

For more details and a complete itinerary visit www.commonwealthclub.org/travel or call (415) 597-6720 or email travel@commonwealthclub.org

facts, but as authors of the book, that is their prerogative.” However much climate-change advocates may vilify the geoengineering solutions presented in SuperFreakonomics, one thing is now certain: the cat is out of the bag. Or, in terms Joe Romm might prefer, Pandora’s box has been thrown open. Prior to the immense publicity (good and bad) enjoyed by the book among the climate-change crowd, the geoengineering dialogue hadn’t developed past a nebulous environmental moralism: Should we tinker with the weather or shouldn’t we? But with the economic clarity provided by Levitt and Dubner’s singular focus on incentives, environmental moralism looks to be completely superseded.

As Dubner argued during the November talk with The Commonwealth Club (see main story), “it’s a bit like blaming the heart surgeon for rescuing the guy who behaved badly.” One of the feats proposed in the book, emulating the effects of volcanic eruption on global climate, has already been tested and studied in Russia by controversial scientist Yuri A. Izrael. In the test, Izrael’s team of scientists pumped sulfur aerosols (similar to the substance described in SuperFreakonomics) into the atmosphere. The subsequent study maintains that the sulfur screen was effective in reducing sunlight levels. The political ramifications of unilateral climate modification are among the many major issues presented by

geoengineering. Playing part in the shifting climate-change landscape were the guidelines resulting from the COP 15 talks, which will serve to benchmark the world’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Should that commitment be found wanting, it is likely that geoengineering options – the cheap, simple solutions favored in Levitt and Dubner’s incentive-driven world – will enter the mainstream climate-change discussion in force. Ken Caldeira gets his own time before the microphone this February, when he visits The Club for a geoengineering discussion.

ry/MA rR ch C H 2010 feb r ua ry/Ma

Written by Andrew Harrison. THE COMMO N WE AL TH

InSight Yes You Can Dr. Gloria C. Duffy

Photo courtesy of Gloria Duffy

President and C.E.O.

alifornia historian and former state librarian Kevin Starr recently published the latest in his wonderful multi-volume history of our state. In addition to providing rich detail about the 1950s and early 1960s, Golden Dreams documents a fundamentally important period in our state’s development. This was the era in which the first California state water plan was crafted and adopted, turning water use from a sometimes deadly free-for-all competition into an orderly process that allocated water for agricultural, residential, commercial and recreational users. The state’s highway system was also designed and constructed during this period. It was the time when a commission led by Occidental College President Arthur Coons drafted, and the state legislature adopted, our Master Plan for Higher Education, creating the system of state universities, colleges and community colleges that guarantees any qualified California student access to higher education. Leaders from the private sector and education were engaged in the design of these systems. A legislature with a majority of centrist Republicans and Democrats cooperated to pass the needed laws. Through intense work and collaboration, these major social systems and physical infrastructure were put in place. They then supported the development of business, science and industry, and with them the enormous growth in the California economy and quality of life that we enjoyed for the next four decades. Last November, Dr. Starr and I had a conversation about the future of California, at a dinner for some of The Club’s long-time members. We discussed California’s current problems against the backdrop of this history of the 1950s and early 1960s. The group agreed that California is in a difficult situation today. The decline in the state’s tax base has severely impacted public higher education, with access to college receding for many of the state’s students. Without continued investment, the state’s infrastructure is fraying. Our fiscal and budget situation is out of whack, with dramatic ups and downs in the state budget caused by the swings in tax revenues based on fat and lean economic cycles. For decades, the state prospered from the political, social and organizational capital put in place in the 1950s and early ’60s. In fact, the work our predecessors did during these years was so good that the vast majority of the state’s citizens and potential leaders could

THE COMMO N WE AL TH

F e br ua ry/MA R C H 2010

afford not to pay attention to how things were working in our state, and most of us didn’t have to bother ourselves with being personally involved in politics, government or community leadership. Everything seemed to work well enough without our attention. But as brilliant as they were for their time, these structures are now out of date and are not working any longer. There is nothing new in place that remotely resembles the insightful plans that governors Goodwin Knight and Pat Brown, moderate legislators and private sector leaders created in the 1950s and early ’60s. The lack of smart new strategies will undermine the state’s prosperity in the future, making us less competitive in the U.S. and global economies. What to do? Many people, including Dr. Starr, see the increasing polarization of California state politics as one of the fundamental problems that prevents us from getting things done. The state’s current primary system and other factors encourage the election of extreme candidates from both parties, and then when they take office, they find it hard to agree on what needs to be done. We clearly need some creative new work to reconstruct the platform for California’s prosperity. It might consist of rethinking the economic base for public higher education in the state, figuring out how to green the state’s economy for both economic savings and growth, redesigning our energy economy, developing smart highways and transportation systems, supporting the biotech industry. But to implement any such strategies, we need to eliminate the ultra-partisanship in the state that so often paralyzes us from moving forward, including preventing the state from even passing a sensible budget. One proposal – taking redistricting out of the hands of the legislature and putting it into the hands of an independent commission – was passed by the voters on the November 2008 ballot and is currently being put into practice. This should make state legislative races more competitive and those elected less extreme. At our November dinner, one long-time member agreed about all these problems, and said, “But what can I do about it? I can’t run for office...” We need to produce new strategies for a strong economy and prosperous society in our state, and get people elected who will make them happen. No one, including current elected officials, is going to take care of this for us. So, my answer to the question above is “Yes you can.” For example, I believe that new, independent redistricting commission is looking for applicants right now: www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov Ω

