Who could have thought that May would bring us so many hues of green?

We feel refreshed just by slowly gazing at the trees in all their newborn shades. For a brief period, our thoughts can turn away from the bold black headlines of the daily news, and our ears can silence the angry voices that disturb our equilibrium.

It is restorative to rediscover the delicate green leaves that have emerged, seemingly out of nowhere, slowly unfolding themselves in delicate filigree patterns against the blue sky. The heavy evergreens assert themselves on hillsides by both their stately size and their well-defined dark clusters.

We learned in kindergarten that by mixing blue and yellow, we create the color green. But which artist played with those paints so happily and endlessly to give us this almost infinite palette of greens? Layers and layers of green are set one upon the other, sometimes framing fields, a deep brown, freshly tilled and slightly damp soil waiting to be sown.

The onset of spring follows a familiar pattern; it is a gift of renewal, of rebirth. We have witnessed this miracle ever since our own birth, even before we were conscious of it. Why then, does the advent of spring still surprise?”

Sometimes I want to brush against the newborn leaves, gently, carefully, so as not to impede their growth.

The onset of spring follows a familiar pattern; it is a gift of renewal, of rebirth. We have witnessed this miracle ever since our own birth, even before we were conscious of it. Why then, does the advent of spring still surprise?

Could we have harbored doubts in those gray, sullen days of winter, doubts that it might not return in full bloom?

Were we afraid that perhaps this year, with all the foreboding that accompanies climate change, we would have to confront a modified spring, one without myriad greens, even one without bird song?

No, not yet. Spring is here, as expected. We need not fear a silent spring, as Rachel Carson warned, when she wrote her book 50 years ago. Thanks to her, birds still alight on tree branches, build their nests of leaves and twigs and sing their songs of procreation.
See if you can spot a robin red breast high up in the branches, more visible in spring than in high summer. Breathe in the sweet exhalations of buds and wildflowers.

Yes, spring has returned to Vermont. Just as we dreamed all winter, that it would.

VTDigger

Contact
Briggs, Michael (Sanders)
Sen. Bernie Sanders office

Bill Introduced to End Conflicts of Interest at the Federal Reserve

WASHINGTON, May 22 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today introduced legislation to prohibit banking industry executives from serving as directors of the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is an original co-sponsor of the measure to end conflicts of interest involving regulators and the financial institutions they regulate. She joined Sanders at a Capitol news conference. Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) also is a co-sponsor of the bill.

A Government Accountability Office audit – conducted pursuant to a Sanders provision in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform law –found that allowing members of the banking industry to both elect and serve on the Federal Reserve’s board of directors creates “an appearance of a conflict of interest” and poses “reputational risks” to the Federal Reserve System.

The recent multi-billion-dollar trading loss at JPMorgan Chase underscored the need to structurally reform the Federal Reserve System to make a more democratic institution responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans, not just Wall Street CEOs.

“It is a blatant conflict of interest for Jamie Dimon, the CEO and chairman of JPMorgan Chase, to serve on the New York Fed’s board of directors,”Sanders said. “If this is not a clear example of the fox guarding the henhouse, I don’t know what is.”

“Allowing bank presidents to play such an important role at the Fed – the institution that regulates their industry – is a conflict of interest, plain and simple, and it must come to an end. This legislation will help restore the confidence of the American people that the Fed is a truly independent entity,” Boxer said.

The Federal Reserve is responsible for both supervising the financial services sector and deciding whether to provide bank holding companies low-interest loans through the discount window.

Under current law, two-thirds of the Federal Reserve Bank board members are directly appointed by the financial services industry and one-third of the Fed directors are employed in the financial services industry that the Fed is in charge of regulating.

Under the legislation, no one who works for or invests in a firm eligible to receive direct financial assistance from the Fed would be allowed to sit on the Fed’s board of directors or be employed by the Fed.

