U.S. president Barack Obama, speaking at the University of Michigan's Al Glick Fieldhouse on Friday morning, Jan. 27. His remarks focused on the issue of education and college affordability. (Photos by Mary Morgan.)

Also not wanting to miss Barack Obama’s appearance at the University of Michigan – a return visit after delivering the commencement address in May of 2010 – were dozens of other national, state and local media. Attention is heightened even more during this election year, and Friday morning’s speech was just one of many stops as Obama hit the road following Tuesday’s State of the Union address.

There will be countless reports and opinions offered on the Jan. 27 speech at UM, but we’d encourage you to approach it unfiltered, at least initially. You can watch the roughly 40-minute speech in its entirety online, or read a transcript of it here.

For Obama’s remarks almost two years ago at the 2010 UM commencement, we provided a bit of our own analysis, along with photos by Myra Klarman.

This time, we went with an eye for recording the community connections we could see at the event. And there were many – not surprisingly for a Democratic stronghold like Ann Arbor. Politicians were easy to spot, of course, but there were also educators, business owners, government workers and many others.

Over 3,000 people attended Friday morning’s speech. Here are a few of those we encountered there.

Eugene Kang, left, lost a close race for a spot on the Ann Arbor city council several years ago – and now has to content himself as the president's special projects coordinator and assistant. State Rep. Jeff Irwin of Ann Arbor, top left, had worked on Kang's council campaign. In the foreground is state Sen. Rebekah Warren and her husband Conan Smith, chair of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

Susan Pollay, director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

Deborah Ball, dean of UM's School of Education, gets camera instructions from Brit Satchwell, president of the Ann Arbor Education Association, before the president's speech. Satchwell is standing with Tracey Van Dusen, a Pioneer High School government teacher who was a 2010 Classroom Teaching Ambassador Fellow with the U. S. Department of Education.

Washtenaw County commissioner Yousef Rabhi (in light blue cap and scarf, with beard) and Andy LaBarre (back right), a candidate for commissioner and former aide to Congressman John Dingell.

Ann Arbor city administrator Steve Powers had a height advantage over some of the other spectators at the Jan. 27 event.

Jim Kosteva, UM's director of community relations, glides down the risers.

Jason Brooks, a management analyst in the Washtenaw County administrator's office and a 2011 Ann Arbor Chronicle Bezonki Award winner, got a prime spot next to the stage.

Many people in the crowd were taking photos and texting on their iPhones or other mobile devices and sending the information to the Internet in realtime. But one man passed the minutes waiting for the president by reading an account of the previous day's news printed off on multiple sheets of paper – a so-called "news paper."

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, leaning over in the center of the huddle, prompted a brief media scrum before the start of Obama's speech.

Media photographers stood on risers for a clear view of the speaker's podium. Photographers in the crowd had to rely on other techniques to get their shots.

Jo Mathis, left, takes a "Hail Mary" shot. The former Ann Arbor News columnist is now editor of the Washtenaw Legal News.

University of Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson poses for a photo with U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow. The crowd's cheer for Robinson, who arrived several minutes before the president, nearly rivaled its enthusiasm for Obama. Robinson fielded dozens of autograph and photo requests, including one from a member of the event's security detail.

Ann Arbor city councilmember Stephen Kunselman, who's employed by UM as an energy management liaison.

Among the spectators in this crowd shot are Ann Arbor Public Schools superintendent Patricia Green and AAPS trustee Andy Thomas, and Ann Arbor city councilmembers Christopher Taylor, Tony Derezinski and Carsten Hohnke.

From left: University of Michigan regents Kathy White and Denise Ilitch, chair of the board of regents.

From left: Eastern Michigan University president Susan Martin and Rose Bellanca, president of Washtenaw Community College.

Barack Obama during his speech. Trust us: Among the people in the background risers are Ann Arbor city councilmember Sabra Briere and her husband, local attorney David Cahill; Democratic activist Doug Kelley; Ann Arbor Art Center president Marsha Chamberlin and her husband John Chamberlin, a UM professor of public policy.

UM president Mary Sue Coleman, at right, listened to Obama's speech on a platform behind the speaker's podium. She did not address the crowd.

After his speech, Barack Obama worked the crowd. He offers a high five to Mark Bernstein's kid – Bernstein is a candidate for UM regent.

Ann Arbor city councilmember Sandi Smith, center, gets ready to greet the president. Behind her, slightly to the right, is Ann Arbor Public Schools trustee Glenn Nelson.

Following Obama's speech, anti-fracking protesters were keeping a cold vigil in the parking lot outside of the Al Glick Fieldhouse. To the right, a man holds an "I Vote Pro-Life First" sign. Volunteers were also passing out Obama re-election campaign literature and collecting signatures for repeal of the state's emergency financial manager law.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs – and the occasional photo essay. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The event also included national, regional, and local media organizations, who were eventually allowed into Michigan Stadium. But I don’t think most members of the media really listened to his address.

The online New York Times ran at least four different headlines for the Obama speech. In this collage of screen shots, from the upper left, going clockwise: (1) "At a Graduation, Obama Defends Government"; (2) "President's Plea to Graduates: Be Civil"; (3) "At a Graduation, Obama Urges Openness and Defends Government"; (4) "Obama Assails Antigovernment Rhetoric." (Image links to higher resolution file.)

For example, I didn’t see any of these headlines, which could have been attached to an accurate account of Obama’s speech:

Obama Lambastes Media for Sound-Byte Coverage

Obama Takes Aim at Media for Stoking Conflicts

Obama Puts Blame for Coarse Discourse on Media

Obama Erupts But Does Not Confirm Ties to Volcano

The fourth alternative is based on a kindergartner’s question to the president, which Obama reported as part of his speech. That one is admittedly a stretch. It’s included for the benefit of an audience of two, perhaps three, local Ann Arbor readers who might crack a smile when they read it. [For those of you who don't know, Ann Arbor is building a "volcano" in the center of its downtown.]

The other three, however, are legitimate candidates for a headline that summarizes what the president’s speech was “about.” The venerable New York Times tried out at least four different headlines for a single online story on the Obama speech. But none of the NYT alternatives – nor those of any other media coverage I saw – identified as a significant theme of Obama’s speech the culpability of the media in the kind of “over the top” public debates that Obama said “coarsens our culture.”

That’s because I don’t think media organizations were paying attention to all of Obama’s speech the way they would have if they’d approached it like they were cutting up fish.

Slicing, Serving Obama’s Speech

Here’s an outline of Obama’s speech, which The Chronicle overlaid on its annotated version  of his transcribed remarks:

I. Introduction

II. America’s Voices

A. How Obama Keeps in Touch

B. Kindergartners

C. Niceness

III. Contentious Discourse

A. Origins in Current Crisis

B. Historical Context

C. The Nature of American Politics

IV. How to Preserve Democracy

A. Adapt Role of Government to Changing World

B. Maintain Civility

C. Participate In It

V. Conclusion: Calling Graduates to Action

Obama’s speechwriters probably worked from a different outline. But those are some slices that I thought would allow readers to chew easily through the material of the speech. So that’s the way The Chronicle served up the president’s address. The Chronicle’s headline: “Obama’s Michigan Commencement Speech.”

The Chronicle thus served it up relatively raw, and uncooked over the flame of analysis of what Obama was using the occasion to do. In this regard we took an approach to the commencement coverage similar to the approach a sushi chef takes to serving fish. The skill of the chef is not in the cooking but in the cutting.

I first encountered this kind of analogy in a 1989 essay by Japanese biologist Tatsuo Motokawa: “Sushi Science and Hamburger Science.” In that essay, Motokawa applies the comparison of Eastern and Western cuisines to the practice of science, but I think it’s applicable to the presentation of news as well:

A lot of skills are hidden behind the no-cook. This is really an art, and definitely a different kind of art than that found in Western cooking. Some Western cuisines are great: we taste the skills of chefs. Sushi is also great: we taste the materials themselves.

