interview

Although it was over a year since we had the chance of interviewing city architect and reconstructor Michael E. Arth, I still often reference his ideas and visions, which serve as a great source of inspiration. It was clear from the beginning when we got in contact with him that he's not just another idealistic architect with big dreams and an empty pocket. Michael's triumph, today known as the Garden District, is real proof of what one strong will can do to influence other people and create a better community for all of us.

Michael, unlike most architects, thinks practically and get things done, no matter what. But first and foremost I believe he's a thinker; a kind of philosopher in the sense that he first looks at ideas very carefully, and only later worries about how to apply them to real life. He dreamt up the New Pedestrianist vision before he got to work, and regardless of the extremely difficult circumstances, he succeeded. He's like one of those brilliant, seemingly slightly-out-of-touch-with-common-reality kind of people who always lives in the future. Yet he's one of the common folks you see out on the street, mowing the lawn and repairing the porch after work.

And so I was hardly surprised when he just a few months ago announced that he was going to run as candidate for Governor of Florida. When you think about it, it's a logical extension of his past work, most notably involving a complete social, cultural and architectural remake of a neighboorhood in De Land, Florida. He just had to take it further, all the way up to a political level. I guess he now feels ready to implement some of his visions on a broader scale. Visions that combine Libertarian and Progressive ideas, openly defying what Ron Paul famously coined the "two-party charade."

True, you may not agree with all of his policies--some, like the virtual reality projects, may even strike you as unrealistic. However, after having had the great opportunity of interviewing him again about his upcoming political work, I know for a fact that he's never been more serious and focused than what he is today. Politics, as Michael himself is clearly aware of, is a dirty business, but if we know anything about this man, it is that he's not afraid of getting his hands dirty. Watch him succeed, again.

- A. Birch, 08/01/09

Your recent announcement of running for Florida Governor in 2010 positively surprised many of us. What was it that ultimately made you take the step of entering the world of politics?

Televangelism It surprised my wife too. She tried to talk me out of it by saying what we all know—“Politics is a dirty business.” I told her that I want to help make changes that would turn politics into a noble business. To do this, we have to change the winner-take-all voting scheme and eliminate pay-for-play. Our ultimate goal—in addition to protecting and expanding the constitutional guarantees—is to bring the greatest good to the greatest number in the most efficient manner possible. This would also mean turning our winner-take-all economy into one that spreads the benefits more equitably while also increasing efficiency and democratic representation.

To do this we should have electoral reform that includes:

1. Public campaign financing: Make private campaign financing illegal. Give publicly funded micro-payment credits to each voter, who can assign them to their candidates of choice anytime during the campaign. We should have publicly funded websites and in-depth coverage of the issues with a means to compare candidates at any level of scrutiny. TV and radio media would have to air debates among the candidates (who reach a certain threshold of support) as part of their licensing of the publicly owned airwaves. Every candidate would have to take a “political courage test” that requires them to state their views in detail on a long list of subjects. The candidates should have to undergo a meaningful public hearing so the public can know better who they are voting for.
2. Instant Runoff Voting: (aka Majority Voting). Instead of winner-take-all voting, voters would rank their candidates in order of preference. Only a majority can win, so the votes are recounted with the lowest ranking candidates being dropped until there is a majority. This would eliminate spoilers and vote strategizing. In general, this does not favor either end of the political spectrum, but let’s take one particularly egregious example: If instant runoff voting had been in place for the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore would have probably been elected instead of George W. Bush. It would be a different world today.
3. Proportional Representation: Instead of single member districts, you make bigger districts (automatically drawn by computer) where the candidates are elected proportionately. Instead of districts that either Democrat or Republican, thus usually leaving out the majority, you might have 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans, 1 Green, a Libertarian, and 2 Independents in a 10 member district. Almost everyone gets represented in every district. This would make gerrymanders extinct, eliminate redistricting fights, allow third party challengers, and create a representative democracy. Most of the other world’s democracies have some version of this, but we don’t. Why not? It threatens the hegemony of the two-party duopoly.

With the American democratic system being something of a money game for rich contestants, how do you plan to build public momentum without great economic resources backing you up?

After registering to run and setting up my web site, I called up the Florida Democratic Party headquarters and talked to a top official. He did everything he could to talk me out of running. In so many words he said, “If you don’t have $3 million to start and $1.3 million a week to win it you’re wasting your time.”

I said, “If I know the issues better than the other candidates and would make a better governor why shouldn’t I run?”

