Ethics Bowl competitions could improve public decision-making

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, April 19, 2024

Columbia’s Hickman High School won the National Ethics Bowl championship last week. I suppose any scholastic national championship brings attention to the Columbia Public School System, but in this case, it can achieve more than that. It can lead to developing alternatives to less polarizing, less confrontational group decision-making processes.

Both Hickman and Rock Bridge high schools have been the Missouri Ethics Bowl state champion several times since it started in 2013 at Columbia College.

Ethics Bowls were founded in 2012 at the Parr Center for Ethics at the University of North Carolina to promote collaborative decision making. Ethics Bowls differ from traditional debate in that rather than competing with the objective of attacking the opposition and “destroying their argument,” each side is given the same case, has time to reflect and analyze it, and then explain and defend the position they believe is right. Teams are judged by how thoughtful they are, how they respond to judges’ questions and how they respectfully interact with the opposing team. Teams win by showing they have thought carefully about the case and advanced their arguments in a collaborative way.

Ethics Bowls use cases that are real-life issues but not specific situations. They are usually three or four well-designed paragraphs that are ripe for conversation and deliberation. The National Ethics Bowl final this year had 15 topics that high school students could easily understand but probably had not directly confronted in their own lives.

This year, topics included the right to privacy of authors and celebrities such as Taylor Swift, parents’ rights involving cell phones, the future ownership of the moon and the right of private interests to develop it and the right of governments to prohibit extreme parties from appearing on electoral ballots.

My favorite case as a topic used at the recent national tournament might be “Unequal Cities” National Case Set that describes the shortage of housing in most cities that is characterized by older, economically stable couples with grown children no longer living at home while lower income families with multiple young children, sometimes with one parent, are crammed into smaller units of shared housing. The case took an innovative turn when it proposed that cities require “that at age 65, all residents will be moved into high-rise retirement homes in the city center, and all their basic needs will be met for the reminder of their lives” so their single-family homes could be made available to families with children. The case is accompanied by questions such as “should citizens ever be required to give up claims to some kinds of resources that could be better used by others?” Now that will make for a good dinnertime discussion.

American public policymaking processes are too heavily influenced by a legalistic, adversarial approach. It is even common for television news programs to take a pro-con approach rather than a “informed discussion” approach. Imagine if legislative bodies spent at least some of their time in an Ethics Bowl format discussing policy issues and developing informed alternatives rather than strategizing about how to add “poison pill” amendments that preclude solving the real-world problem.

Traditional adversarial debate uses research and information as a weapon against an opponent, not as an ingredient for making a good decision. About 25 years ago, when health care reform was the national debate topic, I mentioned to a student that participating in high school debate that year must have really increased students’ understanding of the health care system. The student replied, “Not really. It mostly teaches you how to destroy another person’s argument.”

Many — probably most — citizens dislike public policymaking. I’ve seen and heard this for more than 40 years. They don’t understand the cumbersome process, they dislike conflict, they don’t know how to get involved, they are afraid they will look foolish. The last half of my teaching career, I realized that the only topic that political science and journalism majors fear more than statistics was “Robert’s Rules of Order.”

Several Missouri legislators over the past two decades have expressed similar sentiments. I asked a representative once, “What are they doing on the floor?” He replied, “I don’t know. I don’t get involved.” Most citizens don’t want to be more involved in public decisions; they want to avoid them.

If Columbia and Missouri piggybacked on the success of Hickman and Rock Bridge high schools Ethic Bowl teams and held a local Ethics Bowl, there is a good chance it would improve civic participation and understanding of government.

Here are five topics that would make for riveting cases for collaborative discussion:

1. Traffic circle design and placement should be subject to a vote of residents within 200 feet of the proposed project.

2. Pets are great companions so everyone, including homeless individuals, should have an opportunity to have one.

3. Rather than rigid K-12 schooling, public education should be from “womb to tomb” with greater flexibility and more parent and student choices.

4. College tuition debt should be forgiven for public service jobs to encourage students to become teachers and social workers.

5. Voting shouldn’t be a right and should be mandatory. Failure to vote would be treated as a parking ticket or failure to take in a roll cart.

My biggest criticism of Ethics Bowls is that there are not enough of them and that not all students have the opportunity to participate in them. Out of 15 million American high school students, about 4,000 students in 34 states participated in Ethics Bowls regional tournaments leading to the national championship in 2023. When these veterans of high school Ethics Bowls age, they will change colleges, and then political campaigns, and then public institutions and communities. People used to believe that making a small difference rippled across society and improved all of us. Missouri Ethics Bowl should aspire to have more high school participants next year.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994. He can be reached at webberd@Missouri.edu

Be in a hurry to read ‘The Anxious Generation’

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, April 8, 2024

Parents of all ages, teachers, policymakers, and all those concerned about the future of American society should read and heed the message of Jonathan Haidt, “The Anxious Generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness” just published last week.

This social science book develops the arguments that the mental health of Generation Z has changed. He presents lots of data showing that the introduction of social media, such as Instagram and Snapchat, accelerated the decline in young America’s mental health starting in about 2013. At first look, the book might have too many numbers, but Haidt is skilled at summarizing data and drawing its implications. Haidt is widely available on YouTube and podcasts, including “The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway: Conversation with Jonathan Haidt — The Kids Are Not Alright.”

Haidt presents graph after graph of reputable data usually from pre-2000 to 2020 indicating that measures of depression, anxiety, emergency room visits and suicide rates for younger adolescents while increasing steadily for years, rapidly accelerated between 2010 and 2014. While true for both boys and girls, he explains why the most immediate affects have been worse for girls, as other studies have also found. Whatever the lasting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic might be, Haidt’s data and analysis is pre-pandemic so it’s likely to be consistent, not counter, to the decline in mental health he describes.

