Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it—Jonathan Swift

When Alexandrians elect a new member of the City Council on April 21, 2026, they may also vote on a proposed amendment to the Virginia Constitution.

According to the Virginia Department of Elections, the question that will be on the ballot is:

Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?

A series of campaign flyers (three are shown above; there may be more) from the intriguingly-named Justice for Democracy PAC of Williamsburg, Virginia has attracted attention as examples of deceptive information delivery in the political sphere or, more bluntly, campaign trickery.

The Justice for Democracy PAC

The Justice for Democracy PAC’s website can be seen

here

and its Statement of Organization can be seen

here.

The Statement of Organization states that the purpose of the Justice for Democracy PAC is “To support elections in Virginia.” The PAC’s Chairman, A.C. Cordoza, was the only Black Republican member of the House of Delegates when he lost his seat in the November 2025 election. More about Mr. Cordoza, and the controversy over some even more inflammatory flyers, can be seen in a March 10, 2026 article in The Virginia Mercury that can be seen

here.

Deception in the Mailbox

The postage prepaid flyers shown above are in the traditional size (about 11 inches by five inches) for campaign materials. The flyers are very direct in their messaging. The flyers urge voters in the April 21 special election to “VOTE NOW! VOTE NO! on the ballot question on redistricting in Virginia. The special evil identified in each flyer is “GERRYMANDERING!” The flyers also highlight, in text and graphics, issues of race and potential harm to minority representation.

One of the flyers quotes a March 12, 2026 editorial in The Washington Post as criticizing Virginia politicians for, “…presenting the proposed amendment to voters in the most brazenly dishonest way imaginable.” The editorial is actually an evenhanded condemnation of both political parties for initiating mid-decade redistricting proceedings. The Post’s “brazenly dishonest” criticism refers to the “restore fairness in the upcoming elections” language in the ballot question. The editorial can be seen

here.

Each flyer contains quotations from either or both of former President Barack Obama and Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger condemning gerrymandering as a scheme that disenfranchises voters and vests control in politicians. The flyers also assert that minority representation is at stake in the April 21 vote.

The quotations in the flyers are not misleading or inaccurate in themselves. Indeed, the quotations cite a source and date, usually well before 2026. Accordingly, a moment’s thought confirms that the quoted statements from former President Obama and Governor Spanberger could not have been about the special election on the proposed constitutional amendment.

Instead, the deception is in the intentional manipulation of the quotations to make it appear that they prove or support something they do not. The flyers imply a link, which does not exist, between Obama and Spanberger’s prior statements opposing gerrymandering and the proposed amendment to the Virginia Constitution that will be on the ballot on April 21. The deception might well work if a potential voter fails to read carefully and assumes that the effect of the amendment to the Virginia Constitution will be to promote gerrymandering, a position that the amendment’s proponents vigorously reject. To the contrary, the amendment’s supporters describe it as a measure necessary to combat the gerrymandering that has occurred, or will occur, in other states that adopted redistricting measures at the instigation of President Trump.

Of course, another factor working against the Justice for Democracy PAC’s approach in the flyers is that anyone who has watched television, or used the Internet, for more than 30 minutes over the last several weeks has probably seen former President Obama and Governor Spanberger in advertisements that run repeatedly urging voters to vote for, not against, the ballot question on redistricting in Virginia. But not every potential voter has seen these advertisements.

Where Justice for Democracy’s Money Comes From

More can probably be expected from the Justice for Democracy PAC, if only because it appears to be very well funded. Here is a recent report filed by the PAC with the Virginia State Board of Elections showing contributions in March 2026 approaching $3 million.

Media reports have linked contributions to the Justice for Democracy PAC to billionaire Peter Thiel.

A Few Final Thoughts

The Justice for Democracy PAC’s “Vote No” flyers containing quotes by former President Obama and Governor Spanberger appear credible at first sight. In a democracy under siege, close reading of, and careful thinking about, campaign claims and information are more essential than ever.

Your comments are very welcome.

The Jamie L. Whitten Building: On the National Mall Since 1908

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Building, also known as the Jamie L. Whitten Building, at 12^th Street and Jefferson Drive, S.W., is the only building on the heavily-visited National Mall not intended for public use. It was the first Beaux-Arts building in Washington and was the prototype for buildings in the Federal Triangle complex. The Whitten Building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974.

May 2025: The Trump and Lincoln Banners Go Up on the Mall

It was arresting, and fascinating, when two large banners depicting presidents Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump were installed in May 2025 on the façade of the Whitten Building. Each banner reads “Growing America Since 1862” and commemorates the 163^rd anniversary of the USDA’s establishment. A USDA official said that the banners will be up “for the coming months.”

The Lincoln banner shows a familiar late in life image of the 16^th president. The Trump banner is the August 24, 2023 booking photograph taken at the Fulton County Jail in Atlanta, Georgia after Trump’s indictment on racketeering and related charges. It is the only police booking photograph of a U.S. president.

The pairing of Trump’s mug shot (as distinct from an official portrait or other image) with Lincoln’s photograph was intentional. Trump’s mug-shot-as-banner simultaneously celebrates his victories in the criminal justice system and aligns him with Lincoln, who is generally accorded a place on any list of the greatest American presidents.

The hanging of the Lincoln and Trump banners together in a prominent place on the National Mall is a visual reminder that in important ways Trump and Lincoln are very different. The following briefly explores their connections and differences.

Trump’s Repeated References to Lincoln

Trump has often compared himself to Lincoln, a fact underscored by the large banners on the Whitten Building.

John O’Connor of the Associated Press picked up on Trump’s self-association with Lincoln in an October 2022 article. O’Connor describes Trump’s Lincoln references as a “recurring refrain in Trump’s unique brand of oratory” and cites this example:

“This is Donald Trump, hopefully your favorite president of all time, better than Lincoln, better than Washington,” Trump said in a video introducing “Trump digital trading cards” in December 2022, shortly after announcing his third run for the presidency.

The article can be read

here.

.

Plans and Themes for a Second Presidential Term

How Trump and Lincoln began their second terms as president reveals a great deal about each man. Each confronted the challenge of translating an electoral victory into a path forward for governing a very divided nation.

In 1864, Lincoln easily defeated Democrat George B. McClellan in an election conducted only in states that had not seceded from the Union. The nation was exhausted, but it was largely clear by the end of 1864 that the North would win the war. Lincoln’s challenge was how to guide the country through the end of the war and in the post-war period.

Lincoln rejected triumphalism or gloating about the North’s victory. His Second Inaugural Address on March 4, 1865 described common characteristics of the North and South:

Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.

The question of what impact Lincoln would have had on the post-Civil War period is one of American history’s great imponderables. There might be a clue in the compassionate and generous way Lincoln ended the Second Inaugural Address by making no distinctions among those who had suffered and died for either side:

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.

The complete Second Inaugural Address, which is very short, can be seen

here.

In the daily open firehose of information describing how President Trump has begun his second term it is clear that in many respects—notably his issuance of Executive Orders targeted at universities, law firms, and others—Trump’s approach is nothing like the conciliatory and generous way Lincoln began his second term.

The Consoler-in-Chief

A president’s responsibilities include honoring the memories of those who were injured or killed defending the nation. Trump and Lincoln demonstrate very different approaches to this solemn duty

Here is how The New York Times reported on Trump’s wreath-laying speech on May 26 at Arlington National Cemetery:

In remarks commemorating Memorial Day, Mr. Trump thanked those who had fought in some of the nation’s defining battles, and cited specific stories of sacrifice by soldiers and their families.

“We certainly know what we owe to them,” Mr. Trump said. “Their valor gave us the freest, greatest and most noble republic ever to exist on the face of the earth — a republic that I am fixing after a long and hard four years.”

He also used the occasion, traditionally a solemn day of tributes, to indirectly criticize his predecessor, former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., for his border policies while valorizing his own return to office.

“We’re doing so very well right now, considering the circumstances,” Mr. Trump said. “And we’ll do record-setting better with time. We will do better than we’ve ever done as a nation, better than ever before. I promise you that.”

The complete article can be read

here.

On November 19, 1863, about four and a half months after the battle of Gettysburg and the costly victory of the Union's Army of the Potomac over Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, Lincoln traveled to Gettysburg for the dedication of a cemetery for those who had died in the battle.

A noted orator, Edward Everett, a former senator from Massachusetts, was the featured speaker. Everett spoke for about two hours. Lincoln followed with a speech of hardly more than two minutes that defied the florid oratory of the time.

The Gettysburg Address was not universally admired at the time. Historian Shelby Foote has described the sparse applause that followed Lincoln's speech as "barely polite." The Chicago Times, no admirer of Lincoln's, described the address as "silly, flat and dishwatery utterances." Everett was gracious, writing to Lincoln after the ceremony at Gettysburg that, "I should be glad, if I could flatter myself that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion, in two hours, as you did in two minutes."

Lincoln delivered a self-effacing speech at Gettysburg with no description of his priorities or achievements. He intentionally downplayed his role in light of the purpose of the occasion, saying, “The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but can never forget what they did here.”

This photograph, which was not discovered until 1952, is believed to be the only image of Lincoln at Gettysburg. The speculation is that his speech was so short that the photographers present could not get organized to get a picture of him delivering his address.

The complete text of the Gettysburg Address can be seen

here.

A Few Final Words

President Trump should not be denigrated for striving to associate himself with President Lincoln. The more Lincoln is understood for his values and ideals, the better off the nation will be.

The eminent social philosopher, my mother, offered a nuanced understanding when she said, “People do not change as they get older, they get more so.” The Trump-Lincoln comparison, now evident in the banners installed at the Whitten Building, may be an example of people revealing their essential characters more fully as time passed.

Certainly, the Trump of the second term is consistent with the Trump of the first term and what he told us his plans were during the four years he was out of office.

As to Lincoln, he announced the generous and expansive understanding of America shown in his Second Inaugural Address and the Gettysburg Address in the conclusion of his First Inaugural Address on March 4, 1861. As the Civil War became inevitable, Lincoln told America:

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Your comments are very welcome.

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading About Alexandria!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts.

 “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
 “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
 “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.” —Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis Carroll

“Deal” may be the most overused and elusive word of our time. There are near-constant accounts of deals, or potential deals, between Russia and Ukraine, between India and Pakistan, among various Middle East parties, and between the United States and other nations about trade and tariffs. Other stories describe deals to house or imprison deportees from the United States, and deals driven by Executive Orders directed at major American law firms and universities.

The closing of a deal has traditionally meant that parties negotiating in good faith completed a transaction with an outcome that, while not perfect for any party, contained benefits such that the undertakings or constraints involved are worth paying a price for and/or acting according to the terms set out in an agreement. In a sign of the times, the word “deal” is now used in very different contexts.

President Trump rose to prominence partly through his best-selling book, The Art of the Deal. Closely examined, the Administration’s incessant language about deals is really the language of promotion. A promoter holds out the promise of a deal, which can be illusory to potential investors or in the realm of politics, to voters.

As a lawyer in private practice, I worked with clients and others who were consumed with deals and how to make them. The Administration’s descriptions of its actual or promised trade, foreign policy, economic, and culture war deals bring back memories of the ways I saw those seeking deals delude themselves and others.

With the proliferation of supposed deal-making and deal-related thinking today, it is timely to explore what is, and is not, a deal, what it takes to make a deal that means anything, and the language of deal-making.

The Importance of Promising a “Great Deal”

The examples of the Administration promising that something will be a “great deal” for someone (America, Ukraine, etc.) are numerous. A primary characteristic of a promoter, as opposed to a serious participant in public policy, is the promise of a “great deal,” irrespective of what actually transpires.

Here is a paragraph from a May 10 story in The New York Times on the U.S.-China trade talks:

On Friday, Mr. Trump signaled that he was prepared to begin lowering tariffs, suggesting that an 80 percent rate on Chinese imports seemed appropriate. Later in the day, referring to the China trade talks, Mr. Trump said, “We have to make a great deal for America.” He added that he would not be disappointed if a deal was not reached right away, arguing that not doing business is also a good deal for the United States.

This is the language of a promoter. The message distills to, “Believe me about this great deal and you win regardless of whether the deal occurs or not.”

What Does it Take to Make a Deal?

The corruption of “deal” is evident in the way President Trump described his trade policy on May 6:

I could announce 50 to 100 deals right now because you know, I’m the shopkeeper and I keep the store…And I can just set those terms and they can go shopping or they don’t have to go shopping, because everybody wants to shop here.

Conflating storekeeping, or merchandising and price setting, with completing international trade agreements elides what it means to reach a trade compact with another country. Exercising pricing power, or making demands on counter parties, is not the same as completing a carefully negotiated and durable trade agreement which can take months or years. The language is driven by the Administration’s sweaty focus on announcing deals, regardless of substance.

In a paradox, deals matter until they don’t. On May 6, The New York Times reported on President Trump’s meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney this way:

“Everyone says ‘When, when, when are you going to sign deals?’” Mr. Trump said, at one point motioning toward Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary. “We don’t have to sign deals. We could sign 25 deals right now, Howard, if we wanted to. We don’t have to sign deals. They have to sign deals with us. They want our market. We don’t want a piece of their market. We don’t care about their market.”

The Times story, which is almost totally about deals (“One day we’ll come and we’ll give you 100 deals,” the president said.) can be seen

here.

