The Commonwealth

TheCommonwealthTHE MAGAZINE OF THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB OF CALIFORNIA DEC 2012 / JAN 2013

JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O’CONNORpg 48

Otis Brawley:TREAT THEM RIGHT!pg 6

Dr. Gloria Duffy on senior abuse pg 54

Social Entrepreneur Revolutionpg 47

$2.00; free for members | commonwealthclub.org

ELECTIONS

ECONOMICS

&eENERGY

Turkey – where Europe and Asia meet to form “the cradle of civilization” – is yours to discover on this exclusive 15-day educational tour, limited to only 28 people.

Legendary TurkeyFrom Istanbul to the Turquoise Coast

May 16 to 30, 2013

• Discover Istanbul, Turkey’s cultural and spiritual heart, and visit the legendary Blue Mosque, Hagia Sofia and Topkapi Palace.

• Experience the sacred World War I battle-field of Gallipoli.

• Visit Troy, and explore the wealth of Greco-Roman ruins at ancient Pergamum.

• Learn about history and contemporary politics during our guest lectures and a briefing with foreign service staff.

• Spend a full day at Turkey’s nonpareil classical city, Ephesus.

• Cruise the exquisite Turquoise Coast for four splendid days, aboard a privately chartered gulet yacht, relaxing and dis-covering hidden sights, quaint fishing villages and remote ruins.

• End your journey in the seaside resort Antalya, with a side trip to ancient Perge. An optional post-trip extension to Cappadocia and Ankara is available.

For Information & Reservations: visit commonwealthclub.org/travel call (415) 597-6720 email [email protected]

Trip Cost: $5,392 total price ($4,995 air, land & cruise inclusive plus $397 airline taxes and departure fees)CST: 2096889-40 Photos: clockwise from top left: Moyan Brenn, axo, CM Ortega, Kristina Nemeth, Magic Ketchup, Hillarie, virtualwayfarer, Alaskan Dude, Kristina Nemeth, Vincent_AF / Flickr

INCLUDES AIRFARE FROM SAN FRANCISCO!

THE COMMO N WE AL TH 3DECEMBER 2012/JANUARY 2013

25 PROGRAM INFORMATION

26 EIGHT WEEKS CALENDAREvents from December 3 to February 7, 2013

32 PROGRAM LISTINGS

32 LANGUAGE CLASSES

4 EDITOR’S DESKWhad’ya know? A quiz about this combined year-end/new-year issue

5 THE COMMONSVoting in Cuba, Barney Frank is speechless, and some old friends return to the Club

54 INSIGHTDr. Gloria C. Duffy President and CEO Protecting Our Seniors

Photo by Ed Ritger

Phot

o by

Ed

Ritg

erPh

oto

by R

ikki

War

d

About Our Cover: Photo by Pidjoe / istockphoto.

VOLUME 107, NO. 01 | DECEMBER 2012/JANUARY 2013

INSIDE The Commonwealth

FEATURES

EVENTSDEPARTMENTS

ON THE COVER

8 SPECIAL SECTION: THE KEYS TO 2013Get some visibility into the big issues of 2013 with this special section, featuring “Propositions Power Play,” “Time to Spend Political Capital,” “Budget Balance,” “California’s Economic GPA,” “Election Fallout,” “Is California Fixable?” “Prop. 8 and the Court,” “Bipartisan Power,” and “Hitched to Hetch Hetchy”

6 DO NO HARMOtis Brawley highlights the damages done to people misdiagnosed and misled

20 BUCKLE UP: THE GREAT ECONOMIC TURBULENCEPaul Saffo on the new global economic era, in which disruptions are the norm

43 IRAN AND THE BOMBSeyed Mousavian offers a plan for bridging the Iran-U.S. nuclear divide

47 THE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEUR REVOLUTIONRuth Shapiro on the growing field

“California still elects some of its judges. You shouldn’t do that. You should change that. It’s really shocking to me that, after all these years, we still have so many elected judges.” – Sandra Day O’Connor

48 CITIZEN SANDRA

THE COMMO N WE AL TH4 DECEMBER 2012/JANUARY 2013

After more than a half year of writing Week to Week news quizzes for Huffington Post San Francisco every week, I can’t stop. If someone asks me how I am, I respond with a

multiple choice answer. So here is a quiz relating to and inspired by the content of this issue of The Commonwealth.

1. What was the international monetary management structure created after World War II? a. The Yalta Conferenceb. Camp Davidc. Bretton Woodsd. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

2. Who are the political odd-couple lawyers leading the anti-Prop. 8 fight in court?a. Democrat Gloria Allred and Republican Fred Thompsonb. Democrat David Boies and Republican Theodore Olsonc. Democrat Alicia Florrick and Republican Kenneth Starrd. Democrat Eric Holder and Republican Alberto Gonzalez

3. Where does the name “Hetch Hetchy” come from?a. Early Spanish settlers named the area for their queen’s nicknameb. The resevoir was designed by Aldabert “Hetch” Hetchyc. It was the name of the company that won the concession to build and operate the reservoir for 100 yearsd. It is derived from the Sierra Miwok words for a type of grass

4. What year did Reagan appointee Sandra Day O’Connor become the first female U.S. Supreme Court justice?a. 1981b. 1980c. 1983d. 1986

5. Who funded and promoted Prop. 38, the tax measure in op-position to Governor Jerry Brown’s Prop 30?a. Arnold Schwarzenegger

b. Gavin Newsomc. Molly Mungerd. Charles Koch

6. The P5+1 group negotiates with Iran over its nuclear program. Who is the Five Plus One?a. Turkey, Israel, India, the United Kingdom and the United Statesb. Hillary Clinton, Henry Kissinger, George P. Shultz, Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albrightc. China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United Statesd. The five permanent UN Security Council members plus Japan

7. Who said the following: “Entrepreneurs and business people around the world and here at home think that at some point America is going to become like Greece or like Spain or Italy, or like California -- just kidding about that one, in some ways.”a. Barack Obamab. Mitt Romneyc. Bill Maherd. Jerry Brown

8. How many state propositions were on the November 2012 ballot?a. 6b. 11c. 18d. 10

ADVERTISING INFORMATION: Mary Beth Cerjan, Development Manager, (415) 869-5919, [email protected] Commonwealth (ISSN 0010-3349) is published bimonthly (6 times a year) by The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-2805. | PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID at San Francisco, CA. Subscription rate $34 per year included in annual membership dues. | POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Commonwealth, The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-2805. | Printed on recycled paper using soy-based ink. Copyright © 2012 The Commonwealth Club of California. Tel: (415) 597-6700 Fax: (415) 597-6729 E-mail: [email protected] | EDITORIAL TRANSCRIPT POLICY: The Commonwealth magazine covers a range of programs in each issue. Program transcripts and question and answer sessions are routinely condensed due to space limitations. Hear full-length recordings online at commonwealthclub.org/archive or contact Club offices to order a compact disc.

Whad’ya Know?

EDITOR’S DESK

Photo by choyoungkwan / Flickr

FOLLOW US ONLINE facebook.com/thecommonwealthclub twitter.com/cwclub commonwealthclub.org/blog commonwealthclub.org

BUSINESS OFFICES The Commonwealth, 595 Market St., 2nd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105 | [email protected], MEDIA & EDITORIAL John Zipperer | SENIOR EDITOR Sonya Abrams | ART DIRECTOR Steven FromtlingEDITORIAL INTERNS Amelia Cass | CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHERS Ed Ritger, Rikki Ward

JOHN ZIPPERER VP, MEDIA & EDITORIAL

ANSWERS: 1. (c). 2. (b) 3. (d) 4. (a) 5. (c) 6. (c) 7. (b) 8. (b)


A t Club events, you can rub shoulders with some of the most interesting peo-

ple around. At one recent event, it was even possible to rub shoulders with people from our past.

Audrey Hepburn and presidents Bill Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt were among the former Club speakers who worked the crowd. The famous speakers were, of course, actors who pro-vided some fun history at a party to support the Commonwealth Club’s capital campaign, held at the home

of Club Board of Governors member Char-lotte Mailliard Shultz and for-mer Secretary of State George P. Shultz. The S h u l t z s a r e honorary chairs of the capital cam-paign, which is raising funds for the Club’s new building at 110 The Embarcadero. As you can see in the photo above, the Roosevelt cousins were more than happy to pose with

Club Board member Colleen Wilcox and President Gloria C. Duffy.

The most popular character at the program was reportedly the actor portraying two-time Club speaker Chesley Sullenberger.

J ust a few days before he was scheduled to address a Com-monwealth Club luncheon in San

Francisco, U.S. Rep. Barney Frank let us know he was canceling. More accurately: He was forced to cancel.

The soon-to-retire Democratic Mas-sachusetts congressman was due to discuss the 2012 election. All was in order, until the House committee that oversees members’ ethics – yes, such a committee exists – ruled that Frank’s trip could not take place. Was it a block

by his political opponents, who hold the House majority and therefore control the committees? Or was it just a mundane example of a committee crossing the T’s and dotting the I’s? We might never get an answer, but that won’t stop the Club from booking future programs with Frank or politicians across the aisle.

Politics is a sharp-elbows game, and Frank is no newcomer to receiving or giv-ing political jabs. But you’ll have to wait a little longer before you hear him jab from the Commonwealth Club’s stage.

M otor magnate H e n r y Fo rd

famously told people they could have any color car they want, as long as it’s black.

If that frustrates you, imagine going to the polls in Cuba. A recent Commonwealth Club trip to the island nation found the ex-pected – artists, great food – and the unex-pected – Hurricane Sandy threatened but did not disrupt their journey. One unex-pected thing that hap-pened when they were in the communist na-tion was that an elec-tion was taking place. But, like Henry Ford’s admonition to buyers, the only choices were all from the Commu-nist Party. The sign in the photo below tells Cuban voters in Span-ish, “your vote counts.”

Anyone with a com-mon name knows

the online world makes it easy to be confused with someone of the same name. We know your pain.

For example, if you saw this tweet last month – “It’s FRYday! Come join the Detroit Women’s #Rugby team as they work the Fish Fry at the Commonwealth Club tonight starting at 5:30PM.“ Not us. Or “I’m at a place called the Com-monwealth Club using their wifi in London. This is the life!” – we do have wifi you are welcome to use, but we’re not in London. Or “A bit disappointed @MCHammer did not join @JerryBrownGov at Com-monwealth Club. Guess we’ll have to wait til he runs for Oakland mayor.“

OK, that was about us.

CommonsTHE

Talk of the Club

Historic MeetupShultz soiree sees superstars

Twit picksDoppelgängers

When a Choice Is No ChoiceA simple ballot

The Limits to Political SpeechRep. Barney Frank’s election preview cancelled

Photo courtesy of Barney Frank

Photo courtesy Charlotte Mailliard Shultz

Phot

o by

Oon

a M

arti

CUBA VOTES


Illus

trat

ion

by S

teve

n Fr

omtli

ng

noDo HarmSometimes even patients who are trying to get help are

forced to endure overtreatment, mistreatment, and even risk death. Excerpt from “Dr. Otis Brawley: Fighting Patient Mistreatment in America,” October 29, 2012.

oTIS BRAWLEY Chief Medical Officer and Executive Vice President, American Cancer Society; Co-author, How We Do Harm: A Doctor Breaks Ranks About Being Sick in America

Ralph was a guy who called me in 2003 because I’d been outspoken about prostate cancer. Ralph was a wonderful human being. He and I had a lot in common. He was a white guy from Indiana, I was a black guy from Detroit –

it’s still the Midwest. Ralph had had a Jesuit education as well. Ralph and I used to tell Jesuit stories and compare them.

Ralph had been forced to go to a local mall for prostate cancer screening by his wife. She had seen this advertisement from a

hospital that they were having free prostate screening. He didn’t want to go, but she forced him to go. He had an abnormal measurement. He went to the doctor’s office he was referred to, and everyone in the waiting room had

been screened at that same place. He didn’t like that place so he went someplace else.

He went across town to this young guy who had a new da Vinci robot. His hospital was advertising him. He liked this guy, and he got the da Vinci

Prostatectomy for prostate cancer. He had one out of 12 biopsies positive with 20 percent hav-

ing Gleason 3 plus 3 disease. If you’ve ever read the book The Emperor of All Maladies, I do sort of think of myself as Forrest Gump, because about three quarters of the people in that book

I know personally. One of them is a guy named Don Gleason who did the Gleason scoring for

prostate cancer. He never wanted Gleason 3 plus 3 prostate cancer to be called cancer. Don used to say,

“People want to cut cancer out, so I want to call this adenosis.” Unfortunately the urologists, the surgeons, the treaters overruled

this pathologist and called it cancer. Ralph had this cancer. He got it cut out with

the da Vinci robot. His PSA didn’t go down. He’s a smart guy, college

educated. His prostate is in a bottle in somebody’s lab, and he still has PSA in his


blood. He must have cancer somewhere. He starts freaking out. So he goes doctor shopping and he finally finds a radiation oncologist who, for $80,000 billed to his insurance, gives him I.M.R.T., basically radiation to the pelvis. This is done blindly, sort of a shotgun blast, maybe we’ll hit cancer there. Unfortunately Ralph ends up with every side effect you can imagine. When Ralph called me to talk about my feel-ings about prostate cancer screening, he had an ostomy on the left to collect stool, and an ostomy on the right to collect urine, because he had had a pelvic dissection. It was terrible.

Ralph and I talked about prostate cancer screening. He asked why I was so outspoken about prostate screening, and I told him I’d been an aide to David Satcher when he was surgeon general. I got to go to President Clinton’s apology for the Tuskegee experiment at the White House. The Tuskeegee syphilis experiment was a period of about 40 years where the U.S. government lied to about 700 men. Two weeks after that, I was back at the National Cancer Institute and I went to see a cancer center. When the guy from the NCI, the federal government agency that gives out millions of dollars goes to a cancer center, they have this dog and pony show that they put on.

In the intermission I happened to be sitting next to a marketing guy. That’s when I realized that marketing people are evil. This marketing guy started talking about their prostate cancer screening program at the hospital. He could explain to me that if they announced they were going to screen 1,000 men six weeks from now at a certain mall, he knew how much extra busi-ness they would get at the breast cancer clinic for mammography. Women would go there because if that hospital cares so much about their men, they’re taking their mammogram business there. He knew how much extra busi-ness they would get in their chest pain clinic. He knew the extra publicity they would get for free.

Once they get to the mall and screen 1,000 guys who volunteer over the age of 50, their previous years’ data for several years showed that 135 would have an abnormal screen and come to their hospital to figure out why it was abnormal. Even though 10 additional would have an abnormal screen and go to their com-petition, but they would get 135, charge an

average of $3,000 to figure out why the PSA is abnormal. Of the 135, 45 would actually have prostate cancer. Of the 45 with prostate cancer, he knew the percentage that would get surgery, the percentage that would get radiation, the percentage that would get cryo-surgery. Then he told me, if we screen 1,000 guys and diagnose 135 with an abnormal PSA and diagnose 45 with prostate cancer, this is the number of artificial sphincters we’re going to sell because this is the number of guys that are going to have incontinence to the point that diapers just don’t hack it for them. Then he apologized to me, because there is this new thing called Viagra on the market that screwed up his estimate of how many penile implants he was going to sell for impotence.