Haidt argues that cellphones, more specifically smartphones providing internet access to social media, most notably Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, caused children to not only have more contact with their peers but caused more comparisons with them. As we have known for some time, information technology has not been a supplement to ordinary activities and daily live. It has become the major activity of daily life. It is not only that information technology use makes us less active and more isolated, it is that developers of engaging apps got into our heads and provide us attractions we cannot resist. Humans, even well-behaved and well-intentioned adults, find it nearly impossible to resist responding to the ping of a notification.

A one-sentence summary of the book suitable for texting might be “Childhood has gone from play-based to phone-based because of The Great Rewiring” of children’s brains. Just think of childhood experiences before smartphones: Kids were running around the neighborhood or local parks organizing tag and games, getting into arguments and fights, and resolving them without parental supervision. Haidt believes this gave them more independence and developed more social skills by providing opportunities to take social risks and learn to deal with other people.

Phone-based childhood is, of course, less active, but has it also reduces children’s independence, social risk-taking and social problem-solving skills. Haidt identifies what he calls “four foundation harms” of this transition in childhood. These are: social deprivation, sleep deprivation, attention fragmentation and addiction. Adult suffer from these too, but a child’s developing brain is particularly affected.

Haidt is careful to differentiate between effects on boys and girls. Haidt finds that girls have high rates of “internalizing disorders” and boys a higher rate of “externalizing disorders.” Adolescent girls tend to seek more social interactions in developing their identifies and seek affirmation of their peers, while boys use information technology to find independence and isolation. The simplest difference is that girls use social media to engage with other humans while boys play computer games. Girls, therefore, are more likely to be vulnerable to insecurities affiliated with social comparisons of beauty attributes while boys tend toward social isolation and “failure to launch” into relationships and employment.

Haidt proposes four actions to reduce this decline in mental health related to social media. These are: encourage more unsupervised play and childhood independence; ban smartphones until kids are 16; prevent social media use until 16; and establish phone-free schools.

Haidt is a parent of high school students and acknowledges the difficulty of taking these four actions. He correctly identifies them as “collective action” problems, “that is, problems that we all may want to solve but it is too hard for us individually to decide and implement on our own.” All parents dislike hearing their teenagers say “but everyone else is doing it,” for they know they are trapped. The remedies must, therefore, be social and political.

Public policies can be adopted to reduce the ills of “phone-based” childhoods. Students have to be 16, or 15-and-a-half, to obtain a driver’s license. The same should be the social practice for smartphones. In situations, where phone communication might be essential due to family circumstances, flip phones without internet connectivity, are an alternative for students under 16.

Schools should prohibit the use of phones past the school’s front entrance. Allowing students to carry phones while banning their use is not effective in schools.

While it is easier prescribed than implemented, we should encourage alternative activities that reduce smartphone use. Sports are one option, of course, but camping, traveling, playing in a band would all be a distraction from social media and also develop social skills and lifelong interests.

While we shouldn’t be too optimistic that today’s political polarization will adopt sufficient changes to phone-based childhood to improve mental health, American public policy offers some successes in changing individual behaviors once thought as fixed social practices. It is estimated that 90%of drivers wear seatbelts and tobacco smoking has declined to 11.5% of adults. Nowadays we hardly think twice about buckling up and enjoying smoke-free air in public places. Changes in social norms and public policies made that happen.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994. He writes twice monthly.

Homeless man’s string of legal problems should have been prevented

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURAIN, March 23, 2024

Since last summer, I’ve been interacting often with Justin Trim, a 33-year-old local homeless man recently charged with stabbing a man downtown.

It’s a sad story that might have been prevented if our legal, social, health and education institutions were different.

Last July, a local group posted on social media that Justin had been released from a hospital and needed food he could consume through a straw. He had been involved in an altercation and was kicked in the head, requiring an operation on his jaw. A Good Samaritan put him up for a few nights at a low-cost hotel, after which two guys let him stay in their room. I delivered protein drinks and bananas to him several times and drove him to the Food Bank. I asked about his income and housing situation and arranged an appointment for him at Love Columbia, but he failed to show up.

Previously, Justin had lost his disability benefits because his identity was stolen. He had a trespassing change for sleeping in a vacant house a year ago.

Justin has nothing. No money, no identification, no disability benefits. As I slowly learned, he really does have nothing — no parents, no siblings, no girlfriend, no driver’s license, no car, no bike, no job, no place to go, no hobbies, no responsibilities, no favorite chair, nothing. It is hard to imagine having nothing.

I have known Justin for about six years from Room at the Inn and Loaves and Fishes and knew that a childhood stroke left him disabled on his right side. He walks with a severe limp and can’t use his right arm to eat or to defend himself. Unfortunately, he is not able to control his mouth. He has no filter, and that gets him in trouble with other homeless guys and people in authority. He is rather resilient; he can be charming; he has a good memory of his past; he never sought my pity. He thanked me when I helped him out. He reminded me of a 13-year-old boy. Justin would be easy prey due his disabilities, his uncontrollable mouth, his desire for social interaction and his insecurities.

On Oct. 12, Justin was arrested for cashing four checks worth $17,000 in Cole County and was incarcerated there with a $10,000 cash-only bail. When I could find no one who had contact with him, I drove to the Cole County Jail. He was in a solo cell “for his own protection” given his disabilities. I talked with him by phone several times, but mostly through instant messages. I tried to explain the legal process as I understood it. His stay was longer than it should have been because there was a misunderstanding about whether he had talked to a caseworker — he thought he had; the judge had no record that he did. It turns out that there are “public defender caseworkers” and “court caseworkers.” It was just one of several misunderstandings compounded by Justin’s disability.