When a Deal is Not a Functioning Agreement

The Executive Orders directed at major American law firms are an existential threat to their businesses. Nine firms elected to “bend the knee” and enter into agreements with the Administration that included, among other things, commitments by the firms to perform a total of $940 million of pro bono legal work.

There are strong indications that the agreements between the Administration and the law firms do not represent a true meeting of the minds of the parties.

An April 22 column in The Washington Post titled “Trump’s ‘deal’ with law firms: Who’s bamboozling whom?” by lawyer David Kendall of Williams & Connolly identified significant gaps in the agreements between the Administration and the law firms. The column is viewable

here.

Kendall observed:

The deals do not appear to have been formalized in bilateral documents, signed by the parties and specifying respective duties, obligations and penalties for noncompliance. Though some of the firms have issued internal documents (which have quickly made their way to the media), none of these appear to have been approved by the Trump administration.

In addition, the two sides’ accounts of the agreements often seem asymmetrical. Trump, for example, in an executive order revoking the original executive order regarding Paul Weiss, claimed the firm “will engage in a remarkable change of course” and “specifically … has acknowledged the wrongdoing of its former partner Mark Pomerantz.” (Pomerantz left Paul Weiss in 2021 to work on a criminal investigation of Trump.) The firm made no such acknowledgment in public.

The Perkins Coie firm was the subject of an Executive Order titled “Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP” which is viewable

here.

Perkins Coie did not go the deal route; the firm hired Williams & Connolly to litigate the validity of the Executive Order issued against it.

Sometimes the best deal is one that is not made. On May 2, 2025, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a lacerating 102-page opinion invalidating the Executive Order issued against Perkins Coie. Judge Howell’s opinion can be read

here.

Deals are Much Easier to Talk About Than to Make

The double-sided truism about deal-making, “You can make any deal if you want to make it bad enough” seems evident in the Administration’s position relating to a trade agreement with China which was the subject of bilateral talks in Geneva earlier this month.

On May 11, ABC News reported that the White House announced that the White House announced that it “reached a deal [with China] without providing any details.” The differences in how the representatives of the United States and China described what happened in Geneva are revealing:

While U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer called it a “deal,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who was in Switzerland for the talks with Greer, said only that "substantial progress" had been made.

“The two sides agreed on establishing a consultation mechanism for trade and economic issues, identify the lead persons on each side, and will carry on further consultations relating to trade and economic issues of their respective concerns,” the Chinese vice premier said.

So, depending on who is worthy of belief, the outcome of the U.S.-China discussions in Switzerland was (i) a deal, (ii) substantial progress, or (iii) an agreement on “a consultation mechanism for trade and economic issues” with further consultations to come.

The White House’s desperation for something it can call a deal comes through very clearly. In contrast, China’s Vice Premier used the cautious and incremental language of diplomacy. Not surprisingly, the tariff agreement between the United States and China expires in 90 days.

The ABC News story can be viewed

here.

One of the persistent flaws in the Administration’s deal-driven approach to almost every issue is the failure to recognize that a meaningful agreement requires a willing counterparty. This explains President Trump’s descriptions or musings about China and who called, or should call, or will call, whom.

The Unintended Consequences of a Hasty Deal

The future may involve institutions and the Administration reckoning with the consequences of making a rushed deal that is incomplete, ambiguous, silent as to essential terms, or otherwise flawed. Surely, Columbia University’s leaders are reassessing the university’s deal with the Administration in light of Harvard University’s decision to litigate a similar set of issues.

The nine law firms that agreed to provide $940 million in pro bono legal services may have assumed that this commitment would apply to their existing pro bono clients, or to new clients with similar legal issues. That assumption may not be correct. An April 25, 2025, Executive Order titled “Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens” shows that the Administration has a different understanding. The Executive Order can be viewed

here.

Section 2 of the Executive Order states:

The Attorney General shall take all appropriate action to create a mechanism to provide legal resources and indemnification to law enforcement officers who unjustly incur expenses and liabilities for actions taken during the performance of their official duties to enforce the law. This mechanism shall include the use of private-sector pro bono assistance for such law enforcement officers.

When the nine law firms signed up to provide pro bono legal services, the defense of police misconduct cases may not have been on their radar as a pro bono initiative. In contrast, the Executive Order authorizes the Attorney General to direct the firms to undertake $940 million worth of that work on an unpaid basis. The disconnect is stark and its resolution, or lack thereof, will be interesting.

Other Themes and Final Thoughts

The examples of deal-related rhetoric described here are not all-inclusive. For example, another recurring deal-related construct is, “Our-deals-are-vastly-superior-to-those-made-by-the-stupid-prior-Administration.” You may have your own favorite examples of this theme.

The exaltation of deals and deal-making in so many contexts reveals an Administration that, thus far, has promoted many more deals than it has completed. Deal posturing and rhetoric is ultimately self-limiting—it sells the promise of progress when little or none occurs.

Issuing 147 Executive Orders and promoting deals are exercises in ruling. The real work of governing is much harder. Wariness about the promise and language of deals is appropriate, particularly when so many of the Administration’s purported deals are flawed or illusory.

Your comments are very welcome.

Special thanks to Chuck Finke and Rod Fonda for assistance with this post.

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading About Alexandria!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts.

Henry Ford’s only son, Edsel, lived an event-filled life. He made exceptional contributions to the Ford Motor Company, to the Allies’ victory over the Axis Powers in World War II, and to the civic and cultural life of his native Detroit.

The urbane Edsel was very different from his father, who had only a grade school education. Edsel attended a Connecticut prep school, The Hotchkiss School, and college at what was then Detroit University School. Henry Ford’s single-minded drive to build cars and trucks as efficiently as possible, and to sell as many as possible, contrasted with Edsel’s more complex view of life, corporate responsibility, and his company’s future.

Edsel was an American business prince. He grew up trailing after his father as Henry built his first car, which he called a Quadricycle, in the garage behind his home on Bagley Avenue in Detroit and later as the rapidly-expanding company occupied a succession of ever-larger manufacturing plants.

Henry’s manufacturing dream came true at the massive River Rouge plant in Dearborn, Michigan which opened in 1920. At its peak, the Rouge employed over 100,000 people. The Rouge’s operations were vertically-integrated manufacturing on a massive scale. Henry had the Rouge River dredged so that freighters carrying iron ore from Minnesota could unload at the plant. Almost everything else required to build a car, from making steel to final assembly, was done at the Rouge.

Edsel as Ford’s President

Edsel was 25 when he became Ford’s President in 1919. His relationship with his father was tense and difficult. Henry often countermanded, frustrated, and humiliated Edsel. When Edsel directed that new coke ovens be installed at the Rouge, Henry had them torn out. When Edsel created space for an accounting department, Henry had it cleared out and fired the accountants. Edsel found them other jobs in the company. Edsel’s difficult relationship with his father is described in Ford—The Men and the Machine by Robert Lacey.

In Wheels for the World—Henry Ford, His Company, and a Century of Progress historian Douglas Brinkley wrote:

Dressing down Edsel became an almost daily routine for Henry who wanted his introverted son to be a tough-fisted power broker. To his credit, Edsel refused to be remodeled to meet his father’s notions of the perfect son. “The senior Ford never seemed to grasp the fact that his son’s differences in personality were a strength, not a failing,” historian Thomas E. Bonsall wrote. “Where Edsel was gentle, Henry saw weakness. Where Edsel was imaginative, Henry saw frivolity. Henry spent years trying to make Edsel into a carbon copy of himself instead of letting him be his own man.” (401)

Edsel’s interest in design was evident in the sleek cars he had built for his own use. More about his car collection can be seen

here.

Edsel’s cars are kept at an expansive house on the shores of Lake St. Clair designed by architect Albert Kahn which is now a museum. More about the Ford House can be seen

here.

Edsel saw a future for the company beyond car manufacturing. He led the company in the development of the Ford Tri-Motor airplane and championed the construction of an airport and the first airport hotel, the Dearborn Inn, which exists today. Edsel saw early that the engineering methods used in building cars could be applied to building airplanes, which had been mostly artisanal before World War II. Edsel’s dream was to sell inexpensive planes in Ford dealerships. Henry killed the idea.

Edsel also moved the company from Henry’s unyielding hatred of unions to meaningful negotiations with the United Autoworkers Union. Years of intimidation, union-busting and labor violence in Ford plants culminated in a brutal 1937 attack on UAW officials on a highway overpass outside the Rouge in what became known as the Battle of the Overpass.

The UAW organizers were attacked and beaten by men from the Ford Service Department, a private army of thugs and spies controlled by Henry Ford’s right-hand man, Harry Bennett.

The company’s resistance to organized labor eventually ended. Brinkley explains:

However, on June 20, 1941, the Ford Motor Company signed a landmark agreement with the UAW. Henry Ford’s last surprise was the contract itself, offering even more liberal terms than the union had requested. Once Henry Ford accepted the idea, he wanted it to be done right, with the result that Ford workers received a much better contract than their counterparts at GM or Chrysler. (432)

Historian Thomas E. Bonsall summed up Edsel’s contributions to the company in his book, Disaster in Dearborn—The Story of the Edsel:

It was Edsel who persuaded his father to buy the Lincoln Motor Company at a receiver’s sale in 1922. It was Edsel who finally persuaded his father to retire the antiquated Model T. It was Edsel who then directed the highly successful styling of the Model A, which, as much as anything, put that all-important model across to the public. It was Edsel who saved Lincoln in the depths of the depression by creating the upper medium-priced Lincoln-Zephyr. It was Edsel who saw the need for a mainstream medium-priced care to enable Ford Motor Company to compete head-to-head with General Motors and Chrysler, and created the Mercury. And, not least, it was Edsel who gave the company the three sons who would, after their father’s death, save it from their senile grandfather and his thuggish cronies. (38-39)

Edsel would never run the company without his father’s interference. After Edsel died at 49 in 1943, his father, then 80, reassumed control of the company which accelerated its descent into chaos. The erratic and failing Henry relied heavily on Bennett. As a result, the future of the company was in serious doubt. Bennett attempted to get Henry to sign a codicil to his will that would have given Bennett even more authority over the company.

Two years after Edsel’s death, the Ford family, led by Edsel’s son, Henry Ford II, asserted itself and fired Bennett and numerous other employees loyal to him.

My Connection to Harry Bennett, Edsel Ford’s Nemesis

The historical accounts are essentially unanimous that Harry Bennett was a bad man. His principal traits were a fierce loyalty to Henry Ford and a willingness to use violence against Ford’s enemies, real or imagined.

Bennett, a World War I Navy deep-sea diver and who boxed as “Sailor Reese,” started at the company at 24 in 1917, about the same time as Edsel. He catered to Henry Ford’s every whim. Henry thought Bennett was indispensable and Bennett was often Henry’s instrument in countermanding or frustrating Edsel’s plans for the company.

Bennett’s influence with Henry grew through the 1920’s and 1930’s. In The Fords—An American Epic, co-authors Peter Collier and David Horowitz describe Bennett’s role:

Entering the Ford saga relatively late, Bennett changed it from the spectacle of an increasingly bitter and fitful old man unwilling to relinquish power into a Byzantine court drama filled with treachery and intrigue, dire struggles for power and real physical danger. (152)

Through Henry Ford, Bennett acquired a large home on a bend in the Huron River, just east of Ann Arbor. The Castle, as it came to be known, reflected Bennett’s well-founded concern for his personal safety. Bennett built turrets with gun emplacements, rooms with secret compartments for weapons, and a hidden escape tunnel to the river.

Bennett, a smallish man, liked to show that he could control large animals, for example, horses, which he would bring into the house during parties. Bennett kept lions, which he would show off to guests, in concrete cages with steel bars in a building near the main house. Here are front and rear views of the Castle:

I grew up in Ann Arbor and was looking for work during summers and school vacations. In the spring of 1970, my career in the aftermarket sector of the automotive industry ended when was I was laid off from a Midas Muffler shop on Washtenaw Avenue. I needed work right away.

I approached Harold Stark, the then-owner of the Castle and surrounding property about a job. Mr. Stark controlled Electro Arc, a manufacturer of metal disintegrating machines, on the estate. The United States Navy was the principal customer for Electro Arc’s machines which could remove a broken bolt or machine screw without damaging the threading that held it. Thus, a repair job that would ordinarily require a ship to return to port could be done at sea.

Mr. Stark said, “I only have outside work.” So, that summer I did nothing but cut up downed trees around the Castle property with a chain saw.

In the woods with my chainsaw, I saw a deep partially excavated V-shaped trench that ran across the neck of the bend in the river. Bennett’s plan, which was never completed, was to divert the river to channels on both sides of his house to create a natural moat.

During a winter break, a co-worker, Jim Rutherford, and I broke up the very thick concrete floors of the lion cages adjacent to the Castle with an electric jackhammer. Mr. Stark wanted the cages remodeled into stables and the concrete was too hard (clay is the preferred material) for his horses’ hooves. We carried the broken concrete chunks out in drywall compound buckets, some of the hardest work I have ever done.

Edsel Ford and the Arming of America: The Willow Run Bomber Plant

Henry Ford was a vocal pacifist and isolationist. During World War I, he was a major organizer of the Peace Ship, an ocean liner that traveled to Europe to prompt a peace conference to end the war.

Despite Henry’s history, Edsel convinced him that the company should play a leading role in gearing up America’s manufacturing base for World War II. Along with veteran executive Charles (“Cast-iron Charlie”) Sorensen, Edsel acted as the intermediary between the company and the Roosevelt Administration as Ford pivoted from making cars and trucks to making armaments.