So Motokawa isn’t arguing for the superiority of Eastern cuisine over Western cuisine. He was simply pointing out the specific ways they’re different. Extending the analogy to scientific cultures, he describes the difference this way:

Western science is hypothesis oriented. A hypothesis is a personal interpretation using words about how universal rule works in a particular matter of interest. The hypothesis should be big: the final rule should be one, and therefore the biggest and most general hypothesis is the best one. This drives the hypothesis to become abstract. [...]

Eastern science is fact oriented. It tries to communicate with the truth, not through generality and abstraction as Western science does, but through specificity and objectivity.

So in presenting the text of Obama’s speech – sliced into an outline and lightly garnished with annotations – we took an “Eastern” approach. It was centered on the actual words of the speech, left intact.

It wasn’t perfectly “intact” – that is, we didn’t teleport the physical being of Obama through computers to re-deliver the speech right in front of Chronicle readers – that would be like offering a live fish and asking readers to bite into it. And it would taste terrible, unless you are a grizzly bear.

What Obama’s Speech Was About

Based on the outline, Obama’s speech was a standard graduation speech in theme, and fairly unremarkable and workmanlike in its organizational structure. It can be seen as a longer version of the standard five-paragraph essay that most of UM’s graduating seniors learned to write four years ago – in whatever class corresponds to freshman composition. Obama certainly introduced the three sub-sections under “How to Preserve Democracy,” with a strategy straight out of freshman comp – simple enumeration: “First of all, …” “Now the second way …” and “Which brings me to the last …”

But what was the meat on those bones of an outline?

Focusing just on the fourth section, the one we labeled “How to Preserve Democracy,” Obama talked first about how one key to preserving our democracy is to allow the proper role of government to change to fit the needs of the time. Rhetorically, the strategy for that first point was to emphasize the role historically of Republican presidents in “big government” philosophies: Abraham Lincoln (intercontinental railroad, land-grant colleges), Teddy Roosevelt (national parks), Lyndon Johnson (Great Society), and Dwight Eisenhower (national highway system).

The second crucial ingredient Obama identified to preserve democracy was civil discourse. He called for the debate to center on a common set of facts and for the debate to be civil. And he called on graduates to seek out a diversity of opinion among the various choices in the media that are available to them.

And finally, Obama called on graduates to participate in public life. That was the section that concluded with the one passage from the speech that has a chance of enduring for the ages, the one that likely gave goosebumps to the staunchest Obama supporters:

What is certain, what has always been certain, is the ability to shape the destiny. That is what makes us different. That is what sets us apart. That is what makes us Americans. Our ability at the end of the day to look past all our differences and all of our disagreements, and still forge a common future.

So if we analyze the significance of that “How to Preserve Democracy” section and try to identify the one salient theme there that’s headline-worthy, the possibilities produced by the New York Times for the same online story are, I think, reasonable candidates:

1. At a Graduation, Obama Defends Government
2. President’s Plea to Graduates: Be Civil
3. At a Graduation, Obama Urges Openness and Defends Government
4. Obama Assails Antigovernment Rhetoric

But there was more than one section to the speech.

What the Speech Was Not About

I think it’s fair to conclude that what Obama wanted the speech to be about was the fourth section. One clue, I think, is the presentational strategy of “First of all, …” “Now the second way …” and “Which brings me to the last …”

So the fourth section is what the author of the text wanted the speech to be about. But why should we trust the author of the text to tell us what it’s about?

Maybe it was about something else, too. Was it about U.S. Senators beating the crap out of each other? Well, no, although in the section on “Contentious Discourse” Obama alluded to a physical attack by Congressman Preston Brooks on Senator Charles Sumner in 1856. That came in response to a speech that Sumner had delivered against the Fugitive Slave Act. The speech had insulted one of the authors of the act, Andrew Butler, who was a relative of Brooks.

Was the speech about volcanoes? Not really. In the section on “America’s Voices” one of the questions Obama reported receiving from a kindergartner was, Do you live next to a volcano? But that was there clearly for comedic effect – Obama himself seemed tickled enough that he paused to work through a chuckle.

What Else the Speech Was About

But in that same section with the volcanoes, Obama reported another question: Are people being nice? And Obama’s remarks on that question went like this:

The media tends to play up every hint of conflict, because it makes for a sexier story, which means anyone interested in getting coverage feels compelled to make their arguments as outrageous and as incendiary as possible.

But that came right on the heals and in the same section clearly intended mostly to lighten the mood – it’s only kindergartners and their cute little funny questions, right? That’s not the “news” out of the speech, is it?

But the thread was continued in the meat-and-potatoes section that most the the media seemed to think the speech was about. Right there in the “Preserving Democracy Section”:

Today’s 24/7 echo chamber amplifies the most inflammatory soundbites louder and faster than ever before.

So I don’t think it’s unreasonable to conclude that Obama’s speech was also about the role of the free press in our democracy, and that the press in general might think a little more deeply about whether they’re “writing for the fight” or “writing for the right.”

In Defense of Occasional Journalistic Sushi

It’s certainly possible that I missed other journalists’ presentation of the media’s culpability in the coarsening of the public discourse as a significant theme of Obama’s speech.

If I did, then it’s likely because I was distracted by trying to practice the art of “journalistic sushi.” The hours after the president spoke I spent transcribing the speech as delivered and tracking down the various allusions in the speech that warranted some kind of annotation.

Part of the task of transcribing the actual speech would not, I’m fairly certain, seem very much like journalism to most conventional Western journalists. That’s the part where you determine whether the line I rendered as “Some of these letters tell stories …”  should have been transcribed instead as “Some of these st- letters tell stories.” Obama began with the hint of the /st/ for “stories,” saved it smoothly, and delivered “letters.”

It’s also the part where you determine whether to include the Obama trademark hesitation vocalization that seems to live somewhere in the glottal area and could be transcribed as “erm,” “ehh,” “aah” or the like. For Saturday’s speech that might have looked something like: “And so may I say, ehh, Go Blue!”

I opted against that, reasoning that most readers would be baffled.

I’m not suggesting that in general the “journalistic sushi” approach we used for coverage of the Obama commencement address is always the right call. In this case, the attention to detail gave enough time for reflection to include the annotated material as well as the in-line commentary.

But I’m content that someone who reads along might reasonably feel like a reader is supposed to feel when they read Chronicle material – as expressed in this publication’s tagline: “It’s like being there.”

Definition of bedraggled: Ann Arbor Chronicle publisher Mary Morgan, with White House Press Pool credentials, after a long day at Michigan Stadium. (Photo by Julie Weatherbee)

On Saturday, along with more than 90,000 other people, I was in Michigan Stadium amid the spectacle of the University of Michigan commencement, with the heightened drama surrounding the presence of President Barack Obama.

Despite standing in the rain for two hours, I was glad to be part of the orchestrated pageantry – it’s a perk to living in a city that’s got the pull of a major university, while still being small enough to score access to something that draws national attention. As the day wore on, the event also helped further crystallize for me some aspects of The Ann Arbor Chronicle’s journalistic mission. And because this is our publication’s 20th monthly milestone message, it seems a good occasion to reflect on that.

The most obvious point of clarity on Saturday was the difference between what The Chronicle typically does and what other media oranizations do – whether they are traditional or newly-emerging enterprises. The second observation is linked to some advice in Obama’s speech: Pay attention.

The Media Pen

If you’re a regular Chronicle reader, you know that our focus on local government coverage leads us to extended hours sitting in uncomfortable seats, listening to elected officials. In this way, our typical day (or often, evening) is not unlike the eight hours spent in Michigan Stadium on Saturday – uncomfortable seats, elected officials.

Of course, what differed dramatically from our typical work – ok, other than the fact that Barack Obama was 50 yards away – is that more often than not, we’re the only journalists in the room. These are meetings where the public’s business is conducted, but the public isn’t clamoring to attend. There are no murmurs of anticipation beforehand, no eruptions of applause when someone enters the room, no tight security.

It’s not glamorous stuff. It does not enhance social standing to say you just returned from covering a park advisory commission meeting – most people just tend to offer pity-filled stares, or tell you straight out that you’re a wing nut.