On Dec.6, he was released; I picked him up at the jail and brought him to Columbia. We talked the whole way.

Driving home, I learned he graduated from a Ritenour High School in St. Louis and attended community college for three semesters. He has been robbed several times and lost a lot of electrical equipment that was a source of some income. He had some involvement with foster care. His father, a stepfather, his mother, and a girlfriend died in the past 10 years. He has two uncles, or perhaps step-uncles, one of whom I met, who will have nothing to do with him.

I accompanied Justin to a meeting with his public defender on Jan. 2. The attorney did an excellent job of insisting that he stay focused on the felony charge and suggested a possible plea bargain that would keep him out of jail but require supervised probation. A hearing was set for a few weeks later but was postponed until the end of March. At the beginning of March, the hearing was continued again, without his knowledge, until May because of a public defenders’ meeting.

Since Dec. 6, Justin was staying at Room at the Inn or on the streets. He made some progress with caseworkers to obtain identification and apply for disability benefits and a housing voucher. On March 13 he was arrested for stabbing someone in downtown Columbia. He is being held at Boone County jail without bail for armed criminal action and first-degree assault. He is in a peck of trouble.

The week before his arrest he told me he was set to receive a housing voucher but did not yet know of any housing options. I asked him how he would care for himself, and he thought he was eligible for a personal assistant and could use the OATS van for transportation. Now it’s likely Justin won’t be receiving disability benefits but will get “three hots and a cot” for several years in our correction system — costing society on an average of $34,000 a year.

I am disappointed and frustrated that no one, no organization or government program, was successful in changing the life trajectory fate dealt him. His family life was never stable, he suffered medical disabilities at the age of 12, he did not achieve a stable job. I know the public defender system is overloaded but it was moving at a slow pace, as it does for other homeless cases I have observed.

Room at the Inn and related homeless services gave him a cot out of the cold and some food, both of which are essential, but did not sufficiently assist him in obtaining permanent improvement in his life — one where he would achieve some independence and control or a sense of achievement, one where he had “pride in his past, and hope for the future.”

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994.

Boone County court system has some positive aspects

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, March 8, 2024

Over the past 15 years I’ve escorted about a dozen homeless defendants to their court hearings, talked with another dozen or two and observed Boone County courts on many occasions. Just walking into the courthouse on a busy court day it becomes immediately obvious that while the MU campus may be four blocks away, it is a world away in terms of demographic composition, form of organization and freedom of mobility.

The courthouse halls are often full of people unsure of their movements and of the process that may soon alter their lives.

Once the proceedings begin, the judge calls out a name and an attorney or defendant responds. Especially when a defender is represented by a public defender — who each has too many cases to handle efficiently and effectively — it is often the first meeting of legal counsel and a defendant. No wonder requesting a continuance is a frequent legal strategy.

There are many valid criticisms of the criminal justice system as it relates to the less fortunate. It is unrepresentative, seems unfair, depends too much on “ability to pay,” takes too long, seems to be run for the convenience of attorneys, and it is unlikely to instill confidence in the defendants who survive it.

However, there are several positive aspects of our Boone County court system deserving praise. There are:

Boone County does not have paid probation;

Our use of treatment courts;

The municipal court’s community support docket;

The new eviction clinics; and

New phone lockers right inside the front doors.

I will discuss each briefly.

1. In smaller Missouri counties, defendants for misdemeanors and non-violent felonies often receive probation supervised by profit-making private firms. As described in Tony Messenger’s “Profit and Punishment: How America Criminalizes the Poor in the Name of Justice,” the result can be that, in addition to court costs, restitution and a criminal record, a defendant can end up being billed for “probation supervision,” unnecessary substance testing and job-training meetings that merely increase private firm revenues. This is paid probation.

Boone County does not have private probation that can access fees. Back in the 1980s, to reduce the Boone County jail population, Boone County created Adult Court Services that completes bond investigations, supervises defendants who are electronically monitored, and supervises defendants placed on probation.

2. Treatment courts use individual treatments of counseling, team support, monitoring and accountability reports rather than incarcerating a person arrested and charged with a crime. Drug courts are the best-known treatment courts but there are DWI courts, family courts, mental health courts and veteran courts. If the prosecutor agrees, rather than sitting in jail, offenders agree to be honest, meet with their management team, submit to substance testing and attend regular meetings. Treatment courts usually have a prescribed curriculum that the offender works through. Treatment court proceedings are less confrontational than traditional court proceedings and involve trained mental health professions with a judge overseeing the offender’s progress. Treatment courts can reduce prison populations and therefore costs, but they have additional administrative costs and treatment costs for services purchased from profit and nonprofit counseling services.

3. The Community Support Docket in Columbia Municipal Court is like a treatment court but for local ordinances. Instead of appearing in the Boone County Circuit for violations of Columbia ordinances such as trespassing, traffic and vehicle violations, and petty theft, an offender can appear at 11 a.m. on the first Monday of the month before Judge Cavanaugh Noce to talk about their violation and plan actions to correct his/her behavior to prevent future violations. Noce, in a non-threatening way, simply asks “what three things do you need to improve your life?” Frequent answers are housing, a job, transportation, drug treatment, medical care and to “get my car back.” The judge arranges for caseworkers from local social services agencies to be in attendance and often refers people to “talk with so-and-so to see if they can help.” The offender must return within a month or two to report on progress. Like county treatment courts, Community Support Docket involves a prosecutor who must agree to the offender’s plan of action. The offender can choose to go to the regular criminal process at any time.

