********************************
C) Slate/Dear Prudence: When Nude is Rude [Conseils sur la vie sentimentale et la vie tout court. Cette semaine : Je loge chez un couple mari qui vient de virer nudiste. / Dois-je dénoncer à la police mon mari alcoolique qui conduit ivre ? / Est-ce vrai que son premier amour est le plus beau et que toutes celles qui suivent ne peuvent s'y comparer ?]
http://slate.msn.com/id/2107400/
When Nude Is Rude
Dealing with roommates who bare it all.
Posted Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004, at 5:09 AM PT

-*-*-*-
Dear Prudence,
I am a single young woman and have been living with a married couple for about a year and a half. I would not consider myself sheltered, and I am not easily offended, but my roommates' behavior is borderline disgusting, and I am not sure how to handle it. About a year ago, the couple joined a nudist resort. They asked me several times if I was interested, and we had lengthy conversations about why I didn't think it was right for me. My male roommate then began hanging around the house naked, but his wife has never joined him. I made comments to him a couple of times like, "Hey, I don't want to see that," but the best he will do is have a blanket nearby to toss over his lap when I come in the room, or he will wear a thong (which is not much of an improvement). To top it off, they have recently started watching porn on the TV in the living room. I have no problem with porn in the bedroom with a spouse or significant other, but I think they are disrespecting their relationship, and me, by watching it in a more public area of the house. When I went downstairs yesterday morning to find a naked man in my kitchen, I was extremely annoyed. What do I do about these people?

—Not a Prude, but Not Crude

Dear Not,
What you do is tell them either the living room porn and the birthday suits go ... or you do. Prudie's guess is that you are there because they need the extra cash from a renter. You are not a family member, you are not a nudist, and the guy in the kitchen is the last straw. Get their commitment to rediscover clothes, or find another place to live.

—Prudie, courteously

-*-*-*-
Dear Prudie,
I have one heck of a dilemma and am in sorry need of advice. My husband, who I love dearly, is drinking more and more these days. He is retired and on disability. I have suggested counseling and many other forms of help, but he believes that is for the birds, and no way is he going to talk to someone else about "problems that don't exist." But it gets worse; he has now taken up driving with his drinking. Meaning not only is he drinking and driving but drinking WHILE he is driving! Plus, his eye sight is not what it used to be. We aren't kids, Prudie; he is 50 years old, and I'm 45. I admit I consume beer and wine, but I do it at home, and there is no way I would ever get behind the wheel once I have one drink. We live in a country setting, and I fear every time he gets in his car that someone is going to be hurt or, worse, killed. I have gone so far as to talk to a local policeman I know, and he said I should talk to the county sheriff's department and tell them what he is doing. I know if I do, they will put his vehicle on a watch list and pull him over just about anytime he is on the road. And I know that would result in a fourth DUI for him and some jail time. Would I be considered a bad wife if I do this? Tell me what you think, please.

—Sincerely,
Ready To Call the Cops

Dear Red,
Since he won't go to AA, you should go to Al-Anon, the support group for family members. An old truism regarding alcoholism is that if someone close to you thinks it's a problem, it's a problem. Your husband is in denial, obviously, and his three previous DUIs underline that problem. Drunk and impaired drivers have to be kept off the road because other people's lives are at stake, so by all means bring your concerns to the county sheriff's office. You have the chance to avert catastrophe. Do not consider your action duplicitous, but rather one of tough love. A perfect addition to this plan, if they are willing, would be for someone in the sheriff's office to advise your husband that, because of his record, he is now on that list. That way he will have been forewarned, and if he should wind up with a fourth DUI citation, he will be forced to confront the issue. You are certainly not a bad wife to look out for your own husband—as well as others on the road—but, rather, a good citizen. Prudie hopes you follow through.

—Prudie, preventively

-*-*-*-
Dear Pru,
I am a 25-year-old single female with a question that neither my girlfriends nor I seem able to answer. I thought maybe your love expertise could help us. Everyone always says you will never forget your first love. My mother once told me that no love will ever be like your first and that even having been happily married for over 30 years, she still has dreams of her first high-school boyfriend. As for my single girlfriends and me, we are at the stage where some of us have experienced two or three serious relationships that for one reason or another have not resulted in marriage. Some complain that "the feeling" is just not there like it was with their first love. My question is: Does the magic that occurs with the first person you love ever repeat itself, or do we all just have Disney princess syndrome?

—Waiting for Prince Charming the Second

Dear Wait,
Disney princess syndrome? Prudie is unfamiliar with that but hopes it does not involve wanting a life with one of those cartoon animals. In any case, here's the benefit of her "love expertise." Your mother has done you a great disservice, and trust Prudie: The world is not filled with women dreaming of some kid from 30 years ago. "The first love" ideal is one of those folkloric things that's been romanticized and overrated. While it is true that some women may always remember their first love, this in no way means that the ones to follow will not be superior. As for your direct question, the magic does repeat itself—and often with improvements on the original.