Perspectives of Iran April 28 to May 13, 2010

Led by Stephen Kinzer

oin award-winning foreign correspondent Stephen Kinzer on a journey through Iran, where vast monuments serve as testament to the extraordinary history of

this country. Begin in Tehran, where we have scheduled time to explore the country’s capital, including a visit to the basement vault of the Bank Milli Iran to view the spectacular Crown Jewels. Discover Kerman and explore the old city, walking down shady alleys that run into the town’s extensive bazaar, mosque and caravanserai complex. Experience Yazd, the country’s center of Zoroastrianism, where the most traditional Persian architecture is found. Spend two days in Shiraz with an excursion to the magnificent ruins of Persepolis – one of the most remarkable archaeological sites found in the Near East. End the trip in Isfahan, a town of unsurpassed beauty where brilliant blue-tiled buildings and majestic bridges are often recognized as the perfection of Islamic architecture. With our expert study leader and local guides, get beyond the media and meet the people of this fascinating country. In 1996 Stephen Kinzer was named chief of he New York Times bureau in Istanbul, Turkey. He spent four years there, traveling widely in the area, including Iran. He is author of the award-winning book All the Shah’s Men. Throughout this program, his lectures focus on Iran’s foreign policy, economic structure and U.S. policy toward Iran.

YAZD - 2 NIGHTS

TEHRAN - 5 NIGHTS

PERSEPOLIS - DAY TRIP

Explore the Archaeological Museum and

Discover a city known for its honey-sodden

Spend a day at the magnificent ruins of Perse-

visit the home of Ayatollah Khomeini as

sweets dusted with pistachios. This is a des-

polis. Gain insight into the astonishingly so-

well as the spectacular Carpet Museum.

ert city, and most homes are topped with a

phisticated and powerful world of the Achae-

badger, a wind tower ingeniously designed

KERMAN - 2 NIGHTS

to catch a passing breeze. It is also the cen-

Follow Marco Polo’s path to Kerman and explore its medieval center. Visit the nearby town of Mahan, home to the tomb of Shah Nematollah Vali and the Bagh-e Tarikhi Gardens with its bubbling fountains and the sweet smell of roses – the quintessential Persian garden.

CST: 2096889-40

ter of Zoroastrianism in Iran, and the sacred flame in the fire temple has been burning for more than 1,500 years.

SHIRAZ - 2 NIGHTS

menid Dynasty, which created a fabulous palace city built by craftsmen from around the Persian empire.

ISFAHAN - 3 NIGHTS Explore Isfahan’s centerpiece, the May-

Explore Shiraz, an important city in the

dan-e Imam Square. All four sides of the

medieval Islamic world. Through its many

square contain architectural masterpieces,

artists and scholars, Shiraz has been

including the Ali Qapu Palace and the won-

synonymous with learning and poetry.

derful bazaar.

$5,990 per person, double occupancy, exclusive of airfare

FOR A MORE DETAILED ITINERARY OR TO BOOK YOUR TRIP, CALL (415) 597-6720, E-MAIL TRAVEL@COMMONWEALTHCLUB.ORG OR GO TO WWW.COMMONWEALTHCLUB.ORG/TRAVEL

Purchase event tickets at commonwealthclub.org

The Commonwealth Club of California 595 Market Street, 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94105

PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID IN SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA

or call (415) 597-6705 or (800) 847-7730 To request full travel itineraries, pricing, and terms and conditions, call (415) 597-6720 or e-mail travel@commonwealthclub.org

The K ingdom

B hutan

Democracy, Royalty and Gross National Happiness April 20 - May 3, 2010

Bhutan is a land of soaring snow-capped peaks and alpine meadows. Its jealously guarded isolation, awe-inspiring Himalayas, ancient culture and friendly people make it a magical place even for the most intrepid of travelers. In Bhutan progress is not only defined by economic achievements, but by the level of cultural development and environmental preservation. The nation is also a bastion of Mahayana Buddhism, and the teachings of this spiritual tradition influence all aspects of daily life. We invite you to join The Commonwealth Club on this incredible journey.

Attend a trip information session on February 16 at 6:00 p.m. at the Club office. Call or reserve your space online.

Commonwealth Club Travel

s Travel to Thimpu, Punakha, Paro in central Bhutan and Trongsa and the Bumthang Valley in the east. Visit holy Buddhist shrines and isolated hermitages. Discover Bhutanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s culture through art and music.

Informed Travel for the Discerning Mind

s Meet a Bhutanese family in their farmhouse and visit with senior monks in a monastery. s Hear from local guest speakers on topics pertaining to democracy, the royal family, Buddhism and the concept of Gross National Happiness. Trip Cost: $5,995 per person, based on double occupancy

COMPLETE program brochure at commonwealthclub.org/travel Phone: (415) 597-6720 E-mail: travel@commonwealthclub.org

CST# 2096889-40 Photos by Kristina Nemeth

s Witness the Ura Tsechu festival in Bumthang Valley and see the sacred Cham dances.

Commonwealth Club Travel Commonwealth Club Travel Informed Travel for the Discerning Mind