4. Mid-Missouri Legal Services has started a weekly “Eviction Clinic” on Thursday mornings to help tenants facing eviction understand what they can do to deal with their situation. Even for college-educated citizens the legal process is a foreign ritual that causes confusion and stress. Most often, the landlord seeking to evict a tenant has a lawyer who speaks the same “foreign language” as the judge and the tenant is alone and confused. This eviction clinic should be expanded to all criminal and civil proceedings involving vulnerable citizens.

5. Finally, while it may sound trivial, phones and other objects can now be stored in lockers at the entrance to the courthouse. This simple change makes the courthouse a more welcoming place for homeless citizens, parents wanting to have closer contact with their children and any visitor who is likely to have forgotten to leave their cellphone elsewhere. I overheard an upset prospective juror who was arguing with the security guard, saying “making me leave my phone in my car just tells any potential thief that I’ll be busy for a while.”

Part of American political culture is respect for the court system that protects the rights of defendants with grand pronouncements by the U.S. and state Supreme Courts. That’s fine but we need to give more attention to the day-to-day operations of the justice system.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994. He now writes twice monthly.

Getting control of America’s gun epidemic

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, February 24, 2024

The shootings in Kansas City after the Super Bowl celebratory parade show the unpredictable madness of the American gun culture. Apparently the two males being charged as adults didn’t know one another but happened to get into an altercation in which guns were instantly drawn. This wasn’t really a “gun fight” but rather an “instantaneous reaction by two guys who had guns.” It was random madness that resulted in the death of an innocent bystander and the wounding of about 25 others, mostly children.

While we don’t yet know the likely causes of the post-parade gun altercation, it does not appear to be gang related, or terrorism, or by a lone crazed madman. It appears to be the result of the random path-crossing of two guys brought up in the American gun culture. One report was that somehow one guy didn’t show the other “respect.” The tenor of the altercation caused guns to be drawn and used because of the availability of guns. Without guns, a few punches may have been thrown, and a few vulgarities hollered that some surrounding fans might have found offensive, but no one would be dead, and 25 bystanders would not have been wounded. But guns changed that.

No killing is justified. Very few shootings are justified, but some, e.g. self-defense, may make sense and be understandable. But, ruining your life, and that of 25 other people, in the blink of an eye over some social altercation, is not only wrong, it also makes no sense. It is road rage without the road. Recently, there was a shooting in a movie theatre because someone was talking and an event in a St. Louis grocery store where a guy pulled a gun after he was accused of having too many items in a self-checkout line.

The U.S. leads the world in senseless fatalities that destroy families and have a chilling effect on community activities. While mass shootings are irksome, they are not a leading type of fatality. Of the approximately 48,830 gun-related deaths in 2021, the most frequent cause of death is suicide. Mass shootings receive lots of media and public attention, but totaled 106 deaths in 2021.

With an estimated 446 million firearms for a population of 330 million people, the United States has 1.3 guns per person. But the majority of Americans do not own a gun. In 2023, 32% of Americans personally own a gun, with another 10% living in a household where someone owns a gun. Forty percent of men compared with 25% of women own guns. Republicans are more likely than Democrats (45% to 20%) to own guns, 47% of people in rural areas own guns compared with 30% in suburbs and 20% in urban areas. Thirty-eight percent of White Americans own guns, compared to 24% of Blacks, 20% of Hispanics and 10% of Asian Americans.

The federal Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, enacted in June 2022, is the most significant change in federal gun laws in 30 years. The law enhances background checks for gun buyers under 21, provides billions of dollars for mental health services and closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole” to prevent convicted domestic abusers from purchasing a firearm for five years. In addition, the law incentivizes states to start crisis intervention programs, clarifies the definition of a federally-licensed firearms dealer and creates penalties for so called “straw purchases” and gun trafficking.

The Pew Research Center surveyed public opinion about the new law, finding surprising results. Two-thirds of U.S. adults (64%) approve of the new gun law, compared to 21% who disapprove. However, most Americans are not optimistic it will do much to reduce gun violence in the country: 78% think the new gun law will do a little or nothing at all to reduce gun violence. About two-thirds (63%) say they would like to see Congress pass another round of legislation to address gun violence, compared with 35% who do not.

American politics have spent decades debating gun control with limited results. There may be a glimmer of hope now that the National Rifle Association appears to be in the midst of financial and generational change that may weaken the NRA’s bloated image as a grassroots organization. I propose that Missouri consider these reasonable changes.

1. Gun ownership should be registered, just like that for vehicles, boats, motorhomes and motorcycles. That will be the extent of gun control for most owners. If a gun is used in a crime, the registered owner will be charged with “failure to control a firearm.’

2. Gun ammunition purchases should require regulation like the purchase of methamphetamine precursor chemicals in cold medicines. Most people accept showing identification and registering their purchase for buying cold medicines. The same should be required for bullets.

3. All gun purchasers, not just those under 21, should be required to submit to background checks. Volunteers at homeless shelters, renters for apartments and some job applicants undergo a background check.

4. State and local government should be encouraged to develop and test “red flag” and other prevention programs.

5. Guns are for adults. Any gun incident should automatically be treated as an adult incident for purposes of immediate disclosure of arrest. Parents should be held responsible for the actions of their children.

6. Open-air, mobile events such as parades should be declared gun free zones for the length of the event and a reasonable pre-setup period and post-takedown period.

7. Communities experiencing a mass shooting should have a local task force asking, “How could this have been prevented?” The task force should identify social, individual characteristics, enforcement and other factors that could have prevented the tragedy.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994. He now writes twice a month.

Taylor Swift, Travis Kelce could reach new heights as power couple

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, February 10, 2024

Super Bowl LVIII with the Kansas City Chiefs and Taylor Swift would have both been huge in 2024, even if Aphrodite had not brought them together.

