Big Dig Investigation

July 14th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the Boston Globe

The Big Dig Investigation

Those politicians calling for an independent review of the Big Dig catastrophe are absolutely correct. It is a mistake to allow those responsible for creating the situation to have a major role in investigating the problems.

One of the more pervasive phenomena in human decision-making is “escalating commitment to a losing course of action.’ This occurs when early investments in terms of money, resources, energy, and time have been committed to a project. At a later stage, the expected pay-offs from the investment have not materialized and the person or organization has to decide whether or not to “cut their losses’ or to make an additional investment. Almost inevitably the person or organization “throws good money after bad.’

This occurs for a couple of reasons. People are very good at identifying external causes for the initial failure and do not expect those causes to recur so they can justify an additional investment in the project. Secondly, success in the project becomes inextricably tied up with their desire to prove themselves competent so the desired outcome has shifted from a successful project to that of a successful project PLUS a successful organization or individual. Te initial objective is swamped by the personal objective.

I said earlier that it is “almost’ inevitable for good money to be thrown after bad. The exception occurs when a different person makes the second decision whether or not to make an additional investment. Successful Banks demonstrate this when they turn non-performing loans to a “work-out’ unit rather than have the original loan officer attempt to resurrect the deal with the client – that way you get escalation!

If the engineers and officials of the Turnpike Authority are to be responsible for the inspection process, we run the danger that – despite their undoubted professionalism – they will be concerned about justifying their prior decisions and work at developing rationalizations rather than reasons for the problems with the tunnel.

It is essential for new eyes, with no emotional commitment to the past decisions,  to investigate the problems.

Withdraw the Hayes Nomination

July 12th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the New York Times

The President should withdraw the nomination of William Haynes for a judicial appointment.

If appointed he will prove to be the Judge Jeffries of American jurisprudence.

He is really too stupid to serve on the bench. Unlike his military lawyer colleagues, he did not grasp that for the US to adhere to the Geneva conventions in all dealings with prisoners and detainees is not simply to protect those prisoners. American adherence to the rules also protects, or should, Americans who fall into enemy hands.

To the extent that we fail to live up to the tenets of international law, our opponents are encouraged to do likewise.

This pattern of activity by the administration, beginning in the early months of its accession to power clearly shows a contempt for international law, a contempt for the Geneva Convention (encouraged by Mr Haynes) and an arrogance that is stupefying in its stupidity. All of these decisions will come back to haunt the United States as other groups and other nations start to play by the US rules. We will come to regret the day we turned our back on the world.

The administration has taken one step in the right direction by declaring itself bound by the Geneva Conventions, let it take another by withdrawing the nomination of Mr Haynes.

Romney, the Big Dig, and Matt Amorello

July 12th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the Boston Globe

What a pathetic, petty person our Governor is proving to be.

At a time when the Turnpike Authority and its leaders should be putting every ounce of their energy in to finding out what led to the tragedy of Tuesday evening, and how the situation can be rectified, and what other hidden problems are waiting to happen, they are being distracted by the Governor's attempt to unseat the Chairman of the Turnpike Authority, Matt Amorello.

Instead of rolling up his sleeves and promising all the State help he could provide to deal with the Engineering and Construction issues, Mitt Romney is putting his energy into reviving his feud with Matt Amorello. What a leader!

The day may come when Matt Amorello should step down but now is not that time. The best chance for an independent inquiry to find out the truth is if it has knowledgeable insiders to deal with. If Amorello steps down before the inquiry is over, his replacement will not have the information the inquiry members need to do their job.

Hospital Deaths

July 5th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the New York Times

Today's editorial on Hospital Caused Death (NYT, July 5, 2006, p: A18 omitted another important step that Hospitals could take to improve patient health: washing hands between patients.

Hospital born/borne infections may not cause death but they do greatly prolong hospital stays. It is unbelievable that almost two hundred years after Semelweiss discovered how germs were transmitted in hospitals, many doctors and nurses do not wash their hands between patients. As a result it has been estimated that about 1.8 million patients contact hospital induced infections each year (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

In the fast based hospital of today with the emphasis on throughput, there must be time given for doctors and nurses to wash their hands, even if gloved, between patients.