“The issues don’t count. I spent a long time writing up the issues and no one pays attention to them. It’s all about the money,” he said. “I don’t work in the fundraising side of it because it would shred every last speck of idealism I have left.”

Then he told me that if I did not have the millions in campaign payola, the newspapers would not write one single word about me. This sounded like a challenge to me and I took it. I emailed the editor at the Daytona News-Journal and asked him: “Is it true that if I don’t have $3 million, you won’t write a single word about me?”

The News-Journal’s answer was a front-page story, both above and below the fold, with four photographs. The article continued on page two. I asked this of a few other newspapers, and I was assured that they would cover my campaign and take me seriously. The West Volusia Beacon, for example, came out with another front page story on July 30th appropriately titled, “Can a Renaissance man with no money become governor?”.

The media, including Corrupt.org, can help spread the ideas and the name recognition needed to alert the voters. However, we will still need substantial donations and volunteers in order to win and reform the system. Even with only a fraction of the money we have a good chance of prevailing over our rich opponents and their rich backers because in these tough times people are beginning to focus a little more on the issues. It will ultimately be up to the voters to decide what is more compelling—the propaganda paid for with millions in donations from special interests, or the important issues that will actually affect our lives. To help my campaign please donate here. Sorry, I gotta ask.

You seem to be a Democrat out of practicality more than anything else. With more and more political leaders declaring themselves independents from the two-party hegemony, do you think political parties are still necessary?

Obama McCain George Washington, in his farewell address, warned against “the baneful effects of the spirit of party” and his vice-president John Adams stated: “There is nothing I dread so much as the division of the Republic into two great parties, each under its leader.”

Parties serve a function in organizing like-minded people, while at the same time they create rivalries that exaggerate the divisions between them. Sometimes it’s like rival football teams from different high schools in the same town. The only thing that separates them are the colors and mascots they identify with. We have to be careful of things that polarize us needlessly and be supportive of rational dialogue that promotes rational thought, mutual understanding, and tolerance. Ultimately we are one country, together with other countries sharing one small planet, and we have to learn to get along. We must hold our principles above our party, or even before country. That is the kind of true patriotism that will ensure the improvement and endurance of our union.

I have voted Democrat for almost 40 years, but it has often been a choice between the lesser of two evils. This is because the candidates produced by the two parties are a product of our dysfunctional electoral system. The system is not completely broken down because—occasionally—good leaders do slip through. I still have hope for President Obama. He has been a miracle worker in regards race relations, even though he is clinging to the status quo on important issues related to economics, the Military Industrial Complex, and criminal justice. He is deepening the quagmire in Afghanistan. He has not put enough pressure on Israel to settle with the Palestinians and other Arab neighbors.

Obama has also ridiculed the idea of legalizing marijuana, which is very disconcerting in a country where the War on Drugs has created the highest incarceration rate in the world. It is even more disturbing that a socially conscious black man would ignore this issue, especially when drug prohibition was conceived and launched by President Nixon as a racist war on poor minorities. Minority communities have been devastated and popular contempt for the law—as embodied in prison-inspired fashion and the lyrics of drug-war-inspired “gangsta rap”—now pervades a huge section of society. Mexico’s war on drugs, funded and supplied by American money and guns, is now operating in over 200 American cities. Six thousand people were murdered in the Mexican Drug War in 2008. Drug cartel operatives routinely drop off beheaded corpses of cops or soldiers with warning notes near school grounds and in shopping centers in Mexico. In the U.S., cartels have hooked up with local gangs that were created after the War on Drugs was declared. Phoenix, Arizona sees over 300 drug related kidnappings a year.

At the core, I’m a pragmatic, progressive Democrat who favors such bedrock issues as single-payer health care and diplomacy over reckless military aggression. I have developed economic politics that aim to reverse the compression of the middle class that has been occurring since the 1960s. I favor stem cell research, civil rights, abortion rights, environmental protections, gun control, and increased emphasis on family planning. These tend to be Democratic Party issues, even if the elected Democrats are usually more talk than action. I support free trade because it will help the planet as a whole, but there have to be laws to protect workers rights and their future security as we head into a world that will have increasing automation. Robots, artificial intelligence, driverless cars and other technological wonders should lighten the load and benefit all of us.

I agree with the Blue Dog Democrats and true conservatives about fiscal responsibility and budgeting. Like any prudent investor, we should put away money in good economic times to be used for in lean economic times.

Reconciling your blend of Libertarian and Progressive opinions, what do you believe the role/function of government is in an ideal society?