I am familiar with the long history of the Super Bowl, with the Kansas City Chiefs losing to the Green Bay Packers in Super Bowl I in 1967, but I did not notice the rise of Taylor Swift.

I was unaware of her music and accomplishments until about five years ago. One of first times I heard her name was when a TV reporter asked a young girl what she was going to do after she completed her cancer chemotherapy treatments, she broke into song with “Shake it Off” “just like Taylor would do,” she said.

I’m sure I noticed her name a few other times and probably dismissed her as another teenage pop star who would fade away without the staying power of a Joni Mitchell, a Bruce Springsteen or a Michael Jackson.

In 2022 I saw that Swift was awarded an honorary doctorate degree by New York University. As a sucker for most things academic, I checked it out on YouTube. I was impressed.

She is a captivating storyteller who projects humility, wisdom and political savvy.

In self-deprecating style, she pronounced “I’m pretty sure the only reason I was selected is because I have a song “22” and the NYU graduates went wild — like she was Elvis or the Beatles.

Having not heard of “22,” I checked it out. I can see why the song is so popular — it’s a catchy tune with a good story. It captures the mixed sentiments of generations of college graduates at age 22.

She went on to describe how “we are a patchwork quilt of our experiences” and that “someone read to you, explained things to you, explained why we eat salad but don’t eat grass.

She advised the grads to express their gratitude to those who helped them in “your steps and missteps.”

Swift said, “I won’t give you advice, because no one likes that, but I will give you some life hacks that I wish I knew when I started my out my career about navigating life, love, pressure, choices, shame, hope and friendship.”

That’s a pretty good list of life topics, especially for a 33-year-old. The single most important message she had for recent college grads might be: “Never be ashamed of trying. Effortless is a myth.”

That NYU speech was about the end of my Taylor Swift education until this Travis Kelce thing came along. Something big was growing.

Granted, everyone follows a celebrity romance, but Swift had an army of followers waiting for some drama. Kelce had last year’s Super Bowl against his brother to bolster his image.

Swift’s selection as Time magazine’s “Person of the Year’ on Dec. 6 first struck me as way too much. How could anyone have more impact on America than a political leader, a business tycoon or the creator of artificial intelligence?

Upon closer examination, however, I see that Time made a credible decision. They cite her entertainment successes — most requested song on Spotify, international popularity of her “Eras” tour, and her economic success of becoming a billionaire.

But one sentence in their announcement haunts me.

They rightly proclaim that 2023 was a rather dark year and that she was one of the few lights. They wrote, “In a divided world where too many institutions are failing, Taylor Swift found a way to transcend borders and be a source of light. No one else on the planet today can move so many people so well.”

By golly, I think Time got it.

Swift’s lasting impact may be on the recording industry where she has challenged the practice of artists signing away the rights to a recording company at the infancy of their careers when young artists are full of ambition but short on legal expertise.

Taylor Swift, and now by association, Travis Kelce, may be on the leading edge of an era of niceness and brightness. They are likable, skilled at their professions, comfortable at being in the public eye in the social media age yet aim to protect their privacy.

They appear to be genuinely nice people. One survey found that 70% of Americans like Swift. They may be riding the leading edge of a wave of America’s frustration and “fed-up-ness” with division and negativity.

Kelce has maybe two to three years remaining in his Hall of Fame professional football playing career; Swift has another two or three decades.

I imagine Kelce will maintain his “New Heights” podcast with his brother and expand his public image and community involvement wherever he is. Swift has the opportunity to maintain her musical achievements and visibility.

My hope is that Kelce becomes a bit more serious, and that Swift focuses her song writing increasingly on social issues. I think they will; aging tends to do that.

So how did I miss the rise of Taylor Swift? First, if I had habitually watched the annual Grammy Awards, I would have noticed her repeat performances.

Second, if my playlist was not almost exclusively Bruce Springsteen and 1970s folk music, I would have known that Swift had a lot more to say than just “Shake it Off.”

Those helping take care of people in need should be nurtured

David Webber, January 27, 2024

“Many people would do more social good, if they knew how to do it.” So my mother said back in the 1960s. About 60 years later, I’m thinking she was, and is, right. My hunch is that for every person, stereotypically a man, who yells “Get a job” to a panhandler from inside his secure, protected vehicle, there are a dozen people who would share a meal, provide extra clothes, give a ride, even share a spare bedroom if they could connect and make it work smoothly and safely. Some of them probably volunteer around town, but others would be more involved if they knew how to make it happen

Over the past four years, I’ve distributed Bombas socks, it will be 74,000 pairs by the end of 2024, to low-income and homeless organizations and individuals in mid-Missouri. I mostly distributed the socks through government and nonprofit organizations, but I posted on a local Facebook group that I could provide some socks to anyone who had a way to distribute them to the intended users —“the needy” as my mother would have called them. I was generous but a good steward of the socks so I engaged the sock recipients in conversation.

I particularly remember five women who contacted me last year. One ran a second-hand shop out of her garage on the outskirts of Columbia. When I delivered socks to her, I noticed she didn’t appear all that prosperous. One woman simply took them to her church, which had an “extra clothes” room. I met a third in front of Walmart who said she stopped her old car in public parking and offered clothing out of her trunk. It was a rather old trunk.

One woman told me, “I just know lots of people who need them.” I gave her 75 pairs. I delivered some to a another woman in the Columbia Public Library parking lot who told me how seeing how I distributed socks reinvigorated her and caused her to re-establish her Christmas gift giving to families staying at Welcome Inn and other local low cost hotels. I didn’t see that coming.