Edsel and Sorensen were the driving force in the construction of Ford’s massive Willow Run bomber plant where over 8,000 B-24 Liberator bombers were built.

A.J. Baime’s book, Arsenal of Democracy-FDR, Detroit, and an Epic Quest to Arm an America at War details the logistical and engineering challenges that Ford and Sorensen overcame as they fulfilled their commitment that Willow Run would build “a bomber an hour.”

Baime summarizes the Ford Motor Company’s astonishing war production this way:

Of the total 18,482 Liberators built during the war, 8,685 of them rolled out of Willow Run. A total of 80,774 workers (61 percent men, 39 percent women) staffed the bomber plant, with a peak employment of 42,331. The cost to make each Liberator dropped from $238,000 per ship at the beginning of production to $137,000 at the end. Under the guidance of Edsel Ford and Charlie Sorensen, Ford Motor Company also built 57,851 aviation engines at the Rouge, plus 277,896 Jeeps, 93,217 trucks, 26,954 tank engines, 2,718 tanks, 87,390 aircraft generators, 52,281 aircraft superchargers, 10,377 squad tents and 2,401 jet bomb engines (which powered the new JB-2 Loon, the American copy of Hitler’s VI and V2 flying bombs, the first-ever pilotless missiles.) (286)

According to Baime, the total value of Ford-produced war materiel, in 1945 dollars, was $4,996,314,000 or about $87 billion in today’s dollars.

Edsel Ford as Civic and Arts Leader: The Detroit Industry Frescoes

As a leading member of the Ford family, Edsel was invited to lead, or support, numerous Detroit civic institutions. He gave his time, and his wealth, generously to numerous local organizations. He was particularly devoted to the Detroit Institute of Arts (DIA) where he was a trustee. According to Brinkley, “during the Depression [Edsel] underwrote salaries and other major expenses to make sure the museum stayed open.” (402)

In 1931, Edsel commissioned the Mexican artist Diego Rivera to create a mural in honor of Detroit’s workers in the museum’s central court. Rivera’s 27 frescoes were painted on wet plaster as the artist stood on a scaffold, a technique dating to the Renaissance. It took Rivera eight months to complete the commission. More about the Detroit Industry Frescoes can be seen

here.

Brinkley describes Rivera’s arrival in Detroit in 1932 to begin work at the museum and the limited, but thoughtful, guidance that Edsel gave Rivera:

After Rivera settled in, Edsel gave him a personal tour of the Rouge. “Ford set only one condition,” Rivera later wrote, “that in representing the industry of Detroit, I should not limit myself to steel and automobiles but take in chemicals and pharmaceuticals, which were also important in the economy of the city. He wanted to have a full tableau of the industrial life of Detroit.” (403)

That Rivera was a registered member of the Communist Party in Mexico apparently did not matter to Edsel. He hired Rivera for his art, not his politics.

Renaissance fresco painters often portrayed their patrons. Here is one of Rivera’s panels showing Edsel Ford and then-DIA Director William Valentiner:

A Tribute Car Gone Wrong

In 1957, the company, under the leadership of Henry Ford II, announced a medium-priced car honoring Edsel Ford for the 1958 model year. The Edsel was aimed at upwardly mobile young executives and professionals and was designed to fill in a gap in the company’s product line, allowing it to compete more effectively with General Motors and Chrysler.

Despite significant promotional fanfare, the Edsel failed in almost every way: styling, marketing, engineering, and quality control. A hypercritical press seized on the car’s flaws and a national recession contributed to weak sales. The Edsel was the wrong car at the wrong time

For a time, the description of something as “an Edsel” signified a disaster of some kind. By 1959 the company had essentially given up on the Edsel.

Bonsall writes:

Yet, of all the indignities Edsel endured, one of the cruelest must surely have been one that transpired after his death: the naming of the Edsel automobile. Thus, even though it came about more than a decade after his demise, the best-known fiasco—at least to the general public—in the automobile industry remains indelibly associated with Edsel Ford. (39)

What Edsel Ford Teaches Us

Edsel Ford is not overlooked (a section of Interstate 94 in Detroit is named the Edsel Ford Expressway and my high school competed against Dearborn Edsel Ford High School. ) More accurately, he is underappreciated.

Edsel assumed a critical role in a company dominated by its famed founder, his father, often referred to as the inventor of the modern age. Henry Ford was a great man in that he changed the way people lived. Edsel Ford was a good man who was on the right side of history in almost every sense. This is not a small achievement.

Edsel made contribution after contribution to the Ford Motor Company, despite his father’s cruel interference. Together with key Ford executives he mobilized the company as an engine of incredible productivity in World War II. And, Edsel gave his time generously to his city.

In our time, the dynamics of famous and powerful fathers and their sons (Fred Trump and Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Joe Biden and Hunter Biden) play out very differently. Edsel managed the blessings and burdens of being Henry Ford’s only son in admirable and constructive ways.

Perhaps the best way to understand Edsel is through Diego Rivera’s perceptive 1932 portrait. Rivera shows Edsel at work in a design studio. He is controlled and composed in an impeccably tailored double-breasted suit with a designer’s tools at the ready. The background is a large sketch of a sleek 1933 Ford coupe, one of the post Model-T cars that Edsel did so much to make a reality.

Special thanks to Rod Fonda for assistance with this post.

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading About Alexandria!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts.

In yesterday’s installation ceremony in the almost-full Rachel M. Schlesinger Concert Hall on Northern Virginia Community College’s campus, Alexandria’s new Mayor, Alyia Gaskins, and the four returning and two new members of the City Council, described their visions for the city in fine and optimistic terms.

The “three-minute” speeches by the new elected officials were an appropriate mix of gratitude (“I sincerely thank my [family] [campaign team] [the voters] [other]”) and goal-oriented box checking (“Working together, we can build an Alexandria that is [affordable] [accessible] [inclusive] [other].”

Some of the remarks were, fittingly, emotional. The final line, or applause trigger, for many of the speeches was “Let’s get to work,” confirming the transition from campaigning to governing and underscoring that governing is, indeed, work.

The “Let’s get to work” closing may have been a coincidence or it may have reflected an agreement among the new Mayor and Councilors. In either case, getting down to work is an important thing for our elected officials. However, spoken or not, there were other themes evident in the installation ceremony.

Early in my teaching career, a wise teacher told me that at the start of each school year teachers received a “deposit” of time with students to be drawn down over the course of a semester or academic year. How the teacher elected to “spend” that time made all the difference in what the students learned and the value they derived from the class.

So it is with local government: the new Mayor and Council have a finite amount of their time, staff time, and other resources to address the city’s priorities. It is not a matter of just “getting to work,” it is also deciding what to work on because resources, especially time, are finite.

Even the worthiest objectives may be unattainable if the timing or circumstances are not right. For example, the last School Board conducted an impressively thorough analysis of electoral reform, an important issue, only to be met with the last Council’s generally lukewarm interest and, from some on the Council, a “stay in your lane” reaction.

Outgoing Mayor Justin Wilson said at the ceremony that “every challenge to be faced by this City Council was created by a prior Council.” Wilson’s point was that whether through what he termed “benign neglect” or direct action, the new Mayor and Council will inherit the results of decisions made (or not made) years, or decades, ago. This truism is worth remembering as the new elected leaders sort through what is important and what can be improved by government action.

Wilson’s observation also relates to what is sometimes called opportunity cost, or the value of a forgone alternative action or decision. In other words, while a local government is responding to vocal advocates calling for initiative X, what is the cost of not doing initiative Y?

This is partly why curmudgeons (I am one) despair when a School Board or City Council engages in a lengthy debate, or resolution drafting process, about the position of a city or school system on a controversy well outside its scope, for example, a foreign affairs crisis. For example, last year the School Board in my boyhood home, Ann Arbor, Michigan, earnestly and thoughtfully adopted a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. There is an actual cost to such debates in the sidelining of matters that are in the elected body’s central responsibilities.

Of course, matters are further complicated by the certainty that unexpected events will occur. If the pandemic, and the proposal for an arena in Potomac Yard that consumed the city government a year ago, teach anything it is that unanticipated events will consume time and resources, and may do so for months and years.

The impact of outside and uncontrollable forces was illustrated when British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan was asked about the greatest challenge for a statesman or (accounts vary) the most difficult thing about being Prime Minister. He replied “Events, dear boy, events.”

So, congratulations to Alexandria’s new elected officials and a New Year/new term of office toast: May events be kind to you and may you “get to work” on those issues where there is an actual opportunity to improve Alexandria’s quality of life.

Subscribe now

Thanks for reading About Alexandria!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts.

What William Goldman Knew

William Goldman, an extremely successful screenwriter (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, All the President’s Men, The Princess Bride), famously explained Hollywood by saying, “Nobody knows anything.”

Goldman’s point was that that movie success is unpredictable and unexplainable.  He amplified on his three-word maxim in his bestselling 1989 book, Adventures in the Screen Trade: A Personal View of Hollywood and Screenwriting: “Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what's going to work. Every time out it's a guess and, if you're lucky, an educated one.”

Goldman’s explanation of Hollywood is worth keeping in mind when sorting through the many published explanations of the results of the 2024 presidential election.  Columnists and other opinion merchants have expended substantial time and effort to explain what happened on November 5.  Many of the explanations fall into recognizable types.

Each analysis of the election’s results, while entertaining and sometimes compelling, fails at what physicists call a unified field theory—an explanation of all the fundamental forces and relationships in a single theoretical construct that explains a condition or phenomenon.  When it comes to elections, there is no “Theory of Everything.”

Lawyers refer to “proximate cause,” a cause which in a direct sequence produces an event or condition and without which such event or condition would not have happened.  A national election may be the ultimate proximate cause-driven event: tens of millions of voters cast ballots for their individual reasons.  What follows are descriptions of four of the most prominent election postmortem styles and suggestions for moving forward.

The Blamethrower

A flamethrower projects a controllable fire jet. A similar effect is evident in post-election analyses that blame a single individual or group, for example, the Democratic Party. “This is All Biden’s Fault” ( Josh Barro in The New York Times, Nov. 11), which can be seen

here

is an example of the blamethrower approach. Training concentrated fire, or blame, on a single target may provide visceral satisfaction, even a score, or ease the disappointment of an electoral loss.  However, this approach inevitably generates “Well, what about [insert equally plausible explanation(s) here]?” questions.

Demographic Slicing and Dicing

Another post-election explainer involves an assessment, usually framed by comparisons to previous elections, of the voting patterns of a particular demographic or ethnic group in a critical state.  This approach involves an “if only” conditional statement, as in “If only [Latino voters in Pennsylvania] [Arab-American voters in Detroit] [Insert voting group and region of your choice here] had voted as they did in [Insert prior election here] everything would have been fine.”  Registration authorities do not maintain data sorted by voter age or ethnicity, so this approach relies primarily on exit polling.  Exit poll respondents know that they can lie or fail to respond to pollsters without consequence.  If it is disappointing pollsters underestimated President Trump repeatedly, why should we think that exit polling is any more accurate?  Moreover, there is no assurance that a different demographic or ethnic group did not have a comparable, or even more profound, effect on the election results.

“The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars”

In Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, Cassius says, “Men at some time are masters of their fates:/The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, /But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”  Cassius argues that collectively we control our fate, but some people, like Caesar, are more influential than others. The inward looking (or the-answer-is-within-us) stance is a time-tested election postmortem.  A call for self-examination, whether from a political party or the entire country, always seems thoughtful.  An example of this approach is “Voters to Elites: Do You See Me Now?” (David Brooks in The New York Times, Nov. 6) which is viewable

here.

Brooks calls for introspection and change from people characterized as America’s educated elite who, he argues, ignored the hollowing out of communities in the middle of the nation as a result of the decline in manufacturing, free trade policies, immigration, opioids, and the flight of capital and people to the East and West Coasts.

Rolling in the Deep Data

Elections generate data points that can be compared with each other and with data from prior elections. Number crunching at a granular level is a prominent explanatory technique for election results.  Consider the following analysis of the Michigan results:

The damage for Harris was particularly dire in Wayne, the state’s largest county. Four years ago, Biden carried it 68%-30%, a margin of 332,617 votes. Harris, though, only won Wayne by 29 points, a margin of 247,803 votes. That’s a net reduction of about 85,000 votes for Democrats from their biggest single source of votes on the map. (Steve Kornacki, NBC News, “The Key Voter Shifts that Led to Trump’s Battleground State Sweep,” Nov. 17.)

Numbers are endlessly interesting, and Kornacki’s state-by-state analysis can be seen

here.

This postmortem approach understands the results of a national election through the outcomes of voting subgroups, often, as in this example, at the county level. That Wayne County’s voters cast about 85,000 fewer votes for Vice President Harris than they did for President Biden in 2020 is important, but why this happened remains open to interpretation. And, if statistics are described as showing that elections are “won at the margins,” that idea should be permanently retired along with the observation that “this election represents an inflection point.”  Each of these ideas is a cliche′ and devoid of real meaning.

Now what?

It is not an accident that national election results often include, or are closely connected to, advice about how to manage what comes next.  Advice for coping with this year’s election results ranges from organized political and social resistance (“Here’s the Plan to Fight Back,” Senator Elizabeth Warren in Time magazine, Nov. 7) to advanced self-care techniques ( “How to Get Through Election Day,” Mark Leibovich in The Atlantic magazine, Nov. 4.)