I’m an epidemiologist from the National

Cancer Institute. I ask the money question. It turns out it really was not the money question. I ask, “If you screen 1,000 guys, how many lives will you save?” He took his glasses off, looked at me like I was a fool and he said, “Don’t you know? There has never been a study to show this stuff saves lives. I can’t give you an estimate on that.” It took me a second to realize that this guy knows how many artificial sphincters he’s going to sell if he screens 1,000 people, he knows how much money he’s going to make if he screens 1,000 people, but he doesn’t know if he is going to save a single life.

The American Urological Association recommendation for screening, which I like a lot, says, “Given the uncertainty of PSA test-ing results doing more benefit than harm, a thoughtful and broad approach to PSA screen-ing is critical. Patients need to be informed of the risks and benefits of testing before it is undertaken. The risk of over-detection and over-treatment should be included in this discussion.”

Despite that, there is all this free testing still being done at all of these hospitals. There is one group that has vans that have been purchased by Kimberly-Clark. They go around with various doctor groups and do free screening

in supermarket parking lots, and in the sum-mertime they go around to state fairs. Why is Kimberly-Clark buying these vans? I don’t know if prostate cancer screening saves lives but it sure as hell sells adult diapers. Kimberly-Clark makes Depends undergarments.

There has been a prospective randomized trial of lung cancer screening that says if you screen 27,000 people at high risk for lung can-cer – meaning they have smoked more than 30 years at a pack a day – you actually save 84 lives, but you cause instrumentation that kills 16. That’s science. We at the ACS recommend that people who have an extensive smoking history realize the double-edged sword of screening. Yes, it saved 84 people, but it caused 16 people to die premature deaths. By the way, there were still 340 people who died over 10 years. If you

want to get screened, you should get screened.

Saint Joseph’s hospital in Atlanta has ads right now recommending that non-smoking women in their 40s who have lived in an urban area for more than 10 years get

screened because, according to Saint Joseph’s hospital, they’re at high risk for lung cancer. Their business plan actually involves the fact that 25 percent of all non-smokers will have a false positive exam and your insurance will pay the fee to figure out why that exam was false positive.

In this country we have a form of corrup-tion in medicine. We allow it all to happen. Who is at fault? It’s the doctors, the hospitals, the insurance companies, the lawyers, the patients, the patient advocacy groups – we all accept it. We all accept not being scientific, not being rational. We keep talking about ration-ing health care in the United States. We need to be talking about rational use of health care. If we’d been rational, bone marrow transplant would’ve only been available during a clinical trial in the 1980s and never have been offered in the 1990s.

I’ve come to realize that when you’re talk-ing to doctors, it’s difficult to get a man to un-derstand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it.

That was Upton Sinclair, by the way.

This program was made possible by the generous support of the California HealthCare Foundation.

“In this country, we have a form of

coRRupTIon In mEdIcInE. We allow it all to happen.”


Would California be better off if the propositions passed? How would they change our state?

Excerpt from “Week to Week,” October 4, 2012

PROPOSITIONS POWER PLAY

TERRY CHRISTENSEN Professor Emeritus, San Jose State University

BARBARA MARSHMAN Editorial Pages Editor, San Jose Mercury News

KIRK O. HANSON John Courtney Murray SJ University Prof. and Exec. Director, Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

JOHN ZIPPERER Vice President of Media and Editorial, The Commonwealth Club – Host

Which also brings me to another ballot measure, 40; it’s the referendum on redis-tricting. If we just vote No on Prop. 40, then the redistricting commission’s plan is invalid and we go back to the old system where they have to do a whole new plan. So we have to vote Yes not to repeal.MARSHMAN: It’s very confusing. HANSON: I would agree that 30 is the single most important thing. This is why, in order to have 30 on the ballot, we elected Jerry Brown. We elected Jerry Brown and said, “Use the fact that you’re an old fella that doesn’t have an-other election to run to do the right thing.” So he’s put this on the ballot and said, “This is the only way to bail yourselves out, California.” If this does not pass, we are in deep trouble, and education is going to be the big victim – and higher education is going to suffer dramati-cally, as well as K-12. The two-week estimate is one of the likely scenarios, that we would have to shorten the school year.MARSHMAN: The main reason that Jerry’s measure is better than 38 is that it does also help higher education; 38 does not.CHRISTENSEN: And some of [Prop. 30’s revenue] goes into the general fund and does not have strings. Part of our budget problem in California is that so much of the budget is earmarked through the initiative proccess that the governor and the legislature don’t have the discretion to move it where it might be most needed.

charge on the wealthy, and it’s a small, quarter-cent sales tax.ZIPPERER: Brown’s is temporary. Is hers?MARSHMAN: They’re both temporary. His is seven years, hers is 12 years. Hers will raise a lot more money over time, but it will also create this whole new bu-reaucracy. The terrible thing would be if nothing passes, because the state has cut and cut and cut, and you just can’t go on doing that without having some kind of recovery. Particularly for the schools. Prop. 30 has the best chances of passing and will do the most good. Unfortunately, Molly is not just campaigning for her Prop. 38 but is campaigning pretty viciously against Jerry’s Proposition 30. If they kill each other, it will be truly tragic. If neither passes, we are going to see some really bad things happening in our schools.CHRISTENSEN: I agree. Prop. 30 is the most important initiative on the ballot. In funding for the public sector, education in particular and higher education, we’ve cut and cut and cut, and there’s got to be something to stabilize it. This is not going to supplement things significantly; it’s just going to stabilize. We can’t cut two weeks off the K-12 school year. My goodness, we’re in international competition economically. We just can’t weaken our education system any further. So Prop. 30 is important. Prop. 38 kind of mixes things up in a way that can confuse voters, and you know what Califor-nia voters do when they get confused about ballot measures: They just vote No.

THE KEYS TO 2013

This program was made possible by the generous support of Silicon Valley Bank.

ZIPPERER: We’ve got a slew of proposi-tions [on the November 2012 ballot]. Eleven of them have qualified. Talk about the ones you think are most significant.MARSHMAN: The most important ones on the ballot are 30 and 38, the two tax measures. Molly Munger’s, Prop. 38, is the direct tax for K-12 schools and very direct – money goes directly to the schools, not to the districts.

Jerry Brown’s, Prop. 30, is a broader tax; it raises money for schools but also for some other things, it’s partly an income tax sur-

We enter the new year after a bruising election and still-unresolved issues involving the economy, environment, education and more. See what guidance recent Club speakers have for 2013.


long-term budget deficit problems. That’s a tough one. One answer is to do some-thing short-term to maintain the stimulus but at the same time have a deal where you promise that you’re going to deal with the longer-term problems.

The likely results from the election, what does this mean for the fiscal cliff? Obama is more than likely to be president, though I wouldn’t put high confidence on it. Likely the Senate will be Demo-cratic and the House Republican. That’s one picture of what the future looks like. The other picture is that Romney will be president; then I think the Sen-ate might go Republican because in his coattails he will bring along some of those Senate races, and the House will be Republican.

If you have the first scenario, with Obama wins, you’re going to get gridlock but there’s room for a deal. I think you’re going to get a Simpson-Bowles kind of deal from the president.

On the other hand, if Romney wins, the Republicans will have a very open field. I suspect they will use reconcilia-tion – where you only need 51 votes in the Senate – again and again and again, and they’ll make major cuts in entitlement programs, and they will really go to town in trying to deal with the deficit, and in the process, destimulate the economy.

think that the stimulus had no impact whatsoever, you don’t have to worry about the fiscal cliff; it won’t have an impact. So to be consistent, you either have to believe the stimulus worked and the fiscal cliff is a problem, or you have to believe the stimulus didn’t work and the fiscal cliff isn’t a problem.

That kind of consistency isn’t found out there among most politicians. Most politicians of the Left and Right think the fiscal cliff is a problem.

One reason the fiscal cliff will have a big impact is because it’s actually not just a one-time $680 billion destimulation of the economy; it’s a repeated destimula-tion, year after year. So it’s as if you had destimulation programs this year, next year, on and on and on.

What are the estimates? Goldman Sachs, Moody’s Analytics and the Con-gressional Budget Office think that if all these things occur – tax cuts expire, tax increases occur, expenditures are cut and this kind of destimulation occurs – we will have a decline in GDP of about 4 percent. That’s a recession. It’s a really significant recession.

So that’s the bad news. Let me tell you the good news.

If we do these things, since we’re going to have more tax revenue coming in and less spending, we’re actually going to help solve our budget deficit problem. One way to do that is to really seriously destimulate the economy, using the austerity kinds of programs that have been used in Europe, that have had some impact on helping with the budget problems they have there. Though the bad thing that happens is by destimulating the economy, you send it into a downward spiral of people losing jobs, and then there’s fewer people to tax because there’s fewer people working.

So the needle’s eye that has to be gone through here is that you want to stimulate the economy, but you want to solve these

TIME TO SPENDPOLITICAL CAPITAL

What is the fiscal cliff and what will the country do when it faces it at the end of 2012? Both parties are concerned about it, but their prescriptions for dealing with it are very different.

Excerpt from “A Political Prognosis for the Presidential Race and Its Aftermath,” October 26, 2012

HENRY BRADY Dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy and Professor of Political Science, UC Berkeley

We’re in trouble. When we get to something like the fiscal cliff, we’ve got problems.

The fiscal cliff is a term used to describe a set of tax cuts that will expire, tax increases that will occur, expenditure cuts that will automatically occur, and expenditures that will need to be reauthorized if they are going to hap-pen again – reappropriated, actually, is the technical term.

If we make all of the tax increases, be-cause the tax cut expiring is a tax increase, expenditures being cut means we’re spend-ing out less. This takes an enormous amount of stimulus out of the economy. We’re going to be taxing people more heavily; they’re going to spend less. We are going to be spending less as a government, therefore there will be less money to be spent. As a result, if these things happen, we have $680 billion in destimulation of the economy.

You might remember the stimulus was about $800 billion. And by the way, if you P

hoto

cou

rtes

y of

Hen

ry B

rady

THE FISCAL CLIFF IS A RE-PEATED DESTIMULATION

YEAR AFTER YEAR.


BUDGET BALANCE

California’s ability to dig itself out of a hole requires more than quick fixes, argues our panel. Did the props help?

Excerpt from “Resolving California’s Budget Crisis: Lessons from A New Six-State Study,” September 20, 2012

LENNY MENDONCA Member, California Forward Leadership Council; Director, McKinsey and Company

GEORGE SHULTZ Former U.S. Secretary of State and U.S. Secretary of Labor; Member, Advisory Board on the State Budget Crisis

DAVID CRANE Former Special Advisor to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger; Member, Advisory Board on the State Budget Crisis

KAROL DENNISTON Partner, Schiff Hardin LLP’s Municipal Restructuring Practice; Instrumental in Passage of California Assembly Bill 506

RANDY SHANDOBIL UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism; Former Political Reporter, KTVU Television — Moderator

countable government is at the heart of the California performance and accountability act, Proposition 31, which will be on the [November 2012] ballot. SHANDOBIL: Can you comment on how the California economy is likely to do in the next few years and whether that could affect the nation’s recovery?SHULTZ: I think California is a fantastic place. What a piece of real estate. Histori-cally people used to come here because the education was so good. And look what’s happening to us. You have to say to yourself, looking out over the last 20 years, Latinos, who are soon to be the dominant ethnic group in California, 43 percent did not finish high school. A little over 10 percent finished college. So you look at places that have done well and you say it’s not the kids’ fault, it’s the system’s fault. We’re educating a labor force that’s not going to be able to do the jobs that are being created by all this hot stuff. So the jobs will go elsewhere. We have some very fundamental problems that are going to affect the long-run prosperity of this dramatically productive state that’s got so much going for it. It just makes you cry out for reform in these processes, so we can get on and take advantage of everything California has to offer.

SHANDOBIL: There are at least three ballot initiatives that deal with the budget. There are three tax issues, and each of them, in an effort to win votes, dedicate all or most of the money raised to some specific popular cause, like schools or clean air. In general, is that a wise approach, or does that end up handcuffing state legislators?CRANE: In general, it’s not a wise approach to have ballot-box budgeting; it’s one of the reasons why California has the problems it has today. The legislators in California have the power, along with the governor, to fix

code further threaten state and local gov-ernments. The federal government provides states more than $600 billion per year. The impact on California from just a 10 percent reduction in federal dollars would be huge.

State budget practices such as treating borrowings as revenue and not disclosing all costs obscure truth and make fiscal stability all but impossible. MENDONCA: We need to extend the bud-get horizon. We need to think about long-term expenditure commitments and move into a two-year budget cycle. Budgets also need to include five-year fiscal forecasts for major programs such as education, health and human services, criminal justice, and infrastructure so that progress on state-wide goals can be tracked. This focus on a longer term view, transparent and performing ac-

CRANE: Spending on Medicaid, pensions and retiree health care is growing at rates that exceed any reasonable expectation for revenue growth. To give you a sense of that math, just consider the recent pension legislation passed in California. The state announced that that reform would save between $42 and $55 billion over the next 30 years, which is a significant amount of money. But what they didn’t announce is the context in which those savings will occur, which is that the state expects to spend more than $600 billion on retirement costs over that same 30-year period. And reputable third parties project the state will spend more than twice that amount.

With federal deficit reduction a near certainty, likely cuts in federal grant dollars and potential changes to the federal tax

Can props save the day?

NY NJCA


all these problems. Tomorrow. The state leg-islature could address all the problems that really afflict the state – from Corrections spending, which is $10 billion this year, we incarcerate more than 150,000 people, we have a legislatively passed law from the 1970s called determinate sentencing that the legislature could reform tomorrow. That alone was the biggest contributor to Cali-fornia’s prison population. The legislature could reform pensions and retiree health care and compensation for prison guards and others in California. The legislature could reform the tax system in California. SHANDOBIL: Last night, the respected Public Policy Institute of California released a poll showing Prop. 31 losing badly, so why do you feel so many Californians don’t see things your way, or is the concept too dif-ficult to understand? MENDONCA: The specifics of that poll were that the vast majority don’t know what they’re talking about and are undecided. There are a small number of people who know what the proposition actually is; that is part of the challenge with complicated reform initiatives. The reality is, most people haven’t decided what they think yet.

A large portion of the guts of Proposition 31 came from a deliberative poll that was done with citizens in California. We brought 400 people together last June to a hotel in Torrance, California, for the weekend to deliberate on, If you had your choice, you were informed, what would you like? Six of the things that in each case started with approval rates above 55 percent and in every case ended with approval rates above 70 percent are at the core of the measure, and those are things like the two-year budget, ensuring there are clear goals for government programs and reporting back on those, that you have to publish projections before the budget, that you have to adopt two-year instead of one-year budgets. Those are the types of things that are in there.

SHANDOBIL: Recent big news: Governor Brown’s pension reform? A Step in the right direction? Not enough? A big charade?CRANE: Mayor Chuck Reed was asked about that the other day. He said he was spending most of his time thumbing through a thesaurus looking for synoyms for the word “small.” I’m not even so sure it’s a step in the right direction, because it may lead people to think something’s been done. It’s a bit like climate change. If you think you’ve done something to address the problem, and you really haven’t, it shows up many years down the road and you’re in a worse position. That reform didn’t come close to what states like Rhode Island, led by a Democratic treasurer, Gina Raimondo, or Minnesota, or Colorado had done.