To further simplify the formula I explained in the first answer, the role of government should be to develop policies that follow the Golden Rule of Sustainability: Do unto current and future generations as you would have them do unto you. There are many important orphaned issues, adopted by the Libertarian and Green parties, that fit into this formula. Some of the libertarian positions need some massaging to make them more equitable, so I would say that the progressives are closer to the ideal. Some of the orphan issues include dealing with overpopulation, taxation, the war on drugs, prostitution, electoral reform, poverty, homelessness, energy self-sufficiency, and growth management.

I won’t go through all of those issues here, but to give one example: I would like to completely overhaul the tax system and replace it with my Sustainable Tax System or STS. Just as Dennis Kucinich proposed an amendment to HR 3200 that would allow individual states to have their own single payer health plans, I propose that Florida be allowed to experiment with STS. I will explain how this could work in a minute.

How have you calculated the $50m figure that would be saved by the abolition of the death penalty? Have you included the costs of increased incarceration rates in that total?

According to Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, since 1972 Florida has spent more than a billion dollars on the death penalty system, which has executed 58 prisoners. That is $18 million per execution. According to FADP’s executive director, Mark Elliott, “Florida spends over $50 million every year on the death penalty. That's an awful lot of money spent to kill a couple of prisoners destined to die in prison anyway. Since [Spenkelink’s execution in 1972], Florida has spent over $1 billion on the death penalty and amassed over 10,000 unsolved homicides.”

The death penalty is not a deterrence according to the majority of leading criminologists. The death penalty is based on retribution, so it violates religious and ethical principles; it probably violates our constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual treatment; innocent people are sometimes executed. Capital punishment disproportionately targets poor minorities who not only have higher conviction rates, but they are suffering for circumstances that have contributed to them committing the crime in the first place. It is also barbaric. We’re in company with countries like Iran, Iraq, China, North Korea, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.

Do you support the same state benefits of marriage for straight and gay couples? Please state your reasons as to why or why not.

I fully support equal rights, including the right to marry, for gay, lesbian, or trans-gender individuals or couples. I reject intolerance on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation. The government has no business trying to regulate, control, or prohibit activities or commitments between consenting adults. Long-term commitments between adults—no matter what their sexual orientation—should be encouraged. Such commitments are good for both individuals and society.

What negative implications can you see from socializing healthcare?

Medicare None, but like anything it has to be done right. It is hard to do it right when the insurance companies are spending $1.3 million a day to convince lawmakers and the public that we shouldn’t have it. That is why you see this hybridized bill called HR 3200 that proposes competing plans. We are the only industrialized Western country without universal health care. We spend twice what Europeans spend and we are behind 41 other countries on life expectancy.

We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. We can just do what other countries do, the way they do it, and we’ll reap the benefits. Actually, we don’t even need to copy other countries. Our own veterans have socialized healthcare. It costs 2/3rds of what Medicare costs and it is the best health care program in the country. The mechanism is already in place. We just need to expand it, and incorporate additional cost-cutting measures that make sense. The Veteran’s Administration reduces costs by taking a comprehensive approach to their patients. They emphasize preventative care and they keep their information in one database. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That preventative medicine is best administered in a single-payer system.

To what extent do you think that applying free market principles in a society can be effective?

The conservative Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman once said that America is about half-socialist. This means it is also about half-capitalist. The socialist half is essential, but it should be reallocated. We should spent less on the prisons, military adventures, and oil subsidies, for example, and more on developing domestic clean energy, education, and an efficient health care system. The market-based half of the economy should be managed better so that banks and other institutions that determine our quality of life are regulated. Things that are bad for us or bad for the environment should be either banned or taxed. Things that are good for us and help sustain us in the long term should be taxed less or not at all. The Arth Sustainable Tax System (STS) should replace our labyrinthine tax system. Ninety-five percent of us—currently that includes those making $200,000 or less a year—would pay no state or federal income tax. Those individuals and corporations in the top 5% would pay federal and state income tax on that portion higher than the 95th percentile. This is fairer than the so-called Fair Tax, but it still addresses the need for an efficient, consumption-based tax.

All taxes would be included in a value-added, consumption-based tax that would be included in the price of the goods or services. It would average around 18%, but unhealthy or unsustainable goods and services would be taxed the most and healthy things the least. The taxes would have to reflect the true social cost of a product instead of privatizing the profits and socializing the costs, as it done now by many businesses. The level of tax for classes of products and services would be determined democratically, but there would have to be independent assessments to determine recommended tax levels and the true social cost. For example, property taxes (whether in the form of a VAT upon sale or in annual property taxes) could be eliminated for houses that are below the median price and size in a given area, but scaled up for houses that are bigger and more expensive. This would help the poor and middle class while tending to reign in construction of the environmentally unfriendly McMansions.