Election explaining is an exercise in assumptions, inferences and hypotheticals. A fairly small number of people—elected and party officials, consultants, and other political professionals—have the means to influence national politics.  At the national level, most of us are political onlookers, no matter how astute we are or think we are.

Explaining election results is an attractive parlor game (even though parlors are unfashionable) for opinion writers and politics nerds because everybody can win and nobody must lose—all election outcome explanations have an element of plausibility, but none is definitive, final, or unchallengeable. But the game is about what happened, not about what we can or should do now.

The respectful suggestion here is that the appropriate and effective way to react to the 2024 election results is to be the best Alexandrians we can be, that is, to double down on local advocacy and commitment. This is work for the long run, not just election to election. No matter how we vote, there is no guarantee that our beliefs and principles will ever govern federal policies.

What we might do in Alexandria involves recognizing and using the resources we have independently, such as:

● Supporting, financially or through direct action, the City’s difference-making organizations such as the Alexandria Tutoring Consortium, Meals on Wheels, Carpenter’s Shelter, Community Lodgings, and ACT for Alexandria.

● Applying for a position on any of the City’s numerous boards, commissions and task forces.

● And, since elections are top of mind, urging the new Mayor and City Council to organize a community forum or discussion to seriously consider staggered election terms and other electoral reforms. Former City Councilor and General Assembly member David Speck said, “Staggered terms create timely, real debate on issues and give candidates and voters focus.  We need to do more to get folks seriously thinking about this.”   Of Virginia’s 38 cities, only Alexandria and Richmond do not use staggered terms; 61 of Virginia’s 95 counties use staggered terms.

● [Insert your idea, and your commitment, here.]

Some of the city’s important transportation infrastructure is invisible because it is underground, but parts of it have been visible recently.

Jet Fuel for the Airports

The work being performed by MidShip Pipeline Company to replace and relocate a segment of a pipeline in the railroad right-of-way off Main Line Boulevard behind George Washington Middle School is an example of the city’s important, but invisible, infrastructure.  The pipeline carries jet fuel from refinery facilities in Louisiana and Mississippi to Washington Reagan and Dulles airports. 

Workers are installing the pipeline in a constrained area in the right-of-way west of the tracks.  Here,  a crane lifts a section of the pipe into place for installation.

Workers at the site explained that the pipeline is being buried 80 feet underground to avoid conflicts with other utilities buried in the railroad right-of way. The pipeline will continue to deliver fuel to the airports while a segment of it is replaced and relocated. 

The pipeline installation equipment that readies pipe segments for placement underground is massive.

The pipeline installation involves the use of water under pressure.  Pictured below is one of the periodic water discharges.

Kinder Morgan’s Project Pipe Line System

The pipeline is owned by Houston, Texas-based Kinder Morgan, Inc. and is part of the company’s Products Pipe Line system, formerly known as the Plantation Pipeline. 

Kinder Morgan describes itself as “...the largest independent transporter of petroleum products in North America, transporting approximately 2.4 million barrels per day.”  Kinder Morgan’s operations through its 79,000 miles of U.S. pipelines, of which 9,500 miles are dedicated to petroleum products, are described in more detail on its website which is viewable

here.

Here is how Kinder Morgan describes its Products Pipe Line system:

PPL is one of the largest refined petroleum products pipelines in the United States.  It is capable of delivering approximately 720,000 barrels per day of gasoline, jet fuel, diesel and biodiesel through its approximately 3,180-mile pipeline network which originates in Louisiana and ends in the Washington, D.C. area.  Along the way, it serves various metropolitan areas, including Birmingham, Alabama; Atlanta, Georgia; Charlotte, North Carolina; and the Washington D.C. area.

PPL connects to 90 delivery terminals throughout eight states.  Products come in to the PPL system from nine refineries in Mississippi and Louisiana, from other products pipeline systems, and via marine facilities on the Mississippi River.  Products handled include motor gasoline, diesel (including biodiesel), kerosene, and commercial and military jet fuels.

PPL receives products in batches for fungible movements which are shipped through lines ranging in size from 6-inches to 30-inches in diameter…A batch leaving Baton Rouge, Louisiana, may travel as much as 1,100 miles to reach a final destination such as National or Dulles airports.  Total travel time for such a trip is approximately 20 days.  Products can be efficiently transported from Baton Rouge to a shipper’s facility in Washington, D.C. for under three cents per gallon.

Coming Soon: The Fourth Track Project

The pipeline work opens the way for additional changes to the railroad right-of-way to accommodate rail traffic.   That work includes the addition of a fourth track between Alexandria and Arlington. The Virginia Passenger Rail Authority describes the project this way:

The Alexandria Fourth Track project will design and construct 6.0 miles of railroad track and related infrastructure in Arlington and Alexandria, Va.  The project extends between the southern end of [the railroad bridge over the Potomac River]…and will add one additional track to the existing three-track segment.

Currently, on the southern end of the project area, west of Alexandria Station, three tracks from the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) Fredericksburg Line and two tracks from the VRE Manassas Line converge into three tracks, causing a bottleneck and delays for passenger and freight trains.  The existing tracks will be shifted, and a new fourth track will be added, all within the existing right-of-way. The results will separate freight and passenger trains and add capacity and efficiency traveling north into Arlington and Washington, DC. The design also accommodates station and platform improvements planned by VRE for the Alexandria and Crystal City passenger stations.

Virginia Attorney General Jayson Miyares issued an August 12 opinion confirming that Alexandria has authority under its charter to regulate gas powered leaf blowers (GPLBs) through the City’s noise ordinance.  The opinion can be seen

here.

Those seeking to ban or restrict GPLBs in the City, notably Quiet Alexandria, an advocacy organization, have been frustrated for years by a seemingly circular discussion.  The uncertainty about the City’s authority to regulate GPLBs arose because the Dillon Rule limits the authority of localities to that specifically granted by the General Assembly. State and City officials expressed differing opinions about the City’s ability to regulate GPLBs. General Assembly members said that state legislative action was unnecessary, while Alexandria officials said the Dillon Rule precluded, or might preclude, the City’s regulation of GPLBs.

Miyares’ opinion gives the City a variety of options, including the passage of a restriction or ban specifically targeted at GPLBs.

“Quiet Alexandria couldn't be happier with the opinion,” wrote Alexandria lawyer Jamie Conrad who has advised the advocacy organization.

“It [the opinion] says very clearly that the City is authorized under its charter to ban gas powered leaf blowers, via its noise ordinance, because they exceed reasonable decibel limits.  With the Dillon Rule issue taken off the table, Council is free to craft an amendment that deals directly with gas powered leaf blowers,” Conrad said.

Alexandria Mayor Justin Wilson reacted to the issuance of the Attorney General’s Opinion by writing, “This is a very positive development. We are now reviewing the opinion and will ask the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for Council consideration.”

The bike lane graphics are described in the City’s Complete Streets Design Guidelines as being based on, “… the current best practices in street design in Alexandria, the metropolitan DC area, and around the world.”  The guidelines can be seen

here.

The Complete Streets Design Guide refers to the comprehensive Urban Bikeway Design Guide published by the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) which describes and explains bike lane graphics and symbols.  The NACTO guide can be seen

here.

Cyclists asked about Alexandria’s bike lane designs had limited knowledge about what they mean.  Accordingly, what follows describes some of City’s most interesting bike lane designs and their meanings.

The Sharrows Image: A Bike Lane Graphic for Streets Without Bike Lanes

In a paradox, the most common bike lane image is displayed on streets without bike lanes.  Drivers and casual observers may wonder about the purpose of the chevron-like “roof,” or covering, over the image of the bike.

The NACTO design guide reveals what these are:

Shared Lane Markings (SLMs), or “sharrows,” are road markings used to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automobiles. Among other benefits shared lane markings reinforce the legitimacy of bicycle traffic on the street, recommend proper bicyclist positioning, and may be configured to offer directional and wayfinding guidance. 

Thus, the implicit meaning of the sharrows (a combination of “shared arrows”) design is aspirational or values driven.  The graphic says, on behalf of the City, “We regret there are no bike lanes on this street, but, motorist, please do not forget about bicyclists. They are entitled to respect on our streets.” 

The directional guidance of the sharrows provides additional meaning.  It translates approximately to, “While there isn’t a bike lane on this street, if you travel on you may find one.”

The Sharrows Image: An Alternative Version

Artists often return to the same subject or theme. [1] This version of the sharrows image that includes a rider and suggested bike lane boundaries.  The bike frame is omitted--the helmeted rider appears to be peddling between two wheels in space. We do not see the rider in profile. He looks to his left, at us, because we are the oncoming traffic.

The Sharrows Image: A Post-Modern Version

The City recently unveiled this updated sharrows image on an eye-catching bright green background.  This design implies a bike lane in the four white accent bars on each vertical side of the image, but omits a rider.  The design and color underscore the City’s commitment to bike lanes.  The three arrows aligned horizontally above the image point back to this version of the sharrows image.

A question for further research: do the position of the image in the center of the lane and the implied bike lane borders signify that cyclists are entitled to ride in the middle of the lane?

The Buffered Bike Lane

This exuberant graphic introduces a bike lane with not just a bike, but also a rider, and a directional arrow.  What first seems to be a distorted ladder on the left side of the bike lane is, according to the NACTO guide, a buffer which fulfills important functions. 

According to the NACTO design guide, a buffered bike lane:

·         Provides space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane.

·         Encourages bicyclists to ride outside of the door zone when the buffer is between parked cars and bike lane.

·         Provides a greater space for bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide that it might be mistaken for a travel lane or a parking lane.

·         Appeals to a wider cross-section of bicycle users.

·         Encourages bicycling by contributing to the perception of safety among users of the bicycle network.

If the city’s streets could be magically reworked it seems likely that there would be many more buffered bike lanes.

An Unbuffered Bike Lane in Dark Green

In this design the buffer is omitted, probably because the street is too narrow. However, the rider-and-bike graphic and directional arrow are evident.  A topic for further investigation: Why is the solid bike lane is introduced with a band of green under the rider-and-bike image?

 A Contra-Flow Bike Lane

A contra-flow bike lane runs the opposite direction from car traffic. The left border of the bike lane is the stern and familiar “do not cross” double yellow line because of the negative outcomes if either cars or bikes stray from their designated lanes on this one-way street.

An Intermittently Striped Unbuffered Bike Lane

Here, a vivid green on an asphalt background combines with a white-edged intermittent striped formation, and the rider-and-bike logo. The striped formation hints at unknowns down the road.

A short time later, a combination solid and striped bike lane in bright green appears.  The trigger for the transition from a solid background to stripes is uncertain—the interrupted curb, perhaps?

Almost Everything All at Once

Intricate designs can serve aesthetic and practical objectives.  Here, a buffered bike lane adjacent to a marked curbside parking spaces launches from a crosswalk that connects to a “no go” area.  The latter is denominated by a contrasting color and raised barriers that have been affectionately described by some Alexandrians as “armadillos” or “zebra butts.”   The effect is a synthesis of color, design and structure.

The Bike and Scooter Box

This unusual design, with physical barriers at its four corners, seems to be a parking area for bikes and scooters.  In fact, it is a bike and scooter box which is designed to facilitate right turns at intersections governed by traffic lights. 

The NACTO design guide states:

A bike box is a designated area at the head of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists with a safe and visible way to get ahead of queuing traffic during the red signal phase.   

The Bike and Scooter Box: An Alternative Version

This design shows a bike lane adjacent to curbside parking areas that transitions from a solid to a striped configuration with a single vertical pillar that protects bike riders preparing to make a right turn.

 A Bike Lane Between Car Lanes

 Here, a bike lane arrives at an intersection positioned between a left turn lane for cars and a curbside right turn/through lane for cars. This bike lane would seem to be for courageous cyclists.

The Combined Bike Lane/Car Turn Lane

This near-abstract design is a rare combined bike lane/car turn lane designed to achieve several objectives. 

The NACTO guide explains:

A combined bike lane/turn lane places a suggested bike lane within the inside portion of a dedicated motor vehicle turn lane.  Shared lane markings or conventional bicycle stencils with a dashed line can delineate the space for bicyclists and motorists within the shared lane or indicate the intended path for through bicyclists.  This treatment includes signage advising motorists and bicyclists of proper positioning within the lane.

The amount of data conveyed in this design is impressive.  The dedicated car turn lane area, with its bold “WAIT HERE” sign, intrudes on the lower left corner of the bike lane image to reinforce the theme of motorist and cyclist peaceful co-existence.

What to Make of Alexandria’s Bike Lane Art

As ever, an aesthetic reflects the values and world views of its creators and its audience.  Alexandria’s extensive and diverse bike lane art affirms its bike-friendly values.  Even so, because of the City’s age and the development history of its streets, Alexandria’s 561 lane miles of paved roads [2] appear to vastly exceed the length of its bike lanes. The extensive and varied bike lane art affirms the City’s commitment to self-propelled transportation and provides a rewarding visual experience.

Your comments are very welcome.

1.  Henri Matisse executed a series of sculptures known as the five Jeannettes which became increasingly abstract.  More information can be seen

here.