Over the past three years, I’ve learned of several women who have gone far beyond distributing socks and actually housed families with children and adult men at their own expense without the support of government or nonprofit organizations. Yes, all of the caregivers I know of are women. I’ve noticed that women volunteers at Loaves and Fishes and Room at the Inn are more frequent than men — but that’s a topic for another column.

I learned of a woman who allowed a unhoused man to stay in her house, intending it would be a few days. She helped him get identification, took her to job interviews and cared for his dog. She was surprised as he slowly took over her kitchen and electronics with no signs of his moving out. Apparently, she never felt her physical safety was at risk but she eventually asked for help to see that he moved out.

Another woman told me she has housed several different men at different times on a neighboring lot on the outskirts of Columbia, encouraging them to do small tasks and gardening. My sense is that she has mixed feelings about her caregiving efforts. She learned that many homeless men have legal, physical and mental issues about which she could do little.

Somewhat similarly, a different woman told me she provided pet food to several homeless men but she ultimately felt unappreciated without seeing much change in their situations. In both cases, these women seemed to have established boundaries due to their physical situations.

Several women have provided short-term shelter to families needing help due to domestic instability, housing problems and job loss. They see themselves as stopgap caregivers, providing help until more permanent housing and assistance can be obtained.

Perhaps the longest ongoing “success” story I am aware is a woman who responded to an anonymous posting on a local Facebook group by a woman on the brink of being evicted from a hotel because of complaints about unruly children who had many disabilities. The potential caregiver responded after realizing that her four bed, threebath house was largely unused because of her two jobs and it needed physical maintenance. It’s been more than a year and a half and the family is still with her, paying a small rent, but more importantly helping her care for the house, too. The caregiver reports that the children have blossomed with stable living, a backyard, and a third person, almost a grandmother, with whom to interact. She wrote, “I am a conservative and so frustrated with the homeless situation in this town. I do feel society just throws money at the problem without bringing any real tangible solutions. The number of people begging for help to find decent housing is terrible. I just think we can’t be the only ones in the situation we both were in, who could benefit from similar solutions …”

What all these caregivers seem to have in common, beyond their compassion, is their belief that society needs to do more and to better —but not necessarily more of what we are currently doing. As I have learned from talking with homeless adults who won’t go to shelters and observing college students at risk, many people don’t do well in institutional settings with well-intended caseworkers structuring their lives.

Columbia has many organizations, such as Love Columbia and the United Way, addressing the needs of families who know how to navigate their processes and have the time and temperament to obtain the services they need. There are lots of potential caregivers and care receivers who would mutually benefit helping one another. There are, of course, the potential obstacles of physical boundaries, clear understanding of the arrangements, any rental agreement and any potential liability. Columbia should find a way to assist and educate more potential caregivers.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994.

Congress will remain our major challenge in 2024

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, January 20, 2024

While the 2024 presidential election could not be over soon enough for most Americans, the central bottleneck in our political logjam — Congress — will persist. I write that with confidence but not with pleasure, for I am an “Article 1 guy.” I believe that the most distinguishing achievement of our Founding Fathers was the establishment of our national legislature with two equal chambers, the House and the Senate, representing the people and the states respectively. A responsible Congress is the keystone of the checks and balances that we were taught in high school civics.

The problem is that there is too much gridlock, too many market-like auctions of political influence, and too little forward-thinking policymaking. Unfortunately, our political system excels at electing, and re-electing, but is not so good at governing.

None of this can be blamed on former president Donald Trump. It is Congress that routinely passes stopgap budget, as members did again this week, and runs an annual deficit. It is the Senate that packed the Supreme Court with political motives, and it is the House that can’t keep a speaker.

These problems are not new. I’ve been looking through some of my political science books and was surprised how old they are. I have a book titled “Tell Newt to Shut Up” by David Maraniss and Michael Weisskopf that won the Everett M. Dirksen Prize for Journalism in 1995. It describes how Newt Gingrich, R-Georgia, who strategized the Republican Party becoming the House majority in 1994, faced increased opposition from House Republican members over his decision to force the first government shutdown in 1995. The books title comes from the Republican members coming back from their 1995 Thanksgiving break with reports that their Republican constituents made two requests: 1) balance the budget and 2) tell Newt to shut up. Way back 30 years ago some Republican voters were uncomfortable with the emerging leadership of House Republicans. Newt’s speakership remained rocky, and he resigned from Congress three years later.

Ironically, Sen. Everett Dirksen, the person for whom the award to the authors of “Tell Newt To Shut Up” was named, was a Illinois Republican who served as the Senate minority leader who appeared nearly weekly on national TV newscasts alongside his Democratic counterpart. Can you imagine that happening in 2024?

Today, the House is teetering on the edge of losing its Republican majority. Republicans began the session with a 222-213 majority but are down to 218 members because of resignations. They have passed 24 laws, but no major, self-initiated legislation this year.

The crux of the current governing problem is that Speaker Gingrich institutionalized strict party voting (i.e. all Republicans were expected to vote for the Republican position on leadership votes). Not only does this make the minority powerless, it makes the majority party vulnerable to a small minority of its own members. Since it takes 218 votes to pass major initiatives, as few as five Republican members can gum up the process.

Prior to Gingrich’s ascent in 1995, the Speaker of the House was less a party leader and more of an institutional leader. And there were fewer “party votes.” It was common for dozens of members to not support their party leader’s positions because of political interests back home or because they had an honest disagreement. Furthermore, historically bipartisan policymaking has been responsible for America’s greatest policy successes such as international stability, civil rights progress and natural resources protection through the 20th century. I have a book to support all this, too. It’s Paul Light’s “Government’s Greatest Achievements” published a generation ago in 2002.