—Prudie, historically

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
2) The Onion: Money Thrown at Lunch Problem [Satire : Comment les consultants d'un cabinet de conseil en management arrivent-ils à se décider quoi commander à midi ?]

http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4038&n=3

Money Thrown At Lunch Problem

LINCOLN, NE—Frustrated by the logistics of developing a viable mealtime strategy, employees of the Ryodan Consulting Group threw money at the lunch problem Monday, according to branch manager Ryan Leverenz.
A Papa Luigi's deliveryman provides a stop-gap solution to the Ryodan office hunger problem.
Above: A Papa Luigi's deliveryman provides a stop-gap solution to the Ryodan office hunger problem.

"Even though a seriously reasoned approach could have yielded huge dividends in both efficiency and deliciousness, everyone settled on a quick fix to the need for a midday meal," Leverenz said. "If the team had really put their heads together, I have no doubt that they could have developed an approach that more effectively addressed each individual's specific needs. Is it really commercially viable to order delivery of 20 subs with cheese for 19 staffers, three of whom are lactose-intolerant?"

"And, if you do order subs, why not utilize Deli Italia? Cost-wise, their food averages out at 80 percent of Papa Luigi's," Leverenz added. "These are the questions that should've been asked well before anyone picked up the phone."

The group undertook the lunch-ordering project shortly before noon, when several of the mid-level employees working on the BankOne account got hungry. Team members brainstormed delivery and take-out options, such as Chinese, pizza, Indian, and bagels, and then turned the broad options over to the group.

According to market analyst Don Roswell, this was a mistake.

"The strategy session lost focus because everyone started yelling out restaurant names before we had even agreed on what kind of food we wanted," Roswell said. "This was followed by a hasty delegation of the task to intern Trish Scranton."

Roswell said client-relations team leader Austin Buford undertook the decision.

"How about subs?" Buford said. "Let's just have Trish get us subs. Here's 10 bucks. Get me an Italian or whatever."

Group members quickly acquiesced, throwing money in a pile at the center of the table.

According to Leverenz, the unilateral decision and rushed delegation resulted in the less-than-satisfying lunch that arrived 50 minutes later.

"We had to spend so much time divvying everything up and making change that the subs were soggy and gross when we finally got to eat them," Leverenz said. "I'm positive we can do better."

Ryodan's upper management derided the office for what one upper-level employee characterized as "a laissez faire lunch attitude."

"Our clients know Ryodan for our reputation for prudence and for our systematic approach to problem-solving," said Ryodan vice-president for public affairs Maggie Orville. "From what I hear of their careless lunch-selection process, I can only determine that the team in Lincoln is dangerously out of step with Ryodan's corporate culture."

Copywriter Allison Weinberg said that the lunch problem was more complex than upper management realized.

"Analyzing deliciousness and cost is taxing enough," Weinberg said. "When you add in convenience and the need for variety, it becomes overwhelming. It would take a massive amount of time to find a lasting lunch solution—and time is something we don't have. Right now, hard as this is for the top brass to grasp, our best option is an unsystematic process of trial and error."

Added Weinberg: "Like, I've been really into wraps lately. But I'd much rather throw a couple bucks in and eat whatever than convince 20 people to get wraps."

Ryodan accountant Karla Moss, who was brought in to consult on the fiscal side of the problem, said the department's problem is typical.

"Corporate dining is spectacularly inefficient, and sharks feed on inefficiency," Moss said. "The kicker is that many meal purchasers don't even mind getting fleeced. Personal lunch expenditures at Ryodan could be as low as $4 per eater per day, but workers pay up to seven times that for their midday goods and services."

Moss estimated that the Monday sandwich order, which also included chips and a two-liter bottle of Coke, was overvalued by nearly $41.

Based on this evaluation, Moss drafted a policy paper and posted it in the break room. The "Let's Take Turns Preparing Lunch" plan resolves that if each worker made lunch for the department approximately once per month, the meals would be better and significantly cheaper.

Ryodan attorney Ted Batterson said the lunch system is long overdue for a radical overhaul, but that the in-house lunch solution "only works in theory."

"Experience has shown that these sort of communal meal plans never pan out," said Batterson, who has been with Ryodan for more than 20 years. "We need a solution rooted in the American entrepreneurial spirit and built on competition. If the fresh market is not involved, people have no incentive to participate."

With no clear solution in sight, even the employee who proposed sub sandwiches characterized the measure as a "stop-gap effort at best."

"There are serious issues on the table, and they merit examination, discussion, and consensus-based decision-making," Buford said. "The daily lunch order should be as much about teamwork as it is about satisfying the need to consume food periodically. Sure, we solved the lunch problem for today, but what about tomorrow, the next day, and the day after that?"

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
3) The Economist: Executive coaching [Le coaching, la nouvelle mode dans les entreprises.]

http://www.economist.com

Executive coaching: Corporate therapy
Nov 13th 2003

Having an executive coach is all the rage

IT ALL sounds alarmingly like the process of self-criticism that kept Chairman Mao's China on the ideological tracks. Your company hires an outsider to grill your boss, your staff and perhaps even your spouse on the shortcomings (and strengths) of your behaviour. The outsider confronts you with the findings and together you draw up a plan for self-improvement. Your boss and staff undertake to help you to keep to the plan. From time to time, the outsider returns to check on how you are doing.