Vincent Van Gogh painted six portraits of his mailman, Joseph Roulin.   A fascinating exhibition, Van Gogh Repetitions at the Cleveland Museum of Art and the Phillips Collection in Washington, D.C., explored Van Gogh’s numerous paintings of the same subjects.  More about the exhibition is available

here.

2. City of Alexandria Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2023, page 247.

Special thanks to Jamie Conrad and Kirk Fedder for assistance with this post.

In the fall of 2007, I arrived at the newly rebuilt T.C. Williams High School when it opened. I was excited to begin my second year as a high school English teacher.  My first year at Oakton High School in Vienna had gone reasonably well.  I felt fortunate to be teaching near our home and in the high school that two of our children had graduated from and where the youngest one was then a junior.

By the fall of 2014, I was teaching English and Journalism and I was avoiding the halls, especially between periods, because they were packed with students. The 430,000-square foot building, which I had been extensively involved with during my last term (2003-2006) on the School Board, had been criticized as being overbuilt and too large. However, the high school’s enrollment had surged steadily and the school was becoming overcrowded. 

In late 2015, a School Board at the end of its term approved a 30-classroom addition to the Minnie Howard 9^th grade center which is about a mile from the King Street building.  While the Board voted for the addition, some members called the plan a “band aid.” The approval of the proposed expansion of Minnie Howard seemed to include a resigned awareness that the additional classrooms were an inadequate solution to the rapidly-increasing enrollment in grades 9-12.

The Minnie Howard building on Braddock Road opened in 1954 as an elementary school.[1]   Later, it was an administration building; it became Alexandria’s all-city 9th grade center 31 years ago. 

I was in Minnie Howard often for back-to-school nights, meetings, and other events.  Whenever I was there, I remembered my father, an architectural historian, saying, “A building never loses the essential character for which it was designed.”  Minnie Howard’s scale and layout said, “elementary school,” even though it was populated with an ever-increasing number of high school students.

The Long Road to a Decision

I learned that many teachers are reluctant to take public positions on school issues like capacity.  Other teachers were willing to advocate, as I was.  In early 2016 I spoke about the capacity crisis at the School Board with other teachers and community members. Former School Board member Yvonne Folkerts and former School Board member Marc Williams, his wife, Nancy, and my wife, Brooksie, and I wrote letters to the editor proposing that the Minnie Howard building be rebuilt as a true high school.

Later that year, we organized a town hall at the Beatley Library on secondary school capacity.  The town hall attendees included elected officials. Yet, there seemed to be almost no movement on a consensus solution for the capacity problem from the ACPS administration and the School Board, even as the high school enrollment kept growing.

During this period, a city-wide debate began over whether Alexandria should open a “second high school.” The discussion was heavily influenced by the city’s complicated racial past: T.C. Williams High School [2] was established in the Civil Rights era by combining the city’s high schools as an integration measure. The projection, or fear, was that a second high school would be inferior or a “dumping ground” for certain types of students.

The result is that the city has one high school, Alexandria City High School, with multiple campuses. As always, we carry the past with us.

In 2018, ACPS rolled out the High School Project which was described as “part of a larger national conversation” about how to expand secondary school capacity and learning opportunities.   More information about the High School Project is available

here.

ACPS went through an extensive planning and community engagement process.  ACPS personnel and its consultants searched the city, without success, for a site for a second high school.  ACPS officials sought to “think outside the box” to develop innovative solutions, including internships or Early College programs at, for example, Northern Virginia Community College, to alleviate the capacity crisis.[3]

I volunteered for every committee, and went to every meeting I could, that addressed possible ways to alleviate overcrowding. There were many proposals, included scattered sites throughout the city. The simplest and most direct path, a new Minnie Howard building on the existing 13-acre site, always seemed to be the most practical alternative. [4]

Ultimately, the School Board decided to construct a new five-story, 340,000 square foot Minnie Howard building.  The school is so large that is impossible to photograph, except possibly from the air.  Here are two views from across Braddock Road:

The New Minnie Howard Building

At the May 29 ribbon-cutting, Alexandria Mayor Justin Wilson called the opening of the new Minnie Howard Campus “a big deal.”  Wilson said, “I cannot think of a better testament, a better symbol of what we value as the City of Alexandria than this building.”

“You can’t miss this place,” said Wilson, referring to the school’s prominent position on Braddock Road.  Wilson called the new school a “generational investment—one we will see and realize the benefit of for generations to come.”

Here are ACPS and city officials, many of whom assumed their positions after the debate about how to address the secondary school capacity crisis began, at the ribbon-cutting:

The Evolution of the New Minnie Howard Campus

Minnie Howard’s “pinwheel” design integrating indoor and outdoor spaces was approved in April 2021.   Ground breaking occurred in March 2022 and a topping off ceremony took place in April 2023.  Notably, the project moved forward despite complications presented by the global pandemic.  ACPS received a certificate of occupancy in April 2024, about a month earlier than scheduled.

The former Minnie Howard building will be demolished and the new school’s fields, tennis courts and other amenities are scheduled to be completed in 2025.

A Brief Look at What is Inside

The five-story $190 million school includes two gymnasiums, an early childhood center, a Teen Wellness Center, a family resource center, and an aquatics facility to be managed by the city’s Department of Recreation, Parks and Cultural Activities.

The new school contains neither a central cafeteria nor an auditorium.  Students will eat in common areas spread throughout the building.

 Staircases with seating areas wired for device-charging are examples of the building’s flexible interior spaces.

The interior of the school contains extensive graphics to enhance way-finding and organization.

Organizing Two Large High Schools

Students will be offered a choice of six content-based academies:  Business and Government; General Studies; Global Studies; Visual, Performing and Applied Arts; Education, Liberal Arts and Human Services; and, Science, Technology, Engineering and Math.  More information about the ACHS academies is available

here.

ACHS Lead Administrator for Operations and Student Support Michael Burch told me at the ribbon-cutting that the current enrollment is 3,000 at the King Street Campus and 1,582 at the Minnie Howard Campus. 

The development of a master schedule for 4,500+ students on two campuses is a major administrative challenge. Burch said that the current draft of the 2024-2025 daily class schedule includes two 13-minute transition periods before and after lunch that will allow students to move between the King Street and Minnie Howard campuses in ACPS-provided transportation.  

Burch said that the current version of the daily bell schedule has students seeing all their teachers on Mondays; the last four days of the week would be a rotating block schedule similar to that now in place at ACHS.

According to Burch, thus far, 54 teachers are scheduled to relocate from the King Street Campus to the Minnie Howard Campus and 17 will go the other way.

What I’ve Learned

I’ve been fortunate to be involved in the planning and construction of both of Alexandria’s high school buildings. I claim no credit for the outcomes: the development of a new high school is a long game with many moving parts.

Your comments are very welcome.

[1] For a description of who Minnie Howard was, see an August 3, 2023 About Alexandria column, Renaming Minnie Howard.

[2] The high school was renamed Alexandria City High School in July 2021 after news reports detailed the segregationist stance of Thomas Chambliss Williams, a former Alexandria Superintendent, for whom the high school was named in 1965. The 2000 Disney movie, Remember the Titans, told the story of the combining of the high schools with the usual Hollywood additions and flourishes:

[3] In one meeting an ACPS consultant told me that it was possible that so many internships for high school students could be created in Alexandria’s business community that this would solve the secondary school capacity crisis. I thought this was nonsense.

[4]  I thought Occam's razor applied to the secondary school capacity shortage.  Occam’s razor states that the simplest explanation is preferable to one that is more complex.  Simple theories are easier to verify. Simple solutions are easier to execute.

The March 6 joint City Council and School Board operating budget work session revealed two groups of dedicated elected officials with largely aligned values wrestling with disagreements about how to implement those values in the city’s operating budget.  ACPS funding is a major part of the  city’s operating budget.

The essence of the discussion involved the School Board’s February 22 addition of $10.7 million to Superintendent Melanie Kay-Wyatt’s proposed $384.39 million operating budget. The work session can be seen

here.

The Board’s additional $10.7 million is mostly composed of $5.35 million for a 2% Market Rate Adjustment (formerly known as a COLA) for school employees, $4.2 million for a step increase—an increase from one pay rate to the next higher rate in the salary range for a position—for eligible staff who did not receive a step increase in FY 2021, and $987,000 to fund an additional 7.4 full time equivalent positions, including an athletic trainer, a counselor, and a psychologist at Alexandria City High School, a Dean of Students at each middle school, two elementary advanced academic services teachers, and a part-time family liaison.

Mayor Justin Wilson called the Board’s budget a “significant disconnect” between the Council and the Board and said that the additional $10.7 million would require a real estate tax increase. The operating budget problems are compounded because ACPS, like many school systems, is in a near system-wide hiring crisis. The often-impassioned work session discussion included statements on intra-government relations, tax policy, education and child welfare, teacher recruitment and retention, and electoral politics.

Some of Alexandria’s best minds regularly consider how the Council and the Board schedule and address their respective operating and capital budgets.  Each body has a knowledgeable budget advisory committee and each adopts a detailed budget resolution or similar process that defines how they examine their operating and capital budgets.  The following are modest suggestions that take no position about the merits of any budget line item.

The Market Rate Adjustment Request

A market rate adjustment, or cost of living allowance, is never guaranteed or predictable—it is subject to city revenues and general economic conditions.  Thus, an MRA is not appropriate for inclusion in the Superintendent’s proposed operating budget.  Treating the MRA as an additional funding request by the Board means that every year there will be a multimillion-dollar addition to the Superintendent’s proposed budget.

A better approach might be to return to the practice of making the MRA a separate and unquantified request in the Board’s budget in language stating that if city employees are granted an MRA, then ACPS employees should be treated similarly.  This “magic language” approach, as it was known, had the advantage of relieving the Board from guessing at the percentage amount of an MRA, a decision that ultimately rests with the Council.  Most rational people would admit that for MRA purposes there is no basis for treating city and school employees differently.

The Funding of a Missed Step Increase from Prior Fiscal Years 

ACPS employee compensation improves on a salary scale based on years of service. A missed step increase is a major irritant, thus the rhetoric about a “loyalty penalty” for long-term ACPS employees. There seems to be little comfort in the fact that neither dividends nor compensation increases are guaranteed in the private sector.  Even so, making up a missed step increase for ACPS employees in a prior fiscal is not an isolated action—city employees who may have missed a step increase in a prior fiscal year are justified in saying, “What about us?”

In the best of worlds, there would be a step increase and an MRA for all city and ACPS employees in every operating budget.  Unfortunately, there is nothing anyone can do to guarantee that will happen.  The essential question may be whether the cost of making up a step increase missed in a prior fiscal year yields significant employee retention value.

The Effect of Adding Personnel Positions to the Superintendent’s Proposed Budget 

Adding personnel positions to the ACPS operating budget is a sensitive topic. There are super-majority voting requirements that apply to motions by Board members to add positions.  The addition of positions in an operating budget that is largely composed of personnel expense can also send mixed messages. 

Each individual position may have merit, particularly in the minds of its sponsor and proponents.  However, the cumulative effect of additional positions can pass a tipping point and create inferences that the Board does not think the Superintendent knows how to staff the school system and/or that the Council has been chintzy with ACPS.  Neither assumption is correct. The debate often evolves to whether the Council will “fully fund” the schools, a concept with meaning that varies in the eye of the beholder.

Even so, the number (7.4) of additional positions proposed by the Board in an environment where the school system is struggling to fill vacancies might lead some observers to wonder why those positions were not included in the Superintendent’s proposed budget.

Whoever said that budgets reveal values was assuredly correct.  How budget decisions are made particularly matters when one elected body, the Council, controls the money and another, the School Board, decides how to spend most of it.

Family, friends, colleagues and current and former students of Alexandria City High School teaching legend Louis Kokonis assembled on January 17 at the ACHS King Street Campus for a Celebration of Historical Service honoring the longest-serving teacher in the history of the Alexandria City Public Schools. Mr. Kokonis, who died on January 4, began teaching mathematics in ACPS in 1959. With deep respect and affection for his reticent formality and humility, attendees at the celebration shared memories of the remarkable Mr. Kokonis and his ACPS teaching career of more than 60 years.

Mr. Kokonis at ACHS

In the 14 years I worked with him at ACHS (then, T.C. Williams High School) I had limited success getting Mr. Kokonis to address me as anything other than “Mr. Eaton,” no matter how many times I suggested, in the friendliest way possible, “Please call me ‘Mark.’” 

A key word in the preceding paragraph is “with.”  Any large organization, like a high school, that delivers different services to a diverse clientele necessarily has work groups in concentric circles based on work commonalities.  For teachers, the innermost circle is other teachers who teach the same class, then teachers who teach related classes, then teachers in the same department, and then teachers in the school as an entirety. The sheer size of a school (the ACHS King Street building exceeds 400,000 square feet) can also limit interaction among teachers. 

Even though Mr. Kokonis taught Mathematics and I taught English and Journalism, I saw him regularly in workrooms (we were on the same early morning schedule in using a second floor copying machine) and in meetings, particularly those involving professional development.  He was unfailingly gracious, but he was also all business.

It is very appropriate that many of the pictures of Mr. Kokonis show him writing equations on an illuminated surface.  He is working at a SMART Board, an Internet-enabled whiteboard introduced in ACPS classrooms over 10 years ago.

ACPS, and the ACHS administration, encouraged teachers to use SMART Boards but they were not immediately embraced by teachers.  Like every new workplace technology, there is a learning curve and time is required for user trial-and-error exploration. Some teachers become set in their ways, but not Mr. Kokonis.