California, unlike those states, is un-willing to spread the pain beyond citizens, new employees and taxpayers. The other people that need to share in the pain are current employees, with respect to years not yet worked, and retirees, with respect to COLAs. The math makes it clear it’s relatively small. It’s a savings of maybe 5 percent. Most of that even is toward the tail end of the next 30 years. It will have very little impact on all the services that are being squeezed out.

SHANDOBIL: What are some of the ca-lamities we could face? SHULTZ: You’re going to drum up the busi-ness for bankruptcy experts and people who know how to work out of a problem. What happens is if you go the way you’re going, you’re not able to pay your bills, literally.CRANE: Part of the problem is that people hear there’s a budget crisis so often, they get numb to it. They hear there’s a budget crisis, yet for most individuals life goes on.

Any tax increase, no matter what they say, is going to dampen economic growth.

So what happens if it keeps going is the frog gets boiled more and more.DENNISTON: From a municipal perspec-tive, it’s a a tragedy if we don’t do something now. Secretary Shultz is right; it’s going to create a lot of work for people like me.

But what we don’t seem to appreciate yet as a society is that bankruptcy in a municipal context is a black hole. We can’t fix it. If we can’t have tax reform, if we can’t deal with all of those other issues to increase revenue, we can’t fix the problem. You can bring all kinds of toolkits and restructuring options, but without some reform, you can’t fix it.The people hurting now are the people in all these small cities that can’t balance their budgets, that have already shut their libraries, already shut down all of the extras, and are now begin-ning to look at ways to reduce police and fire. Vallejo couldn’t balance its budget one year after exiting bankruptcy, and it still has a crime rate that’s frightening.

How do you fix it? We need to back up, take a look and [agree that] some of these are legacy problems, and let’s look at it from a business perspective. Then we need to bring the ocmmunity together, because if you don’t, you’re going to affect the bond market in a way that the municipals are not going to be able to access it. That hampers the future in much bigger and more complicated ways.

Glass half empty? Half full?“We have fundamental

problems that [will] affect the long-run prosperity of

this state.” – Shultz

TX VA IL

Pho

to b

y So

nya

Abr

ams


KHANNA: First, I agree with Joel [Kotkin], and I think we need to look at manufacturing more broadly, as advanced manufacturing, not single out a particular technology.

But then what we need is regional efforts to make the business climate hospitable for manufacturing. California has some natural advantages, resources. We’ve got the national laboratories, we’ve got great community colleges, we’re a nation and a state of im-migrants, we’ve got such great talent and diversity. So how do we take these natural advantages we have and make the most of them? Well, we’ve got problems; we’ve got permitting problems, we have problems of tax incentives, we have problems with people not graduating with the right skills. My hope and belief is that regional organic solutions to this will be more effective than letting Sacramento or Washington fix the problem. CHIANG: I think we have to have a catch-ment approach. We really have to make gov-ernment much more efficient. I have a friend who owns the largest shrimp-importing com-pany in California, and he has to comply with four different government agencies, most of it health-related. Obviously, we ought to inte-grate those functions, have all those agencies working together, or time it properly so he can reduce his administrative costs in terms of compliance with government.

Second, and this is a huge obstacle, we

can’t afford to have the electricity go out in a semiconductor plant.

These are great jobs, highly skilled jobs. And the design functions are integrated into the rest.

I think California has really allowed the manufacturing economy to deteriorate. When we did a ranking for Forbes of the manufacturing jobs over the last decade, two of the worst areas in terms of loss of jobs on the manufacturing side were Los Angeles and San Francisco. If we don’t get that going, I think we’re going to see more losses. A lot of the ancillary services that are connected to manufacturing also will go. Manufacturing generates lots of opportunities for advertis-ing, PR, even lawyers, accountants, business services in general. We’ve seen very strong business services growth in Seattle, which has the advantage of both having a real tech economy, not based on the social media bubble, and also has an enormous manufac-turing sector built around what we used to have here in aerospace.

DEVOL: Intel now has more employees in the state of Oregon than it has in the state of California. Ro, how can California create manufacturing jobs and take advantage of the green technology sector?

DEVOL: Let’s [talk] about manufactur-ing, and what some tout as the new clean, green-tech jobs in the manufacturing sector, including alternative energy. Joel, a lot of people have touted these sectors as a way to create middle class jobs. How many of these jobs do you think will end up in California? There’s a lot of investment going into these sectors, but are the jobs going to stay here?KOTKIN: It seems to me that manufactur-ing is manufacturing, and it’s going to be very difficult for people to do manufactur-ing, green or otherwise, in California under the current circumstances. Second, many of these green jobs are very heavily subsidized by ratepayers, taxpayers, and I don’t know how long that goes on. You’re already seeing some serious problems in the solar sector and the wind sector. I think this has some limitation.

The other thing is that because of the policies that California in particular has, we have very, very high energy costs. Not to tout Utah, but I was just there recently, at a gigantic Intel factory, which is something every American can be proud of, they’ve won all the awards on flash memory – it’s 1,600 people working there, a half-mile-long factory. Great jobs, I’d love to see it in California. The CEO said there’s just no way in the world they could do that in Califor-nia. The electricity cost is just too high, the electricity supply is just too unreliable; you

Our expert panelists give their verdict on California’s economic policies and performance, and how the state can improve both.

Excerpt from “Grading California’s E co n o my : P r o s p e c t s f o r Economic Recovery,” September 19, 2012

CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMIC GPA

Jobs fly away


really have to update California’s tax code. This is a political issue, so it’s challenging the institutional forces and the tax credits that have been built in, for the greater interests of all California.

Our corporate tax apportionment meth-odology encourages people to hire people and to open up shop outside the state of California. When Rick Perry says, “I’m coming and taking California jobs” – Rick, you don’t even have to come here. Just look at our tax formula, and we say we will ship jobs to Singapore, India, China, Texas, South Carolina. So that is something we have to address, and the sooner the better.

GRUEBELE: Going back to the perspective of manufacturing jobs and if you start focus-ing more on green energy and technology, from a banking perspective, there is clearly an interest and support to assist our customers in those areas. We have allocated and have lent more than $1.6 billion toward wind energy in the past five years, $11.5 billion has been lent to customers for green and LEED efficient buildings. So there is an interest for us to support our customers, but whether they’re in a friendly enough state so they can take advantage of the financing that’s available, is there an interest, is there a tax ability for them

to move forward on these projects – is really the question. Is it going to be affordable, is it efficient for them, and is it something that’s sustainable for them in order to complete the projects? That’s the biggest challenge.

There’s always going to be a willingness to support various industries and manufac-turing opportunities, it’s more a question of whether the businesses are going to take on that challenge because of what they perceive might be an ineffective business climate.DEVOL: The most pressing economic con-cern for California seems to be the liabilities held by the state in the underfunded and unfunded pension obligations. What do you predict? [How can we] manage that problem?CHIANG: There was a legislative package that was just signed by the governor. It is a strong start. We obviously have to keep track of what the additional obligations are going to be. The big question is, Can you cut into current worker’s pensions? Under a California constitutional case, those are vested rights. Some people are going to challenge those rights. You need action by all of the relevant agencies and parties, so we can try to get a better grip on the pension issue. One of the things we have to understand is that this is a very different and dynamic age.

In 2000, the state pension plans were 100 percent funded. But we know a lot of the things that happened in the intermediate 12

This program was made possible by the generous support of Chevron.

JOHN CHIANG Controller, State of California

PETER GRUEBELE Executive Vice President, Commercial Banking, Wells Fargo

JOEL KOTKIN Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures, Chapman University; Author, The Next

Hundred Million: America in 2050

RO KHANNA Visiting Lecturer, Department of Economics, Stan-ford University; Former Deputy Assistant Secretary

of Commerce, Obama Adminis-tration; Author, Entrepreneurial Nation: Why Manufacturing Is Still Key to America’s Future

ROSS DEVOL Chief Research Officer, Milken Institute — Moderator

CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMIC GPA

years. So we just have to be smart to make sure that we incorporate the risk practices that weren’t fully up to date. We have to make ad-justments, recognizing that this is a different world; it was easier to invest when the United States was 40 percent of the world’s GDP. We also had a home-field advantage. We now look at emerging markets that have faster rates of growth but have higher barriers of entry that a lot of investors in America aren’t accustomed to. So we’re going to have some growing pains for the intermediate future.

And then you look at QE III and what it’s going to do to the fixed-income portfo-lio, what it does to inflation, it’s going to have an impact on our adjustments to the adjustment rate.

Can it be fixed?

Pho

to b

y Ed

Ritg

er


WALTERS: It’s unlikely to happen. It’s unlikely either one of them will pass, in fact. The parts that are in conflict, such as the income tax, would be resolved by which one got more votes. So you wouldn’t pile one on top of the other. It means the

sales tax portion would go into effect, because there’s nothing in Molly Munger’s [Prop 38] that has to do with sales tax.

How it would affect actual spending is anybody’s guess. The courts would have to sort all that out, because she would give her money directly to the schools, bypassing the state budget, whereas Jerry Brown’s [Prop 30] money would go into the state budget.

The more interesting question might be, What happens if both of them fail – which is the more likely scenario, in which case you have open war in Sacramento to divvy up the remaining dollars.

SHAFER: There are 11 measures on the state ballot. What do you think is most critical on the ballot?MENDONCA: One of the most fun-damental steps in trying to help make California government actually work is Proposition 31, the Government Perfor-mance and Accountability Act. It’s really a product of a long deliberation across the state starting with more than 70 town conversations through a very large, first ever in California deliberative poll – that we’ve talked about in The Commonwealth Club before – where 400 scientifically selected citizens representative of the state came together for a weekend, debated and talked about what they cared about; six of the most important things that they cared about that all had approval [by the participants of ] two thirds and afterwards 67 percent, are part of proposition 31. It’s really about trying to make government

ELECTION FALLOUT

ROBERT HERTZBERG Member, Think Long Committee for California; Co-chair, California Forward; Executive Committee Chairman, The Public Policy Institute of California; Former Speaker, CA Assembly

COREY MARSHALL Good Government and Policy Director, SPUR

LENNY MENDONCA Board Member, California Forward; Chairman Emeritus, Bay Area Council; Chairman, Economic Institute of the Bay Area; Director, McKinsey & Company, Inc.

SCOTT SHAFER Host and Reporter, “The California Report” – Moderator

IS CALIFORNIA FIXABLE?California’s structural governmental problems are exacerbated by a disconnected citizenry, even as they vote on important measures that will affect the lives of nearly every Californian.

Excerpt from “California Votes: What’s at Stake for the Golden State,” October 3, 2012

WALTERS: Jerry Brown came into office last year, 28 years after he left his first gov-ernorship. The stuff he found on his desk was the same stuff he left behind in 1983 because it had not been resolved! Same thing: Water, transportation, state budget deficit. He dropped a budget deficit on his successor, George Deukmejian, and he had one dropped on him by Arnold Schwar-zenegger. They hadn’t fixed the thing. That indicates the system is not really funcioning very effectively.BORENSTEIN: There seems to be a great deal of concern about what happens if both 30 and 38 pass?

If California’s problems are self-inflicted, even the solutions present some self-inflicted problems, says this veteran political observer.

Excerpt from “Ballot Box 2012: A Key to the CA Election,” October 24, 2012

DAN WALTERS Political Columnist, The Sacramento Bee

DANIEL BORENSTEIN Editorial Writer, Contra Costa Times and the Oakland Tribune – Moderator


BORENSTEIN: Let’s go through that scenario, since it’s looking more and more likely. What is likely to happen if 30 fails and even more likely 38 fails?WALTERS: Current law says that if 30 fails, there will be automatic trigger spend-ing cuts, most of which will come out of K–12 education, some of which will come out of the colleges, and a very few dollars out of other things. But most of it comes out of K–12, so that’s why you see the ads, “Save the schools, vote for Proposition 30.” But it’s saving the schools from something Jerry Brown and the legislature decreed would happen. It’s kind of extortion.

But would it actually happen if Prop 30 doesn’t pass? Jerry Brown says yes, there’s no way he would back off of those triggers.But what happened is that the triggers are in such a way that they are legally ques-tionable and the school people would go to court immediately, and nobody knows how that would turn out.

And then the other problem is that they’re really counting on $8.5 billion

perform, make it accountable and make it transparent.

It’s making a dent at the biggest problem California government faces, which is lack of trust from citizens that it can work. The biggest problem we’ve got is that when you ask a large group of people in Cali-fornia how much of the money going to Sacramento do you think is wasted, they started at the high 30s and usually ended up somewhere in the 40s percentages. So until citizens have confidence that their money is being well spent, it’s really hard to get anything else done.

What this is about is helping restore trust by ensuring that what’s going on is really transparent and really clear to citizens. Among other things, it would require that the budgeting process happen over two years as opposed to [the current system under which] they’re continually in a budget process. At the end of the second year of that session, there would be a review of the programs, and the legislature would be talking about what’s working and what’s not. So those of you who are in the media wouldn’t just have to talk about the budget

this year out of Proposition 30, but the triggers are only $6 billion. So even if they pull the triggers, they still have a $2 billion problem. And they have another problem, which is that the Facebook IPO was counted on for $1.5 billion, and that’s not coming to pass. And the spending’s running higher than they anticipated, and the other revenues are also lower.

So what you have, if Proposition 30 doesn’t pass, is about an $11–12 billion problem in this year’s budget, and nobody knows how they would begin to approach that. It’s a huge gamble. They went ahead and did a budget based on a whole series of assumptions, and it may be that none of the assumptions will come true – the Facebook thing won’t come true, Prop 30 won’t come true, all these other revenue assumptions won’t come true, and they’re going to have an enormous mess on their hands [after election day].BORENSTEIN: In the midst of all this, we got high-speed rail passed this year. What’s going to happen in the midst of

all the time; you could talk about what are the outcomes we’re getting.

HERTZBERG: Think about this for a second. We have an emergency. If you’re a third grader and your classes get cut for the next five years, what impact does that have on your life? For that third grader, this is an emergency. “This is my life!”

So [we need an emergency solution], whether it’s Governor Brown’s model in Prop. 30 – which I support; it’s temporary, it’s not long-term thinking, but it’s neces-sary to make sure that we’re plugging the holes in the ship. It doesn’t really fix the hole in any significant way.

And the long term is to ask the fun-damental question, What does California look like in 2025? How do we create a tax structure that works for the future? We’ve got to create an intelligent, long-term stream that then funds the state, that allows it to grow intelligently so we can pay for education and all the other things that are necessary for a vibrant state of California.

all this budget craziness as the finances are going down the tube, where’s high-speed rail going to go?WALTERS: Well, the high-speed rail charitably is expected to cost maybe $60 to $70 billion. The state bond issue is $10 billion, of which only $9 billion is spent on high-speed rail. They’ve got about $3 billion of federal money, so there’s $12 billion. Where’s the other $48 billion going to come from? And the answer is, Nobody knows.BORENSTEIN: But we’re going to start building anyhow?WALTERS: They’re supposedly going to start building, b-u-u-u-u-t we’ll find out if they are, because there’s all sorts of lawsuits over it, and nobody really knows if it is go-ing to happen or not. But also remember that that $10 billion bond issue – those bonds haven’t been issued yet, but once they’re issued to finance this thing, then the state general fund has to absorb the cost of servicing those bonds, and that’s another piece of the whole budget puzzle.