Yet top executives as self-confident as eBay's Meg Whitman and Unilever's Niall Ferguson have undergone “executive coaching”. This week the International Coach Federation (ICF), the largest trade group, is meeting in Denver for its annual conference. Its global membership has soared from about 1,500 in 1999 to almost 7,000 today. The coaching market is now worth around $1 billion worldwide, a number that Harvard Business School expects to double in the next two years. “It's going crazy,” says Brian Edwards of Optima, a British coaching firm that has been in business for five years.

Coaching might seem an obvious second career for a former chief executive keen to profit from a little mentoring. Though a few coaches are ex-bosses, most have other skills, according to the ICF's recently completed first survey of members. Two-thirds are women, it finds; a substantial minority come from teaching or counselling backgrounds. Others are former mental-health workers. Jeremy Robinson, a coach from New York, began as a psychoanalyst and often counsels clients partly on their work problems and partly on those in their home lives. Many such workers are seeking fresh pastures as tighter government budgets and the trimming of the amounts which insurance firms spend on clinical psychology have taken a toll on their employment prospects, argues Edgar Schein, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan School.

Some coaches come to the office. But half, according to the ICF figures, do their coaching mainly by phone. Val Williams, an independent coach who was once an executive at a big health-care group, coaches a client in Finland by telephone every month, discussing what progress he has made in meeting the goals he set himself during their previous conversation.

Like personal physical trainers, some coaches work for individuals. Ms Williams reckons that a quarter of her clients pay their own bills. Five years ago, however, three-quarters did. Increasingly, firms are willing to pick up the tab.

Shrink or swim

Often, coaching is a way to give problem employees one last chance. Mr Schein says it is easier for managers to hire a coach than to give an unsatisfactory employee a bleak performance appraisal.

And yet such “derailment coaching” is not much fun for coaches either, and it rarely achieves much, so the coaching industry is increasingly trying to accentuate the positive, even urging companies to use their services as a perk to retain high-fliers. Judging by how some American executives brag at dinner parties about their hot new coach, this strategy has potential.

Rohm and Haas, a specialty chemical company, picks half a dozen promising executives a year to go through a programme grandly called Leadership 3000. They undergo a battery of psychoanalytic tests, listen to feedback (“we like to call it feed-forward,” says Joe Forish, the firm's head of human resources) which the coach collects from colleagues and subordinates, and agree an action plan that is discussed with the firm's top executives as well as with the person's immediate boss. “We make it clear that this is an investment in people's futures,” says Mr Forish. At a cost of $15,000-20,000 for up to a year of the coach's time, an investment it clearly is.

Most coaches are one-man bands or tiny firms. But a few big human-resources consultancies are moving in: Hewitt Associates has teamed up with Marshall Goldsmith, a celebrity in the coaching industry, who has coached top executives at Boeing, Motorola and General Electric, and more than 50 chief executives. Together, the two have a network of about 200 coaches, all using a proprietary method developed by Mr Goldsmith. This allows them to win big contracts, such as a recent deal with one multinational to coach 200 of its top staff. The two brands spell higher charges: typically $30,000-70,000, and much more for Mr Goldsmith's personal services. But the venture also submits its bill only if the client agrees, a year after the coaching, that certain agreed goals have been met.

What does coaching actually achieve? Rigorous analysis of so touchy-feely an activity is probably impossible. Karol Wasylyshyn, a coach based in Philadelphia, has asked her clients to rate the “sustainability” of what they learned on a scale of one to ten. Over a third rate it nine to ten, she says proudly. However, this may reflect the attitudes of clients as much as real achievement. It seems that high-fliers compete as hard to improve their behaviour as in anything else. “They don't think I'm perfect? I'm gonna prove to them I am,” mimics Marc Effron of Hewitt Associates.

Nevertheless, the perception of success may be as important as the reality. One reason why coaches strive to involve an executive's peers and boss at every stage is so that they, too, feel some responsibility for helping to bring about change. Not only does this reinforce a better approach; it may also persuade them that they are seeing the alteration they want to bring about.

The fact that the firm usually foots the bill for coaching has two big implications. First, says Mr Schein, it means that a lot of coaching is about “self-socialisation”: getting the individual to conform to patterns of behaviour acceptable to the firm.

Then there is the issue of privacy. “I always tell people they have limited confidentiality,” says Mr Robinson. Coaches may find themselves in an especially awkward situation if coaching persuades a client that the best way to develop his career is to quit the firm paying for the coach. Ms Wasylyshyn has formulated a way to tell the human-resources department that a high-flier she is coaching is restive, without breaching confidence. “I think you might lean in and do a reality check,” she will say, with delicate circumlocution.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
4) The Economist: The diner rolls on [Pérennité des "diners", ces restoroutes typiques du New Jersey]
http://www.economist.com

The diner rolls on: Burger's revenge
Nov 13th 2003 | JERSEY CITY AND LEBANON, NEW JERSEY

New affection for an old way of eating

WHAT makes a diner? The hearty, cheap food? The 24-hour breakfasts? The unlimited coffee? The pleasant if harried waitresses? The swivel-top counter seats? All that stainless steel? “Ask ten different people and you'll get ten different answers,” says Peter Genovese, a newspaper columnist and author of the book “Jersey Diners”. What nobody argues about, though, is the fact that New Jersey, even more than other north-eastern states, loves these places. “There's no such thing as a diner come-back,” says Mr Genovese. “Here, the diner never went away.”