So it’s unusual to find us amid the crush of a media throng, as we were on Saturday. There’s an entire culture to it – and to the “handling” of the media that takes place as well. It’s a caste system, in part, made even clearer when the national media comes to town. I remember it clearly from my days working at The Ann Arbor News, but I had forgotten how much I’d disliked that aspect of the circus. [Funniest aside: Overheard complaints by some Washington media who apparently chose Buffalo Wild Wings for dinner on Friday, and who found the wine list there lacking in diversity. Heads up to BWW corporate management: A letter with suggestions about wine could be headed your way.]

That said, I’m glad I had the experience of hearing Obama’s speech in person, and of witnessing the excitement of the day. This will be a touchstone event for many, and I’m glad I was able to share in it.

I’m glad I could spend some time with photographer Myra Klarman and her husband Rich – Myra graciously agreed to shoot photos for The Chronicle, and one of the best things about the day was the chance to get to know her and Rich a little better. I’m even glad I had the experience of standing next to a grizzled photographer – not Myra – who, to my surprise, joined in as the UM graduates sang their alma mater, “The Yellow and Blue.” It wasn’t clear that anyone really knew the lyrics, including him.

But the day also served to remind me that there’s a reason we chose a different path when we launched The Chronicle, and affirmed for me the value in doing so.

Paying Attention

Obama began by describing some cute questions he’d received from a kindergarten class, segued into a discussion of “niceness,” and linked that to the historical context of our nation’s often raucous political discourse. Throughout, Obama threaded the theme of what it means to live in a democracy, and how as citizens, we have a responsibility to participate. He acknowledged that people might be turned off by the name-calling we witness on a regular basis, but cited the danger of turning away [From The Chronicle's annotated version of Obama's speech]:

…when we don’t pay close attention to the decisions made by our leaders; when we fail to educate ourselves about the major issues of the day; when we choose not to make our voices and opinions heard, that’s when democracy breaks down. That’s when power is abused. That’s when the most extreme voices in our society fill the void that we leave.

Obama was speaking to the national arena, but the sentiment is even more applicable, I believe, at the local and state levels. There are exponentially more sources of information and analysis of national issues than you can find about issues and the actions of public bodies in Lansing or locally. And generally, people are likely to know more about how their Congressman voted than who their city councilmember or county commissioner is, or what decisions they’re making.

One reason we founded The Chronicle in September 2008 was because we thought much of our local community wasn’t “paying attention” – and we wanted to do something about it. We believe, despite what many media pundits assert, that readers care about more than the quick-hit, sound-byte story. We trust readers are smart enough and care enough to value our approach, which pretty much lays out the minutiae of what’s happening in local government. Readers who make the modest investment of time to read our reports will have an understanding of how things work. In fact, I don’t think it’s exaggerating to say that Chronicle readers may be better informed on our local issues than public officials who don’t invest time to read The Chronicle.

Obama also talked about how participation in public life doesn’t have to mean running for public office. “But it does mean that you should pay attention and contribute in any way that you can,” he said. “Stay informed.”

I admire individuals who do this locally, even if I don’t always agree with their positions. People who are engaged in their communities, who take the time to try to understand how things work, who draw their own conclusions from the information they gather – they’ve taken on a Herculean task. And it’s a task that’s not universally appreciated. It’s easier for people in power to have a disengaged public – it can be messy and time consuming to respond to “the public,” whom some of our local officials mock as “the hive.” I get that. And I get that there are people who twist facts to align with their own worldview. The Chronicle’s  job would be “easier,” too, if no one ever showed up at meetings for public commentary – that’d sure be less for us to have to write up. But our community would be poorer for it.

Absent a robust public engagement, we might as well live in a benevolent monarchy. And the more access we have to information, the more able we are to evaluate it and make our own informed decisions, and to influence others to share our views. That’s why we’re unrelenting advocates for openness in government.

The Confluence of Community

Back to Saturday’s commencement. One of the things I cherish about living here is the fact that it’s a small enough town to find connections – if you pay attention. And because our profession takes us out into the community every single day of the week, we’ve been able to meet a pretty interesting range of people.

A fair number of them were also inside Michigan Stadium on Saturday – and running into them amid the thousands of strangers really grounded the event for me. Some were volunteering – like Kathy Griswold, a “regular” at many public meetings, and Anna Ercoli Schnitzer, a frequent Stopped.Watched. contributor to The Chronicle.

Wendy Woods, a former city councilmember who serves on the planning commission, passed by and said hello while we were waiting in the pre-dawn line outside the stadium. She works at UM with the Michigan Community Scholars Program – I’m pretty sure she knew more graduates on Saturday than we did.

On the field, I spotted Washtenaw County Sheriff’s deputy Blackwell, who was working security – I’d seen him just last week at the new location of Camp Take Notice, talking with that group of residents who are homeless.

In the stands, I chatted with Doug Kelley, probably the most affable, consistently upbeat person I know – we’ve met him in many different venues, including others with an Obama connection – and I was glad to add another one to my mental archive.

Matt Hampel passed by the media risers in his cap and gown – he’s been active in the community for so many years that I’d forgotten that he’s just now graduating. Talk about an engaged citizen – Matt’s a role model for that.

In some ways, all of this is really just a long-winded way of saying that I draw great satisfaction from the fact that we’re able to make a living at what we’re doing here at The Ann Arbor Chronicle. Thank you, subscribers and advertisers!  I’m glad that our work has allowed us to cross paths with so many others who call this community their home. We’re glad they’re paying attention to what we’re doing, and find value in it. We hope you do, too.

About the writer: Mary Morgan is publisher and co-founder of The Ann Arbor Chronicle.

U.S. President Barack Obama, flanked by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm on the left and University of Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman on the right.

University of Michigan students celebrate their graduation.

A University of Michigan student at the May 1 commencement.

Assorted footwear worn by University of Michigan students at graduation reflected the predicted thundershowers – which did dump a lot of water on the stadium in the early morning hours. But by the time commencement ceremonies began at 11 a.m., the severe weather was past.

The crowd at Michigan Stadium in rain ponchos.

Security staff overlooking Michigan Stadium during commencement.

The crowd at Michigan Stadium attending Saturday's graduation ceremonies. See anyone you know?

Not everyone in the crowd was an Obama supporter.

A graduating UM student listens to Barack Obama's speech.

One of the large screens mounted at Michigan Stadium gave students a chance to see themselves live on TV.

Getting a good photo sometimes requires standing out in the crowd.

The broadcast booth for the Big Ten Network. Seated at right is Ken Fischer, president of the University Musical Society. Seated to the left is Huel Perkins, a Fox 2 News anchor.

Students did their best to snag photos of Obama.

Barack Obama, with his honorary doctoral hood stylishly askew.

On Sunday, see more commencement photos on Myra Klarman’s blog, Relish.

Word cloud analysis of the Obama UM commencement address. Image links to higher resolution file. Analysis done at http://www.wordle.net/

The Chronicle has transcribed the speech as delivered and provided some annotation, in part by providing section and sub-section headings that reflect the organizational structure of the president’s remarks.

The main themes were the role of government in our lives and the keys to preservation of democracy. One of those keys to the preservation of democracy, Obama told the graduates, is to “contribute part of your life to the life of this country.”

Introduction

[applause ~30 seconds] Thank you very much, thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you very much, thank you. Thank you, everybody, please be seated. I love you back! [responding to "I love you" from audience] It is great to be here in the Big House. [applause ~5 s.] And so may I say, Go Blue! [applause ~10 s.] I thought I would go for the cheap applause line to start things off.

[Note: Based on the text that the White House released of the speech to be delivered, the line was not impromptu, but could have been perceived as an ad lib, riffing on the fact that many of the speakers who preceded Obama at the podium went for the "Go Blue" applause line at the end of their speeches, including Gov. Jennifer Granholm, UM president Mary Sue Coleman, and student speaker Alex Marston.]