When ACPS rolled out new technology, such as laptop computers, or any other instructional theme or approach (or fad, as cynics might assert) Mr. Kokonis was in the front row at professional development sessions.  His years of experience did not stop him from mastering new teaching tools and methods. Remarkably, this was true in the more than 20 years or more he taught after reaching what most people would consider a reasonable retirement age.

Memories of Mr. Kokonis

At the Celebration of Historical Service, former T.C. Williams Principal John Porter recalled his 27 years working with Mr. Kokonis. Porter calculates that Mr. Kokonis taught over 7,000 students. He also offered regular after school and Saturday tutoring sessions and volunteered willingly as a club sponsor and for other duties outside classroom teaching.

Porter remembers that in the era of chalk and blackboards, Mr. Kokonis sometimes had blackboard erasers in his pockets.  Porter recalled that in those days Mr. Kokonis seemed to move through the school in a cloud of chalk dust not unlike Pigpen, a character in Charles Schultz’s long-running comic strip, Peanuts.

The paradox of teaching is that repetition—teaching the same course year after year—can help a teacher refine his or her craft, but it can also lead to staleness, or “phoning it in.”  Mr. Kokonis exemplified the truism that teaching is one of the few pursuits in life in which improvement is always possible.

Some of the most heartfelt and impressive memories of Mr. Kokonis at the celebration were from three of his 2023-2024 students, Thomas Lane, Sehar Saba and Taylor Hoganson. Their respectful descriptions of being in his classes included the suggestion that the years he spent teaching at ACPS should be known as the Kokonian Era.

Mr. Kokonis and the Media

I had the interesting experience of being the adviser to the ACHS student media organization, Theogony, for 13 years.  Journalism students are often talented and opinionated and the Theogony staff was no exception.  First-rate high school journalism requires a limited amount of classroom teaching. The task is similar to encouraging and coordinating the diverse personalities of an opera company.

Students working on their own in groups can be nonlinear: discussions suggesting a lack of focus were part of a work style.  In the chatter of Theogony’s newsroom students (forgetting that I was present, or not caring) often gave candid reviews of the school’s teachers.  I never heard anything but respect for Mr. Kokonis.

As Mr. Kokonis passed remarkable teaching milestones—50, 55 and, almost incredibly, 60 years, successive Theogony staffs published affectionate tributes to him, the most recent of which can be seen

here.

Other media organizations covered Mr. Kokonis and his extraordinary career. Here is a CBS Mornings story on him from April 2023.

So, on behalf of so many people, thank you for everything, Mr. Kokonis.

The District of Columbia, Montgomery County, Maryland, Miami Beach, Florida, Evanston, Illinois, and the state of California have banned the use of gas-powered leaf blowers.  

The movement against gas-powered leaf blowers is driven by residents, some of whom work through Quiet Clean NOVA, a nonprofit that has advocated against gas-powered leaf blowers in several Northern Virginia communities. 

Quiet Clean NOVA’s website can be seen

here.

Quiet Clean Nova’s Change.org online petition to the General Assembly advocating such a ban, which has attracted over 2,000 signatures, is 

here.

Alexandria enacted a revised noise control ordinance that went into effect on January 1, 2022.  According to the city’s website, alexandriava.gov, the City Council’s adoption of the revised noise ordinance “…culminated in a comprehensive effort to make the City’s noise control ordinance legally enforceable and more protective of residential areas, while allowing reasonable vibrancy in the business corridors during business hours.”

The essential restriction of the noise ordinance is, “The decibel standard for commercial use is increased to 65 dB(A) for daytime hours of 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. while the nighttime standard remains at 60(dB(A).”

Numerous studies show that gas-powered leaf blowers dramatically exceed the city’s daytime decibel limit.  For example, according to a 2017 National Institutes of Health study, the sound pressure levels of gas-powered leaf blowers can exceed 95 decibels at the ear of the operator.

Samantha Ahdoot, an Alexandria pediatrician who works from home two days a week, regularly hears gas-powered leaf blowers from a neighboring property.  Her husband, a physician, hears gas-powered leaf blowers at the hospital where he works. Ahdoot said, “We’ve given the soundscape of the city over to these machines.”  Ahdoot recommends listening to classical music as an antidote to gas-powered leaf blowers.

The Venerable and Powerful Two-Stroke Engine

Most gas-powered leaf blowers are powered by two-stroke air cooled single-cylinder engines, a power plant for handheld machinery for decades. These engines are powerful for their size and they have historically been preferred by landscaping companies and power-obsessed homeowners.  Gas-powered leaf blowers typically run on a mixture of oil and gas.  These engines are inefficient and emit harmful pollutants.

Gas-powered leaf blowers also emit sound in lower frequencies that travel over long distances and penetrate walls and windows.  Electric leaf blowers are quieter and produce sound that dissipates over a shorter distance according to a Consumer Reports study.

Chemical and Climate-Warming Emissions

According to 2020 data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, gas-powered lawn equipment emitted nearly 22,000 tons of fine particulates or as much pollution as would be produced in one year by 234 million typical cars. Such equipment emits more than 68,000 tons of nitrogen oxides and 350,000 tons of volatile organic compounds, the two chemical components of ground-level ozone which triggers asthma attacks.  Fossil fuel-powered lawn equipment also emits substantial quantities of carbon dioxide.

Resident and Business Perspectives

Susan Davis, a retired teacher and marketing executive, has attended meetings, gathered petition signatures, distributed Quiet Clean NOVA’s door hang-tags, and urged her condominium association to take a position against gas-powered leaf blowers. 

In addition to the noise and pollution generated by gas-powered leaf blowers, Davis points to the disturbance of natural microsystems—bugs, worms, etc.—caused by leaf blowers and the fertilizing effect of leaving leaves in place. Davis said, “Every time you use a leaf blower, you are blowing away a universe of life.”

Old Town residents have been sensitive to the reverberating noise of gas-powered leaf blowers in the area’s compact environment.  Davis suggests that city governments, school systems, churches and hospitals could lead the way by transitioning to battery-powered equipment for landscape maintenance activities.

Frank Diaz runs Josephine’s Garden, a lawn and landscaping company with numerous Alexandria clients.  Diaz focused on the effect of gas-powered leaf blowers on his employees who operate them nearly every day in leaf season.

Diaz said in a text message that one of his clients, an EPA official, advised him “…2 cycle engine gas blowers do not break down the emissions and the fumes are super dangerous to humans who use them. That alone is reason enough to switch to non gas!”

Diaz described the business adjustments necessary to discontinue using gas-powered leaf blowers:

[I]n Alexandria I have some clients that we have switched to battery charged blowers.  The result is that we have to do a bit more raking and always be charging the batteries.  It adds a bit more time to our work and therefore costs clients a bit more but they don’t seem to mind.  I’m all for changing!

The Politics of General Assembly Authorization

Virginia follows the Dillon Rule, meaning that cities and counties can exercise only powers explicitly authorized or delegated to them by the state. 

The National League of Cities describes the Dillon Rule this way:

Dillon's Rule is derived from a written decision by Judge John F. Dillon of Iowa in 1868. It is a cornerstone of American municipal law. It maintains that a political subdivision of a state is connected to the state as a child is connected to a parent. Dillon's Rule is used in interpreting state law when there is a question of whether or not a local government has a certain power. Dillon's Rule narrowly defines the power of local governments.

The Dillon Rule has allowed state governments to constrain municipalities in various ways.  State legislatures in states following the Dillon Rule have voided municipal minimum wage laws, prevented local plastic bag bans, barred the municipal regulation of ride-sharing services and voided local family leave policies. 

Alexandria elected to seek authority from the General Assembly for municipalities to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers even though the plain language of the noise ordinance seems to enable the city to regulate them.

Assistant City Manager and Legislative Director Sarah Graham Taylor said, “It has to do with enforcement.” She thinks the request for authority from the General Assembly was driven in part by the difficulties of enforcing the noise ordinance—a violation of the noise ordinance requires measuring the decibel level of an activity in progress. In contrast, if localities had authority to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers each municipality could do so as it wished.

In a November 15 message, Alexandria Mayor Justin Wilson confirmed that he expected that authority to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers would be included in the city’s package of legislative requests to the General Assembly for its 2024 session, as it was for the 2022 session.

In the 2022 General Assembly session, Delegate Kaye Kory and Delegate Elizabeth Bennett-Parker co-patroned HB 1337 to give localities the authority to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers.  Senator Barbara Favola introduced a similar bill in the Senate.

HB 1337 died, or was “laid on the table,” in a 5-4 subcommittee vote.

The 19^th century Prussian leader, Otto Von Bismarck, is reputed to have said, “Laws are like sausages. It is best not to see them being made.”  The subcommittee debate on the bill in February 2022 was brief.  The debate can be seen

here.

Senator Favola was re-elected earlier this month. Delegate Kory did not run for re-election.  The effects of the new Democratic majorities in the House of Delegates and the Senate remain to be seen, but legislative action permitting cities and counties to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers will need a sponsoring member or members of the House of Delegates.

In a November 17 message, Kelsey Wright, Delegate Bennett-Parker’s Chief of Staff, wrote:

We believe another member is introducing this bill and Delegate Bennett-Parker will support their efforts. Delegate Bennett-Parker supports allowing localities to regulate gas-powered leaf blowers and will continue to co-patron such legislation.

The New York Times published a lengthy and affectionate obituary describing Jaffee’s long and interesting life that can be viewed

here.

A Long and Brilliant Career

In 1964, Jaffee created the Mad Fold-In, an illustration on the inside back cover of the magazine which, when folded in thirds, revealed a second image which contained a different, and often subversive, message. Jaffee was the sole creator of the fold-in for 55 years.

A tribute containing 13 of Jaffee’s fold-ins that spanned decades can be seen

here.

Another of Jaffee’s signature features for Mad was “Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions.”  Here is an example:

In Mad’s peak period in the 1960’s and early 1970’s no target was off limits. Mad’s satire and general irreverence seemed incredibly cool to someone growing up in a small town in Michigan.  Even better, when I became a Mad subscriber my parents disliked it. My Dad called Mad “juvenile.” I was an aspiring, and then actual, juvenile, so the magazine was a perfect fit.

Here is a 1971 cover showing how Mad went after one of its prime targets, Hollywood movies:

Jaffee was one of the group of artists and writers at Mad that were referred to as “the usual gang of idiots.”  He was extremely productive and collections of his work were very popular. 

Here is the cover of one of Jaffee’s collections that shows his somewhat beatnik-looking self-portrait:

New York, New York

I drifted away from reading Mad when I went east to Wesleyan University and then to Columbia Law School in New York City.  I learned many things living near the Columbia campus on the West Side of Manhattan, and not all of them involved legal training.

I discovered that then, and I think now, it is very difficult to travel from east to west (or the reverse) by public transportation in Manhattan after about 10:00 pm.  Busses and taxis go north and south, down Fifth Avenue or up Madison Avenue on the East Side and up and down Broadway or West End Avenue on the West Side, but the crosstown bus routes are limited by the natural barrier of Central Park. The subway lines run generally north and south, except for a shuttle between Grand Central Station and the 42nd Street subway station. And, all forms of public transit run with reduced frequency in the late evening.

The Camera

One weekend night in 1974 or 1975 I went, uncharacteristically, to a party on the Upper East Side.  I left the party late, and I was aware that it could take a couple of hours to to get back to our apartment at 114^th Street and Riverside Drive, in what was then a dubious neighborhood. The apartment faced two air shafts—there were no exterior windows—and I shared it with two other law students.  I decided, in this rare instance, that a taxi, a major expense, was appropriate.

I hailed a taxi and when I got in the back seat I immediately felt something smooth and heavy on the seat—a 35mm camera in its case.  Ever respectful of authority, I told the driver, “ Sir, I’ve found a camera in the back of your taxi.” He replied, in the best traditions of New York cab drivers, “I don’t want to f____ ing know about it.” 

When I got home, I showed the camera to Al Ferrer, my roommate who had driven a cab in the summer after our first year of law school.  His suggested that I call a city agency known as the Hack Commission (from “hackney,” I supposed) and report that I had found a camera.  If nobody claimed it, a virtual certainty in a city as big as New York, then I would own a new (to me) camera.  I made the call and reported that I had found the camera and where I was when I found it.

About a week later the phone rang in our apartment and a woman’s voice, in a heavy New York accent, said, “I think you have my camera.”  The voice described the camera in accurate detail down to the number of exposures and the color of the camera strap.  The camera I had appeared to be the one she was describing and I told her so. She said, “Will you bring it to me?”  I declined, probably ungraciously. I gave the woman my address which, I suspected, was probably alien territory for her.

Three or four days later there was a knock on the door which I opened to find a stylish New York lady with two of the largest men I had ever seen on either side. My camera claimant had come with personal protection that seemed to have been provided by the New York Giants.

I gave her the camera and the woman said, “You know, it’s not really my camera. It belongs to an artist, Al Jaffee, who draws for Mad.  He would like to give you a reward.”

I was too smart to fall for any of this and I was disappointed that my possible acquisition of a fancy camera was not going to happen. I suspected that the woman was a con artist of some kind, but the presence of her two large friends made pursuing that impossible. I adopted my best New York wise guy attitude. “Lady,”  I said, “if the camera belongs to Al Jaffee ask him to do a drawing for me.” 