Diners first appeared in the 1870s in Providence, Rhode Island, as mobile food-servers on work sites. Gradually these wagons turned into more permanent structures that could, at a pinch, be broken down into their separate parts and towed to a more promising location. Diners often became the focus of their neighbourhoods, offering a place for local people of all ages to meet and talk.

With about a dozen diner manufacturers of its own, New Jersey eventually became Diner Central. Mr Genovese reckons the state now has roughly 600 diners, fewer than in their heyday but more than a few years ago—and more than you might expect, given the twin onslaughts of fast-food restaurants and Starbucks-style coffee houses. Although in recent years diners have spread in other parts of America—and, drop your voice, in Europe too—their appeal remains strongest in the north-east.

Most of these diners are owned and run by big families, many of them of Greek origin. The successful ones can pull in millions of dollars a year in earnings, and big enough profits for their owners to wave aside offers from real-estate developers. “Kids are going to college and culinary school and coming back to run diners because they're a big business,” says Robert Kullman, president of an old diner-making company here in Lebanon.

Today's New Jersey diners range from the humble Bendix in Hasbrouck Heights, a family operation run by John Diakakis, who is blind, to the slick, newly renovated Tick-Tock in Clifton. The state is home to a White Manna diner in Hackensack and a White Mana one in gritty Jersey City, tiny, porcelain-clad palaces filled with customers at odd hours. Both have stared down competition from nearby fast-food outlets.

Offering ham-salad sandwiches for $2.22, tuna sandwiches for $3.30 and a “Big Web” burger for $2.03, the White Mana pulls in plenty of customers who like the special feel of a diner from busy national Route 1 outside its doors. Mario Costa, the White Mana's owner since 1979, once misguidedly agreed to sell it to a buyer who planned to tear it down and put up a chain-franchise outlet. Then Mr Costa changed his mind, and paid a heavy price to buy it back. “It becomes part of you,” he says.

In many diners the style is still the Art Deco of the 1930s and 1940s. But quite a few are getting a technological face-lift. A new diner on the campus of New Jersey's Montclair State University features laptop hook-ups. A New York-based company called PrimeSelections has begun replacing old-fashioned jukebox terminals in diners with touch-screen systems that will give customers access to cartoons, video games, e-mail and television. The firm's goal is to have 20,000 units installed in 1,000 locations in a year's time. It is betting that the diner will remain a social magnet for years to come.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
5) The Daily Pennsylvanian: Cereal-only restaurant set to open on campus [Ouverture sur un campus universitaire d'un nouveau restaurant, où l'on ne mangue que des céréales de petit déj.]

http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/09/17/414a784fb5480
Cereal-only restaurant set to open on campus
Cereality to offer 30 types of breakfast food for sit-down meals
By byron kho
September 17, 2004

It's 11 p.m. and the urge is strong for a bowl of Froot Loops and skim milk, with strawberries and mini-marshmallows on top. But how to fulfill this craving without going grocery shopping? Boulder, Colo.-based cereal bar company Cereality looks to answer that question for students, employees and visitors to Penn's campus with the November opening of its first sit-down cafe nationwide.

To be located in the space currently occupied by the Chocolate Guy on University Square, the company seeks to offer cereal -- in 32-ounce tubs, as snack bars, smoothies, hot oatmeal and even parfaits -- every day from 6 a.m. to midnight. With over 30 cereals, three milk options, 34 toppings and many different ways of combining them all, customers will have no lack of ability to eat cereal just how they want it.

"When anybody goes into our store, the first question our servers will ask is, "How do you like your cereal?'" said David Roth, co-founder and chief executive officer of Cereality. "Everyone has an answer to that. Everyone." The 1,500-square-foot location will be set up in Seinfeld apartment-esque fashion, with a kitchen motif and cabinets full of cereal. The seating areas will have farm tables and cozy chairs.

Its business model is a little bit unusual. Not only does the company combine two of the most ubiquitous food products in America -- cereal and milk -- but it also helps democratize the highly competitive cereal market. The Quaker Oats Company has worked closely with the company to supply start-up funding and provide help with understanding consumer behavior and continuing research and development. Additionally, Cereality has business relationships with General Mills, Inc. and the Kellogg Company.

The marketing slogan "got milk?" pioneered by the Milk Processor Education Program has also partnered with Cereality for advertising and promotion. Since milk is featured in the company's cereal creations, the rationale is that this could be a significant cross-promotional effort. "Everything you touch and see in our stores is trademarked," Roth said. "This is an entirely new way of running a business. We've already applied for a patent for this business method."

Last year, Cereality opened up a successful prototype location at Arizona State University in order to test its restaurant concept and study consumer behavior. "We wanted to see if people would eat cereal in a cafe setting -- and they did," Roth said.

Roth was approached by Madison Marquette Realty Services, the leasing agent for University Square, on behalf of Penn. "When they came to us, we thought it would be an immediate fit. We wanted to be near campus and in the company of high-end retail," Roth said. "And Ivy League is the way to go."