Healey, Drugs, and Needles

July 1st. 2006
Sent to but not published in the Boston Globe

Shame on Kerry Healey!

Her support of the Governor's veto of over-the-counter needle sales legislation is, by her own admission, not based on facts (Boston Globe, July 1, 2006, p. B4).

If ever there was a field in which evidence based decisions are needed it is in the fight against substance abuse. For Kerry Healey not to have considered the evidence from studies showing no increase in drug use after the passage of needle sale legislation in other jurisdictions is appalling.
She is an educated woman with a social science Ph.D. so she is trained in the ability to "review the 'methodology'" of the studies. For her to have neglected to do so is an abdication of her responsibility to serve the Commonwealth by making the best possible decisions based on factual evidence.

She must be held to account for this failure.

Martin Evans is Professor Emeritus at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto where he taught research methodology for many years. He also volunteers for the Deval Patrick Campaign.

After Vermont and Texas

June 30th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the Washington Post

Changes needed in the Political Culture of America

Martin G. Evans
Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto

It is a sad day when the Supreme Court demonstrates such intellectual incoherence in the service of partisan advantage. The Court deferred to the Texas legislature in allowing most of its redistricting plan but second-guessed the Vermont lawmakers in striking down the spending limits devised by that State as appropriate to the Election costs in that State.

These two cases demonstrate conclusively that Elections, their financing, and the drawing of electoral district boundaries are too important to be left to the vagaries of Legislators and Judges.

It is time for some common sense to be injected into the debate.

First, voting suppression seems to be rampant in the United States. Most other jurisdictions in Democratic societies separate the administration of Elections from partisan influence. The Chief Elections Officer, who runs the elections, assigns staff and voting machines to precincts, and counts the vote is a Civil Servant subject to the discipline of Civil Service regulations and not beholden to any particular party. This is not the situation in most of the States in the US where the person responsible for running the election is usually a functionary of the political party in power. This has to be changed.

Second, we must move toward a system of campaign financing that depends on public funding rather than private donation. This last will be difficult to achieve because of the Supreme Court rulings that financial donations to politicians and Political Action Committees are protected by First Amendment free speech provisions. To undo this a long run strategy of a Constitutional amendment will be necessary. One step in the right direction can be achieved by a change in a totally different arena: licensing radio and television stations. Most money in election campaigns goes to a media blitz. If TV and Radio outlets were required, as they are in the UK and Canada, to provide access to political candidates then the necessity for candidates to advertise would diminish. Congress should take the necessary legislative action so that new rules can be in place for the next round of license renewals.

Third, as we have seen in Texas and elsewhere, Electoral Districts are often drawn by the legislature. Districts designed by legislators are meant to do two things: first and most important, to protect and enhance the opportunities for more seats for the majority party; and second to protect incumbents of any political stripe. Often the two major parties will horse-trade boundary lines to protect each other's incumbents. In most jurisdictions outside the USA and in some exemplary US States, redistricting is handed over to an Independent Redistricting Commission. These usually have bipartisan representation on the commission but are independent of the legislature.

Changes in these three areas will protect American democracy in the 21st Century.

Due Process

June 29th. 2006
Sent to but not published in the Boston Globe

To the Editor:

As a supporter of same-sex marriage, I find it difficult to be on the same side on the question of due process as the opponents of same-sex marriage. They are however correct in asking for an up or down vote.

Opponents of same-sex marriage followed the Constitution (pending the outcome of the case against the Constitutionality of the Ballot Question). They are entitled to their day in the Constitutional Convention and to having the legislators vote on the issue. If they try to avoid the issue, then it is the right of the Governor to convene another Constitutional Convention and to continue doing so until a vote is taken.

I would, of course, urge the legislators to vote down the ban on same-sex marriage.
That said, it is appalling to see the Catholic hierarchy pontificating in support of their version of family values after the terrible damage it did to families by protecting the sexual predators in the clergy. It will take many years of faithful service before they regain the right to be listened to on these issues.