SHAFER: If propositions 30 and 38 both fail, how bad will it be? There’s about $6 billion in trigger cuts that are ready to go, come January 1.HERTZBERG: Here’s what’s going to hap-

Post-Prop. 30

“THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EXPERIMENTS IN CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.”

–MARSHALL

Pho

tos

by S

onya

Abr

ams


“THE REALITY IS SCHOOL IS JUST THE LOW-

HANGING FRUIT IN THE BUDGET.”– HERTZBERG

pen. They’re going to do some redefining of health and welfare issues, and save about $3 billion there. First of all, there will be all the Armageddon conversation, there’ll be all the noise, all the interest groups that will say you can’t do that.

The reality of the school situation is that they’re just low-hanging fruit in the budget, because so much of the other stuff is con-stitutionally protected. But we can lay off about $2 billion to the federal government by redefining certain numbers. The trigger’s set for January. If revenues get better [that will reduce cuts]. There will be pain, but I don’t think it’s as big as we see it.

But there will be significant impacts on K-12 education. There’s no way around that. And to me it’s just not negotiable. You can’t take away three weeks out of these kids’ schools – or a week and a half – given how we are competitively right now. It’s a kid’s life, you know.

So it takes us two years to fix it. OK, third and fourth grade are gone. That’s not an acceptable answer.

SHAFER: What about the governor? He had a reputation when he was governor the first time of being a big reformer. He talked about bringing government closer to the people; he’s doing that with prison realign-ment, out of necessity, really, because of the courts. Give him a grade for how he’s doing.

MENDONCA: He’s got a single-minded focus right now in the near-term, which is Proposition 30. He is out talking about that incessantly, about the importance of new revenues for the state, what will happen if it doesn’t happen. It’s hard to have multiple messages at the same time, especially in light of all the alternative revenue measures on the ballot. So that’s what he’s doing right now. Bob said it’s an emergency, if you believe that’s important, that’s what he’s focusing on.

The broader sets of things around more fundamental reform, the things that have to do with rethinking the tax structure, that have to do with how Sacramento works more fundamentally, are going to take a longer time and will happen later.HERTZBERG: He’s a one smart guy. If you really talk to him in the private mo-ments, he’ll tell you he really has become smart about how politics really works and what you can and can’t bite off.

I like a couple things [about Governor Brown]. He’s big on water, which is a huge deal in California. He’s big on high-speed rail. He’s doing the big stuff.

SHAFER: If the answer to California’s governance problems is to get citizens engaged, how can we make the process for policy making more accessible and “fun”?MARSHALL: There are a number of ex-periments in cities across the country that are trying to engage citizens in a number of different ways. They’re trying to leverage new advances in technology and the whole crowd and wiki movements to try to bring folks into the process in a much lower fric-tion type of fashion.

So you’re seeing initiatives such as ImproveSF, which is a website here in San Francisco that generates citizen support and ideas through an online platform and tries to give [the city’s residents] the tools and connect them to the appropri-ate people to actually solve some of those problems. The whole point is to try to enable cities to leverage some of these new technologies to try to bring people in, engage them and give them a little bit of ownership.

That doesn’t solve the problem of the over-engineering of our democracy, but it

certainly does give you the control and the ability to engage at the local level, which is what everybody ultimately is doing everyday – you’re not interacting with folks in state government every day, but you are talking to your local police officer, your local nurse – you are interacting with folks here on the ground.

What [platforms like this] do is enable you access to a lot of these types of services, and that may ultimately lead into some-thing like more of a self-service type of a model. But ultimately that’s what we really need. We don’t necessarily need folks to do things for us all the time. Sometimes we just need the answer to a question so that we can take care of it ourselves.MENDONCA: Another example: in Mon-terrey, Mexico, there was an effort driven by the business and civic community to enable every citizen – no matter what kind of device they had, text message, a phone, an email, calling up and saying what was going on – to post on a website every place a crime was occurring. [This was their answer to the fact that] the city couldn’t afford to put more police on the street to deal with the drug issue and was enabling citizens to say what was going on either to direct the police to a hot spot, or if there’s something going on [tell others to] stay away from it. That effort cost the civic and business community less than $50,000 to put up, less than adding one more policeman. There’s a lot of poten-tial for these things to get citizens engaged, and they will understand very quickly that it’s in their interest.HERTZBERG: David Cameron in the United Kingdom did a similar thing – post-ing the location of every piece of criminal activity from their systems – and got 18 mil-lion hits in the first hour. Because it shows the disconnect between what government does and the people’s appetite for informa-tion. All of us agree that this technology is going to be a huge piece of making gov-ernment more responsive and providing a better customer experience for citizens in interfacing with their government. SHAFER: I got a letter this week from the San Francisco Department of Public Works, and, I kid you not, they said my street is dirtier than it should be and they want citizens who live on the block to start taking better care of it. If we wanted, we could call the department of public works and they’d bring us a broom. [laughter]

The Brown factor

Of and by the people


between individuals of the same-sex is a protected constitutional right.

Number two, when’s it going to get bet-ter? Who’s going to be president when the next vacancy occurs and who’s going to be appointed? You don’t know.

Three, we were representing real indi-viduals who felt their constitutional rights were being violated. Are we supposed to tell them they should wait for a few years? For 10 years? How long? We couldn’t tell them that, not in good conscience.

And finally I was influenced by read-ing Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” where he addresses the fact that black ministers were saying, “Wait, you’re going too fast, there’s going to be a backlash; slow down.” He eloquently explains that civil rights are never won by not fighting for them. You’ve got to fight for them. You may lose, but you have to keep moving forward and fighting. And of course he was right.KARLAN: To what extent is [politics] a worry, because of the official position of the Republican Party, for which you’ve served as a lawyer and a nominee to high government office? Have you faced pushback from other Republicans on this?OLSON: In front of the Supreme Court I don’t think it makes any difference. No matter if I argued it or David [Boies] argued it or we divided it up, provided that we’re all equally good lawyers and make the argu-ments and don’t mess up during our 30 min-utes, I don’t think that will make a difference.

To the extent the question is, What kind of a rough-and-tumble time am I having among Republican circles? Not so bad. Some people really make it clear they don’t like what I’m doing – betraying your principles, that sort of thing. I’m happy to be asked that question, because I like to explain that it is not a betrayal of the principals of the party of Lincoln. David Cameron, the prime minister of England, said that he is in favor of gay marriage not despite that fact that he is a conservative but because he is a conservative. Some people don’t like what I’m doing, but I’m anxious for the dialogue. I think that I can be listened to by some people who wouldn’t listen to someone else.

KARLAN: If you’re at the Supreme Court arguing this case, is there an exchange or question you particularly hope to get from one of the justices?OLSON: That’s really a good ques-tion. We prepare for every conceiv-able question. We prepare lists of questions, we have moot courts where

we’re subjected to hostile questioning by our colleagues who really don’t cut us any slack. The idea is that by the time we get to the Supreme Court, the nastiest, most difficult question will be asked and we’ll say, Oh my god, finally I got to the Supreme Court, where it will be a little easier.

If I get an opportunity to talk about what the impact is on individuals who are discriminated against and denied access to what the Supreme Court has said 14 times is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court has said is the most fundamental right, a right older than political parties, older than our country – if I could somehow have the capacity [in the Supreme Court] to convey the emotional impact of the denial of these rights, some of the justices are going to be more susceptible to that. Ruth Ginsberg fought all her life for the rights of women and the right to be treated equal. Now, I’m not predicting how anyone’s going to vote or anything like that, but the idea is that you need to convey the personal impact of this kind of discrimination.KARLAN: If the Supreme Court takes this case, is your approach in terms of the arguments you make going to be the same as it was at the district court and the Court of Appeals, or is there something distinc-tive about how to make arguments at the Supreme Court?OLSON: You only have half-an-hour per side in the Supreme Court. You have to condense it tremendously.

Some people said, “Don’t bring it to this Supreme Court. My God, it’s a conserva-tive Supreme Court, you’re going to lose.” There’s several answers to that.

One, this Supreme Court, with an opin-ion by Justice Kennedy, struck down as

unconstitutional a Colorado statewide initiative that withdrew rights of gay and lesbian citizens to be protected against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. This Supreme Court overturned Bowers v. Hard-wick and said that intimate acts

PROP 8AND THE COURT

Olson says there’s a good chance that the U.S. Supreme Court will take the Prop. 8 case. If the court does not take the case, Prop. 8 is legally dead. Peek inside the strategy of a top legal mind.

Excerpt from “Reflecting on Prop. 8,” October 18, 2012

THEODORE B. OLSON Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher; Former U.S. Solicitor General (2001-2004)

PAMELA KARLAN Professor of Public Interest Law and Co-director, Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Stanford Law School — Moderator

This program was made possible by the generous support of Wells Fargo Bank.


REILLY: Finding a way to price carbon is where we’re going to have to go. The cor-rectness of the analysis of Cap and Trade was that it does that.

Everybody [thinks there will be a price on carbon at some point]. Except Congress. Everybody expects that that is in our future, and most prudent companies are planning for that kind of consequence. I know that it’s in the pricing at ConocoPhillips when they’re looking at different investments that they make, something like a $25-per-ton carbon price is likely inevitable. INGLIS: We were talking about a revenue-neutral price on carbon. If we’re going to reduce taxes somewhere else, then price carbon. Conservatives are very keen on the

environmental benefits, which would be the restoration of Hetch Hetchy Valley; improving flows on the Tuolumne River, where the salmon population has all but disappeared; and reducing polluted storm water runoff into the bay. WUNDERMAN: Prop. F is really a very dangerous thing for San Francisico and a large part of the Bay Region. It’s been an extremely misleading attempt on the voters of San Francisco. I attended the opening of your event when you unfurled this banner that talks about water recycling; you talk a lot about that and about water conserva-tion when in fact we’re all for those kinds of things. The Bay Area Council, a business association which has worked on those kinds of water issues for a long time, could certainly stand with you on water recycling – which is something the PUC has been doing, maybe not as soon as we’d like, but certainly doing – and water conservation.

MARSHALL: Multiple studies over the years have demonstrated that San Francisco can get its water from the Tuolumne River

and still generate power along that river but store its water supply elsewhere with-out harm being done to it. The problem is San Francisco [government] has not been a part of those conversations. They, for all intents and purposes, boycotted those studies, so we put Proposition F on the ballot to accomplish the goal of restoring Hetch Hetchy.

You can’t consolidate 9 reservoirs to 8 without first making reforms to the system. In San Francisco we don’t recycle a drop of water, and we pretty much treat our rainwater as sewage. So we have linked reforming the water system and guarantee-ing our future water security by building up our local water resources with some

HITCHED TO HETCH HETCHY

SUSAN LEAL Former General Manager, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

MIKE MARSHALL Executive Director, Restore Hetch Hetchy

SPRECK ROSEKRANS Director of Policy, Restore Hetch Hetchy

JIM WUNDERMAN CEO, Bay Area Council

In November, voters let their voices be heard on the dam.

Excerpt from “Tear Down That Dam,” October 15, 2012

BIPARTISAN POWERDONNIE FOWLER Founder and CEO, Dogpatch Strategies

Photo by Hal Bergman / istockphoto


idea that we’re not going to grow govern-ment here. But if you want to do what Tom [Steyer] was talking about, which is just bedrock conservatism, this is really a deliver-able that conservatives must make, which is that we’re the people who generally say to the progressives, “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

We need to be the ones who deliver this news that we’re already paying the full cost of coal-fired electricity. It’s just that you don’t pay at the meter. Let’s pay at the meter, and then you can have transparency, free enterprise can deliver the solution, especially if we can do it in a way that doesn’t grow the government. So we either return the money in the form of dividends to the population,

But this is not about that. This is about restoring Hetch Hetchy. It’s about draining Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, which supplies between 85 to almost 100 percent of the water that [comes] out of our tap.ROSEKRANS: When we’ve looked at res-toration projects that have successfully taken place in the state, communities have been able to adapt; they’ve stored water in ground water banks; they’ve recycled water; they’ve done all kinds of things to ensure that water supply reliability that is fundamental for our farms and cities. They’ve been able to do that to the tune of much greater volumes than what we’re talking about here. LEAL: [Marshall] said the city has boycot-ted this [discussion]. When I was general manager [of the SFPUC], we had dozens of our engineers having to go up to Sac-ramento for months for the Department of Water Resources study. For months our people were distracted, going to discuss our system with them. We reach out to property owners. The utility provides incentives for low-flow fixtures. San Francisco conserves water. We are about one third of the state

or reduce taxes elsewhere. Then conserva-tives would say, “Yep, that’s a tune I know.”STEYER: I’ve been listening to people talk on this topic and the progress we’re making, whether it’s technological progress or policy progress. Over the last 10 years we’ve been making incremental progress on both scores.The question I’ve been asking is how long do we have before the climate issues move into a place where they become interactive, nonlinear and beyond our pulling back? That’s generally described in the literature as 2 degrees celsius. So when you look at the trajectory we’re on to get to 2 degrees celsius, it really brings into question a lot of the conversations we’re having in terms of timeframe in terms of whether we will

average in the amount of water we use, and yes, we do recycle. In 2004, our system re-cycled water so that the golf courses between San Francisco and Daily City border uses recycled water.MARSHALL: Residents will reduce water consumption by about 10 million gallons a day. But what does SFPUC want to do with that water? Do they want to leave it

be able to move fast enough so we don’t get there. Because on the trajectory we’re on, it looks to me to be relatively soon.FOWLER: From a public opinion point of view, there’s two things to consider [about fracking]. Fracking is a local issue. Most people don’t have the threat of having a natural gas well that could leak in their back yard. Natural gas generally is as popular with the American people as solar and wind. Coal, oil and nuclear are not as popular.

Talking about policy: Fracking’s a local issue. Most people go, “They’re fracking some-body else’s backyard. That little blue light seems clean, it’s cheap, I’m OK with it.” So natural gas has a real advantage with the policy sector and with the American people.

in the natural environment? No. They want to sell it at cost to Silicon Valley, because they’re projecting more water needs in the future. So the incentive for us to conserve is completely eliminated relative to our en-vironmental sensibilities. Prop. F is not just designed about coming up with a plan, but it’s ultimately designed to change the way we as a city think about water.

Is there room for cross-aisle cooperation on climate change policy?