The company foresees an aggressive rollout of cafe locations nationwide in the next 18 months.

For now, Penn administrators and students are excited about the upcoming opening. "We are thrilled," said Omar Blaik, Penn's senior vice president for facilities and real estate services. "The addition of Cereality to our retail portfolio will add a creative, lively and unique food concept to our business community." Wharton senior Anthony Giuliano voiced similar sentiments. "I think that this cereal bar opening will make University Square even more of a destination for students," he said.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
6) All declared presidential candidates [Voici les candidats à la présidentielle. Je pense qu'il s'agit de candidats régulièrement inscrits auprès de la Federal Elections Commission. Cette commission ne s'occupe que des questions du respect des lois fédérales en matière de financement des campagnes présidentielles. Elle ne gère rien au niveau de la tenue des élections elles-même, qui sont la perogative des divers Etats. Cette inscription auprès de la FEC est gratuite, et la plupart de ces candidats sont plus ou moins frivoles. Pour être présent au bulletin de vote d'un Etat, il faut suivre la procédure de cet Etat. Les partis établis comme les Démocrates ou Républicains n'ont aucun problème pour ce faire (bien que Bush a failli être invalidé dans un Etat pour non respect d'un délai) et recevront la quasi totalité des voix. D'autres partis établis et pérennes (Libertarian, Socialist Workers, Green...) seront présents d'office au même titre, mais leurs candidats recevront peu de voix: les Américains sont pragmatiques et ne s'amusent pas comme certains à jeter leur voix à la poubelle. D'autres candidats feront l'effort d'être présent dans un maximum d'Etats, mais lors de ces élections 2004, le troisième candidat des sondages, Ralph Nader, troublion de 2000, ne sera présent que dans une trentaine d'Etats, malgré l'appui financier et logistique des Républicains qui veulent exploiter le fait qu'à défaut de Nader, ses électeur voteraient très largément pour Kerry. Ca ressemble au phénomène des 500 signatures en France, où les partis les plus forts ordonnent à leurs maires de donner leur signature au petit candidat le plus susceptible de nuire à leur adversaire.

Je joins aussi le bulletin de vote type pour le comté de Denver dans le Colorado. Vous verrez que la liste des candidats diffère sensiblement, et que certains candidats agréés pour le Colorado ne sont pas inscrits auprès de la FEC.]

Presidential Candidates

Mr. Sterling David Allan
Providential - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Gene Amondson
Prohibition - No NPAT

Mr. Michael J. Badnarik
Libertarian - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael W. 'Mike' Bay
National Barking Spider Resurgence - 2004

Mr. Jacques Yves 'Chief Jack' Boulerice
Native American - 2004 NPAT

J. Boydston
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Harry William Braun
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Walter F. 'Walt' Brown
Socialist - 2004 NPAT

President George W. Bush
Republican - No NPAT

Mr. Jerry Leon Carroll
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. David Keith Cobb
Green Party - 2004 NPAT Ms. Patricia H. LaMarche
Green

Mr. Kenneth R. Crippen
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. HRM Caesar St Augustine De Buonaparte
No Party Affiliation - No NPAT

Mr. James Louis 'Watchman' Dezort
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Earl F. Dodge
Prohibition - 2004 NPAT

Earnest Lee Easton
Veteran's Industrial - No NPAT

Mr. Max Englerius
American Tradition - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Christopher G. Fenner
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Ronald E. 'John Galt, Jr' Gascon
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Hoover Mark Gee
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Jackson Kirk Grimes
United Fascist Union - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Max Hacker
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. William A. 'Bill' Hall
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael J. Halpin
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Clay Oliver Hill
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Samuel B. Hoff
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Ms. Georgia L. Hough
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael Idrogo
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Keith Russell Judd
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Darren Eugene Karr
Party X - Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Andrew J. Kensington
United States Justice Party Americale - 2004 NPAT

Senator John Forbes Kerry
Democrat - No NPAT

Mr. Matthew Jon Klemmensen
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Ms. Temperance Alesha Lance-Council
Anti-Hypocrisy - 2004 NPAT

Mr. William Kevin Lowry
Constitution - 2004 NPAT

John E. Maffi
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Joseph Martyniuk
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Andrew George Merritt
Independent - 2004 NPAT

David John Morascini
Human Being - No NPAT

Mr. Leon Motor
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Muadin
E-Democratic Party - No NPAT

Mr. Ralph Nader
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. George C. Nelson
United Veterans Rights - No NPAT

Mr. Joseph W. Organist
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael A. Peroutka
Constitution - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Charles Anton Phillips
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Kevin Sean Polk
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Samuel Lyndell Powell
Independent - No NPAT

Ms. Melanie G. Pridgen
Unknown - 2004 NPAT

Ms. Diana Ramsey-Rasmussen-Kennedy
Fair Representation - 2004 NPAT

Reality
Write-In - No NPAT

Mr. Thomas K. 'Major Tom' Reed
21st Century Prohibition - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Arthur Joseph Regan
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Russell A. Romagna
Unknown - No NPAT