The measure also would prohibit Federal Reserve employees or board members from owning stock or investing in companies that the Fed oversees, regulates and supervises without any exceptions or waivers.

VTDigger

Every year, as the General Assembly works toward final adjournment, legislators know that they must pay very close attention to every bill coming up for action, as efforts to attach or hide various provisions in pieces of legislation becomes a favored way of doing business.

That said, the shenanigans started early this year – in the Fiscal Year 2013 Appropriations bill as it passed the House, and its relationship to this year’s health benefits exchange bill and our state’s health care reform efforts, in general.

When it was introduced earlier this year, the Health Care Reform Implementation Act included provisions to repeal the Catamount Health program and the Catamount Assistance program. At the same time, though, it maintained the Catamount Employer Assessment, the monthly assessment that employers must pay to fund the program.

When some members of the House Health Care Committee objected to this, the repeals were removed entirely.

Unfortunately, the FY 2013 budget, as passed the House did, in fact, eliminate the Catamount program (though not in bill language, just in a line item), but kept in place the employer assessment, and transferred those funds to the State Health Care Reform Fund (SHCRF). We now find that the elimination and transfer language was nestled into the 2012 budget adjustment bill, a bill that usually deals only with minor adjustments to the current year budget and avoids matters with significant policy implications.

It is simply unfair to collect $9.8 million from our state’s small businesses to pay for a program that no longer exists. If our newest health care reform efforts require an additional $9.8 million, that money should come from the General Fund.”

In addition to the objections to the shifty way this was done, there are two significant issues about which to be concerned.

The first is simple fairness. It is simply unfair to collect $9.8 million from our state’s small businesses to pay for a program that no longer exists. If our newest health care reform efforts require an additional $9.8 million, that money should come from the General Fund.

The second issue is even more significant. As has become clearly evident, one of the primary goals of our state’s health care reform effort is to decouple health care benefits from employment. In fact, throughout this past year in the debate surrounding health care reform, both the administration and legislative leaders have been very vocal encouraging employers to drop their coverage once the health benefits exchange is in place in 2014. They would like as many Vermonters as possible to enter into the individual exchange market.

But, with the employer assessment still in place, employers who drop their coverage as the administration and Legislature have been encouraging them to do, will be required to pay the monthly assessment – again, for a Catamount program that no longer exists!

Make no mistake, our health care system needs to be reformed. Vermonters cannot continue to afford double digit premium increases. But if any reform is going to work, it must be fair and it must be transparent. This proposal is neither.

VTDigger

Vermont small businesses may be missing out on $45.64 million annually in health care tax credits available under the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA), according to a new report released by Families USA and the Small Business Majority.

The ACA provides for federal tax credits for small businesses with fewer than 25 full-time employees and average annual wages of less than $50,000. The report estimates that in 2011 Vermont had approximately 10,350 small businesses eligible for the credit, employing 47,200 workers. The average credit per worker is estimated to be $966 annually.

Despite what some groups have been saying, the Affordable Care Act is good for small businesses. This tax credit offers real money to small businesses struggling to provide health insurance for their employees.”

Despite what some groups have been saying, the Affordable Care Act is good for small businesses. This tax credit offers real money to small businesses struggling to provide health insurance for their employees. We hear from small businesses all the time who want to provide health insurance to their employees but who are not able to do so. This tax credit could really help them. It also could free up money that small business owners could use to reinvest in their business.

To qualify for the tax credit, the small business must pay for at least 50 percent of the employee’s health insurance premiums. The tax credit is worth up to 35 percent of the cost of the health insurance, increasing to 50 percent in 2014 when the health insurance exchange is up and running.

The tax credit is one tool the ACA offers small employers to make it easier to provide insurance. However, if they are not able to or chose not to, their employees will be able to buy insurance through the exchange. Small businesses do not have to pay a penalty if they do not offer insurance. Premium tax credits are available for income up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) and cost-sharing subsidies are available up to 250 percent. Four hundred percent FPL is approximately $92,000/year for a family of four and $45,000 for an individual.

VTDigger

The last few years, many of us have complained that our civic leaders, as well as many other adults we know, act like children. Well, maybe they should.

Or at least take stock of themselves as one 8-year-old boy. Recently, he scribbled a short set of rules that could be viewed as a code of conduct, a self-assessment, or both. His mother found the paper when cleaning around the house, and posted it on her Internet blog.

While the commentary is mine, the eight rules (below, in quotes) are exactly as I found them online, in the boy’s handwriting, spelling included:

“Let there be world peace.” As an old soldier, I appreciated this opening salvo. In one all-encompassing swipe, a mandate for ending all wars and living in harmony can’t go wrong. Of course, it’s easier said than done. Human conflict seems to be endemic, almost ingrained in our DNA. Nevertheless, from a collective standpoint, a little serenity would do humanity good.

“Let there be equality among men and women.” This tells me several things. The boy’s household is a dynamic environment where the mother and father have defined roles but pitch in for each other as required, without hesitation. You have to admire his sense of awareness of society’s big picture. At age 8, my view of the big picture was my bike, the kitchen table, and a comic book collection.

While confidence is good, having a big head is not. Even though youth brings with it impulse, bravado and all kinds of inexperience, to see a boy admit it should make the rest of us hang our heads.”

“Ego’s cause suffering.” Yes, they do. As someone who stumbled over his countless times as a youngster, I can attest to the following: While confidence is good, having a big head is not. Even though youth brings with it impulse, bravado and all kinds of inexperience, to see a boy admit it should make the rest of us hang our heads.

“being kind ends suffering.” This statement is so loaded, from the jocular to the sublime. Its premise, though, is no joke. Suffering is a tremendously broad concept, encompassing poverty, hunger, abuse and a myriad of maladies that can, as our young scribe advised, be wiped away with the broad brush of benevolence — whatever form it takes. From the mouths of babes, indeed.

“the bible proves faith.” Clearly, the boy is growing up with spiritual guidance — in this case, that of the Judeo-Christian persuasion. In the highly subjective, personal and often polarizing and controversial world of global religious fervor, the statement’s simplicity speaks volumes to the moral potential within all of us.

“Do not drink or smoke.” Look, I like a glass of wine with my dinner as much as the next person, or a frosty brew on a hot day. But I was also the son of a chain-smoker who repulsed me by the practice, and had to live in a perpetual cloud of tobacco smoke. Yet, in legal recreational matters of personal choice, I always contend to each his own, and excess will lead to consequences — as they did for my father. Enough said.

“belive the bible.” See comments above. We could do a lot worse.

“You are born with 3 things: your body, your belief and your soul.” Coming from an 8-year old, the insight is stunning. As a professional writer and a teacher of college writing, one thing I work on diligently, and emphasize to my students, is the importance of closing. The end of a piece needs to leave the reader with a lasting impression. The purpose or lesson therein carries on in the mind’s eye to see another day, and be passed along.

With his closing line, the boy left me speechless. As I tell my students, spelling is the easiest thing to fix, but you can’t fake the substance. He didn’t fake a thing.

So maybe all of us can take a page out of this young man’s scribbly notebook. His parents should have been rightly proud when coming across these musings. Maybe in a few years he can write the book on how to tackle this strange journey called life.

Adults among us, take notice.

VTDigger

There are times that I believe we in Vermont could really advance our economic standing if only we ceased thinking in small terms. Just because our state is quite small — geographically as well as in population, ranked 48th or so — is no reason our quests for bigger and larger things should be limited. Three such areas would be art, salaries and housing.

Those who are engaged in creating or selling works of art in Vermont represent a fairly large segment of the state’s economy. It would seem there is at least one art gallery in every Vermont village, town or city. In some cases there might even be a half dozen or more. The common thread among them is that the artworks being offered for sale are priced between the low hundreds to the low thousands of dollars — not asking enough, according to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal.

The press reported recently that the late Edvard Munch’s painting “The Scream” sold for $119.5 million at a Sotheby’s auction. “The Scream” now joins an exclusive club — Picasso’s “Boy with Pipe,” $104 million; Giacometti’s “Walking Man I,” $104.3 million; and another Picasso, “Nude, Green Leaves and Bust,” sold for $106.5 million.

The April 29 New York Times noted that Rothko’s “Orange, Red & Yellow” might sell at auction between $35 million and $45 million along with a Warhol (“Double Elvis”) in the range of $30 million-$50 million. Is there a dollar limit?

If you are not into art, then think bigger when it comes to what it is you can be paid in salary for your services. Thirty, 40, 50 or even a hundred thousand dollars a year is just not commensurate with what is taking place in some areas.

Here is a sampling according to CNN Money: in 2010, Les Moonves’ (CBS) salary was $56.9 million, Phillipe Dauman (Viacom) topped out at $84.5 million, Ray Irans (Occidental Petroleum) was a bit less at $76.1 million. Way down the salary scale were John Lundgrew (Black & Decker) at $32.6 million and Richard Brauken (HCA) a low $29 million. When it comes to what we think our services are worth, in Vermont, we are just not embracing the concept of largeness.

However, it is in the area of our home sales that I believe we really are not focusing on the “big picture” compared with other parts of the country.

Candy Spelling (Aaron Spelling’s widow) sold her 123-room house for $85 million, which is down from the $150 million asking price, to the 22-year-old daughter of Bernie Ecclestone of Formula One fame.”

It could be that the New York Times is trying to call our attention to the problem with our way of thinking when it comes to pricing our homes. In the same edition as noted above, the paper reported on a recent sale in Los Angeles.

Candy Spelling (Aaron Spelling’s widow) sold her 123-room house for $85 million, which is down from the $150 million asking price, to the 22-year-old daughter of Bernie Ecclestone of Formula One fame. Ms. Ecclestone wanted some geographical balance to her housing needs. Halfway around the world is Ms. Ecclestone’s 20,000-square-foot, $87 million London residence.

Ms. Ecclestone did herself well by holding off to buy Spelling’s 56,000-square-foot home. She could have been saddled with David Saperstein’s $125 million Los Angeles estate, which she initially looked into.

Closer to home, if that is the right phase, Sanford Weill’s New York’s Central Park location home recently sold for $88 million. As with the Spelling castle, this piece of NYC went to the daughter of a Russian billionaire, who has his own $100 million residence in Palm Beach, Fla., according to the New York Times.

Now that I’ve had time to reflect maybe thinking small is not so bad after all. What in the world would I do with a 56,000-square foot house that can also accommodate parking for 100 cars? I would definitely require a GPS device to find my way around the estate. Furthermore, I don’t know an ample number of folks to fully utilize the available parking.

And insofar as art collection, I’m perfectly happy with my Norman Rockwell and Winslow Homer prints. For those who pay millions of dollars at auction for artworks, I’m sure their purchases are not hanging on their living room walls.

There may be a world outside Vermont that pays tens of millions for salaries, art and home purchases but does it come with peace and tranquility?

VTDigger

When several hundred people turned out to the Air Force’s draft environmental impact statement (EIS) hearing on basing the new F-35 bomber at Burlington’s airport (May 14), things didn’t begin well. For the first 20 minutes Sens. Sanders and Leahy, Rep. Welch, Gov. Shumlin and others issued statements declaring their unconditional support for the basing.

What about the nice flow chart laid out by the Air Force showing the environmental review process? Clearly, it didn’t matter. With contempt for the basic democratic process of a legally required review, Vermont’s political establishment confirmed that “Whatever the cost, environmental or social, it’s worth it.”

They were joined by an entourage of the local 1% who agreed that costs don’t matter. Another 20 minutes were taken up by the CFO of Fletcher Allen Health Care, the owner of Engelberth Construction, IBM spokespersons, college presidents, and other assorted Chamber of Commerce and business leaders invoking purported possibilities of economic calamity, protecting freedom, patriotism, the “war on terror,” 9/11, and the Vermont Guard’s role in Tropical Storm Irene response last year (although I missed the part where the F-16s aided flood victims) to push all recognition of F-35 environmental and social impacts off the table.

After this scripted attempt to intimidate anyone who dared to address the EIS, there were many great statements from people who actually read the document and care about what it says, and what it fails to investigate. Even with the poor F-35 data (the bomber’s development is not completed yet) used in the EIS, many things are clear: The F-35 will be significantly louder (maybe four times louder) than the current F-16s that bring classrooms to a halt and leave children cowering in their yards. The effect on affordable housing and working class neighborhoods will be significant, yet the EIS barely explores the subject. That the bomber’s mission is actually not wonderful, but as a plane designed to bomb the Middle East and Asia and potentially carry nuclear weapons, its function is widely unpopular. In fact, the F-16s have played a major role in the colonial occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Here is a video from the U.S. siege of the city of Fallujah early on in the Iraq war showing the F-16 indiscriminately bombing a couple dozen Iraqis walking down a street. (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BUN410A.html) Be prepared for your stomach to drop, but let’s be honest about the role of U.S. bombers like the F-16 and F-35.

This hearing was the “dog and pony” show that some F-35 basing opponents warned about. The next time the Air Force and the congressional delegation hold a “public” meeting on the F-35, a protest is in order.

VTDigger

By the end of April, when members of the Vermont House Agriculture Committee finally concluded weeks of testimony and discussion on H.722, a bill that would require foods made with genetically engineered (GE) ingredients to be labeled, one thing had become very, very clear: Many thousands of Vermonters have strong concerns about the unknown health and environmental impacts of GE foods and want them labeled so that they can know if the food they buy and feed to their families is, or isn’t, GE-free.

An estimated 75 percent of processed, packaged foods found on supermarket and natural food store shelves in Vermont and throughout the country contain GE ingredients derived from GE corn, soybeans, sugar beets or other GE plants. In 2010 these GE crops were planted on over 165 million acres of U.S. farmland. As the number of new GE grains, vegetables and animals continues to grow, so too will the prevalence of foods containing GE ingredients.
Unfortunately, H.722 was not passed by the end of this legislative session. But, of course, Vermonters’ longstanding concerns about GE foods remain and the number of people who desire to avoid them continues to grow.

So, it is not surprising that, in Vermont and throughout the country, the production and sales of USDA certified organic foods continues to expand. In fact, surveys conducted by the Organic Trade Association have found that over 80 percent of organic consumers cite avoidance of GE foods as a major reason for their purchases.

From the beginning of the USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) in 2002, rules and standards that govern the production of certified organic crops, animals and processed foods have prohibited all methods “used to genetically modify organisms or influence their growth and development by means that are not possible under natural conditions or processes.” This means that all seeds, animals, food ingredients, animal feeds, and production inputs used in certified organic production must not be produced using genetic engineering.

In order for a farm, food manufacturer or food handling facility to become certified organic they must comply with a broad range of NOP rules and standards pertaining to health, environmental and sustainability practices, of which prohibition of GE methods is only one. All certified operations are visited and inspected at least yearly by trained inspectors employed by one of over 50 USDA Accredited Certifying Agencies across the country.

In Vermont, the Vermont Organic Farmers, LLC (VOF), the certification program of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, inspects and certifies over 580 farms and food facilities. Operators must demonstrate compliance with these standards and present complete records, including, among other things, sales receipts and affidavits that prove the non-GE status of all purchased inputs. Failure to comply with these requirements can lead to decertification.

This rigorous third-party certification process is guaranteed each time you see the green and white “USDA Organic” label or the logo of certifying agencies such as VOF; the same process applies to products labeled “Made with Organic,” which include at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients. (No ingredients in the “Made with Organic” category, whether organic or non-organic, can be produced using GE.)

Of course, no system is without challenges and opportunities for improvement. For example, in Vermont, as elsewhere in the world, GE crops are increasingly prevalent and pose serious risks of GE genetic contamination of certified organic seed stocks, ingredients and organic supply chains. Organic farmers, processors, certifying agencies and the National Organic Program are all working very hard to identify effective methods and standards to prevent and mitigate these risks.

Rigorous standards, professional third-party inspection and certification protocols, and continuous improvement are the hallmarks of USDA certified organic foods. They are what makes the USDA organic label the standard for consumers who care deeply about the safety and the integrity of the food that they buy and feed their families.

VTDigger

The Vermont stage has a new play. The cast includes the Governor, the Legislature, the Department of Public Service (DPS), the Public Service Board (PSB), three Energy Utilities (GMP, CVPS and Vermont Gas Systems, aka VGS), Ratepayers (aka citizens) and a Wizard (aka Gaz Metro) who lives in a (not so) far away land called Canada.

As the curtain rises on Act 1 we learn that the plot centers on the Wizard wanting to bring eternal bliss to the Kingdom of Vermont by joining together one member of his family (GMP) that moves electrons with another electron mover in Vermont (CVPS).

The Governor and the CEO of GMP (who also plans special events for the Governor) thinks the marriage is a great idea. One of the Wizard’s other family members is VGS that has been providing small gas molecules to 45,000 Vermonters for a long time.

The Governor and his spokesperson, the DPS, have been so happy with the Wizard and VGS that they encouraged the PSB to grant permission to VGS to retain (permanently) a legally mandated refund of $88 million over 20 years owed to 45,000 current VGS customers so that 3,000 new customers in Addison County can have access to the small gas molecules that VGS distributes.

One disagreeable citizen complains that the PSB order (#7712) means that over 20 years 15 average customers in Chittenden and Franklin counties, including Vermonters with incomes below the poverty line, are going to be forced to contribute (in aggregate) between $19,000 and $29,000 so that one new customer in Addison County can heat their home with natural gas, with all dollar profits going to the Wizard.

The disloyal citizen grumbles that the Wizard’s greatest magic is making Vermonters’ hard-earned dollars disappear and then reappear in Canada.

Some in the Legislature, and one member of the PSB, also complain that the Wizard already has lots and lots (and lots) of money, so why are Vermont citizens subsidizing an expansion in which the Wizard keeps all the profits.

The Chief of the DPS dismisses the objections of those opposed to the expansion’s financing by saying that the expansion is a public good. Another disloyal citizen mumbles that the fact that a reverse Robin Hood syndrome may be occurring with low-income Vermonters subsidizing the expansion and all profits going to the wizard represents a most unusual definition of a public good.

In Act 2, we see that the marriage between GMP and CVPS has hit a Vermont pothole. Many in the Legislature think corporate trickery is on the loose when they discover that the soon-to-be-married couple will refuse to repay in cash money one of them (CVPS) needed to obtain from its customers during financial hard times.

The newlyweds would rather donate the money to a cause that the Governor’s supporters think highly of, and then require that 250,000 customers in the newly merged company pay for the newlywed’s entire donation. Some current GMP customers grumble that they will be forced to pay for debt obligations of a company they were never part of, while the Wizard becomes even richer.

In Act 3, we see an all-out effort by the Governor, the GMP CEO, and the DPS to ensure the marriage happens. The Governor issues a royal decree stating the Legislature should not meddle in affairs of state even though legislators represent citizens (aka ratepayers) who reside in a (representative) democracy.