Excerpt from “Energy and the Election,” October 9, 2012

Left: The Hetch Hetchy Valley in 1908, before the construction of the contentious dam that flooded the valley; Right: The Hetch Hetchy Reservior in 2006. Photos by Isaiah West Taber & Samuel Wong / wikimedia commons

BIPARTISAN POWERDONNIE FOWLER Founder and CEO, Dogpatch Strategies

BOB INGLIS Former Republican U.S. Representative, South Carolina

BILL REILLY Former Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

TOM STEYER Managing Partner, Farallon Capital


I n addition to being brilliant, [Alan Greenspan] was the luckiest econo-mist who ever lived. His tenure from 1987 to 2006 is also a perfect overlap

with a sunny economic period characterized by modest business cycles. The period even has a name. It’s [called] the Great Modera-tion, a term conferred on it in 2002 by James Stock. The Great Moderation amounted to an overall decline in volatility: a relatively modest GDP; modest, predictable interest rates; stable employment; and more or less steady industrial production. In essence, it was a period of mostly modest business cycles and low inflation.

The problem was that as it went on for so long, all the moderation lulled everyone into complacency. Companies lowered their reserves [thinking] we don’t really need all that extra cash; they increased their debt levels [thinking] we want to build some other stuff or maybe buy a new jet; and even economists were lulled into wishful think-ing. In 2003, Bob Lucas, in the presidential

address at the American Economic Associa-tion speculated that, “The central problem of depression prevention has been solved for all practical purposes.” and even James Stock wondered if the Great Moderation might mark the end of business cycles. Talk about standing on a mountaintop in the middle of a lightning storm with your hand in the air.

Well, we know the answer to their speculation. In November 2008 the Great Moderation came to an abrupt and dramatic end. It’s now a fading memory and the ques-tion of what next? still hangs in our minds. Is it yet greater collapse? Is it economic nirvana? A new sunny upland, or perhaps vast disaster? I think the way that question is framed makes the answer elusive, because actually something quite different is afoot. It’s neither a matter of up nor down, but a fundamental state change in the economy to a new kind of volatility we have not seen before – or at least not seen in a very long time. The history of the great Moderation and how it came about offers a hint of the

shape and challenge of what lies ahead.The roots of the Great Moderation go

back to 1944 and the Bretton Woods con-ference, a moment when war-weary great powers were determined to not repeat the mistakes made at the end of World War I and, also, public servants like Harry Dexter White and John Maynard Keynes were deter-mined to architect a system for a lasting peace by removing and refining those economic factors that might otherwise contribute to the possibility of future war. The result is the institutional order that shaped the last 50 years. Institutions like the World Bank, the IMF and NATO all emerged from the Bretton Woods process. For example, it is no coincidence that the foundational institution of the European community was the Euro-pean Coal and Steel Community, designed not just to make more steel or dig more coal, but [also] to make available and avoid the competition for those essential war materials that shaped the first and second world wars.

All of the institutions to come out of the

THE GREAT ECONOMIC TURB

ULENCEBUCKLE UP:

Policymakers, investors and workers are all grappling with the erosion of the economic infrastructure that has guided much of mankind for half a century. What’s next? Excerpt from “The Great Turbulence: Economics and the New Global Order,” September 6, 2012.

PAUL SAFFO Managing Director of Foresight, Discern Analytics

MATT RICHTEL Pulitzer Prize-winning Technology Reporter, The New York Times; Author, Our Brain on Computers – Moderator



milieu of the Great Moderation were not just economic. They were more than just financial. We had entities like NATO and, of course, the United Nations. Thus at its core, the Great Moderation can be defined as a period of strong institutions acting as shock absorbers capable of pulling events back when things get weird in the financial markets, and in that sense it was truly a Keynesian triumph. The result was a multi-decade period of basically clear weather, punctuated by the occasional storm, in contrast to today, which is mainly a period of stormy weather with an occasional clear-ing in the clouds. However, the problem was that the Great Moderation itself was laying the foundation of its own end.

Two forces in particular stand out as we look back at history.

Shocked by the inflationary effects of the 1970s oil crisis, policymakers directed their attention to a new concern: inflation. Employment, the preoccupation of Bretton Woods, took a back seat. This was a perfect reversal of worldview away from worrying about employment to worrying about infla-tion. In the search for a cure to inflation, world leaders began leaning away from the notion of government interventions and to-ward the lure and prospect of self-managing markets. Beginning in the early 1980s, spe-cifically with Thatcher coming into office in 1979, Reagan coming into office in 1981, the Bretton Woods worldview of managed global capitalism was abandoned in favor of

what eventually would be called the Wash-ington Consensus – so named in 1989 by John Williamson. Initially created to help developing nations in crisis, it eventually morphed into a broad shift encompassing an almost religious belief in efficient, self-regulating markets. The policy changes that followed were things like deregulation, free trade, floating exchange rates and privatiza-tion. They all greatly diminished the power

of the Bretton Woods institutions. The institutional shock absorbers that helped hold the center were thus quietly hobbled and incapable of rapid response.

But this shift was only half the story. The second factor was technology, and [a sign of it lies] hidden in that moment in 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell, [symbolizing] the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of globaliza-tion. Not coincidentally, in the same year a memo written by an English boffin on the Swiss-French border in March 1989 de-scribed the original plan for the world wide

web. That was written by Tim Berners-Lee. I would argue that that second factor is

embodied in Tim Berners-Lee’s memo; the second factor eroding the Great Moderation was information technology. Here in Silicon Valley, we take info tech for granted. How many revolutions can there be every year? Someone once asked John Sculley [this] at Apple, and he said, Well, how many weeks are there in a year? We have cuddly little revolutions happening all the time. This stuff [in the late 20th century] was truly revolutionary. The arms race didn’t end the Soviet Union; it was the information revolution that helped usher in the collapse, in the form of samizdat videos in Poland, photocopiers churning out smuggled texts in Czechoslovakia, and eventually cell phones and email in Russia itself. When we look back on 1989 a century from now, I am quite certain that Tim Berners-Lee’s memo will be remembered as the most momentous event in that very momentous year, leading as it did to the dotcom revolution, social media and surprise after surprise, with more waiting out on the horizon.

As we entered the 1990s, thanks to the digital revolution the predicable world of the Great Moderation was becoming steadily more connected and a more complex place, as the predictable world of the Cold War yielded to a new multipolar world. Behind all of that excitement and wealth and inno-vation, though, there were digital termites in the global framework silently working

THE GREAT ECONOMIC TURB

ULENCE


“War-weary great powers

were determined to

not repeat the mistakes made at the

end of World War I.”


away. To be blunt, digital technology is the solvent that is leeching the glue out of the global institutional order and beneath the sunny climate and the wealth of three decades of the Great Moderation, power was fleeing from center to periphery. Con-sider the example of the G20, or whatever number it is today.

With all that complexity, the institution-al shock absorbers started losing their power, and not just in the financial space. Think of the first Gulf War, August 2nd, 1990; the only reason Saddam invaded Kuwait was that the Soviet Union was no longer around to stop him. [Civil wars were fought in] Bosnia, Somalia, [and amidst the] complex-ity everywhere, suddenly non-state actors, terrorists, capable of wildly disproportion-ate, asymmetrical power and effect were afoot. Of course for the United States, these harbingers of vast change were all storms in other men’s worlds, easy to ignore – until, of course, 9/11…Afghanistan…Iraq. We

had a brief moment of economic insecurity and doubt and uncertainty, but then the sunny economic news continued and we were all lulled into complacency again. But even in 2003 as Bob Lucas speculated about the end of business cycles, it was clear that something much deeper was afoot.

Then in November 2008, it all became quite clear: cycles still existed and now pes-simism is the new – and oh-so-fashionable – black. What lies ahead? Depression? Re-covery? A new boom? None of these things. The Great Moderation is being replaced by the Great Turbulence. The new order is neither up nor down. We will have both. Rather it is a shift to a world characterized by events that are high amplitude and short cycle. Like the flash crash on May 6, 2010: You wake up, the market drops 998 points – 9 percent – and then recovers in minutes, followed by a record 1000-point-plus swing; $1 trillion disappears in nanoseconds, then like the Cheshire Cat reappears minutes later. How strange! Once upon a time, crashes and recoveries took months or years to resolve themselves. Now they do so in hours or even minutes. It could happen between sips of a single Starbucks latte. This is the new normal, the new normal of high amplitudes and shorter cycles. The shift from the Great Moderation to the Great Turbulence is thus a shift from that sunny period with an occasional storm to a stormy period with breaks of clear weather in between. It’s not crash or boom; the new normal is volatility – mind-bending, un-nerving volatility. It doesn’t mean you lose your money – in fact, new fortunes will be made in all of this uncertainty – but it is not for the weak of heart.

Weakened as they are, the Bretton Woods institutions have been unable to keep up with this change. Like the guns on the Maginot Line, they are now aimed in the wrong direction and arguably do not have the power to stop events as they begin to swing out of the norm. New institutions are replacing the old institutions as new centrifugal forces become dominant and the center-seeking forces get ever weaker. [The world is full of new] institutions like Google, Zynga, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Wikipedia. Now, this is a moment when changes in the global economy are as vast as they were in that Bretton Woods moment after World War II. Everything, absolutely

Phot

o co

urte

sy o

f Pau

l Saff

o

everything, is up for grabs, and the implica-tions are equally vast.

There’s something very odd afoot about the current struggling recovery – it’s jobless. This jobs drop is deeper and longer than we have seen in any prior recession. It’s not really a surprise at all. The cause is automa-tion, which is productivity spelled sideways. Automation is not new; it’s been around for some time. We have been replacing workers on the assembly line for decades. Our as-sembly lines at places like General Motors are places where there not only are workers, but it wouldn’t be safe for a worker to work in the presence of the robots. The change has been happening for a while, and now it’s going exponential and not just in manu-facturing. When’s the last time you spoke to a telephone operator? When’s the last time you got cash from a human teller, or had an airline agent actually hand you a ticket? Productivity is jobless innovation, and it hasn’t hurt much now because there’s an old axiom: Yeah, we lose the old jobs, but we create a net number of more new jobs than we lost and the only challenge is retraining people for the new jobs – not something we do terribly well. But what’s changed is that the new jobs may not be coming on faster than the old jobs disappear. In fact, I would argue, the question of losing jobs to automation is not the problem and it’s not even the issue. The real job problem, the real issue behind this jobless recovery, is not that the old jobs are being lost – the new jobs are never created to begin with.

I was at Facebook two days before their public offering, and one of their corporate officers proudly reminded me that they were $3.8 billion in 2011 revenues – $1 billion net – they had 926 million active users – about 1.3 billion total users – adding 500 million logons every day, and, most inter-estingly, he said, [they’re] a 3,500-person company. Not a bad ratio. But, in fact, if you think about it, Facebook is not a com-pany. It’s a machine. It’s a machine in which programmers walk around and make sure the power plugs don’t fall out from the wall. The jobs were never created to begin with. It’s just a big machine. So meanwhile, what we’ve done with electrons in the last five decades is now moving to atoms. And the turbulence to come is breathtaking.

Consider that 70 years ago at the mo-ment of the Bretton Woods conference, it

“The Great Moderation

is being replaced by the

Great Turbulence.

The new order is neither up

nor down. We will have both.”


was a world in which workers were cheap, labor was cheap and machines were expen-sive. Today we live in a world that’s exactly the opposite: Workers are horrendously ex-pensive and machines are sometimes cheap to the point of being free. This will ripple through the economy in ways that are not good for traditional jobs.

Foxconn, the world’s largest component manufacturer, employs over 1.2 million workers. They are aggressively robotizing their manufacturing lines. Their goal is to have 1 million robots on their lines before 2015. I guarantee you that it will be well before 2020 when Foxconn has many, many more robots than it has workers. So thanks to algorithms and robots and 3D printing, we’re entering an era in which ... there will be ever less role for human workers in the process of assembling stuff. A key issue of the next 20 years will be the central vexing problem of cyber-structural unemployment. This is not a return to 1970s worries of infla-tion, but to 1940s Bretton Woods [worries] about jobs. And a very special kind of worry. I think the greatest social challenge of the Great Turbulence will be figuring out what replaces the notion of job, of paid work as the central nexus of income, health care and meaning in our society. If jobs disappear, what replaces them? The optimist within me remembers that in the 1960s, Daniel Bell and other sociologists talked at length [about how] automation was going to make us all unemployed by usurping our jobs and the result would be the coming leisure

policy architectures despite the multitude of voices and opinions?

Well, my fear is very simple. Govern-ments lack the will and the power to do it, companies lack the conscience to do it, and markets – last time I checked – are neither wise nor free. So we need new kinds of in-stitutions, and one of the great uncertainties is whether we will see a new third or fourth kind of institution emerge.

Sixty-eight years ago Bretton Woods was convened in part as a response to half a century of industrial revolution. Now we’re dealing with the consequences of half a cen-tury of the information revolution, and it is still accelerating and there is no end in sight. I am quite certain that we are on the verge of another Bretton Woods moment when chastened global leaders will finally commit to building a new institutional architecture. However, I fear that it will take at least one more serious global crisis before the collec-tive will to do so is found.

Everyone in this room has benefited from the architecture created half a century ago at Bretton Woods. Now we desperately need a new architecture and our leaders are letting us down.

If we don’t get that new architecture, I fear that the first half of this coming century will resemble in many unwelcome ways the unpleasant and unhappy first half of the 20th century. Faced with this challenge, will we have the vision like the vision the architects at Bretton Woods had half a century ago? Will the leaders we elect

society in which the biggest challenge would be figuring out what to do with all our spare time. I can’t wait! I’m afraid, however, that the concentration of power implicit in this new order will make that highly unlikely.

Where does the new power reside in this era of turbulence? What specifically is the foundation of national power? The Cold War world of the Great Moderation was defined by institutions, treaties and a few great powers. In contrast, this new era of the Great Turbulence is a world defined by power nodes, feedback loops and more players than we can possibly count. Size alone is not a factor for success and in fact may make things more difficult.

Behind the Great Turbulence is a world struggling to deal with the consequences of globalization and an unending, accelerating digital revolution. Today the future looks as protean as the future must have looked to John Maynard Keynes and others at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944. Everywhere we turn individuals, institu-tions and entire societies are struggling to adjust; from the demonstrators at the Seattle summit to mullahs fighting modernism, to demonstrators in Tahrir Square hoping for a new future. Everybody is trying to make sense of what lies ahead and where they fit. A key question to answer is, What can we do? Amidst all this turmoil, are institutions up to the task of addressing our most serious challenges like climate change embodied in the Keeling curve of atmospheric carbon dioxide? Are we able to create new global

There’s no way, except waiting, to know whether Paul Saffo’s predictions will come true. But we can guess as Saffo might guess – we can examine the past. Saffo has been forecast-ing for over 20 years. Some of his early predictions concern what is now the present, even the past.

In 1991, Saffo declared the personal computer dead. Instead it turns out it was really about to leave childhood behind.

But in the same New York Times article Saffo predicted that “In a few years, we will carry all kinds of information appliances in our pockets, purses, briefcases and cars.” This prediction turned out to be more accurate. “We all” (46 percent of American adults, according to Pew Inter-net & American Life) carry smartphones, and many of us also carry tablets and e-readers. As these devices dupli-

cate more of the PC’s components with every new model, Saffo’s first prediction may eventually come true as well.

If we apply this model to an analogous current predic-tion, we could guess that the Bretton Woods institutions that Saffo has declared effectively dead might be, like the PC in 1991, going through an awkward puberty stage, and will live many more years in a more advanced form and, perhaps, before becoming obsolete, will even establish the specific components that the institutions of the future will have already begun to recreate.