Mr. Andrew Mark Rotramel
Independent - No NPAT

Klayton Chadwick Rutherford
Independent - No NPAT

George Louis Rutten
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Joseph Charles Schriner
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Steven Wayne Schrom
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Larry J. Schuetter
Turtle - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Freddy Irwin 'Messiah' Sitnick
Independent - No NPAT

Mr. Daniel L. Snow
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Brian Baker Springfield
Menorah-Thor - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael Ross Tunick Strauss
Mike's Party - No NPAT

Mr. Randy Wayne Sutherland
United Christian - 2004 NPAT

Ms. Diane Beall Templin
American - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Charles 'Jock F. Kennedy' Vick
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Da Vid
Write-In - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Hugh Wallace
American Independence - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Ted C. Weill
Reform - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Timothy Rexford Wilson
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Robert B. Winn
Independent - 2004 NPAT

Mr. Michael T. Witort
Health - 2004 NPAT

Background Information
Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Laura Welch Bush
2 Children: Jenna, Barbara.
Birthdate: 07/06/1946
Birthplace: New Haven, CT
Home City: Crawford, TX
Religion: Methodist

Education:
MBA, Harvard University, 1975
BA, History, Yale University, 1968.

Professional Experience:
Former Board Member, Tom Brown Inc.
Pilot, Texas Air National Guard, 1968-1973
Founder/CEO, Bush Exploration, 1975-1986
General Partner, Texas Rangers Baseball Organization, 1989-1994.

Political Experience:
President, United States of America, 2000-present
Governor of Texas, 1994-2000
Candidate, United States House of Representatives, 1978.

Organizations:
Tarrytown Methodist Church, Austin
Highland Park United Methodist Church, Dallas
First United Methodist Church, Midland
Past Board Member, National Paralysis Committee
Chair, Hearts and Hammers Housing Rehabilitation Group, 1990-1994.

-*-*-*-*-

Senator John Forbes Kerry (MA)
Current Office: U.S. Senator
Current District: Junior Seat
Office Seeking: President
First Elected: 11/06/1984
Last Elected: 11/05/2002
Next Election: 2008
Party: Democrat

Committees:
Commerce, Science & Transportation [Senate]
Finance [Senate]
Foreign Relations [Senate]
Small Business and Entrepreneurship [Senate], Ranking Member

Background Information
Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Teresa Heinz
2 Daughters: Alexandra, Vanessa
3 Stepsons: John, Andre, Christopher.
Birthdate: 12/11/1943
Birthplace: Aurora, CO
Home City: Boston, MA
Religion: Roman Catholic

Education:
JD, Boston College Law School, 1976
BA, Political Science, Yale University, 1966.

Professional Experience:
First Assistant District Attorney, Middlesex County, MA, 1977-1982
Attorney, Admitted Massachusetts Bar, 1976
Lieutenant, United States Navy, 1966-1970
Received Silver Star, Bronze Star, 3 Purple Hearts, 2 Presidential Unit Citations and a National Defense Medal.

Political Experience:
Senator, United States Senate, 1984-present
Lieutenant Governor, Massachusetts, 1983-1985
Democratic Nominee, United States House of Representatives, 1972.

Organizations:
Leader, Vietnam Veterans Against the War
Co-Founder, Vietnam Veterans of America.

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Co-Chair, Congressional Vietnam-Era Veterans Caucus
Chair, Democratic Steering Committee
Chair, Hispanic Task Force
Senate New Democrat Coalition
-*-*-*-*-
Mr. Walter F. 'Walt' Brown
Current Office: Challenger
Office Seeking: President
Party: Socialist

Background Information
Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Mary
6 Children: Jeffrey, Kendall, David, Joshua, Gabriel, Shyann.
Birthdate: 07/28/1926
Birthplace: Los Angeles, CA
Home City: Lake Oswego, OR
Religion: Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship

Education:
MLS, University of Oregon School of Librarianship, 1975
Attended, US Army Judge Advocate General's School, 9-month LL.M., 1965
MA, Boston University School of Letters, Arts & Sciences, 1961
JD, University of Southern California School of Law, 1952
BA, University of Southern California School of Letters, Arts & Sciences, 1949.

Professional Experience:
Voluntary Attorney, Consumer Justice Alliance, 2000-present
General Counsel, Oregon Consumer League, 1987-1989, 1991-1999
County Counsel, Malheur County, 1989-1991
Deputy District Attorney, Malheur County, 1989-1991
Associate Professor, Northwestern School of Law, Lewis & Clark College, 1970-1980
Commissioned Officer, Judge Advocate General's Corps, US Navy, 1952-1970
Petty Officer, US Naval Reserve, US Navy, 1944-1952.

Political Experience:
Chair Emeritus, Socialist Party of Oregon, 2001-present
Alternate Member National Committee, Socialist Party U.S.A., 2001-2003
Senator, Oregon State Senate, 1975-1987
Senate Member, Governor's Commission on Senior Services, 1983-1986.