Good afternoon, President Coleman, the Board of Trustees, the faculty, parents, family and friends of the class of 2010. [applause] Congratulations on your graduation and thank you for allowing me the honor of being a part of it. [applause] Let me acknowledge your wonderful governor, Jennifer Granholm, your mayor John Hieftje [Obama misses pronunciation with a novel variation to The Chronicle, saying /Heef-jay/] and all the members of Congress who are here today. It is a privilege to be with you on this happy occasion.

America’s Voices

-

America’s Voices: How Obama Keeps in Touch

And you know, it’s nice to spend a little time outside of Washington. [applause] Now, don’t get me wrong, Washington is a beautiful city. [audience laughter] It’s very nice living above the store – you can’t beat the commute. [audience laughter ~5 s.] It’s just sometimes, all you hear in Washington is the clamor of politics. And all that noise can drown out the voices of the people who sent you there. So when I took office, I decided that each night I would read 10 letters, out of the tens of thousands that are sent to us by ordinary Americans every day. This is my modest effort to remind myself of why I ran in the first place.

America’s Voices: Kindergartners

Some of these letters tell stories of heartache and struggle. Some express gratitude, some express anger. I’d say a good solid third call me an idiot, [audience laughter] which is how I know that I’m getting a good representative sample. [audience laughter, Obama also laughs, generating cheers] Some of the letters make you think, like the one I received last month from a kindergarten class in Virginia. Now, the teacher of this class instructed the students to ask me any question they wanted. So one asked, How do you do your job? [audience laughter] Another asked, Do you work a lot? [audience laughter] Somebody wanted to know if I wear a black jacket or if I have a beard. [audience laughter] So clearly they were getting me mixed up with the other tall guy from Illinois. [audience laughter, followed by collective "aww" in response to a shot of a little kid on the stadium scoreboard screen] And one of my favorites was from a kid who wanted to know if I lived next to a volcano. [audience laughter] I’m still trying to piece the thought process on this. [Obama laughs] I love this letter.

[Note: Obama's reference to "the other tall guy from Illinois" is a reference to Abraham Lincoln.]

America’s Voices: Niceness

But it was the last question from the last student in the letter that gave me pause. The student asked, Are people being nice? Are people being nice? Well, if you turn on the news today, or yesterday, or a week ago, or a month ago, particularly one of the cable channels, [audience laughter] you can see, [audience laughter] you can see why even a kindergartner would ask this question. [audience laughter] We’ve got politicians calling each other all sorts of unflattering names. Pundits and talking heads shout at each other. The media tends to play up every hint of conflict, because it makes for a sexier story, which means anyone interested in getting coverage feels compelled to make their arguments as outrageous and as incendiary as possible.

Contentious Discourse

-

Contentious Discourse: Origins in Current Crisis

Now, some of this contentiousness can be attributed to the incredibly difficult moment in which we find ourselves as a nation. Fact is, when you leave here today, you will search for work in an economy that is still emerging from the worst crisis since The Great Depression. You live in a century where the speed with which jobs and industries move across the globe is forcing America to compete like never before. You will raise your children at a time when threats like terrorism and climate change aren’t confined within the borders of any one country. As our world grows smaller and more connected, you will live and work with more people who don’t look like you, or think like you, or come from where you do.

Contentious Discourse: Historical Context

I really enjoyed Alex’s remarks, because that’s a lot of change. [The allusion was to the student speaker at the commencement, Alex Marston, whose message focused on change, and the difficulties inherent in accepting change.] And all these changes and all these challenges, inevitably cause tension in the body politic. They make people worry about the future. And sometimes they get people riled up. But I think it’s important that we maintain some historic perspective. Since the days of our founding, American politics has never been a particularly nice business. It’s always been a little less genteel during times of great change. A newspaper of the opposing party once editorialized that if Thomas Jefferson were elected, murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will be openly taught and practiced. [audience laughter] Not subtle. [audience laughter] Opponents of Andrew Jackson often referred to his mother as a common prostitute, which seems a little over the top. [audience laughter, also from Obama] Presidents from Teddy Roosevelt to Lyndon Johnson have been accused of promoting socialism or worse. We’ve had arguments between politicians that have been settled with actual duels. There was even a caning once on the floor of the United States Senate, which I’m happy to say didn’t happen while I was there. [audience laughter] It was a few years before. [audience laughter, also from Obama]

[Note: The reference to "actual duels" is to the pistol duel in 1804 between Alexander Hamilton, the former U.S. secretary of the treasury, and Aaron Burr, who was vice president at the time. Hamilton died of the wound he received at the duel. The reference to the Senate caning is to a physical attack by Congressman Preston Brooks on Senator Charles Sumner in 1856, in response to a speech that Sumner had delivered against the Fugitive Slave Act. The speech had insulted one of the authors of the act, Andrew Butler, who was a relative of Brooks.]

Contentious Discourse: The Nature of American Politics

The point is, politics has never been for the thin-skinned or the faint of heart. If you enter the arena you should expect to get roughed up. Moreover, democracy and a nation of more than 300 million people is inherently difficult. It’s always been noisy, and messy, contentious, complicated. We’ve been fighting about the proper size and role of government since the days the framers gathered in Philadelphia. We’ve battled over the meaning of individual freedom and equality since the Bill of Rights was drafted. As our economy has shifted emphasis from agriculture, to industry, to information, to technology, we have argued and struggled at each and every juncture over the best way to ensure that all of our citizens have a shot at opportunity.

So before we get too depressed about the current state of our politics, let’s remember our history. The great debates of the past all stirred great passion. They all made somebody angry. And at least once led to a terrible war. What is amazing is that despite all the conflict, despite all its flaws and its frustrations, our experiment in democracy has worked better than any form of government on earth. [applause ~15 seconds] On the last day of the Constitutional convention, Benjamin Franklin was famously asked: Well, doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy? And Franklin gave an answer that has been quoted for ages. He said: A republic, if you can keep it.

If you can keep it.

How to Preserve Democracy

Well, for more than 200 years we have kept it. Through revolution and civil war, our democracy has survived. Through depression and world war it has prevailed. Through periods of great social and economic unrest, from civil rights to women’s rights. It has allowed us slowly, sometimes painfully, to move towards a more perfect union.

And so now, class of 2010, the question for your generation is this: How will you keep our democracy going? At a moment when our challenges seem so big and our politics seem so small, how will you keep our democracy alive and vibrant? How will you keep it well in this century? I’m not here to offer some grand theory, or detailed policy prescription. But let me offer of few brief reflections, based on my own experiences, and the experiences of our country over the last two centuries.

Preserving Democracy: Adapt Role of Government to Changing World

First of all, American democracy has thrived, because we have recognized the need for a government that while limited, can still help us adapt to a changing world. On the fourth panel of the Jefferson Memorial is a quote I remember reading to my daughters, during our first visit there. It says, “I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.” A democracy designed by Jefferson and the other founders was never intended to solve every problem with a new law or a new program. Having thrown off the tyranny of the British Empire, the first Americans were understandably skeptical of government. Ever since, we have held fast to the belief that government doesn’t have all the answers. We have cherished and fiercely defended our individual freedom. That’s a strand of our nation’s DNA.

But the other strand is the belief that there are some things that we can only do together, as one nation. And that our government must keep pace with the times. When America expanded from a few colonies to an entire continent and we needed a way to reach the Pacific, our government helped build the railroads. When we transitioned from an economy based on farms to one based on factories, and workers needed new skills and training, our nation set up a system of public high schools. When the markets crashed during The Depression, and people lost their life savings, our government put in place a set of rules and safeguards to make sure that such a crisis never happened again, and then put a safety net in place to make sure that our elders would never be as impoverished the way they had been. And because our markets and financial systems have evolved since then, we’re now putting in place new rules to safeguard and protect the American people.