Some say America is currently moving closer to a European model of society. What are your thoughts on this?

Pledge We should be pragmatists and use what works, and stop pretending that there is something good about just being different. That famous European, Winston Churchill, once said that Americans usually do the right thing, but only after trying everything else. Should we keep doing the wrong thing, just because someone plants an American flag on it?

If you were able to implement at least 1/3 of your policy proposals and your vision of New Pedestrianism in a random American small city, how would it change people’s lives for the better?

Do I get to choose which third? I have about 200 proposals in my forthcoming books A New Road, and The Labors of Hercules If I got to pick out 67 of those and implement them, we’d be much better off but I’d have to cheat because everything connects to everything else.

To really fix something you have to go to the root causes. For example, to really fix the schools, you’d have to discourage parenthood among the people who are least qualified from having children. Teaching begins at home, and if kids without proper grounding are sent to school, the teachers end up being wardens for delinquents who drag down the standards for the others. The lack of family planning and effects of overpopulation have grave consequences for a whole range of societal ills. My wish list—no matter how short it is—would include zero population growth. Tragically, despite its importance, it’s unpopular, politicians won’t touch it, and the media ignores it. As mathematician Bertrand Russell once said about overpopulation, “People would rather commit suicide than do math.”

People living in a Pedestrian Village that follows the principles of New Pedestrianism would be radically better off than those not living in one, but they would still have to deal with the problems of the greater society in which they are embedded.

What are the main issues the State of Florida faces today?

Florida Florida is the canary in the coalmine, and it’s choking on its last tweet. Florida is lower, flatter, hotter, and getting more crowded faster than any other state in the continental U.S. Florida faces the same issues the rest of the country faces, but certain issues stand out. We are in greater danger than any other state from global warming and climate change. We have more than our share of ugly, dysfunctional architecture and poor town planning.

Our State Board of Administration (SBA), which administers the financial nest egg of over 1000 schools, municipalities, pension funds, the state lottery, the hurricane disaster fund, and other monies, lost $61 billion in the 18 months preceding March 2009. The funds were mismanaged even after many audits and critical reports warned the current trustees of risky practices. The trustees are Governor Charlie Crist, CFO Alex Sink and Attorney General Bill McCollum. Crist is now running for Senate, while Sink and McCollum are running against me for the governor’s job. I would call for a comprehensive audit and radical transparency.

Florida has the fastest growing prison population and is a major drug-dealing gateway and crossroads. The average U.S. incarceration is 7 times that of Canada. In Florida, it’s 8 times higher. Yet we still have higher rates of violence than Canada. To this Florida’s leaders have answered: “build more prisons.” When are they going to realize that if you cannot keep drugs out of prison, you won’t be able to keep drugs out of open society.

More than half the people in prison are the non-violent mentally ill or those in for drug-related offences. We have 30,000 to 40,000 homeless people wandering our streets, most of whom have mental or substance abuse issues. The answer is to end the war on drugs and treat mental illness and drug addiction as the health issues they are. We also need to let judges do what they do best in regards sentencing. Florida needs to lead on these issues and if the feds do not have the courage to replace the drug war with treatment they at least need to pass a bill that allows Florida and other states to do the practical thing.

In regards global warming and growth issues: Florida’s population in 2010 will be 19 times higher than it was 100 years earlier, while the country as a whole grew by 3.3 times. World population tripled during the same period. So the U.S. population has been growing slightly faster than the world population while Florida’s population grew around 6 times faster than either the country or the rest of the world. This has caused growth-related issues both in terms of the built environment and in how dependent our local economy has become on growth. This growth spiral collapsed during the recession, and we must seize this opportunity to redirect our economy.

All new growth should follow the New Pedestrianism model. We should begin to develop an energy conservation model that promotes a transportation system based on technology now in development—publicly owned, electric, self-driving vehicles coupled with virtual reality. We should also take advantage of Florida’s reputation as the Sunshine State. Cheap solar thermal power, thin, flexible solar panels and other kinds of solar arrays are being developed and installed. Taking into account the subsidies that are flowing out of the country to either prop up or fight with theocratic dictatorships that don’t like us, solar is already cheaper than oil. For more on all these issues, please go to http://www.michaelearth.org.

Michael Arth campaign