Organizations:
Member, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, 2003-present
Member, Amnesty International, 1997-present
Charter Member, Alliance for Democracy, 1995-present
Member, Friends Committee on National Legislation, 1995-present
Member, Oregonians for Health Security, 1994-present
Active Emeritus Member, Oregon State Bar Association, 1981-present
Member, Lincoln Lodge Number 34, F. & A.M., Olonpago, Zambales, Luzon, Republic of the Philippines, 1962-present
Life Member, Sierra Club, 1957-present
Member, California State Bar Association, 1952-present
Member, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1949-present
Member, Board of Directors, Oregon Common Cause, 1994-1998
Member, Board of Directors, Tualatin Valley Cable Access, 1995-1997
Member, Board of Directors, Loaves and Fishes, Inc., 1984-1986.

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Member, State Steering Committee, Health Care for ALL-Oregon, 2001-2002
Member, Western States Legislative Forestry Task Force, 1984-1986
League Member, Oregon Consumer Advisory Commission, Oregon Department of Transportation, 1971-1974
Public Member, Multnomah County Public Safety Retirement Board, 1971-1974.
-*-*-*-
Ms. Temperance Alesha Lance-Council
Current Office: Challenger
Office Seeking: President
Party: Anti-Hypocrisy

Background Information
Gender: Female
Family: Husband,
Birthdate: 05/04
Birthplace:
Home City: Los Angeles, CA
Religion: Baptist/Christian

Education:
California State University
Virginia Commonwealth University
Ferrum College.

Professional Experience:
Social Activist
Political Activist.

Political Experience:
Candidate, United States President, 2000
Political Commentator.

Organizations:
National Deans List
Phi Theta Kappa
Kappa Alpha Psi Sweetheart Organization
Who's Who (Among Junior Colleges)
Screen Actors Guild
People for the American Way.
-*-*-*-
Mr. Michael W. 'Mike' Bay
Current Office: Challenger
Office Seeking: President
Party: National Barking Spider Resurgence

Background Information
Gender: Male
Family: Single.
Birthdate: 01/25/1957
Birthplace: Cedar Rapids, IA
Home City: Lakewood, CO
Religion: Non Denominational

Education:
Associate, Arapahoe Community College, 1986.

Professional Experience:

Political Experience:
Candidate, United States President, 2000.

Organizations:
Member, Laughter Crafters (online humor writer collective), 2002-present
Member, The NetWits (online humor writer collective), 2000-present
Member, National Society of Newspaper Columnists, 1998-present.

^RETURN TO TOP^

Americans vote on everything. Everything. On the first Tuesday of November each year, they vote on dozens of matters, from the members of the local animal control board, to the sewer commission, to the sheriff, to the school board, to… well you get the picture. They vote for local offices, state offices, and federal offices. They may vote on millage (school tax), on any number of local or state initiatives or proposals, and about anything else you can imagine. Each ballot may be made up of dozens of lines, each calling for a decision.

One reason for this is America's federal system of government, the product of the failure of the first attempt at national government, the Articles of Confederation (established in 1777, soon after the US Declaration of Independence, but only ratified in 1781). Under the Articles of Confederation, the thirteen original States retained most of their sovereignty, with a very weak central government. Given the failure of this form of government to deal with relations between the US and other countries, and more importantly among the various States, it was decided in 1787 to reform the Articles of Confederation. As is often the case, instead of modifying the Articles of Confederation, the Constitutional Congress decided to start from scratch, inventing a new form of government embodied in the Constitution that has continued to be the law of the land since its ratification in 1788.

The Constitution is the result of these historical tensions between the various States and the central government, between the North and the South, between the interests of the commercial and industrial cities and the agricultural countryside, between small States and large States. Each of these tensions led to various compromises without which the Constitution would never have been written and ratified, and without which the United States would probably not exist today. For example, the issue of the balance of power between small and large States was settled by the division of the legislature into two houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate protects the interests of small States, as each State is represented by two Senators, giving each State equal weight. The House of Representatives, on the other hand, reflects the balance of population, with each State entitled to a number of Representatives proportionate to its population. The approval of both houses is required to make a law, and each house has specific powers (taxation bills must be initiated by the House of Representatives, the Senate must approve the President's nominations for federal and Supreme Court judges, for members of the Cabinet, and for other offices).

The issue of slavery was a source of contestation from the very beginning of the country. In terms of representation, the southern States wanted their slaves to be counted as part of the population. The North refused to grant representation on the basis of slaves who had no status as citizens. With slaves counting, the population of the South would have been greater than that of the North. Without slaves counting, the opposite would have been true. The compromise, known as the "3/5 Compromise" was to count each slave as 3/5 of a free citizen for purposes of representation. The result appeared and appears shocking, but gave a balance in electoral weight between North and South without which the Constitution could not have existed.

The Americans had just fought a long war for freedom from tyranny, and were very concerned with safeguarding their sovereignty and rights, both the rights of individuals to be protected from government, and from the States to be protected from the central government. The Constitution established a balance of powers between the legislature (itself divided between Senate and House of Representatives), the executive branch (President) and to a lesser degree, the judiciary (the Supreme Court and the federal court system). The Constitution gives only certain powers to the federal government, with all remaining powers retained by the sovereign States (the historical trend has been to find justification within the Constitution for a progressive increase in the power of the federal government that the writers of the Constitution would probably not approve of).