Now this notion [applause ~ 10 s.], this notion, class, hasn’t always been partisan. It was the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, who said the role of government is to do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves. And he would go on to begin that first intercontinental railroad and set up the first land-grant colleges. It was another Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, who said the object of the government is a welfare of the people. And he is remembered for using the power of government to break up monopolies, establish our national park system. [applause ~5 s.] Democrat Lyndon Johnson announced the Great Society during a commencement here at Michigan, but it was the Republican president before him, Dwight Eisenhower, who launched a massive government undertaking known as the interstate highway system.

Of course, there have always been those who oppose such efforts. They argue that government intervention is usually inefficient, it restricts individual freedom and dampens individual initiative. And in certain instances that’s been true. And for many years we had a welfare system that too often discouraged people from taking responsibility for their own upward mobility. At times we’ve neglected the role of parents, rather than government, in cultivating a child’s education. And sometimes regulations fail, sometimes the benefits don’t justify their costs.

But what troubles me is when I hear people saying, all of government is inherently bad. And one of my favorite signs during the health care debate was somebody who said, “Keep your government hands out of my Medicare,” [audience laughter ~5 s.] which is essentially saying “Keep government out of my government-run health care plan.” Now, when our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening, foreign entity, it ignores the fact that in our democracy, government is us. We, the people, hold our [applause ~ 5 s.] we the people hold in our hands the power to choose our leaders, and change our laws, and shape our own destiny.

Government’s the police officers, who are protecting our communities, and the service men and women who are defending us abroad. [applause ~5 s.] Government is the roads you drove in on and the speed limits that kept you safe. Government is what ensures the mines adhere to safety standards, or that oil spills are cleaned up by the companies that caused them. Government is this extraordinary public university, [applause extending through "big and small"] a place that’s doing life-saving research, and catalyzing economic growth, and graduating students who will change the world around them in ways big and small. And the truth is, the debate we’ve had for decades now, between more government and less government, it doesn’t really fit the times in which we live.

[Note: The reference to mine safety alludes to the April 5 explosion that killed 29 people at the Upper Big Branch mine in Montcoal, W.Va., a mine owned by Massey Energy. The U.S. Justice Department is currently investigating that incident. The mention of oil spills refers to the ruptured oil well off the Louisiana coast, creating a massive spill that's projected to be a worse ecological disaster than the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. The well is owned by the oil company BP. Obama was expected to visit the region on Sunday.]

We know that too much government can stifle competition and deprive us of choice and burden us with debt. But we’ve also clearly seen the dangers of too little government. Like when a lack of accountability on Wall Street nearly leads to the collapse of our entire economy. [applause ~5 s.] So, class of 2010, what we should be asking is not whether we need a big government or a small government, but how we can create a smarter and better government. Because in an era of iPods and TiVo, where we have more choices than ever before, even though I can’t really work a lot of these things, [audience laughter] but I have 23-year-olds who do it for me, [audience laughter] government shouldn’t try to dictate our lives, but it should give you the tools you need to succeed.

Government shouldn’t try to guarantee results, but it should guarantee a shot, an opportunity for every American who is willing to work hard. [applause ~10 s.] So, yes, we can and should debate the role of government in our lives. But remember, as you are asked to meet the challenges of our time, remember that the ability of us to adapt our government to the needs of the age has helped make our democracy work since its inception.

Preserving Democracy: Maintain Civility

Now the second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. These arguments we’re having, over government and healthcare and war and taxes, these are serious arguments. They should arouse people’s passions. And it’s important for everybody to join in the debate with all the vigor that the maintenance of a free people requires. But we can’t expect to solve our problems, if all we do is tear each other down. [applause smattering extending to "right-wing nut"] You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it. You can question somebody’s views and their judgment, without questioning their motives or their patriotism. Throwing around phrases like “socialists,” “Soviet-style takeover” and “fascists,” and “right-wing nut” [audience laughter] – that may grab headlines, but also has the effect of comparing our government, our political opponents, to authoritarian, even murderous regimes. Now, we’ve seen this kind of politics in the past, it’s been practiced by both fringes of the ideological spectrum, by the left and the right, since our nation’s birth. But it’s starting to creep into the center of our discourse.

The problem with it is not the hurt feelings or the bruised egos of the public officials who are criticized. Remember, they’ve signed up for it. Michelle always reminds me of that. [audience laughter] The problem is that this kind of vilification and over-the-top rhetoric closes the door to the possibility of compromise. It undermines democratic deliberation, it prevents learning. Since, after all, why should we listen to a fascist or a socialist or a right-wing nut? [audience laughter smattering] Or a left-wing nut? It makes it nearly impossible for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences, to sit down at the same table and hash things out. It robs us of a rational and serious debate, the one we need to have about the very real and very big challenges facing this nation. It coarsens our culture. And at its worst, it can send signals to the extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.

So what can we do? As I found out after a year in the White House, changing this type of politics is not easy. And part of what civility requires is that we recall the simple lesson most of us learned from our parents: Treat others as you would like to be treated. With courtesy and respect. [applause ~10 s.] But stability in this age also requires something more than just asking if we can’t just all get along. Today’s 24/7 echo chamber amplifies the most inflammatory soundbites louder and faster than ever before.

It’s also, however, given us unprecedented choice. Whereas most Americans used to get their news from the same three networks over dinner or a few influential papers on Sunday morning, we now have the option to get our information from any number of blogs or websites or cable news shows. And this can have both a good and bad development for democracy. For if we choose only to expose ourselves to opinions and viewpoints that are in line with our own, studies suggest that we become more polarized, more set in our ways. That will only reinforce and deepen the political divides in this country.

But if we choose to actively seek out information that challenges our assumptions and our beliefs, perhaps we can begin to understand where the people who disagree with us are coming from. Now this requires us to agree on a certain set of facts to debate from. That’s why we need a vibrant and thriving news business that is separate from opinion makers and the talking heads. [applause ~5 s.] That’s why we need an educated citizenry that values hard evidence and not just assertion. [applause ~5 s.] As Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously once said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.” [audience laughter]

Still, if you’re somebody who only reads the editorial page of the New York Times, try glancing at the page of the Wall Street Journal, once in a while. If you are a fan of Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, try reading a few columns on the Huffington Post website. It may make your blood boil, your mind might not be changed. But the practice of listening to opposing views is essential for effective citizenship. [applause] It is essential for democracy. [applause ~5 s.]

So, too, is the practice of engaging in different experiences with different kinds of people. I look out at this class and I realize for four years at Michigan you have been exposed to diverse thinkers and scholars, professors and students. Don’t narrow that broad intellectual exposure just because you’re leaving here. Instead, seek to expand it.

If you grew up in a big city, spend some time with somebody who grew up in a rural town. If you find yourself only hanging around with people of your own race or ethnicity or religion, include people in your circle who have different backgrounds, life experiences. You’ll learn what it’s like to walk in somebody else’s shoes. And in the process you will help to make this democracy work. [applause ~10 s.]

Preserving Democracy: Participate In It

Which brings me to the last ingredient of a functioning democracy, one that’s perhaps most basic. And it’s already been mentioned, and that is participation. Class of 2010, I understand that one effect of today’s poisonous political climate is to push people away from participation in public life. If all you see when you turn on the TV is name-calling, if all you hear about is how special interests lobbying in partisanship prevented Washington from getting something done, then you might think to yourself, what’s the point of getting involved?

Here’s the point: When we don’t pay close attention to the decisions made by our leaders, when we fail to educate ourselves about the major issues of the day, when we choose not to make our voices and opinions heard, that’s when democracy breaks down. That’s when power is abused. That’s when the most extreme voices in our society fill the void that we leave. That’s what powerful interests and their lobbyists are most able to buy access and influence in the corridors of power, because none of us are there to speak up and stop them. Participation in public life doesn’t mean that you all have to run for public office, though we could certainly use some fresh faces in Washington. [audience laughter] But it does mean that you should pay attention and contribute in any way that you can.

Stay informed. Write letters or make phone calls on behalf of an issue that you care about. If electoral politics isn’t your thing, continue the tradition that so many of you started here at Michigan, and find a way to serve your community and your country, an act that will help you stay connected to your fellow citizens and improve the lives of those around you.