Of course these two situations are probably not much more than rhetorically parallel, but they do suggest a pat-tern in Saffo’s predictions. And Saffo would tell you that in the forecasting business, patterns are worth looking at.

By Amelia Cass

Putting Saffo’s Powers of Prognostication to the Test


take it seriously? Can we build new global institutions for the 21st century?

For the sake of our children and our grandchildren let us hope and make it so.

Question and answer session with Matt Richtel, Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times technology reporterRICHTEL: Tell us a little bit about whether this [presidential] election matters. SAFFO: It matters, but there’s a deeper underlying problem with our political system. It’s unfair to blame the politicians, and it’s also unfair to blame the voters. The problem with our republican system here in the United States was that our whole system was architected in a period of really lousy communications, and so the found-ing fathers went out of their way to create a system with feedback so that word could get from the outside to the center and back out. Remember, this was a world [in which] the most famous battle of our war against Brit-ain was the battle of New Orleans, fought a week after the treaty was signed. So we have a system that goes out of its way to build in feedback loops, and the consequence, in my opinion, over the last 200 years is that with each successive advance in communications technology our government has gotten that much worse.RICHTEL: Is this a depressing message you’re sending? Is that your view?SAFFO: No. It’s a depressing message only if we’re attached to the old order. Change is a wonderful thing. Take a very narrow investor view: if the stock market never changed, there would be no opportunity for profit. If you can surf uncertainty, this is a very exciting time. I’m fundamentally an optimist. And history, by the way, is alone a good basis for optimism. In general, over the flow of human history things have generally gotten better. We may blow ourselves up yet, but I’m not with the apocalypse crowd. RICHTEL: What are the attenuators to volatility? What [institutions] might we build?SAFFO: We have to think about new kinds of institutions, and the place where I’m most optimistic is the NGO [non-governmental organization] sector. Entities in the NGO sector have shown remarkable abilities to be nimble and creative and also not outlive their usefulness. One example [they could address]: A big part of our crisis today in

ly won’t get to the kind of doublings we’ve had in the past. The problem is it still doesn’t solve a lot of problems. We’re still too many people consuming too much stuff to really solve the climate problem. Beyond that it really is unknown territory. As a forecaster, I look for things that are surprising and unex-pected and I think a lot about cycles – that things tend to repeat, what looks like it’s new just hasn’t happened lately. But sometime in the last two years we experienced a truly new event that was hardly noticed: Humankind became, for the first time ever, a majority urban species. That fact alone is going to have more of an impact on shaping the next century than just about anything in the demographic space.

What can we do in the meantime? Those of us in the San Francisco Bay Area have a special role to play. If we are to make sense of this new global landscape, we need a new kind of global economic observatory, an observatory that is impartial and capable of collecting and digesting the vast oceans of data needed to truly understand the global economy in all of its complexity. In theory that’s what the IMF, OECD and World Bank already do; in fact, what they collect is too narrow, and they publish too slowly for it to make a difference. Instead, imagine an institution with the velocity and analytic resources of Wall Street, the reach of Google and the openness of Wikipedia. It would be an institution that would leverage cyber-space and the lessons of the last decade of social and technological innovation to cost-effectively become a global clearinghouse for information.

Its scope would extend far beyond the data collected by established entities today; perhaps go deep into the illicit economy, which in some nations is larger than the aboveground economy, and it could quan-tify the off-book measures, so often ignored, that end up being so important to policy decision makers.

Above all, this observatory would be open and independent, inviting the par-ticipation of crowds and encouraging the broadest possible research access in its data, to the service of rethinking our global eco-nomic architecture. Will we build it? I have no idea. I certainly wish we will.

politics is that our system has gotten so complex that ordinary citizens can no longer see the link between the taxes they pay and the benefits they get. Imagine an NGO dedicated to the very simple task of finding a way of showing people how they can trace every last cent of their taxes to benefits and then maybe we wouldn’t have people like the guy in Florida holding up a sign saying, “U.S. Government keep your hands off my Medicare.” [laughter]

RICHTEL: How does this volatility [relate to] the growing world population? How does that fit in with the turbulence?SAFFO: There has been an exponential curve of population growth and plenty of uncertainty around population growth. But one thing we do know is when there are periods of high social uncertainty, there tend to be population drops. Russia is going through the consequences of a population drop during all the chaos after the fall of the Berlin Wall. When people don’t feel secure and they don’t have manufacturing jobs, they’re going to do things like defer mar-riage. You see that in countries where kids are still living at home. Or go to Spain right now, and you’ll see Spanish youth are flee-ing Spain. That causes a population drop. Increases in wealth like what we’ve seen with the middle class in China also cause people to have less kids. It’s possible that global population will peak around 2050 and then start to drop, and we’ll be in the very unfamiliar territory of how to deal with a decreasing population. In some places it’s going to happen faster; China’s economic problem today is [whether it] can get rich before it gets old, and it starts getting old around 2020. RICHTEL: How will we deal with the population drop? SAFFO: The good news is that population will level off and drop, hopefully; we certain-

“I fear the first half of this century will resemble in

many unwelcome ways the first half of

the 20th century.”

This program was made possible by the generous support of Bank of the West.


ProgramsFor up-to-date information on programs, and to subscribe to our weekly newsletter, go to commonwealthclub.org

OVERVIEW

The Commonwealth Club organizes more than 450 events every year – on politics, the arts, media, literature, business and sports. Programs are held throughout the Bay Area.

STANDARD PROGRAMSTypically one hour long, these speeches cover a variety of topics and are followed by a question and answer session. Most evening programs include a networking reception with wine.

PROGRAM SERIESCLIMATE ONE programs are a conversation about America’s energy, economy and environment. To understand any of them, it helps to understand them all.

GOOD LIT features both established literary luminaries and up-and-coming writers in conversation. Includes Food Lit.

INFORUM is for and by people in their 20s to mid-30s, though events are open to people of all ages.

MEMBER–LED FORUMS (MLF)Volunteer-driven programs focus on particular fields. Most evening programs include a wine networking reception.

MEMBER-LED FORUMS CHAIR

Dr. Carol Fleming carol.fleming@speechtraining com

FORUM CHAIRS ARTS Anne W. Smith [email protected]

Lynn Curtis [email protected]

ASIA–PACIFIC AFFAIRS Cynthia Miyashita [email protected]

BAY GOURMET Cathy Curtis ccurtis873@gmail

SF BOOK DISCUSSION Howard Crane [email protected]

BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP Kevin O’Malley [email protected]

ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES Ann Clark [email protected]

Marcia Sitcoske [email protected]

GROWNUPS John Milford [email protected]

HEALTH & MEDICINEWilliam B. Grant [email protected]

HUMANITIESGeorge C. Hammond [email protected]

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Norma Walden [email protected]

LGBT Stephen Seewer [email protected]

Julian Chang [email protected]

MIDDLE EASTCelia Menczel [email protected]

PSYCHOLOGY Patrick O’Reilly [email protected]

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Chisako Ress [email protected]

Prepayment is required. Unless otherwise indicated, all Club programs – including “Members Free” events – require tickets. Programs often sell out, so we strongly encourage you to purchase tickets in advance. Tickets are available at will call. Due to heavy call volume, we urge you to purchase tickets online at commonwealthclub.org; or call (415) 597-6705. Please note: All ticket sales are final. Please arrive at least 10 minutes prior to any program. If a program is sold out and your tickets are not claimed at our box office by the program start time, they will be released to our stand-by list. Select events include premium seating; premium refers to the first several rows of seating.

Subscribe to our free podcasting service to automatically download a new program recording to your personal computer each week: commonwealthclub.org/podcast.

Watch Club programs on KRCB TV 22 on Comcast & DirecTV the last Sunday of each month at 11 a.m. Select Commonwealth Club Silicon Valley programs air on CreaTV in San Jose (Channel 30). View hundreds of streaming videos of Club programs at fora.tv and youtube.com/commonwealthclub

TICKETS

To request an assistive listening device, please e-mail Ricardo Esway at [email protected] or call (415) 869-5911 seven working days before the event.

HARD OF HEARING?

RADIO, VIDEO AND PODCASTS

Hear Club programs on about 200 public and commercial radio stations throughout the United States. For the latest schedule, visit commonwealthclub.org/broadcast. In the San Francisco Bay Area, tune in to: KQED (88.5 FM) Fridays at 8 p.m. and Saturdays at 2 a.m. KRCB Radio (91 FM in Rohnert Park) Thursdays at 7 p.m.KALW (91.7 FM) Inforum programs on select Tuesdays at 7 p.m. KOIT (96.5 FM and 1260 AM) Sundays at 6 a.m. KLIV (1590 AM) Thursdays at 7 p.m. KSAN (107.7 FM) Sundays at 5 a.m. KNBR (680 and 1050 AM) Sundays at 5 a.m. KFOG (104.5 and 97.7 FM) Sundays at 5 a.m.


M on Tue Wed

December 03 04 05

10 11 12

17 18 19

24 25 26

31 January 01 January 02

07

14

21

08

15

22

09

16

23

Eight Weeks Calendar

Christmas Eve

Club offices closed

New Year’s Day

Club offices closed

Club offices closedChristmas

Club offices closed

December 03 – January 27

5:30 p.m. SF Book Discussion: Before the Dawn FE6:00 p.m. Grandmother Power FM6:00 p.m. Show Me The Funny!6:30 p.m. Beans to Bars

6:30 p.m. Stephen Schneider Climate Science Communication Award

6:00 p.m. Simon Winchester: Skulls

5:30 p.m. Middle East Discussion Group FE6:00p.m. Ethical Destinations: Vote with Your Wings FM6:00p.m. End of the World Doom FM

5:15 p.m. Trauma and First Responders FM

6:30 p.m. Will Durst: Elect to Laugh6:00p.m. Commonwealth Club Book Launch: The Real Problem Solvers FM

6:30 p.m. Joanne Weir: Hot Out of the Oven

Noon Gary Bukovnik: Exploring the Palate

5:30 p.m. Public Trust and Public Land FM

5:30 p.m. Donald Berwick: A Bright Future for Health Care: Is It Possible?

6:30 p.m. A Blueprint for Growth in Contra Costa County

6:30 p.m. John Mackey: A Whole-istic Ap-proach to Capitalism

7:00 p.m. John Mackey5:15 p.m. Follow the Open Doors5:30 p.m. Book Disc.: A Pepys Anthology FE6:30 p.m. Theater in the East Bay

Highlights:• Experience Bali with leaders who

have spent years developing relation-ships with Balinese royalty, govern-ment officials, artists and musicians.

• Luxuriate in our 5-star resort in Ubud, the cultural capital of Bali.

• Meet with the royal princes at their palace, and speak with members of a cultural arts cooperative.

• Spend the day with a master mask carver and his family; learn about the gamelan, the traditional Bali-nese instrument; experience magi-cal dance performances; and tour the Green School which focuses on sustainable practices.

• Visit a banjar, a fascinating self-gov-erning community, and learn about the subak system of water alloca-tion, a potential model for countries around the world.

• Learn about Bali’s history, unique mix of religions, textile and spice trades, as well as their economy and political challenges.

• Fly to the island of Flores and discov-er beautiful coastlines, volcanic lakes, and Kelimutu National Park.

• Learn about dye-plant harvesting, ikat work, and weaving.

• Marvel at the colorful underwater life during snorkeling at Maumere Bay.

Bali and FloresAdventure and Luxury on the Islands of Indonesia

June16 to 26

2013

CommonwealthClub Travel

Day 1 | Sunday, June 16Arrive BaliFly to Denpasar airport and transfer to our luxurious accom-modations in Ubud for dinner and overnight.ARMA Resort (D)

Day 2 | Monday, June 17thUbud After an orientation, take a walk-ing tour of Ubud followed by a Balinese meal at Threads of Life, a non-governmental organization working with weavers in Bali, Flores, and other nearby islands. Enjoy a fascinating lecture by co-founder William Ingram, about the history and politics of the tex-tile and spice trades in Bali and Flores during the colonial period. After dinner at our hotel, enjoy an open-air performance of Balinese dancing and music.ARMA Resort (B,L,D)

Day 3 | Tuesday, June 18thUbudVisit the family compound of Anom, the renowned 9th gen-eration mask maker for a private demonstration of sacred mask carving and a discussion of the role of wood and stone carving in Balinese culture. We will then join the family for a traditional lunch, prepared by Anom’s wife Noneek. Learn about the gamelan, the tra-ditional Balinese musical instru-ment. Dinner is on your own to explore Ubud, a very safe town with many excellent options.ARMA Resort (B,L)

Day 4 | Wednesday, June 19thUbud & DenpasarVisit Denpasar, the island’s capital, to be briefed by U.S. Consulate offi-cials on the state on the state of U.S.-Indonesian relations. After lunch enjoy a free afternoon, or visit with Cokorda Rai, Bali’s leading tradi-tional healer to observe and learn about his techniques, and have a session with him if you choose. Lat-er in the day meet the Royal Princes of Ubud in their Palace.ARMA Resort (B,L)

Day 5 | Thursday, June 20thUbudEarly mornings in Bali are magi-cal. In the company of Agung Rai, the founder of the ARMA muse-um and resort, half the group will explore the early morning Balinese landscape and village life. The oth-er half of the group will have the opportunity to shop for Balinese silver, textiles, woven baskets and paintings. In the afternoon, visit The Green School, arguably the world’s greenest school which uses sustainable materials and teaches sustainable practices. His sched-ule permitting, meet the school’s founder, John Hardy, who has giv-en a TED talk about the school. ARMA Resort (B,D)

Day 6 | Friday, June 21stUbud The two groups’ activities from the previous morning are switch-ed. The afternoon and evening will be free to explore indepen-dently, relax, swim or to visit a local banjar to learn how these local communities organize and govern themselves.ARMA Resort (B,L)

For additional information or to make a reservation, contact Commonwealth Club Travel Online: commonwealthclub.org/travel Telephone: (415) 597-6720 Email: [email protected]

Wilford Welch Former U.S. dip-lomat who played a role in the re-estab-lishment of U.S. China relations in the early 1970’s, and who wrote a prescient Harvard Business Review article in the mid 1970’s entitled “The Business Po-tential of Southeast Asia”. Author, The Tactics of Hope, How Social Entrepre-neurs are Changing Our World; Co-Founder, Quest for Global Healing con-ferences tht took place in Bali in 2004 and 2006.

Carole Angermeir Founder of Cross Cultural Journeys (CCJ), in 1991, and founder of the CCJ Foundation in 1997; Co-Founder of the Quest for Global Healing conferences in Bali that included over a thousand participants from 40 countries, including Des-mond Tutu and two other Nobel Peace Prize laureates.