The Constitution deals mostly with the relations between the States and the federal government, and we can see this in the elections for national office. Each State is the master of these elections, and it can be said that there are in fact no national elections in the US. The most extreme example of this is the Presidential election, in which the popular vote across the country has absolutely no importance for the designation of the President. In the beginning, the legislature of each State, and not the people of the State, would vote on the presidential candidates. Although the vote is now in the hands of the people, the tradition remains that the vote in each State determines the vote for the entire State. This is translated to the presidential election through the Electoral College, in which each State has a number of Electors equal to the number of Senators and Representatives of the State. Each State thus designates all of its electors for only one candidate, meaning that even a small majority for a particular candidate results in that candidate winning all of the Electors of the State (there are only two exceptions to this, Maine and Nebraska, which divide their Electors on a geographical basis).

While there were originally logistical reasons for the creation of the Electoral College, given the long distances and the difficulties of transportation and communication in early America, the primary reason for creating such a means of electing the President was to translate two of the historic Constitutional compromises from the legislative to the executive branch. Small States are over-represented, as they benefit automatically from two Electors (the number of Senators), along with a number of Electors proportionate to its population (number of Representatives). A small State like Wyoming, for example, has only one Representative, but has three times the number of Electors it population would warrant (1 Representative + 2 Senators = 3 Electors). Likewise, thanks to the attribution of Electors on the basis of the number of Representatives, the 3/5 Compromise can be found in the Presidential election. (Thomas Jefferson, the third President, was the first to benefit from this, as he was elected with a majority of Electors from slave States, despite losing the popular vote by a significant majority.) It must of course be noted that the 3/5 Compromise is no longer in effect (slavery was abolished thanks to the victory of the North in the Civil War in 1865), but the Electoral College can be seen as a sort of constitutional fossil remains of this measure.

Each State is in charge of its own elections, including the Presidential election by which each State designates its list of Electors to the Electoral College. In general, the officer in charge of elections in each State is the Secretary of State, who in some States is named by the Governor, and in others is directly elected. A great deal of authority and responsibility is given to lower levels of government. In some States, the counties are in charge of the organization of elections. As a result, there can be different methods of voting even within a given State. The great number of elections held on the same day (dozens in most places) means that some sort of automation is desirable. Various solutions have been adopted: mechanical machines, optical card readers, punch cards, and now, touch-screen electronic voting machines. As you may have seen in some of the articles I have sent over the last year, these machines are a source of great concern, due to their lack of security (easy to hack), their ability to be tampered with ("trafiquer"), and the refusal of manufacturers to include basic safeguards such as a paper copy of the vote.

With regard to the presidential election, each State totals its vote, and the candidate receiving the majority (absolute or simple) receives all the Electoral College votes for the State (except in Maine and Nebraska, where the votes can be divided; there is currently a referendum scheduled to do the same in Colorado). As a result, the presence of a strong third party candidate can mean that a presidential candidate receives all the State's Electoral College votes without winning an absolute majority of the popular vote. In practice, these Electoral College votes are people who are proposed by each candidate or party. If the candidate wins the popular vote in a State, his list in that State becomes the official list for the State. It is possible for an Elector not to vote as he has promised to vote, but this is rare, and in certain States such a betrayal can be punished by law. The Electors transmit their votes in January, and the President elected by the Electoral College takes office on January 25. The period between the election in early November and the inauguration of the new President serves as a transition period for the establishment of a new administration.

We usually hear only about the candidates of the Republican and Democratic parties, but in each presidential election there are many more who get little attention, and few votes. It is not easy to be present on ballots across the country, and each State has its own rules on who can be present as a candidate. Established parties have a great advantage as their past performance gives them automatic representation. Candidates running as individuals or for small parties can have much more difficulty being present in each State. There are currently battles throughout the US concerning the presence of Ralph Nader on ballots, with the Republicans providing financial and logistical help for Nader who is certain to take votes from Kerry, and with the Democrats opposing his presence in the Courts (this strategy doesn't always work, as in Florida, where Governor Jeb Bush, the brother of George W, has overrode a court decision barring Nader from the ballot due to irregularities in his petitions).

The country is divided almost 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, but in most states the outcome is clear. The result is that the candidates concentrate their campaigns on a few "swing" states that could go either way. Because of this division, the outcome of the election is hard to determine, and the presence of a strong independent or third-party candidate like Nader can have a big impact.

---

President: Elected every four years by the Electoral College. Presidents can serve two terms.

Vice-President: Elected with the President. Presides the Senate. Replaces the President in case of death or removal from office. If he serves more than two years of the President's term, he is limited to only one more term.

Senators: Two from each State. Elected for a six-year term by the entire population of each State. Each two years a third of the Senate comes up for election.

Representatives: Since 1911 the number of Representatives has been set at 435. These seats are apportioned according to the population of each State. Each State is divided into a number of districts equal to its number of Representatives (one for small States like Alaska or Wyoming, dozens for big States like New York or California). These districts have nothing to do with geographical considerations, and everything to do with ensuring that the party that controls the State legislature has the best chance of winning the greatest number of seats. All Representatives serve a two-year term, so they are perpetual candidates.

^RETURN TO TOP^