You know, it was 50 years ago that a young candidate for president came here to Michigan and delivered a speech that inspired one of the most successful service projects in American history. And as John F. Kennedy described the ideals behind what would become the Peace Corps, he issued a challenge to the students who had assembled in Ann Arbor on that October night. On your willingness to contribute part of your life to this country, he said, will depend the answer whether a free society can compete. I think it can, he said.

This democracy we have is a precious thing. For all the arguments and all the doubts and all the cynicism that’s out there today, we should never forget that as Americans, we enjoy more freedoms and opportunities than citizens in any other nation on earth. [applause extending through "down"] We are free to speak our mind and worship as we please, we are free to choose our leaders, and criticize them if they let us down. We have a chance to get an education and work hard and give our children a better life.

None of this came easy. None of this was preordained. The men and women who sat in your chairs 10 years ago, and 50 years ago and 100 years ago, they made America possible through their toil and their endurance, their imagination and their faith. Their success and America’s success was never a given. There is no guarantee that the graduates who will sit in the same seats 10 years from now, or 50 years from now, or 100 years from now, will enjoy the same freedoms and opportunities that you do. You, too, will have to strive. You, too, will have to push the boundaries of what seems possible. For the truth is, our nation’s destiny has never been certain.

What is certain, what has always been certain, is the ability to shape the destiny. That is what makes us different. That is what sets us apart. That is what makes us Americans. Our ability at the end of the day to look past all our differences and all of our disagreements, and still forge a common future.

Conclusion: Calling Graduates to Action

And that task is now in your hands. As is the answer to the question posed at this university a half a century ago, about whether a free society can still compete. If you are willing, as past generations were willing, to contribute part of your life to the life of this country, then I, like President Kennedy, believe we can. Because I believe in you. Congratulations on your graduation 2010. May God bless you. May God bless the United States of America. Thank you.

Barack Obama holds a quilt of his family at the White House, made by Susan Walen. It was part of a folk art exhibit for the Ann Arbor Democratic Party's Labor Day picnic at the Elks Pratt Lodge. (Photo by the writer.)

The Chronicle first heard about Doug Kelley’s collection of Obama folk art when we met him at a health care forum last month, so when we learned that he’d be exhibiting part of it at the annual Ann Arbor Democratic Party‘s Labor Day picnic, we headed to the Elks Pratt Lodge on Monday to check it out.

The collection – two pairs of dolls, a quilted hanging, a hook rug, a walking stick, and several other items – includes original, somewhat eccentric work by artists from Ann Arbor and across the country.

Kelley gives frequent exhibits from his extensive Democratic Party archive – on Oct. 3, he’ll be displaying a collection of items related to voting rights at the annual meeting of the Washtenaw County Democratic Party. That meeting will feature civil rights activist John Lewis as guest speaker. But the Labor Day display was unique in at least one way: “It’s the first exhibit I’ve ever done that offers free peanuts,” Kelley said, pointing to a plastic dish filled with nuts for the taking.

So as rank-and-file Dems noshed and mingled with elected officials on the wraparound porch of the Elks lodge, we chatted with Kelley about some of the more unusual pieces he’s acquired.

Obama Dolls: Kathy Snyder

Local dollmaker Kathy Snyder had never before attempted a political subject, Kelley said, but she made two sets of Barack and Michelle Obama dolls for Kelley – and has now sold more than $1,000 worth of the dolls through the local Democratic Party.

Skylar Pryor plays with Barack and Michelle Obama dolls made by local craftswoman Kathy Snyder. They're sitting in a wooden toy swingset that Doug Kelley, who owns the collection, found at Treasure Mart. (Photo by the writer.)

One set of dolls stands 21 inches high – the Michelle Obama doll in this set wears a hand-painted red-and-black dress modeled after the one she wore at the election night celebration in Chicago’s Grant Park. All of the clothing is meticulously crafted, Kelley says: “They even have underwear!” Snyder’s 17-inch Obama dolls sell for $50 each or $95 for the pair. The 21-inch Obamas cost $195 for the set.

Wall Hanging: Susan Walen

Earlier this year Kelley got a call from his son Peter, who was in the Washington, D.C. area at a quilt show. “He said, ‘You’re never going to believe it – all the quilts are about Obama!’” Kelley recalled. The show had been organized by Bethesda, Md. artist Susan Walen, and Kelley ended up acquiring two of her quilted wall hangings. The one on display at the Labor Day picnic shows the Obama family at the White House. For the record, Kelley notes that the dog pictured in the quilt is a different breed from Bo, the Obama’s Portuguese water dog. Walen made the quilt after they’d announced plans to get a puppy, but before they actually chose one.

Kelley also brought a copy of a book put together by Walen: “President Obama – A Celebration in Art Quilts.” In it, there’s a picture of the other quilted wall hanging he owns, which was too large to bring to the Labor Day picnic. Titled “Dear Mr. Obama …” it includes an image of Obama and a nine-page letter that Walen wrote to him – she discusses the piece in an interview published on the Alliance for American Quilts website.

Doug Kelley with Steve Shepard's portraits of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. (Photo by the writer.)

Obama/Clinton Portraits: Steve Shepard

Steve Shepard is an artist from Gautier, Miss. who won best of show several years ago at the Ann Arbor Street Art Fair – that’s where Kelley first learned of his work. Shepard suffered financial losses in the wake of Hurricane Katrina that have prevented him from traveling back to Ann Arbor, but Kelley has kept in touch and purchased several pieces, including portraits of Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Kelley made a point of noting that the artist had not been advocating an Obama/Clinton ticket – it was Kelley’s decision to frame the two portraits together.

In addition to the work on display at the Labor Day picnic, Kelley also owns another piece of Shepard’s artwork: A portrait of Obama painted on a seven-foot-long slice of cypress wood.

Walking Stick: Victoria Fox Robertello

Artist Victoria Fox Robertello lives in Britton, Mich., and is a regular at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market, where she’s best known for making elaborate fish out of driftwood and other found timber.

But during the 2008 presidential campaign, she made several items that are now in Kelley’s collection. For Monday’s display he brought three of them: Two wooden signs that Kelley and Patrick Boeheim, a Washtenaw Democratic Party officer, carried in the 2008 and 2009 Ann Arbor July Fourth parades; and an elaborately painted Uncle Sam walking stick, made from a crooked piece of wood that forks into two “legs.”

A detail from a walking stick by Victoria Fox Robertello made during the 2008 presidential campaign. (Photo by the writer.)

More Obama Folk Art

Rita Barnard of Ann Arbor made this hook rug using a poster that Doug Kelley provided as inspiration. (Photo by the writer.)

A close-up of the Michelle Obama doll made by Kathy Snyder of Ann Arbor. (Photo by the writer.)

Detail from a quilted wall hanging by Susan Walen, showing the Obama family at the White House. For the record, the puppy next to Michelle Obama is not a Portuguese water dog. (Photo by the writer.)

Scenes from the Ann Arbor Democratic Party Labor Day picnic

Congressman John Dingell and his wife, Debbie Dingell, right, talk to Lois Mayfield on the porch of the Elks Pratt Lodge. (Photo by the writer.)

Jeff Irwin, a Washtenaw County commissioner, with his daughter Sylvia, talking to radio talk show host Lou Perry. (Photo by the writer.)

Conan Smith, chair of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party and a Washtenaw County commissioner, sells tickets to the Labor Day picnic with Kathy Wyatt, vice chair for membership and outreach of the Washtenaw County Democratic Party. (Photo by the writer.)

The folk rock band Birds of a Feather played together for the first time on Monday. From left: Lisa Pappas, Cory Snavely, Vicki Dischler and Michael Weiss. The decision whether to play again as a group "depends on the reception we get today," Weiss quipped. (Photo by the writer.)

Iced cookies in the shape of Democratic donkeys, Congressman John Dingell's contribution to the Labor Day picnic. (Photo by the writer.)