Trip Leaders:

Itinerary:

Day 7 | Saturday, June 22ndFlores This morning we take a 90 minute flight to Maumere, Flores, accom-panied by William Ingram. Fol-lowing lunch we are briefed on the history, culture, politics and economics of the island. The rest of the day will be open for explor-ing the town, hiking, or swim-ming in the beautiful bay in front of our hotel. Seaworld Club (B,L,D)

Day 8 | Sunday, June 23rdFloresVisit Bliran Sina Cultural Arts Cooperative of Watublapi, estab-lished in 1988 to rediscover, sus-tain, and develop regional art and culture. Their success is based on the sale of their authentic natural-dyed textiles, and their world-class dance and music perfor-mances, which we are privileged to experience. After lunch at the cooperative, spend the afternoon with co-op members to join in their dye plant harvesting, nat-ural-dye preparation, ikat work, and weaving. Seaworld Club (B,L,D)

Day 9 | Monday, June 24thFlores A scenic 3 1⁄2 hour drive to Ke-limutu National Park and its tri-colored lakes, winds through spectacular mountain and coastal scenery, offering a vivid slice of Flores life. Take a half-hour hike up to the volcanic lakes where we enjoy a picnic lunch and spectacular views. Seaworld Club (B,L,D)

Day 10 | Tuesday, June 25thFloresWe travel to the islands, beaches, and world-class snorkeling sites around Maumere Bay, an area where over 1,200 species of fish have been catalogued. Snorkel, swim, or beach comb. Back at the hotel enjoy a celebratory farewell dinner. Seaworld Club (B,L,D)

Day 11 | Wednesday, June 26thFlores to Denpasar AirportThis morning fly back to Bali’s Denpasar airport and connect with returning flights home. Or extend your stay in Bali on your own.(B)

Dates: June 16 - 26, 2013 (11 days) Group Size: Pricing is based on a minimum of 10 participants and a maximum of 20. Cost: $5,850 double occupancy; $6,500 single occupancy (villa upgrades available)

Included: All activities and entrance fees as specified in the brochure; guest speak-ers; in-country transportation per itinerary; accommodations as specified; meals (B,L,D) per itinerary; bottled water; beer and wine at the welcome and final dinners; tour leaders; Commonwealth Club host with 12 or more participants; local guides and experts; gratu-ities to local guides, drivers and for all group activities; pre-departure materials.

Not included: International air; Indo-nesian visa of $25 upon arrival; departure tax of $20; alcoholic beverages except at welcome and farewell dinner; travel insurance (recom-mended, information will be sent upon reg-istration); items of a purely personal nature.

Trip Details:

CST: 2096889-40 Photos: cover: sculpture by Erik K Veland / Flickr, fish courtesy sea-world-club.com, rice paddy by wYnand! / Flickr; inside: bike by Pondspider / Flickr, baskets by Zenubud / Flickr, volcano by whl.travel / Flickr, girls by Pandu Adnyana / Flickr

NAME 1

NAME 2

ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP

HOME PHONE CELL

E-MAIL ADDRESS

SINGLE TRAVELERS ONLY: If this is a reservation for one person, please indicate: ___ I plan to share accommodations with _____________________________________OR ___ I wish to have single accommodations.OR ___ I’d like to know about possible roommates. I am a ___ smoker / ___ nonsmoker.

PAYMENT:Here is my deposit of $______ ($750 per person) for ___ place(s). ___ Enclosed is my check (make payable to Cross Cultural Journeys). OR ___ Charge my deposit to my ___ Visa ___ MasterCard

CARD# EXPIRES

AUTHORIZED CARDHOLDER SIGNATURE DATE

Mail completed form to: Commonwealth Club Travel, 595 Market St., 2nd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105, or fax to (415) 597-6729. For questions or to reserve by phone call (415) 597-6720.

___ I/We have read the Terms and Conditions for this program and agree to them.

SIGNATURE

Bali and Flores Reservation Form June 16 – 26, 2013

Phone: (415) 597-6720Fax: (415) 597-6729

CommonwealthClub Travel

TERMS & CONDITIONS

The Commonwealth Club (CWC) has contracted Cross Cultural Journeys (CCJ), to organize this tour.

Reservations: A $750 per person deposit, along with a completed and signed Reservation Form, will reserve a place for participants on this program. The balance of the trip is due 90 days prior to departure. Cancellation and Refund Policy: Notification of can-cellation must be received in writing. At the time we receive your written cancellation, the following penalties will apply: •120daysormorepriortodeparture:$250perperson •90-60daystodeparture:$750deposit •59-1dayspriortodeparture:100%fare Tour can also be cancelled due to low enrollment. Nei-ther CWC nor CCJ accepts liability for cancellation penal-ties related to domestic or international airline tickets pur-chased in conjunction with the tour. Trip Cancellation and Interruption Insurance: We strongly advise that all travelers purchase trip cancellation and interruption insurance as coverage against a covered unforeseen emergency that may force you to cancel or leave

trip while it is in progress. A brochure describing coverage will be sent to you upon receipt of your reservation. Medical Information: Participation in this program re-quires that you be in generally good health. It is essential that persons with any medical problems and related dietary restrictions make them known to us well before departure. Itinerary Changes & Trip Delay: Itinerary is based on information available at the time of printing and are subject to change. We reserve the right to change a program’s dates, staff, itineraries, or accommodations as conditions warrant. If a trip must be delayed, or the itinerary changed, due to bad weather, road conditions, transportation delays, airline schedules, government intervention, sickness or other con-tingency for which CWC or CCJ or its agents cannot make provision, the cost of delays or changes is not included. 12. Limitations of Liability: CWC and CCJ its Own-ers, Agents, and Employees act only as the agent for any transportation carrier, hotel, ground operator, or other suppliers of services connected with this program (“other providers”), and the other providers are solely responsible and liable for providing their respective ser-vices. CWC and CCJ shall not be held liable for (A) any damage to, or loss of, property or injury to, or death of,

persons occasioned directly or indirectly by an act or omission of any other provider, including but not limited to any defect in any aircraft, or vehicle operated or pro-vided by such other provider, and (B) any loss or damage due to delay, cancellation, or disruption in any manner caused by the laws, regulations, acts or failures to act, demands, orders, or interpositions of any government or any subdivision or agent thereof, or by acts of God, strikes, fire, flood, war, rebellion, terrorism, insurrec-tion, sickness, quarantine, epidemics, theft, or any other cause(s) beyond their control. The participant waives any claim against CWC/CCJ for any such loss, damage, in-jury, or death. By registering for the trip, the participant certifies that he/she does not have any mental, physi-cal, or other condition or disability that would create a hazard for him/herself or other participants. CWC/CCJ shall not be liable for any air carrier’s cancellation pen-alty incurred by the purchase of a nonrefundable ticket to or from the departure city. Baggage and personal ef-fects are at all times the sole responsibility of the trav-eler. Reasonable changes in the itinerary may be made where deemed advisable for the comfort and well-being of the passengers.


Sun

06

13

20

27

03

10

17

24

Thu Fri S at

08 09

14 15 16

21 22 23

28 29 30

04 05 06

11

18

25

12

19

26

13

20

27

07

Club offices closedClub offices closed

Legend FM

FE

MO

San Francisco

East Bay

Silicon Valley

Free program for members

Free program for everyone

Members–only program

2:00 p.m. Russian Hill Walking Tour Noon Oil, Earthquakes and Declining Sci-ence in Arabia FM

2:00 p.m. North Beach Walking Tour 5:30 p.m. Explore the World – What’s Your Wish List? FE6:30 p.m. Y Combinator: The Secret in This Incubator’s Sauce

6:00 p.m. Why Free Trade Doesn’t Work

Noon Jared Diamond2:00 p.m. SF Architecture Walking Tour5:30 p.m. Recent Acquisitions6:00 p.m. Infections Cures

Noon Clean Clothes FM


My World and How I Color It: An Exhibition by Toby Tover

Tover’s color-rich paint-ings are a personal narrative on the human experience. Embodied with humor, her “clip shot” portraits capture the inner characters of her subjects. Whether with the flick of a cigarette or a sideways glance, her subjects speak to us in volumes. Tover’s exhibition will be on view until February 8.

MLF: THE ARTS

Location: SF Club Office

Time: Regular Club business hours

Cost: FREE

Program Organizer: Lynn Curtis

Beans to Bars: Exploring the World of Artisan Chocolate

Join us as we delve into the fascinating world of artisan chocolate makers, cacao growers and the pleasures of tasting fine chocolate. Chocolate curator Sunita de Tourreil brings her scientific train-ing in molecular biology, her desire to strengthen communities and promote a healthier planet, and her appetite for delicious food to educate us on the history, science and ethical production of chocolate. During the program, we will taste decadent chocolate blends of the world’s finest cacao beans, created exclusively for The Chocolate Garage.

Location: The Chocolate Garage, 654 Gilman

Street, Palo Alto

Time: 6:15 p.m. check-in, 6:30-8:30 p.m.

program/tasting

Cost: $35 standard, $30 members. Advance

registration required.

Show Me the Funny! Hollywood’s Top Comedy Writers

Jeffrey Davis, Writer, “Love Boat,” “House Calls with Lynn Redgrave,” “Give Me a Break,” “Diff’rent Strokes” and “Night Court”Peter Desberg, Writer; Researcher on Humor and Business; Consultant

Enjoy a unique glimpse into the intel-ligent and quirky inner workings of the comedic mind as Davis and Desberg share their experiences interviewing 28 top comedy screenwriters, from the revered figures of television’s Golden Age to today’s favorite movie and TV writers.

MLF: BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program

Cost: $20 standard, $8 members, $7 students

Program Organizer: Ann Clark

Grandmother Power: A Global Phenomenon

Paola Gianturco, Author; Photojournalist

Gianturco discusses a new international movement by grandmothers who are younger, better educated and healthier than grandmothers have ever been before. Grandmother Power: A Global Phenom-enon depicts activist grandmothers in 15 countries who are fighting effectively and courageously against poverty, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation and abuse of human rights to create a better world for grandchildren everywhere.

MLF: GROWNUPS/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS



Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE, $7 students

Program Organizer: John Milford

Also know: In association with the Interna-

tional Museum of Women, the Global Fund

for Women and San Francisco Village

M O N 0 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 0 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 0 3 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y

DECEMBER 03 – FEBRUARY 08

December 03–10

M O N 0 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors, by Nicholas Wade

Nicholas Wade explores the deep roots of our cognitive and emotional nature, beginning with the origin of humanity in Africa 50,000 years ago, and traces the human population’s spread and develop-ment throughout the world, up to the present. Science journalist Wade applies the insights of genetics to these questions about our species. As a reminder, this is a book discussion group. The author will not be present.

MLF: SF BOOK DISCUSSION


Time: 5:30 p.m. program

Cost: $5 standard, MEMBERS FREE

Program Organizer: Barbara Massey and

Howard Crane

FOREIGNLANGUAGEGROUPSFree for members Location: SF Club OfficeFRENCH, Intermediate Class Thursdays, noon Pierrette Spetz, Graziella Danieli, [email protected]

FRENCH, Advanced Conversation Tuesdays, noon Gary Lawrence, (925) 932-2458

GERMAN, Int./Adv. Conversation Wednesdays, noon Sara Shahin, (415) 314-6482

ITALIAN, Intermediate Class Mondays, noon Ebe Fiori Sapone, (415) 564-6789

RUSSIAN, Int./Advanced Conversation Mondays, 1:30 p.m. Rita Sobolev, (925) 376-7889

SPANISH, Advanced Conversation (fluent only) Fridays, noon, Luis Salvago-Toledo, [email protected]


Simon Winchester: Skulls – A Compelling Tale of the World’s Most Bizarre Collection

Journalist; Author, A Crack at the Edge of the World and Skulls: An Exploration of Alan Dudley’s Curious Collection

The renowned writer and raconteur whose books on the 1906 earthquake, the Oxford English Dictionary and Kraka-toa captivated readers worldwide now presents a spellbinding exploration of an obsessive collector of what some may call the macabre: more than 300 animal skulls. Join Winchester for a fascinating and entertaining exploration into obses-sion and the macabre.


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception,

6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. book signing


James Hansen: Stephen Schneider Climate Science Communication Award

Political Science: Michael Mann, Professor of Geosciences, Penn State; Author, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars • Additional panelists TBAHow did climate science become so politicized? Just a few years ago, John McCain and Lindsay Graham were among conservatives who accepted the basic physics of heat-trapping gases and the need to decouple carbon pollution from economic growth. Today, many candidates claim the science is unsettled and scientists are the targets of smear campaigns.Time: 4:30 p.m. check-in, 5-6 p.m. program, 6-6:30 p.m. refreshment break

Stephen Schneider Climate Science Communication Award James Hansen, Head, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; Adjunct Professor, Earth Institute, Columbia University; Author, Storms of My GrandchildrenNASA climatologist Hansen has grown increasingly concerned about the risks of climatic tipping points, which could bring catastrophic consequences. His recent research is also identifying human fingerprints on specific instances of extreme weather, putting him out in front of many of his peers. Hansen is the recipient of the 2012 Stephen Schneider Award for Climate Science Communication, a $10,000 award in memory of the late, great Stanford climate scientist and former member of the Climate One Advisory Council. Climate scientist Ben Santer will present Hansen with the award for his achievements.

Location: SF Club Office • Time: 6:30-7:30 p.m. program • Cost: Regular: $30 standard, $20 mem-

bers, $7 students (with valid ID). Premium (priority seating): $65 standard, $45 members. Price

includes both sessions.

Russian Hill Walking Tour

Join a more active Commonwealth Club Neighborhood Adventure! Russian Hill is a magical area with secret gardens and amazing views. Join Rick Evans for a two-hour hike up hills and staircases and learn about the history of this neighborhood. See where great artists and architects lived and worked, and walk down residential streets where some of the most historically signifi-cant houses in the Bay Area are located.

Location: Meet in front of Swensen’s Ice Cream

Store located at 1999 Hyde Street at Union. Tour

ends about six blocks from the Swensen’s Ice

Cream Shop, at the corner of Vallejo and Jones.

Time: 1:45 p.m. check-in, 2– 4 p.m. tour

Cost: $45 standard, $35 members

Also know: Steep hills and staircases, parking

difficult. Limited to 20. Must pre-register. Tour

operates rain or shine.

Middle East Discussion Group

Make your voice heard in an enriching, provocative and fun discussion with fel-low Club members as you weigh in on events shaping the face of the Middle East. Each month, the Middle East Member-Led Forum hosts an informal roundtable discussion on a topic fre-quently suggested by recent headlines. After a brief introduction, the floor will be open for discussion. All interested members are encouraged to attend. There will also be a brief planning session.

MLF: MIDDLE EAST



Cost: FREE

Program Organizer: Celia Menczel

Oil, Earthquakes and Declining Science in Arabia

Muawia Barazangi, Professor Emeritus, Cornell University; Ph.D., SeismologyRichard Cardwell, Academic; Former Senior Geophysicist, Chevron - Moderator

How do natural resources and geologic features affect the course of Middle East-ern history and geopolitics? Barazangi highlights the critical importance of bet-ter understanding Islamic history and cultures of the Arab/Persian region, which has the world’s largest oil reserves. He will also discuss the earthquake haz-ards of the Dead Sea Fault and the de-cline of science and technology in Arabia.

MLF: MIDDLE EAST/SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY


Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program

Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE,

students free (with valid ID)


W E D 0 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T H U 0 6 | S a n F r a n c i s c o F R I 0 7 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 0 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o


December 10 – January 10

Will Durst: Elect to Laugh

Hailed by The New York Times as “possibly the best political comic in the country,” Durst has amused audiences around the nation on radio, television and stage. A five-time Emmy nominee, he was fired by PBS three times; racked up seven nominations for Stand-Up of the Year; and his 800+ television appear-ances include stints on Letterman, HBO, Showtime, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, the BBC and many more. After the waning of the 2012 election season, join him for a night of laughs and bipartisan bashing that is sure to lighten the mood.