Weeks, or maybe months, passed and I forgot about the camera, the lady, and her huge sidekicks.

Then, the mail came one day and this was in it:

Only Al Jaffee would conclude the camera episode with a cartoon self-portrait as the Greek philosopher, Diogenes.1

So, thanks Al, for the many laughs and for shoring up my faith in people.

Much has been written, and will be written, about the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB.)  The definitive account of how a bank with more than $200 billion in assets vaporized almost overnight will take time to construct.  This is a short exploration of the asset classification system that is one part of the theology, or belief system, of American banking and how it relates to SVB’s failure.

A Bank’s Choice: Are Assets “Held to Maturity” or “Available for Sale”?

The most detailed news accounts of SVB’s collapse describe an asset classification choice that banks are permitted to make to comply with regulatory requirements designed to insure they have sufficient capital. Banks are permitted to designate investments (acquired with deposits and other assets) as “held to maturity” (HTM), meaning that the bank intends to hold the investment, often a bond or other security issued by the Department of the Treasury, until its due date when the principal and accrued interest will be paid to the investing bank. 

The advantage of designating assets as HTM is that the bank can carry the assets on its books at their amortized cost, or essentially the price paid for the asset.  If interest rates on, say, Treasury bonds, rise above the interest paid on the HTM assets the market value of those bonds declines.  However, because those assets are designated HTM, the bank is not required to realize a loss—the HTM assets continue to be carried on the bank’s books for regulatory capital compliance purposes at their amortized cost.

One argument for the HTM designation of assets is that if a bond really is held to maturity interim price movements should not matter: the principal and interest on the bond accurately represents the bank’s capital.  Another argument supporting HTM classification is that when interest rates rise, the rates banks pay on deposits do not rise point for point.  In other words, the spread widens between what the bank earns on its assets and what the bank is obliged to pay depositors. This makes the deposits more valuable to the bank just as its HTM-designated bonds become less valuable, provided the deposits stay in the bank.  If the deposits stay in the bank, everything works out fine in the long run.

A detailed March 14 story, Inside the Collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, in The New York Times shows that SVB relied extensively on HTM asset classification. The Times reported:

As of Dec. 31, SVB classified most of its debt portfolio, or roughly $95 billion, as “held to maturity.” Because of an accounting loophole, the bank didn’t have to show fluctuations in the value of those bonds on its balance sheet.

On average, banks with at least $1 billion in assets classified only 6 percent of their debt in this category [HTM] at the end [of] 2022. But Silicon Valley Bank put 75 percent of its debt as held to maturity, according to a research report by Janney Montgomery Scott.

The complete story can be read

here.

The HTM classification is subject to an important condition: if the bank sells any of its HTM assets then, all of its HTM assets are automatically designated as “available for sale,” meaning that such assets must be carried on the bank’s books at their market value—the assets are “marked to market.”

Should the high percentage (relative to other banks) of SVB’s assets classified as HTM have been a bigger warning signal to the bank’s regulators?  Stay tuned for investigations, reports and statements by politicians on this issue.

Large U.S. Banks Extensively Reclassified Assets as HTM in 2022

SVB classified Treasury bonds as HTM when it acquired them—effectively betting that interest rates would go down. On March 30, the Journal reported that it had identified six large U.S. banks that together reclassified more than $500 billion in previously acquired bond holdings in 2022. The Journal reported:

The banks’ held-to-maturity bonds had a combined $1.14 trillion balance-sheet value as of Dec. 31, up from $681 billion a year earlier. The increase was mainly due to the reclassifications.

The $1.14 trillion figure was $118 billion, or 12%, higher than the bonds’ fair market values, disclosed in footnotes to the banks’ financial statements. The $118 billion was equivalent to 18% of the banks’ total equity, which is the difference between assets and liabilities.

The complete article can be read

here.

Thus, HTM reclassification by the large banks had a significant effect on making their balance sheets look better than they would have if their HTM-designated assets had been reported at fair market value.

Does the “Held to Maturity” Versus “Available for Sale” Asset Classification Distinction Make Sense?

Treasury-issued debt securities are subject to complete price discovery—the market price of a Treasury bond is ascertainable on a computer screen in second-by-second intervals.  Thus, there would seem to be a more accurate picture of a bank’s capital position if all its assets were deemed “available for sale” and booked at their market value. In other words, is there any real purpose to the HTM classification?

The question seems logical. However, SVB’s collapse, and the way the banks have managed risk as interest rates increased, suggest that eliminating HTM classification may further stress the banking system.  An article in The Wall Street Journal’s March 25-26 edition, The Economy Changed, Bank Regulation Didn’t reports that the aggregate unrealized losses on securities held by U.S. banks now exceed $500 billion, or roughly twice the size of SVB’s asset base at its peak.

These unrealized losses are not due solely to the classification of assets as HTM. A Journal chart illustrates that the banks’ unrealized losses derive mainly from holdings in four types of securities. The largest portion of the unrealized losses is attributable to mortgage-backed securities (MBS). There are also unrealized losses in bank holdings of commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), asset-backed securities (ABS) and United States Treasury obligations (“Treasuries.”)

The complete article can be seen

here.

Journal opinion writers suggest that HTM classification helped to hide SVB’s true financial condition and advocate for banking system change. A column in the March 29 edition said that, “[B]y December 2022, SVB had an unrecognized loss of $24 billion on its hold-to-maturity securities combined with a new reliance on hot money.” The column asserts:

Instead of raising the deposit insurance limit or expanding supervisor powers, Congress should require all assets held by banks to be marked to market.

The column can be read

here.

The marking of all bank assets to market—the elimination of the HTM classification— would be a significant revision to American banking theology. In the near term, at least, bank balance sheets would look significantly worse. Would the additional transparency derived from marking all bank assets to market be worth the shock to the banking system?

Possible Takeaways

SVB was not the only bank that has miscalculated risk as interest rates increased. The reclassification of assets as HTM by large banks in 2022 now looks like the “go to” move to preserve balance sheet appearances when, in fact, there were significant declines in total equity. The accounting consequence of HTM classification seems to outweigh the reasons—the theology—supporting it. The problem for policy makers is that eliminating the HTM classification of assets in the worthy pursuit of accurate financial reporting by banks would further stress the banking system.

Banking, as some wise guy said, is a confidence game.1

Your comments are very welcome.

 And He tells me I am His own,

And the joy we share as we tarry there,

None other has ever known.

The moving refrain of the hymn, “In the Garden” was heard Friday night, January 13, in the Gibbon Street headquarters of the Departmental Progressive Club (DPC) during the ceremony installing the club’s new officers.  “In the Garden” is the official song of the DPC, an Alexandria African-American fraternal organization with a long history of community service.

The new officers were installed before a gathering of DPC members, city and state political leaders, and city officials. Attendees included Delegate Charniele Herring, City Manager James Parajon, and City Councilors Canek Aguirre, John Taylor Chapman, Aliya Gaskins and Kirk McPike.

Former School Board member Christopher Lewis took over from former School Board member William Campbell as the DPC’s President.  Campbell moves to the position of Chair of the House Committee which oversees the club’s physical plant.                                      

Lewis thanked the DPC’s members and new officers and vowed to carry on the DPC’s traditions.

A slideshow presented by longtime DPC member Lawrence Robinson depicted decades of activities involving club members.

Lewis and master of ceremonies Merrick Malone, the DPC’s incoming Vice President, emphasized the club’s heritage and recalled the many DPC members who held leadership positions in the city.

Referring to DPC members and community leaders of the past such as Ferdinand Day, Melvin Miller and Nelson Greene, Lewis said, “We stand on the shoulders of others.”

It is difficult to predict how long this back-and-forth White House-Capitol Hill dance will last, but it has become increasingly clear that about the only real value of the debt ceiling is that congressional Republicans believe that not breaking the debt ceiling matters to Democrats. Thus, Republicans think, if Democrats believe Republicans might be crazy enough to breach the ceiling, Democrats will agree to more or less any demand put forward by Republicans including the draconian spending cuts Republicans seem to have in mind. This kind of “Do what I say, or I’ll shoot” (as the gun is pointed at the shooter’s head) approach is not new. 

In director Stanley Kubrick’s classic 1963 movie, Dr. Strangelove: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, Russian ambassador Alexi de Sadesky (Peter Bull) tells U.S. President Merkin Mufley (Peter Sellers) that the Russians have invented a “doomsday machine”— a network of underground nuclear weapons that cannot be disarmed and are automatically triggered by a nuclear attack on Russia, resulting in global devastation. However, as national security expert Dr. Strangelove (Peter Sellers, again, eerily anticipating Henry Kissinger) witheringly explains, the doomsday machine is of no value if Russia does not publicize it.  Ambassador de Sadesky offers a feeble, but very human, excuse for Russia’s failure to disclose the doomsday machine.  Here is the scene:

The idea that life imitates art is not a new one, but the parallels between the debt ceiling and Dr. Strangelove’s doomsday machine are intriguing.  Neither the debt ceiling nor the doomsday machine has any positive or constructive value, each is based on an assumption about what others might think, and each potentially puts events in motion that may lead to an avoidable widespread catastrophe.

None of this is an argument for ignoring the potential devastating economic consequences of a breach of the debt ceiling that outlasts the period (which, according to the Times, runs through early June) when the Treasury runs out of extraordinary measures.  And, today’s events are, in movie terms, a sequel: there was debt ceiling brinkmanship between Congress and the Obama administration in 2011 and 2013 with negative consequences. 

A reasoned conversation by Congressional and fiscal policy leaders, as part of or after the posturing and negotiation to come, about the continuing utility of the debt ceiling is probably too much to ask.  It may be that the best we can hope for is a mini-life lesson: we should be wary of situations where the only utility for something seems to be its assumed effects on the minds of others. 

 Your thoughts are very welcome.

In 1926, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Public Assemblages Act which required the racial segregation of all public events and facilities.  The statute mandated that if a white person entered, for example, a theater, African Americans were required to leave immediately.

The Public Assemblages Act was one of three “racial integrity” laws passed in Virginia between 1924 and 1930.  The Racial Integrity Act of 1924 prohibited interracial marriage and defined as white a person “who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian.”  In 1930, a law was passed that defined as black a person with even a trace of African American ancestry.

A Matter of Necessity: The Founding of the Departmental Progressive Club

Another important event occurred in 1926: Alexandrians Jesse Carter, Lawrence Day, Clarence Greene, Raymond Green, Booker T. Harper, Jesse Pollard and Samuel Reynolds, all of whom worked in federal government departments, organized the Departmental Progressive Club (DPC) as a social and community service organization.  The club continues to operate today from its Gibbon Street headquarters which dates from 1955.

School Board member and former City Councilor Willie Bailey, former School Board Member Bill Campbell, Bill Chesley, the retired Deputy Director of the city’s Department of Recreation, Parks and Cultural Activities, and Merrick Malone, a real estate developer, attorney and former District of Columbia and Detroit official, have been DPC members and officers for decades.

Malone has lived in Alexandria since 2005. He said, “These seven men got together and really created the Departmental Progressive Club—you had mail carriers, elevator operators—to think of the strength and the vision of those seven founders to be able to come together and do that…the vision and the courage they had, tied together with comradeship.”

Malone said, “I like to say that we [the DPC] were created out of necessity.  Back then, they would provide safe haven for kids having a place to study or to have a dance.  They also began to fight for equality. During those times there was no alternative. It was one place that all African Americans could gather…because they couldn’t do it anywhere else.”

What the DPC Meant to Alexandria’s Youth

“Growing up, you heard of the club—they sponsored your teams, football, basketball…you just knew that they were out there supporting youth, somehow—the name was on the back of your jersey. Then, as you get older, you find out that your coaches were members of the Departmental Progressive Club,” Bailey said, “It was just a respected organization.  You knew that this was one organization in the city that was doing something to help you as a black man growing up in Alexandria city.”

Bailey said, “I wanted to be a member to help give back… because I knew what the club did for me and folks like me growing up. Knowing that some of those folks were still members of the club, I owed it to them because of what they did for us.”

Chesley began working in Alexandria in 1980.  He joined the DPC in 1988 at civic activist Melvin Miller’s suggestion.  Miller was an active recruiter for the DPC.  Chesley first became aware of the DPC in 1984 when he oversaw youth sports programs in the city and eventually served three years as the DPC’s President. 

During the middle 1980’s Little League baseball teams were organized by residential boundaries which meant that teams with players from Alexandria Redevelopment Housing Authority properties were essentially all black.  Chesley described how DPC members worked to defuse problematic interactions with parents over which teams their children would play on. Chesley said that the DPC’s leaders “definitely wanted to dispel” the idea that the DPC did not want white players on its team. 

The DPC was represented at that time by Lawrence Day, Charles Nelson, Sr. and Lawrence Robinson.  “I was really impressed that the club was really interested in not just putting money up to sponsor the team but had an active stake in coaching and making sure that the program went well,” Chesley said, “We pretty much navigated that—there were still some challenges there but they weren’t because of the club,” but rather because some white parents did not want their children to play on a DPC-sponsored team.

The DPC’s Alexandria Roots

Bailey said that young people in Alexandria may not know the DPC’s history or be familiar with the accomplishments of its members. 