A book that still nearly haunts me is “It’s Even Worse than it Looks” by Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, perhaps two of America’s most respected academic observers of Congress. I remember reading it when it was new. It was published in 2012. The subtitle is “How the American constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism.” They attribute much of our political stalemates and congressional inaction to the art and practice of gerrymandering mastered by practically all state legislatures.

Missouri’s legislative districts are surgically drawn by computer-aided cartographers to maximize the power of the party that happens to be in power at the time. You might expect your Columbia neighbor to be in the same congressional district as you. Not so fast. Broadway, through downtown, is the dividing line. In fact, one of our two Columbia congressmen announced last week that he was retiring after this term. If you reside in southern Boone County and east of Broadway, you should know we will have an open seat in the 3rd District, now represented by Blaine Luetkemeyer. Elsewhere in Columbia and Boone County, the 4th District, will likely be represented by current officeholder and former Kansas City TV journalist Mark Alford. I have not seen, or heard, that either was in Columbia this past year because, well, our city has been “fringed out.”

Gerrymandered legislative districts encourage political polarization and congressional gridlock because there are few competitive districts where legislators are forced to compromise and be moderate.

Rather than spending time and brainpower on the politics of MAGA followers or investigating their rivals, members of Congress should be debating and adopting new rules and regulations to constrain a powerful, yet unaccountable, Donald Trump. Congress should propose policies dealing with the Southern border crisis, migrants in other cities, reducing the education slide post-pandemic, increased sea levels on the East Coast, a decaying infrastructure and the economic and privacy loss due to ChatGPT. Congress can do that best when its members forget their party at home and govern, not electioneer. It’s been three decades since the House majority tried to govern as the majority party on the Hill and it hasn’t worked — for either Republicans or our country.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994.

People like ‘Demon Copperheads’ are easy to find right here in Columbia

David Webber, January 5, 2024

Barbara Kingsolver’s novel “Demon Copperhead” caught my attention about a year ago, but I didn’t get to reading it till last month. Perhaps it was the unique names of the author and the main character that first caught my attention.

“Demon Copperhead” is a retelling of Charles Dicken’s classic “David Copperfield” in the context of Appalachia’s struggle with poverty and opioid addictions. Having taught at West Virginia University from 1982 to 1986, I am familiar with how absentee money exploited the resources and people of the region for a century and how in the past two decades Big Pharma flooded it with addictive pain killers.

I seldom read fiction. I’m not bragging, I’m acknowledging a shortcoming. I prefer the clarity of economics and history to remembering all those characters and twists and turns. Nonetheless, I decided to attempt the 548-page novel when I read how Kingsolver mirrored “David Copperfield” after having an imaginary conversation with Charles Dickens, who advised her to “let the boy tell the story.” Corny, but it captured my attention.

Kingsolver is a well-accomplished writer. She received a Pulitzer Prize for Fiction this year and, of course, was an Oprah Book Club selection.

Demon Copperhead is the main character and narrator who recounts his life born into Appalachia without privilege or good fortune. He never had a chance. The first sentence of the book is: “First, I got myself born. A decent crowd was on hand to watch, and they’ve always given me that much: the worst of the job was up to me, my mother being let’s just say out of it.”

So it was that Copperhead was born to a single, drug-addicted mother on the floor of the kitchen of a trailer home; his father had died of a mysterious heart attack before Demon’s birth. The only encouragement I felt to keep on reading was that Demon was the narrator — so if he made it through the whole book, he must have some good fortune.

Kingsolver recounts Demon’s struggles with a nearly helpless mother, an unaccepting stepfather, the uncaring foster care system, a decade of opioid drug addiction initiated with a medical industry new pain-reducing panacea to cope with recovery from a high school football injury. Demon’s one positive twist of fate is that he escapes into Marvel superheroes that sharpened his drawing skills and eventually allow him to earn some money as a cartoonist.

Kingsolver can flawlessly do a teenage boy becoming a young man. From what I’ve read, and learned on YouTube, a reader more literate than I would appreciate Kingsolver’s clever twists of the dozens of characters’ names and experiences that parallel Dickens. I will just applaud her mastery of teenage boys’ and young men’s language, attitudes and experiences.

Three big themes will stick with me. First, how our lives are shaped, if not determined, by fate and the unfairness of it all. Demon, whose formal name was Damon Fields, but got the nickname due his red hair, was born into the Appalachian mountains of southern Virginia with its tobacco and coal economy. The only fairness of it is that none of us chose our parents, birth year or birthplace. Some of us are dealt a good hand, some of us aren’t.

American public policy has thrown a few crumbs for economic and social development into Appalachia where 25 million people are trapped, left behind, or chose to stay.

A second theme Kingsolver reveals, chapter after chapter, is that once life is headed downhill, it just keeps on going. The child of a mother with a substance use disorder is rewarded with low-quality housing, schooling, foster care, job opportunities, peer examples, role models and more parental and family poor choices. Trauma is often and consistent. It’s usually hard to tell the difference between good luck and personal resilience among survivors of misfortune.

Third, there are big policy and societal failures and small policy and societal failures throughout Appalachia. Perhaps the highest order is absentee land ownership of coal and land resources that have allowed exploitation and environmental destruction. Next to that would be the historical political manipulation that has allowed the political system to tolerate, and even encouraged, abuse of local citizens for political and economic gain.

I know, I know: Some people look at mountain top removing (strip mining), acid polluted streams and black lung disease and see the free exchange of resources and labor for pay; other people see social injustice. There are everyday policy failures, too, with poorly implemented foster and hospital care.

“Demon Copperhead” deals with dark topics, but I found the book engaging and inspiring: How is it that Demon can take such a kicking and keep on ticking? Moreover, Kingsolver captures the caring community often found in impoverished towns and neighborhoods. Demon is benefited by a caring grandmotherly neighbor and a long-term football coach who sees mutual benefit in helping Demon’s living situation as Demon helps the school’s football performance.