Doug Kelley's wife made this shirt out of material that has pictures of all U.S. presidents, except for Obama. So Kelley wears his Obama T-shirt underneath. He was also selling the T-shirts at Saturday's meeting of the Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor. (Photo by the writer.)

The 16 people who gathered in Judy Dooley’s living room on Saturday came by different paths. Some had talked to Dooley or other volunteers with the Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor at a table they man each week at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market. Some had received a flyer about the event, distributed by volunteers who regularly canvas city neighborhoods. Three of the people there – Dooley, Gus Teschke and Daniela Gobetti – are coordinators for the local Obama group.

We’re pretty sure U.S. Rep. John Dingell didn’t hear about the meeting from a flyer in his door, but he showed up too. He’s using the August recess in Congress the same way other legislators are – returning to their districts to mobilize support or opposition to the health care reform bill that both the House and Senate will tackle in the fall.

The focus of Saturday’s small neighborhood gathering was President Barack Obama’s health care reform efforts, including legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced by Dingell that proposes a public health insurance option. People attending the two-hour meeting raised a lot of questions about what the proposal entailed, and many shared their own experiences with problems they’ve encountered under the nation’s current health care system.

What’s the Obama Caucus?

The goal of the Obama Caucus is to capitalize on the networks and organizational infrastructure developed during the presidential campaign to try to maintain the political momentum. The election campaign developed volunteers’ skills in raising money and getting out the vote. But Gus Teschke, who served as a local campaign volunteer coordinator, sees a continued role: “We’re going to keep going and see what we can do,” he said. Teschke passed around a sign-up sheet for people who wanted to volunteer at the Saturday farmers market table from 8 a.m. until noon, or for door-to-door canvassing on Monday evenings between 6:15-8:30 p.m.

The group at Judy Dooley’s home also heard from Chris Wolff, the new local field organizer for Organizing for America, an outgrowth of the Obama for America campaign organization. Wolff’s territory includes the counties of Washtenaw, Monroe and western Wayne, but his energies are focused on the parts of that area which aren’t heavily Democratic, including western Washtenaw, Plymouth and Canton.

On Saturday, Teschke told the group that the local caucus is pushing to let Congressional leaders know that citizens support the health care reform initiative. As part of that effort, Teschke passed around a handout to the folks gathered in Dooley’s living room with tips on how to write a letter to Senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow – including a template of what points to include, and addresses for the senators’ offices in Detroit and Washington D.C.

Dooley had incentives for letters that got published: Some hard-to-find Obama stickers from the 2008 campaign.

Wolff said they need to “hammer away” at U.S. Rep. Thad McCotter, a Republican from the 11th District, representing northwestern Wayne and southwestern Oakland counties. The rest of the region’s representatives and senators – all Democrats, including Dingell, Levin, Stabenow and Mark Schauer, from District 7 – are supportive of the president’s health care reform, he said, but “it doesn’t hurt to keep pressuring them, even if they’re in the bag.”

The handout that Teschke passed around states that writing a letter by hand and including your personal health care story makes a bigger impact.

Passing the hat for donations at the Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor meeting. (Photo by the writer.)

Personal Perspectives on Health Care

Attending Saturday’s Obama Caucus gathering was Emanuel Tanay, a physician and retired professor of psychiatry. Tanay recalled that there was universal health care in Poland when where he was born, “and that was a long time ago.” He said he supports reform, both as a physician and a consumer.

One woman, who had volunteered last year at Obama’s local campaign office at the corner of Liberty and First, has a son-in-law who started his own small architectural firm – providing health care for his employees is breaking the bank, she said.

Another woman said the last time she was politically active was in 1972 for George McGovern’s campaign. But watching her life’s savings “going down the toilet” propelled her to action.

Saturday’s event was the second time within the past week that The Chronicle encountered personal stories on health care issues. Last Thursday, several people shared their perspectives in a discussion at the Ann Arbor District Library, sponsored by the National Issues Forums.

Those perspectives included a man who had never been without health insurance, but had recently been enrolled in Medicare – he’d heard there’d be significant cuts to Medicare and wondered how that would affect him. Another young man, who had been without health insurance, reported that he’d recently been diagnosed with suspected glaucoma – the cost of the regular checkups required to track possible progress of the disease were a concern to him.

There was a woman who’d lost a friend to breast cancer in Canada, where she said there was a higher mortality rate from breast cancer. She wondered if Canadians’ satisfaction with their health care system was a result of their unwillingness to ask hard questions of their health care providers.

One man spoke about his mother, who had recently passed away and who’d been covered by Medicaid. He reported that he felt like every step of the way, the entire health care system had been trying to “push her over the cliff,” that is, to end her life.

A GM retiree expressed concern that health care could “sink my battleship.” An owner of an urgent care facility suggested that high health care costs were partly attributable to illegal immigrants receiving health care.

But one man, who was uninsured, allowed: “This whole topic bores me to death.” The only reason he was there, he said, was out of a sense of civic duty.

The gathering at the library on Thursday was not universally supportive of the Obama administration in general, or in favor of the kind of reform proposed in the current House bill. There was much skepticism expressed about any government-mandated features of the program, in particular the idea that employers should shoulder the burden of providing health care for their employees.

Some of the sentiment at the library on Thursday is reflected in a line-by-line critique of the 1,000-page House bill adapted by Liberty Counsel from a blog post by Peter Fleckenstein, which one of the participants in the forum forwarded to The Chronicle afterwards.

The Obama Proposal: Dingell Makes the Push

People attending the Obama Caucus meeting at Dooley’s home on Saturday had concerns, but were supportive of reform. For the first hour – before Dingell arrived – the group had talked generally about the health care reform measures in Congress, with many saying they didn’t feel informed about the details at this point. Several said they wished that Obama would be more clear and vocal about what he wanted.

Gus Teschke, a coordinator for the Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor, ran Saturday's meeting at the Dolph Park neighborhood home of fellow coordinator Judy Dooley. (Photo of the writer.)

So when Dingell arrived, there were questions. But first there was applause as he entered the living room with his district administrator, Andy LaBarre. Dingell – the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, and a decades-long advocate of universal health care – then spent an hour talking about his own experiences with health care legislation, and answering questions.

The good news, Dingell contended, was that Congress is further along than it’s ever been to passing health care legislation that will cover every American. “It’s not the bill I would have written,” he said, but it’s good enough. “I’d rather have a single payer system and be done with it.”

He described himself as a pragmatist, quoting former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping: “It doesn’t matter whether the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice.” So the “good enough” bill he sponsored is out of committee – it was approved on Friday by the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

But there’s a long way to go. Congress is taking its August recess  and won’t pick up the issue again until the fall. [The House went on break last Friday, and the Senate will adjourn on Aug. 7.]

The House bill still requires a floor vote. In the Senate, there are two competing bills. One includes a public option, which means the government would offer a health insurance plan. The other eschews a public option in favor of nonprofit health care cooperatives. On Saturday, Dingell said he’d do everything he could to keep the “public option” component in whatever final legislation is passed.

U.S. Rep. John Dingell is greeted by Felicia Leipzig at Saturday's Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor meeting. He shook hands and introduced himself to everyone in the room, with the exception of Bella, the rather talkative family dog who can be spotted next to Leipzig. (Photo by the writer.)

Teschke has concerns about co-ops and triggers, and politely pressed Dingell on the issue.

The idea of a “trigger” is that a public insurance option would not be mandated at first – but could be “triggered” if voluntary measures in the health care industry did not work to meet certain standards. One example of a trigger might be if private insurance companies can’t meet certain goals for breadth of coverage within a given time frame – at that point, public health insurance would kick in.

As background for his question on triggers, Teschke said that at a previous meeting, a spokeswoman for Stabenow didn’t answer the question of whether the senator opposed co-ops and triggers.

“I’d bet you a good dinner that when the last dog is shot, Stabenow and Carl [Levin] will be with us,” Dingell said. Teschke later asked whether Dingell could post on his website that he opposes triggers and co-ops. Dingell seemed to hedge a bit, saying that there’s only so much he can put online, adding “I can only take on so many fights.”