Malone said that because of affordability many DPC members who grew up in Alexandria now live in other jurisdictions. Bailey said, “That tells you a lot about how they feel about their city that they don’t even live in—they come back and are still members of the Departmental Progressive Club and give back to the community.”

“I marvel at the closeness of the African American community that grew up here—the nicknames, the stories,” Malone said, “The fabric created by those men—I feel like I know them.” 

Malone has served on numerous corporate and nonprofit boards. “I can’t think of another organization that is more important to me than the Departmental Progressive Club.  This is an organization that was founded out of necessity by African American men,” said Malone, “Think about how many organizations have come and gone in 90 years.”

An Accomplished Membership

Malone, Chesley and Bailey cited the leadership and accomplishments of DPC members Melvin Miller, Nelson Greene, brothers Lawrence and Ferdinand Day, Bill Euille, Earl Cook, Lawrence Robinson, Jackie Mason and others. Malone said, “A lot of leaders have come out of this club who were willing to put it on the line to press things like affordable housing.”

Bailey said, “If you look at any organization in the city that’s trying to do right by people overall, there are members of the club that are involved…we recruit each other to do that.”  Malone said, “We sit on boards and commissions, that’s for sure.”

Campbell, the DPC’s current President, moved to Alexandria from the Seattle area in 2005.  He said, “Every time I turned around, I kept running into people linked to the DPC,” including Jim Henson, Melvin Miller, Ferdinand Day, the Gray brothers, and Roy Priest, the Director of the Alexandria Redevelopment Housing Authority.  As Campbell’s children progressed through ACPS they encountered DPC members in elementary, middle and high school.

Campbell said, “The DPC made me feel that Alexandria was a good place, although it still had some challenges.”

Campbell said that gentrification, the pandemic and an aging membership (some members have belonged for more than 45 years) reduced the DPC’s membership from a peak of about 125 to below 50.  Campbell, the DPC’s current President, has made expanding the membership a priority.

The DPC’s Historic Headquarters

Malone said that Old Town has gentrified around the DPC’s Gibbon Street headquarters. Malone said that today, “You would be hard pressed to find a black family [that lives] around our club.” 

Bailey described the relationship between the DPC and its Old Town neighbors as cordial.  Bailey said, “The neighbors respect the club—when you’re there and you see them, they smile...And, we’re very respectful of our neighbors.”

Gentrification drove an increase in the assessed value of the building and in real estate taxes. The DPC’s headquarters now has an assessed value of $2.8 million.  Malone sees the DPC’s headquarters as “our nemesis as well as our opportunity.”  

Campbell and others are interested in exploring the possibilities of renovating the Gibbon Street building or a property trade similar to the one between the city and the Old Dominion Boat Club.

The DPC’s Next 95 Years

Malone, Bailey and Campbell said that there were occasions when each questioned whether his DPC involvement was worthwhile.  Every time one of them considered resigning, he decided that the club’s history, particularly its tradition of community involvement, made it important to stay and work to sustain the club and rebuild its membership.

Campbell is particularly interested in involving the DPC’s historically important Ladies Auxiliary more directly and effectively.  He said, “We haven’t done as good a job as we needed to with the Ladies Auxiliary.” 

Chesley said that the Ladies Auxiliary was active in the past.  His wife was a member of the Ladies Auxiliary, as was legendary activist Eula Miller, the wife of Melvin Miller.   Chesley said, “I think it [the Ladies Auxiliary] has had a very respected and healthy existence.”

Campbell, Chesley, Malone and Bailey want to see the DPC engage more positively with Alexandria as an organization, not just through the reputations and accomplishments of its members.  Campbell said, “We have as many prominent members as we’ve ever had.”

Malone is optimistic about the DPC’s future because of its younger members. Campbell agreed and said, “We need to do a better job of letting folks know that and also use that to continue rebuilding our membership.” 

Malone believes there is a role for the DPC in Alexandria’s increasingly difficult affordable housing situation.  He said, “When 90% of your [city] employees live outside of your city you need to be making affordable housing your number one priority.”

“If you look around, our [the DPC’s] base has shrunk. The city is becoming whiter, wealthier, and the question is to try to figure out how not to be ignored…I have always thought that, if allowed, this city could ignore people of color,” Malone said, “One of the things the Departmental Progressive Club is going to do is we are not going to allow people to ignore that we have underserved people of color in the city.” 

Bailey added, “There are not a lot of organizations doing enough for people of color. Those folks who need help, who helps them?”

The DPC has a wealth of historic documents and has formed a Historical Documentation Committee to organize this material. 

Campbell said, “For the next 95-100 years we still want to be in Alexandria, still doing things we’ve historically done, but in a modern way.”

Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan announced on August 21 that she was retiring her column and leaving the paper for a teaching position at Duke University.  On August 18, CNN canceled host Brian Stelter’s long-running Sunday morning show, Reliable Sources, one the few television shows focusing on journalism and the work of journalists.  Like Sullivan, Stelter was dedicated to analyzing the media’s failures and successes and particularly how the media covered former President Donald Trump.

Sullivan’s 42 years in journalism saw her rise from an intern to be the first woman to become the chief editor of her hometown paper, The Buffalo News.  From 2012 to 2016 she served as the Public Editor, or “reader’s representative” of The New York Times before joining the Post.   Her book, Newsroom Confidential: Lessons (and Worries) from an Ink-Stained Life will be published by St. Martin’s Press in October.

Stelter graduated from Towson University in 2007.  At 18, he created a blog, TVNewser, about television and cable news that became a must-read.  At 22, he was hired as a media reporter by The New York Times.  In 2014, he became the host of Reliable Sources and CNN’s chief media correspondent.  With the show’s cancellation, Stelter will leave the network.  In 2020, he published Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth.

Sullivan and Stelter are not the only journalists to dedicate themselves to reporting on how well the media does it job, but they were among the best and they will be missed.

Does Journalism Criticism Even Matter?

For Americans who assert not just their own opinions, but also their own facts [1] intelligent criticism of how well journalists do in conveying the best available version of objective truth may be irrelevant. After all, what is the point of assessing the media’s performance if you can select media sources that support your personal (and sometimes detached from reality) worldview?

Trying to understand how journalists succeed or fail at conveying the best available version of the truth is an act of citizenship. In contrast, the most damning indictment of the media attaches to those outlets that enable, or continue to enable, the election denial lie.  There are repeated reports that prospective Republican candidates in some areas of the country are told they need not believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen, they only need to say that it was.  Moral issues sometimes seem to be out of fashion.  Even so, when a candidate must sacrifice the truth for party membership or endorsement we are at a degraded level of cynicism.  Journalists who enable or support this deserve equal blame.

Sullivan and Stelter contributed valuable critiques of journalism and it is worth considering their work.

The End of Ombudsmen and Public Editors

Journalism has a long tradition of self-criticism and self-reflection that arises out of what seems to be an antiquated idea: journalism is a public trust.  Until a few years ago that tradition included the presence of a paid staff critic of standards and practices at two leading newspapers.

The Washington Post discontinued its Ombudsman position in 2013 and The New York Times discontinued its Public Editor position in 2017.  The rationale for ending these positions (besides reducing personnel costs) was that the Internet empowered readers to communicate (and complain, if necessary) to media outlets instantly.  Many Post and Times reporters were not sorry to be free of the inward-looking examination of the Ombudsman or the Public Editor.

Where to Find Media Coverage and Criticism

While the Ombudsman and Public Editor positions were discontinued, the Post and the Times still assigned reporters to cover journalism and the media. The Times publishes its Media Equation column on an intermittent basis and it is not identified with a particular reporter or columnist.

The Post ran Sullivan’s column, and runs stories on the media by Paul Farhi, Elaine Izadi and others, in its increasingly thin and irrelevant Style section.  The implication is that opinion journalism about the media is not as weighty or significant as the issues addressed on the editorial pages. Another possibility is that someone on the Post just thinks media analyses should be located near the television listings.

Many of the reporters on the media beat are among the most independent-minded practitioners of the profession and some of its most talented writers. The late David Carr was an exceptionally talented media reporter for The New York Times.  Carr seemed to be everywhere at once and his column, the Media Equation, became must-reading until his untimely death at 58. 

Carr overcame drug addiction and his journey from an alternative newspaper in Minneapolis to the Times was remarkable. His life and work were gracefully and affectionately memorialized in his Times obituary which can be read

here.

Carr and Stelter figure prominently in an entertaining 2010 documentary, Page One: Inside the New York Times. Carr, while an iconoclast, represents traditional journalistic values and a very young Stelter shows a profound understanding of the significance of social media for journalists. More about the movie is available

here.

Former Post reporter Howard Kurtz, the host of Fox News’ MediaBuzz, is another consistent chronicler of journalists and what they do. Unlike other Fox programming, MediaBuzz offers a diversity of views.

More about MediaBuzz is available

here.

What Margaret Sullivan Did and Why It Matters

Sullivan combined extensive journalism experience with succinct expression, an ability to respond rapidly to events, and a willingness to credit the insights of others. Her convictions included the belief that, “News outlets can’t continue to do speech, rally and debate coverage—the heart of campaign reporting—in the same old way.  They will need to lean less on knee-jerk live coverage and more on reporting that relentlessly provides meaningful context.”

Here is Sullivan’s final column describing the importance of “framing,” or providing context as part of reporting:

As Kate Pickert, director of Loyola Marymount’s journalism program noted last week, AP’s Twitter news alert took De Santis’ hyperventilating news conference at face value, providing the kind of treatment the governor might have written himself: “Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced criminal charges against 20 people for illegally voting in 2020, the first major public move from the Republican’s controversial new election police unit.” Whereas the New York Times tweet cut through the noise (I’ve added the italics): “Gov. Ron De Santis said 17 people have been charged with casting illegal ballots in the 2020 election, in which 11.1 million Floridians voted.  There is no evidence that election crimes are a serious problem in Florida or anywhere else in the U.S.”

Sullivan did not hesitate to call out the media for its fixation on conflict, for reporting on elections as horse races, and the practice of false balance or “both sidesism”—the tendency to report both sides of a controversy “objectively,” or as equally credible, when one position clearly contradicts the vast weight of evidence, for example, the existence of climate change or whether major historical events actually took place.

The titles of some of Sullivan’s 2022 columns for The Washington Post reveal the range of her perspectives on the practice of journalism: 

Book Bans are threatening American democracy. Here’s how to fight back.;

The cautious calculation behind whether Fox will dump Trump; 

Four reasons the Jan. 6 hearings have conquered the news cycle;

Newspapers are dying?  This digital media veteran launched one anyway.;

 Please, pundits, stop trying to predict the future. You’re bad at it.;

 Every week, two more newspapers close and ‘news deserts” grow larger;

 How journalists can spot the signs of autocracy—and help ward it off; and,

Chris Stirewalt lost his job at Fox News. But he knows he was right.

Sullivan was among the earliest observers of the media to recognize the importance of Facebook as a news source.  She was highly critical of the company’s reluctance to police extreme content on its platform. Where appropriate she has criticized established media institutions such as the Times and the Post and she accurately perceived and described the co-dependent relationships that Donald Trump had with Fox News and CNN.

Much of what Sullivan advocates involves old school journalistic values—fairness, accuracy, completeness, the use of identified, not anonymous, sources and dogged effort to get at the truth.  She believes that real-time fact checking has its uses, but, “Better to wait until these live events have occurred and then present them packaged with plenty of truthful reporting around them.”

Sullivan’s farewell column can be read

here.

What Brian Stelter Did and Why It Matters

Reliable Sources ran for 30 years on CNN. Prior to Stelter, the show was hosted by Marvin Kalb and Howard Kurtz.  Stelter, though limited by the high concept/sound bite nature of television, consistently explored the news and the government’s (particularly the Trump Administration’s) relation to the media and where journalists fell short.

With this year’s sale of AT&T’s media properties to what is now Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN went through an ownership change. CNN’s new direction seems to involve less commentary by opinionated hosts.

Here is Claire Malone of The New Yorker on August 19 on the cancelation of Reliable Sources and Stelter’s departure from the network:

In retrospect, it seems clear that it was only a matter of time before Stelter got the boot.  Under new ownership, CNN’s parent company was in thrall to the libertarian billionaire John Malone, who said he wanted to see “CNN evolve back to the journalism it started with, and actually have journalists which would be unique and refreshing.”

Stelter, who became a target for Fox News “personalities” and like-minded others, was perceived as anti-Trump because he consistently and effectively pointed out Trump’s lies.

On the final episode of Reliable Sources, Stelter said, wonderingly, that his farewell message had not been reviewed in advance by CNN’s management.  Stelter said:

I know it’s not partisan to stand up for decency and democracy and dialogue. It’s not partisan to stand up to demagogues. It’s required. It’s patriotic. We must make sure we don’t give platforms to those who are lying to our faces.

Stelter’s message to the Reliable Sources audience during the show’s finale contains the disarming admission that he did not think he had enough hair to be on television.  His five-minute summary of his time on the show is heartfelt and worth watching. It can be seen

here.

Stelter said in his farewell message that, “We are all members of the media now.” The expansion of social media platforms suggests that this is true. It is also true that critical analysis of how the media works, or should work, by knowledgeable journalists such as Margaret Sullivan and Brian Stelter is a public service.

1. “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts” is attributed to the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D). Moynihan was a social critic and widely-published Harvard professor who served in the Kennedy and Nixon Administrations. He represented New York in the Senate for 25 years.  More about Moynihan is available

here.