Location: Lafayette Library, 3491 Mt. Diablo

Blvd., Lafayette

Time: 5:45 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program,

7:30 p.m. book signing


Ethical Destinations: Vote with Your Wings

Jeff Greenwald, Executive Director, Ethical TravelerMalia Everette, Director, Global Ex-change Reality Tours; Founder, Altruvistas

One of the most important things con-cerned travelers can do is spend their tourist dollars in countries that uphold core values like human rights, civil society and environmental protection. Every No-vember, Bay Area-based Ethical Traveler releases its list of “The World’s Best Ethical Destinations,” which honors 10 countries – all in the developing world – that are promoting a locally based, sustainable tourism economy. Join a discussion on which nations made the 2013 list.



Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE, $7

students (with valid ID)

December 21st, 2012 and All That: An Entertaining History of End of the World Doom

David Morrison, Director, Carl Sagan Cen-ter for Study of Life in the Universe; Senior Scientist, NASA Lunar Science Institute

Monday Night Philosophy looks at the widespread conviction that the end of the world is nigh. Polls tell us that one in ten Americans does not expect to live past December 21. We will delve into why eschatological excesses excite and enchant otherwise (fairly) rational minds, and how the Internet is being used to spread doomsday stories. Come have some unusual holiday discussions. This may be your last chance!

MLF: HUMANITIES




Program Organizer: George Hammond

Commonwealth Club Book Launch: The Real Problem Solvers

Ruth Shapiro, Ph.D.; Editor, The Real Problem Solvers; Principal, Keyi; Founder and Senior Advisor, Asia Business Council Strategies; Social Entrepreneur in Residence, The Com-monwealth Club of CaliforniaMatt Bannick, Contributor, The Real Problem Solvers; Managing Partner, Omidyar Net-workKriss Deiglmeier, Contributor, The Real Problem Solvers; Executive Director, Graduate School of Business Center for Social Innovation, StanfordPremal Shah, Contributor, The Real Problem Solvers; President, Kiva

Today, “social entrepreneurship” describes a host of new initiatives and approaches that break from traditional philanthropic behavior and are having a major impact on society. Come celebrate the launch of a new Commonwealth Club book entitled The Real Problem Solvers, featuring leading entrepreneurs, funders, investors, thinkers and champions talking from their own, first-person perspectives. Join Editor Shapiro and contributors Bannick, Deiglmeier and Shah for the premiere of this important book that serves as the ideal introduction to the amazing potential of social entrepreneurship.


Time: 5:15 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m program, with brief comments by panelists 6:30 p.m. light hors

d’oeuvres and book signing

Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE, $7 students (with valid ID)

Joanne Weir: Hot Out of the Oven

Chef and Owner, Copita Tequileria y Comida; Host, “Joanne Weir’s Cooking Confidence”; Author, Joanne Weir’s Cooking Confidence

We love the occasional bit of sea urchin foam with our rabbit roulade, but more often than not we find comfort in a home-cooked meal. Weir has cooked with Alice Waters, studied under Mad-eleine Kamman in France, and won a James Beard Award, but her heart is in home cooking. Come glean tips from her food theory and technique.


Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program,

7:30 p.m. reception and book signing


Also know: Underwritten by The Bernard Os-

her Foundation, as part of the Food Lit Series

M O N 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T U E 1 1 | E a s t B a y

T U E 1 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o W E D 1 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o


Trauma and First Responders: An Insider’s View of First Responder Culture

Joel Fay, Psy.D.

First responders include police, fire and emergency medical services. They have unique cultural norms that allow them to function individually and as a team during high-stress events. The ability to suppress emotions and remain functional despite what is encountered is an asset but can also be a liability when they need help. This presentation will discuss some common first responder cultural norms, how those norms affect treatment, and lessons learned at the West Coast Post-trauma Retreat.

MLF: PSYCHOLOGY


Time: 4:45 p.m. networking, 5:15 p.m. program


Program Organizer: Patrick O’Reilly

Design Alert: Blue Is the Next Green

Peter Williams, Founder, CEO and Archi-tect, ARCHIVE Global

This program is cancelled.

Gary Bukovnik: Exploring the Palate

Gary Bukovnik, Visual Artist

Primarily using watercolor, monotype and lithograph, Bukovnik fuses sensual vitality with fluid yet powerful colorations, creating floral and culinary images. Renowned for his signature designs for the San Francisco Symphony, he reflects upon the exploration of ideas influenced by residencies at home and abroad. Bukovnik’s solo exhibitions include Caldwell Snyder Gallery in San Francisco, Campton Gallery in New York City; the Concept Gallery in Pittsburgh and the A.C.T. Gallery in San Francisco.

MLF: THE ARTS


Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program


Program Organizer: Anne Smith

Explore the World – What’s on Your Wish List of International Relations Programs?

Join us for this special brainstorming session of our International Relations Forum to launch the 2013 program year. We want to know who your dream speakers are. What hot international top-ics interest you? Our forum focuses on Europe, Latin America, Africa and global issues. What subjects have we neglected? Who at the podium would draw you to the Club no matter what? Here’s your chance to raise your voice and shape our plans. Anyone is welcome to attend, and all ideas are open for discussion.

MLF: INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS



Cost: FREE

Program Organizer: Norma Walden and

Linda Calhoun

North Beach Walking Tour

Join another Commonwealth Club Neighborhood Adventure! Explore vi-brant North Beach with Rick Evans dur-ing a two-hour walk through this neigh-borhood with a colorful past, where food, culture, history and unexpected views all intersect in an Italian “urban village.” In addition to learning about Beat genera-tion hangouts, you’ll discover authentic Italian cathedrals and coffee shops.

Location: Meeting spot is Washington Square

Park at Saints Peter and Paul Church (Filbert

& Powell). Transportation to Washington

Square Park is either the 30 bus or the 41/45

- all of which stop right in front of the park.

Our guide will be on the steps of the church.

Please meet at 1:45, depart by 2.

Time: 2-4 p.m. tour


Also know: Limited to 20 people. Must pre-

register. Operates rain or shine.

W E D 1 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 0 7 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T H U 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

A Bright Future for Health Care: Is It Possible?

Dr. Donald Berwick, Former President and CEO, Institute for Healthcare Improvement; Former Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

The second annual Lundberg Institute Lecture welcomes Berwick. Hear Berwick’s ideas on how true delivery system reform – changing care to better meet the needs of patients, families and communities – pro-vides a sensible and effective alternative to the much-feared threat of rationing of care.

MLF: HUMANITIES





Also know: In association with The Lundberg

Institute

W E D 0 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T H U 1 0 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 1 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o


January 10–24

A Blueprint for Growth in Contra Costa County

Panelists TBA

The California Center of the Milken Insti-tute recently published a report providing a platform to help public officials and business leaders chart a brighter future for CoCo County. The county boasts a mature industrial base that generates more than $50 billion in annual sales. Lately, however, lower-paying jobs have grown more rapidly than higher-paying ones, leading to increasing wealth disparity. The Milken report presents a plan for creating widespread prosperity in the county while also addressing the needs of the region’s job creators and industries.

Location: Lafayette Library and Learning

Center, 3491 Mt. Diablo Blvd. Lafayette

Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program


Y Combinator: The Secret in This Incubator’s Sauce

Harj Taggar, Co-founder, Y CombinatorJoe Gebbia, CPO and Co-founder, AirbnbSteve Huffman, Co-founder, Hipmunk and RedditDrew Houston, Co-founder, DropboxJude Gomila, C-founder, Heyzap

Companies like Heyzap, Airbnb, Hipmunk, Reddit and Dropbox are all very different but have one mighty factor in common – they got their initial green and kibitz from Y Combinator. Heralded by Wired as the “most prestigious program for budding digital entrepreneurs,” YC rests on a formula of seed funding, peer networking and a three-month do-or-die boot camp. What is the secret to the Y Combinator sauce that turns out such wildly successful companies? Hear from Y Combinator Partner Harj Taggar and four of its most booming YC graduates to get a look behind the curtain of this Silicon Valley incubator icon.


Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program, 7:30 p.m. networking reception

Cost: Regular: $20 standard, $12 members, $7 students (with valid ID); Premium (includes re-

served seating and premium reception with the speakers. Limited to 65 guests): $60 standard, $45

members.

Public Trust and Public Land

Chris Kay, COO, The Trust for Public Land

Monday Night Philosophy looks at America’s increasing need for more and better urban parks. As urban areas be-come ever more densely populated, and urban populations ever more sedentary, both the health and economic benefits that vibrant park systems provide to local economies have too often been overlooked. Kay will discuss how local conservation communities have worked together to educate their neighbors and to inspire more leaders to commit public and private resources to enhance our parks.

MLF: HUMANITIES



Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE,

$7 students (with valid ID)


Why Free Trade Doesn’t Work

Ian Fletcher, Author, Free Trade Doesn’t Work; Senior Economist, Coalition for a Prosperous America

Free trade is one of the sacred cows in American economic policy. But as our $500 billion a year trade deficit continues, people are asking whether it deserves this status. The principles of economics that underlie free trade are controversial, and some of the most recent economic models question its soundness as policy. Fletcher will look at what economic history really says about free trade, and what some rational alternatives might be.

MLFS: BUSINESS & LEADERSHIP/

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception,

6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. book signing


Program Organizer: Norma Walden

Nora Volkow: Working to Eliminate Addiction

M.D., Director of the Na-tional Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health

Addiction affects 23.2 million Ameri-cans. The head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse believes that all addic-tions can be eliminated if the brain’s receptors can be controlled. She will explain her groundbreaking work and the amazing personal story that has al-lowed her, as the great-granddaughter of famed Russian dissident Leon Trotsky, to achieve her current prominence.


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m.

program

Prices: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE, $7stu-

dents (with valid ID)

T U E 1 5 | E a s t B a y

M O N 1 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 1 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T H U 1 7 | S a n F r a n c i s c o



John Mackey: A Whole-istic Approach to Capitalism

John Mackey, CEO, Co-founder, Whole Foods Market

Iconic CEO and co-founder Mackey is known for his all-natural approach to a mega chain of grocery stores, Whole Foods. He’s also taken the formula for conscious capitalism and corporate social responsibility to a whole new level, and other businesses are following suit. Find out more about the Whole Foods story.

Location: Schultz Cultural Hall, Oshman Fam-

ily JCC, 3921 Fabian Way, Palo Alto

Time: 6:30 p.m. check-in, 7 p.m. program,

8 p.m. book signing

Cost: $20 standard, $12 members, $7 students.

Premium (priority seating and copy of Mackey’s

book) $40 standard, $40 members.

John Mackey: A Whole-istic Approach to Capitalism

John Mackey, CEO, Co-founder, Whole Foods Market

Iconic CEO and co-founder Mackey is known for his all-natural approach to mega chain Whole Foods. His stores are, in part, credited with a boom in the healthy food movement. He’s also taken the formula for conscious capitalism and corporate social responsibility to a whole new level, and other businesses are following suit. Find out more about the Whole Foods story.


Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program,

7:30 p.m. reception and book signing

Cost: Regular: $20 standard, $12 members,

$7 students. Premium (book, reserved seat-

ing and premium reception. Limited to 65

guests): $50 standard, $35 members

Follow the Open Doors: How Boomers Are Creating Second Careers through Franchising

Gordon Dupries, President, FranNet of San Francisco

Dupries shares stories of boomers who have achieved second careers, security and suc-cess through franchising. He will address what is uniquely important to the boomer generation, what kind of person is right for self-employment, why franchising works for boomers, and what opportunities are most exciting now. He will discuss second incomes, semi-absentee ownership, sources for free business counseling, financing op-tions and access to free online assessment.

MLF: GROWNUPS


Time: 4:45 p.m. networking, 5:15 p.m. program



Also know: In assn. with San Francisco Village

Infectious Cures: Hijacking Viruses to Overcome Disease

Leor Weinberger, Ph.D.; Associate Investigator, Gladstone InstitutesShannon Bennett, Ph.D.; Associate Curator of Microbiology, California Acad-emy of Sciences (host)

Everywhere, viruses such as HIV com-pete with their hosts in an evolutionary arms race – building resistance to the latest therapies in order to maintain their deadly hold on our species. What if we could turn HIV on its head by hijacking the very virus that ravages the body, and transforming it into a cure?


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking, 6 p.m. program,

7 p.m. book signing


Also know: In partnership with the California

Academy of Sciences. In association with the

Gladstone Institutes.

Theater in the East Bay

Jonathan Moscone, Artistic Director, California Shakespeare TheaterTony Taccone, Artistic Director, The Berkeley Repertory Theatre

The artistic forces behind the success of the Bay Area theater scene join us to explore their life and work. Moscone, son of San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and a Yale-trained director, took charge of the California Shakespeare Theater in 2000 and turned around the once strug-gling troupe. And during Taccone’s tenure at the Berkeley Rep, the Tony Award-winning nonprofit has earned a reputation as an international leader in innovative theater and as an incubator of new plays.

Location: Lafayette Library and Learning

Center, 3491 Mt. Diablo Blvd. Lafayette

Time: 6 p.m. check-in, 6:30 p.m. program


W E D 2 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o W E D 2 3 | E a s t B a y T H U 2 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T U E 2 2 | S a n F r a n c i s c o W E D 2 3 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y

Humanities West Book Discussion: A Pepys Anthology

Join us to discuss the writings of Samuel Pepys, a Restoration-era London civil servant who worked to improve the Royal Navy and eventually became a member of Parliament. The diary he kept as a young man in the 1660s, published in 1825, has made him posthumously famous. Pepys’s diary gives vivid insight into his life and times and includes a first-hand account of the Great Fire of London. The discussion, led by Lynn Harris, will use the edition edited by Robert and Linnet Latham.

MLF: HUMANITIES





W E D 2 3 | S a n F r a n c i s c o


San Francisco Architecture Walking Tour

Explore San Francisco’s Financial District with historian Rick Evans. Hear about the famous architects who influenced the building of San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake. Discover hard-to-find rooftop gardens, Art Deco lobbies, unique open spaces and historic landmarks. This is a tour for locals, with hidden gems you can only find on foot! For those interested in socializing afterward, we will conclude the tour at a local watering hole.

Location: Lobby of Galleria Park Hotel, 191

Sutter St.

Time: 1:45 p.m. check-in, 2–4:30 p.m. tour


Also know: Tour operates rain or shine. Limit-

ed to 20 people. Participants must pre-register.

The tour covers less than one mile of walking

in the Financial District. Involves stairs.

Recent Acquisitions: Bay Area Museums Collect

Alexis Coe, Museums Blogger, SF WeeklySusan Goldstein, City Archivist of San Francisco Elizabeth Kathleen Mitchell, Burton and Deedee McMurtry Curator of Prints, Draw-ings, and Photographs, Cantor Arts Center at StanfordJulie M. Muñiz, Associate Curator of Crafts and Decorative Arts, Oakland Museum of CaliforniaForrest McGill, Ph.D.; