FREE WHITEWATER

Daily Bread for 8.30.11

Good morning.

For Whitewater today, afternoon showers with a high temperature of seventy-eight.

There are myriad consequences of a recession, but here’s one of which I’ve heard only now – Recession-sensitive parenting: Child rearing by mothers with gene variant became more aggressive.  An NYU researcher noted the susceptibility of some mothers:

Recent economic woes in the United States may have triggered a temporary upturn in the use of harsh parenting methods by mothers carrying a particular gene variant.

Mothers who inherited either one or two copies of a particular form of the dopamine D2 receptor gene, dubbed DRD2, cited sharp rises in spanking, yelling and other aggressive parenting methods for six to seven months after the onset of the economic recession in December 2007, sociologist Dohoon Lee of New York University reported August 22 at the American Sociological Association’s annual meeting.

Hard-line child-rearing approaches then declined for a few months and remained stable until a second drop to pre-recession levels started around June 2009, the research showed.

Mothers who didn’t inherit the gene variant displayed no upsurge in aggressive parenting styles after the recession started, Lee and his colleagues found.

It’s another reason to favor prosperity.

 

Daily Bread for 8.29.11

Good morning.

It’s a sunny day ahead in the Whippet City, with a high temperature of eighty-one.

There’s a meeting of the Whitewater CDA today from 4.30 to 7 p.m., a portion of which will be in closed session.  The agenda is available online.

It turns out that not all worker ants are identical in their role within a colony, as previously thought.  Some are more influential than others —

Some worker ants are more equal than others.

As with other social insects, it was once thought that workers were essentially equivalent in ant colony hierarchies. But it appears that a few well-informed individuals shape group decisions by leading nestmates to new homes.

The findings could add a new dimension to ant-derived models of self-organization.

“Although self-organized systems appear very effective under the assumption that all individuals follow the same simple set of rules, the presence of key, well-informed individuals altering their behavior according to their prior experience might generally enhance performance even further,” wrote biologists from the University of Bristol and the University of Toulouse in an Aug. 24 Journal of Experimental Biology paper.

See, Pioneering Ants Challenge Self-Organization Assumptions.

Whitewater’s Next, Permanent Police Chief

I’ve written before about Whitewater’s search for a police chief, now concluded in the selection of Lisa Otterbacher as the city’s next, permanent police chief. (The remaining few steps are procedural, and simply met.) For an earlier post on the search, see During Whitewater’s Police Chief Search.

It was right to conduct a more public search process. Repetition of public processes is better over time.

It’s been only about five months since then-chief Coan’s departure, but as with many managerial departures, it might as well have been five years: people typically look forward, not backward.  Most leaders, whether good or bad, are seldom long remembered – people pay attention to what’s close at hand, not managers who’ve retired.

Among the candidates in the field, two things may be said confidently: there’s no reason to think any was more persuasive than Otterbacher, and all were more persuasive than Coan would have been.  In fact, it’s nearly impossible to imagine Coan being comfortable in so public a process.  He was not supportive of televised commission meetings, as ironically the current commission president — who now lauds this very process — was once not.

Coan’s long presence is both Otterbacher’s advantage and disadvantage.  It’s her advantage, because she follows that long, odd tenure, and is sure to be more conventional (as a genuine value) than Coan was as chief.

But it’s a disadvantage. too, as his long tenure doesn’t represent merely actions that were deeply mistaken, but omissions and inaction, the absence of what should have been.  It’s hard for people to see, and feel, how much better things might have been, all these many years.  What’s been missing entirely is harder to find.

Other towns nearby haven’t had the controversies that Whitewater has had because they didn’t have the chief, and chief’s policies, that Whitewater had; it’s that simple.

It doesn’t matter in the slightest what Otterbacher says of Coan’s long-enduring administration; it matters only how she acts in succession to it. His small but dutiful clique of supporters were useless to him in the end: his tenure ended poorly despite their many efforts, the consequence of own misguided policies.

It wasn’t a public relations problem; it was a policy and perspective problem.  (I doubt among that number there are many who grasp, let alone admit, as much. It’s still true.)

Whitewater makes much, to her disadvantage, of the need for the ‘visionary.’  It’s mostly the neediness of small-town officials, and supposed vision descends into the grandiose, and from there to self-parody.  Coan and Boden exhibited this striving need, as Brunner does now.  It’s like crack for small-town bureaucrats.

(This is why, for so many of them, the answer to a mistake is simply to repeat, ever more absurdly, that all is well.  Their supposed success is always another, sugary press release, another fawning story, away.)

If Whitewater finds some significant measure of normalcy from Otterbacher’s selection, it won’t be a small feat.  On the contrary, if we wind up there after having been where we were, it will be a major accomplishment.

There’s probably no particular direction or perspective that will be necessary for success.  There are certainly some directions and perspectives, having been tried, that are best avoided now.

I’ve no way of knowing how this will turn out, five or ten years on.  Many of those who’ve played a role, of whatever kind, in Otterbacher’s selection will have retired from the public scene by then.

That probably seems like a lifetime from now; then again, her predecessor’s departure already seems like a lifetime ago. What she makes of all this is mostly within her own control and of her own account, as it has been for other leaders in the city previously.

Recent Tweets, 8.21-8.27

RT @WiStateJournal: Supreme Court members say Prosser a hot-head who has ‘temper tantrums’ dlvr.it/j0fpt

RT @WisWatch: Posted the #Prosser investigative file on our site. Was it a ‘chokehold’? Justices divided.wisconsinwatch.org/2011/08/26/doc…

It’s hardly a ‘recovery’ at all U.S. Recovery Sputters, Consumer Confidence Sinks- Bloomberg bit.ly/nJrjha

Slate lays off Jack Shafer, others – Shafer will land quickly; he was worth the whole website bit.ly/pSWxeT

No big labor, little chance of recall success: AFL-CIO chief says labor hasn’t decided role in Walker recall bit.ly/nI47bI

The recovery that isn’t CBO: No Recession, But Growth So Slow Jobless Rate To Top 8% Until 2014 – WSJ on.wsj.com/mPRVmG

Could well-funded Franklin Center hire someone to help Wisconsin Reporter proof? (‘The Democracy Convention beigns Wednesday…’)

Prof. Fallone on ‘The Constitutional Right of Recall’ : Marquette Law Faculty Blog bit.ly/oSSzn8

Good organizations often grow better, but bad ones more often grow worse

Known to public, trustees only via newspaper’s public records request Missteps in Africa end dean’s career bit.ly/oVVRJ6

Journalism’s Voyage West – The Growth of Newspapers Across the U.S., 1690-2011

Stanford University’s Bill Lane Center for the American West offers a series of essays and an interactive chart on the growth of newspapers in America since the late seventeenth century.

All the essays are informative.  Embedded below is a video that illustrates newspapers’ expansion, across the centuries, across this continent.


The Growth of US Newspapers, 1690-2011 from Geoff McGhee on Vimeo.

Via Data Visualization: Journalism’s Voyage West | Rural West Initiative.

Weekend Poll and Comment Forum: Who Benefits Most from a Strong Third-Party Challenge in 2012?

There’s much talk about the possibility of a third-party candidate in 2012. What would a third-party candidate (not of the Libertarian Party, necessarily, but more of a protest-celebrity candidacy, e.g., Sarah Palin) mean for the 2012 general election?

Naturally, the LP’s executive director expresses umbrage at the assumption that there’s not already a viable third-party effort in the Libertarian Party, itself. See, LP responds to Wall Street Journal editorial.

It’s summer, with a long year ahead; why not have fun speculating?

In the Wall Street Journal, pollster Pat Caddell and pundit Doug Schoen are sure there will be a third-party candidate (of the John Anderson or Ross Perot-type):

The political order as we know it is deteriorating and disintegrating, and politics abhors a vacuum. So there is very good reason to believe that a credible third party, or even fourth political party, may be on the ballot in 2012. The American people clearly are looking for alternatives. Now.

Public Policy Polling, surveying the possibility of a third-party candidacy, concludes that third-party bids (even from the left!) would help Obama more than Gov. Romney:

But we took a look at seven possible independent candidates against Obama and his strongest GOP challenger, Mitt Romney, and found that the chances of defection by GOP-inclined voters are stronger than are cracks in the Democrats’ armor. Despite their grumbling, Democrats remain pretty united behind Obama, and six of the seven possible independent candidates would hurt Romney more than the president.

(Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight shares the view that Pres. Obama would be the Democrats’ strongest general-election candidate, rather than, say, a Hillary Clinton candidacy. That seems right to me.)

If there should be a third-party candidacy, of a candidate like Perot or John Anderson, what would it mean?

I’d guess it would (1) help Pres. Obama, (2) help a recall against Gov. Walker if the recall were held at the same time as the presidential general election (as it might be), and (3) might help Democrats running for state or local offices. A less formidable Republican presidential candidate (weakened in whatever way) might produce a weaker retention campaign on behalf of Gov. Walker. Some in the GOP may doubt Gov. Romney, for example, but I think he’d do better in Wisconsin than most other Republicans; his weakness in whatever form would hurt, not help, other GOP candidates.

(I see that Reagan is the exception — as a challenger, he won an absolute majority, and an electoral college landslide, despite a relatively strong third-party candidate. I’m doubtful any candidate will have that kind of electoral college strength, and landslide victory, next year.)

Below is a poll on this topic, and space for commenting, too: Would a strong third-party candidate help Pres. Obama or his GOP Challenger?




Comments will be moderated against profanity and trolls; otherwise have at it. This post will be open until Sunday morning.