One attendee said he was surprised that Obama has been so quiet as Congress wrangles about health care legislation, and asked for Dingell’s thoughts on why that might be. Dingell began answering that question by saying that he originally supported Hillary Clinton for president, but that he thought Obama was doing a superb job.

Obama was scared by the failure of the Clinton administration’s attempts to reform health care, Dingell said. Bill Clinton’s approach was to deliver proposed legislation to Congress. The point man for that effort, Ira Magaziner, “is so smart that he outsmarts himself.” And Bill Clinton was slow to push for Congress to act, Dingell said – all of that led to failure by a narrow margin.

Obama’s approach has been different, he said, leaving it to the leadership of Congress to pound out legislation – it’s not top-down. That’s led to a lot of disarray, Dingell said, including the massive problem of not getting answers about how much these different approaches might cost.

Tanay, the retired professor of psychiatry, expressed concern that if this legislation fails to solve the health care crisis, that will give opponents more ammunition to say that the public option doesn’t work. He’s worried that legislators will be satisfied with “half a loaf.” Dingell conceded that it’s possible for Congress to screw it up. Moving too quickly is a risk, he said. That makes him a careful legislator, he noted, and as a result, a slow one.

Dingell added: “I don’t think we’ll screw it up.”

Dingell is holding a health care town hall on Thursday, Aug. 6 at the Romulus Athletic Center, 35765 Northline Road in Romulus. That event starts at 6 p.m.

The Obama Caucus of Ann Arbor will hold its next meeting on Saturday, Aug. 15 from 2-4 p.m. at 321 Parklake in Ann Arbor, next to Dolph Park. [confirm date]

Rob Cleveland

I held back submitting this monthly column until the end of March to see what latest theatrics would wash over the auto industry. I wasn’t disappointed. The Obama administration looked over the homework submitted by GM and Chrysler – homework designed to demonstrate how they were going to get out of their collective messes – and sent them back to detention to do it over again.

On top of it all, long-time CEO at GM Rick Wagoner was summarily dismissed, as if one lone auto executive had been responsible for creating an unworkable fiscal structure and a corporate culture developed over decades of booms and busts in the auto business. And just for good measure, the government is insisting that Chrysler and Fiat hook up – something they were bound to do anyway – making this requirement the equivalent of forcing children to eat dessert.

Those inside the industry recognized the Obama administration’s reply for what it is – political theatre. Only 16% of Americans polled believe the auto industry should get additional loans, making any decision to give GM and Chrysler more money…toxic. Obama had to scold the two companies, and chastise them for not being aggressive enough in their restructuring plan to show that the money he is bound to give them came after careful review and critique. And Wagoner? Bob Lutz, GM’s vice-chairman, called it throwing the virgin into the volcano to appease the gods a few months ago. I’m having trouble picturing Mr. Wagoner in a hula skirt, but the analogy fits.

Despite all of the pronouncements and lecture, something major is missing from the activity. It is an opportunity not just to save GM and Chrysler, but also to change the fundamental landscape of the auto industry and our energy consumption patterns across America. Sound too far-fetched, too grandiose? Well so does universal health care and rebuilding our education system, but I expect the Obama administration to handle these problems too.

Government’s job is not to try and decide how many employees GM should have, or whether or not a tie in with Fiat is a good idea. Government’s job should be to instigate fundamental change. As part of the loan package, the Obama administration could require GM and Chrysler to roll out their production-ready electric vehicles in 2010, offering the first real step towards a fundamental shift in how Americans get around and what they consume in order to do it.

Are these cars ready? GM and Chrysler both have pre-production models that have been driven by hundreds of people, including the hypercritical automotive press. The general consensus is that they are as good as any pre-production model can be. GM and Chrysler are not exactly bullish on how profitable the vehicles will be once they are in showrooms, but it seems pretty clear that they’re not making money on their gas-powered cars and trucks anyway, so why not at least lose money on something that shifts the environmental burden and the energy focus to the electricity industry.

If this kind of authoritarian mandate sounds too socialist, you’re close, because the Chinese are doing exactly this. The New York Times reports that Chinese leaders are planning to pour vast government resources into the development of electric vehicle technology and EV production. This comes from the very top down, meaning they have the means and the political will to actually pull off this grandiose plan.

Make no mistake; the Chinese aren’t doing it to save the planet from global warming or pollution (much of the new electricity demand in China will likely come from coal or nuclear power plants). Instead, they are eliminating a massive liability – their dependence on foreign oil. Most of China’s oil comes in from the Middle East, and must take a long sea route to show up in Chinese ports. The U.S. has a pretty big navy. Actually, it is considered the best and the biggest in the world. So the math isn’t hard. Either the Chinese government builds a massive navy that can go head to head with the U.S. to guarantee its energy security, or it reduces oil imports to negligible volumes by developing technology solutions that also could also be exported around the world, making the Chinese government even more money.

Meanwhile, back in Washington D.C. and Detroit, government is fretting over details about projected U.S. vehicle market volume (not even Nostradamus knows where that is going) and standalone viability casting a wafer-thin veneer over the obvious political subterfuge. I’m not advocating communism by any stretch, but if the executive branch is going to make a decision about the car companies unilaterally anyway, why not step up and make a decision to promote real and resounding change that will live on for generations.

Call it a silver lining, lemonade out of lemons, making the best of a bad situation. Whatever the label, the ideal confluence of events is upon us: needy car companies, a president who has made energy efficiency a keystone of his administration and a genuine shift in consumption patterns made by the American public that are more sensitive to the environment.

Change. Hopefully it won’t just be a tidy campaign slogan. If it is, you can bet the Republican Party – the authors of this miserable state of affairs – will be using exactly the same theme to rebuke the incumbent in 2012, blaming him for the failure of our manufacturing base, and the lack of progress in reducing our dependence on foreign oil. My hope is that President Obama realizes the opportunity in front of him and acts in a way that realizes those lofty goals he now is obliged to execute. 

About the author: Rob Cleveland is CEO of ICON Creative Technologies Group and a co-owner of Vinology Restaurant in Ann Arbor.

Inauguration Day (David Cahill)
(With apologies to William Shakespeare, King Henry V, and St. Crispin)
-
Those who are here this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast their neighbors,
And say “Tomorrow is Inauguration Day.”
Then they will strip their sleeves and show their scars,
And say “These wounds I had on Inauguration Day.”
This story shall they teach their children,
And Inauguration Day shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
Be we in it shall be remembered –
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers and sisters,
Two million strong,
For they today who are with me
Shall be my brothers and sisters, be they ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle their condition;
And those in this nation now abed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That were with us upon Inauguration Day.
-
-

Obama Inauguration: The address. (Photo by Sabra Briere)

Obama Inauguration, before the oath. (Photo by Sabra Briere)

Obama Inauguration: The ticket line. (Photo by Sabra Briere)

Obama Inauguration: The fur coat after "Fur Coat, Sit Down!" (Photo by Sabra Briere)

Toasting President Barack Obama at a gathering at Marsha Chamberlin's downtown Ann Arbor home just after the swearing-in ceremony.

When people ask “Where were you when Barack Obama was inaugurated?” The Chronicle will say “At Marsha Chamberlin’s home.”

Chamberlin, president of the Ann Arbor Art Center, hosted a small gathering at her Liberty Lofts condo to watch Obama’s inauguration on CNN.

The dozen or so women raised a toast to the new president after he was sworn into office. Someone in the group gave this toast as well: “To the Constitution – welcome back!” They laughed when the TV camera showed George Bush during Obama’s inauguration speech, looking more than a little uncomfortable. And when the band played the national anthem at the end of the ceremony, everyone in the room softly sang along.

There was a sense of history, in many ways. Chamberlin had hung a flag from her fourth-floor balcony, saying she’d never felt like flying one before today. It was the flag from the funeral of her husband’s father, a World War II veteran.

The wind blew an American flag hung on Marsha and John Chamberlin's Liberty Lofts balcony, marking the inauguration of Barack Obama.