I’ve met several Demon Copperheads on the streets of Columbia. Men and women born into drugs, poverty, family dysfunction and social instability, followed by unsatisfactory schooling, quite often physical and sexual abuse, a health problem or two and some encounters with the criminal justice system.

On a personal, individual level it is not hard to treat them with kindness and respect; on a policy and societal level it is hard to know how “to solve” the problem. Like Demon, local homeless folks have experienced a wide variety of societal and institutional failures, all of which need to be fixed to reduce the incidence of homelessness America is facing.

Demon is able to complete the task of narrating his own story through the miracle of his indomitable human spirit and getting a small lucky break here and there. Whether this conclusion is a mean false or not depends on the reader, I suppose. Kingsolver left me clinging to that hope but knowing that the odds are too often long.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first column for the Missourian in 1994.

Course on homelesness offers ideas and hope

David Webber, Columbia MISSOURIAN, December 15, 2023

This fall semester, and in fall 2022, I offered an MU Honors College class on “Homelessness in America.” Because I have taught Asian government officials in the MU Asian Affairs program since I retired in 2013, I was a little apprehensive, yet eager, to teach Mizzou undergraduates again.

I was challenged by creating a course on homelessness, a wide-ranging topic about which I am unaware of similar courses, and I was curious about current undergraduate students who are often portrayed as unread, addicted to social media and unable to write more than 100 characters.

More than half the class were hard science majors, about a quarter were in public health, and only a few in political science and journalism, my more familiar draw. Fourteen of 18 students were women, a bit higher ratio than other Honors courses.

I am an interactive instructor fundamentally because I am interested in how other people think about a topic. I aim to get every student involved in class discussions and aspire to fit their contributions into the flow of the course. I remember every student’s name and often I recall what they have said in previous classes, reminding them at pivotal times.

Compared with last year’s syllabus, I decided to include less political science, e.g. federalism, role of government and public opinion surveys, and more common-sense analysis and personal experiences of homelessness using videos and an experienced caseworker’s book. Additionally, rather than merely suggest students visit a local homeless shelter, I made visiting Harbor House a class outing. Furthermore, rather than reviewing the assigned reading I required every student to review a chapter in one of the two required books

The most notable feature of the semester, however, was the learning benefits of what may be my original contribution to pedagogy: the missed class essay. In about 2000, I lost interest in bickering with students about “excused absences” for “official university activities” such as athletics, band and conferences as well as “family emergencies” and grandparent funerals.

Somehow, I came up with the “missed class essay” where students lose 10 points for any class absence but can restore them by posting a class-relevant essay on the class cyber bulletin board for each absence — no questions asked. While it worked well in previous semesters, this homelessness class gets the gold medal.

Their missed class essays, exactly 48 of them, were well done, interesting and often well-tailored to the student’s interest. One student missed 12 classes because of family reasons and travel time, and another missed nine, evidently because of lab work for his major interest. They both probably learned more by writing the missed class essays than if they had attended class. The remaining 16 students wrote 27 missed class essays — fewer than two classes each. Four didn’t miss any. I sensed no resentment to the “missed class essay.” Several times I referred to a specific essay in class or to another student. I saw them as essays on 48 homelessness-related topics not selected by me or the authors.

A critical point in the semester came when several students wrote and voiced their objections to one of the book author’s “snarky” and “condescending” tone. While I often invite students to disagree with me and the readings, it was refreshing to witness it happening.

Two local adults spoke to the class, one was in and out of foster homes in her youth and tended to her homeless father, and the other is a recently unhoused 60-year-old man who is digging his way out of the hole of homelessness. Additionally, we welcomed a Missouri state government program administrator and a Kansas City nonprofit organization executive director, both former MU political science students, to talk about their careers, but also how they managed the life-work balance. They related children’s poverty, neglect and abuse, and affordable housing to homelessness. A class member’s efforts resulted in us listening to a speaker on human trafficking.

Each student was asked to post an original ChatGPT request to “write an 800-word essay about some aspect of homelessness.” Topics selected include “big topics” such as the effectiveness of “housing first” initiatives and “harm reduction drug programs” to more practical issues such as “should shelters be required to house pets owned by homeless guests?” The number of class members selecting a childhood or youth topic moved those topics up the priority scale.

The highlight of the semester was students proposing a policy resolution to address an aspect of homelessness. There were proposals for better delivery of medical assistance, for addressing subpar parenting and foster care deficiencies, for providing incentives to landlords to accept rental vouchers, for establishing harm reduction sections of shelters, and for employing shelter guests to do some of the tasks now done by volunteers. Two topics new to me related to providing physical therapy and dental services to homeless people. A controversial proposal was the “Homeless Pet and People Initiative” that provides an incentive for animal care facilities to hire homeless people so that they had access to pets and required shelters to house pets owned by homeless people.

Two takeaways from the semester emerged and were reinforced by several speakers and readings. First, “housing first” may have been an effective attention-grabbing slogan a decade ago, but housing without “wraparound services” relating to mental health, nutrition and financial counseling is not likely to have long-lasting positive impacts. Second, the slogan “a person doesn’t become homeless when they run out of money, they become homeless when they run out of relationships” should cause us all to pause and think “how did this person get into this situation and how can other cases be prevented? “

While not a cross section of college students, or even MU’s student population, these students proved to be thoughtful, motivated, interested, skillful and respectful to one another. I expect they will be compassionate and informed doctors, dentists, lawyers, EMTs, therapists, scientists, teachers, government officials and parents.

David Webber joined the MU Political Science Department in 1986 and wrote his first colun for the Missourian in 1994. He writes twice monthly.