The GMP CEO issues her own proclamation saying the marriage is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and extraordinary financial benefits will come to Vermonters if they put their trust in the Governor, the DPS, the PSB, and of course the Wizard and members of his family. The scene ends with one disloyal citizen muttering: “Didn’t Bernie Madoff make similar promises to his investors?”

Act 4 will follow after a short intermission.

VTDigger

The latest trend in American politics is for conservatives and liberals to point to Europe as some kind of economic herald. This is especially true when relating the current recession to how we should vote in November.

We’re told so much is at stake — the usual mantra when it’s time to select a chief executive. What no one points out, though, is how the American political system is largely dissimilar to Europe’s and, except in rare instances, resistant to meaningful change.

In essence, our society is the axis of a sine curve: Middle of the road, with just enough fluctuations to satisfy Republicans, Democrats and independents. Eventually, it kicks extremists to the curb. This makes the “let’s look at what’s trending in Europe” an exercise in demagoguery. Since 2010, Greece’s economic crisis best illustrates the dynamic. Conservatives have latched on to it as a harbinger for what’s facing us. Wonks such as Rep. Paul Ryan have offered up nothing but a “slash and burn” budget diet to the point of indigestion. They’ve used Greek austerity measures imposed by the European Union as their paradigm.

But the ethos of Greek society is fundamentally different than the U.S. — in ways too lengthy to explain here. Trying to frame ours in the context of Greece’s darkest parallels is way over the top.

Liberal voices aren’t innocent here, either. Just this week, Paul Krugman went down that road in his New York Times op-ed. He proclaimed a European voter “revolt” against austerity measures, manifested in France and Greece’s recent elections.

Predictably, Dr. Krugman focused on the Socialist victory in France. But he made only a passing reference to Greece. There, Socialists were taken to task, finishing in third place just two years after winning in a landslide — all because they were the first to implement the E.U.’s “slash and burn.”

The real lesson we can take from Europe is that politicians will say anything to get elected. In Paris and Athens, both Socialists and conservatives decided to feed the pig and rule the day, even though in Greece the latter’s weak plurality might lead to further instability in the absence of a coalition government.

On this side of the Atlantic, one of our major problems isn’t the size of the federal government; it’s waste. The nature of our public sector budgeting doesn’t reward efficiency and thriftiness. For example, the term “use it or lose it” is a ubiquitous command heard from federal supervisors at the end of each fiscal year. Instead of awarding budget increases and incentives to those agencies that save taxpayer money yet still get the job done, we strip away their funds. The surplus is handed over to bigger spenders, who burn through it to secure the expected annual uptick.

This goes back to how the American system works. Constitutional powers granted to the 50 states are globally unique. While the federal government has grown in scope past anything the Founders could have imagined, there remain 50 other ways to hang ourselves — or survive. Such choices to control smaller destinies at the state level are not afforded to Europeans with their monolithic central governments.

Ultimately, the U.S. needs a prudent balance of cuts and spending. Also, let’s consider a modest and time-limited national sales tax — the fairest type of revenue — raised strictly toward paying down the national debt, and building a surplus to buttress the economy against future dips.

Polls consistently show nearly two-thirds of Americans are moderate pragmatists. As much as we’ve grimaced over the current political divisiveness, it’s nothing compared to how vitriolic things get in Europe. The only reason we hear the shouting is because ideologues from both parties spend most of their time doing so.

Yes, on some focused issues, such as debt management, currency floating and bailouts, the U.S. can learn from European mistakes. But drawing societal conclusions from Europe as a whole is more of an exercise in politics than economics. Especially with the White House at stake, it has become de rigueur to advance any notion for electoral gain. And that’s the real business of Mr. Ryan and Dr. Krugman, whether from the Beltway or Princeton.

If we allow overtly partisan stances to have us look to Europe as a preview of our voting choices, then we’ll reduce ourselves to nothing more than a herd of sheep led to pasture by wolves.

VTDigger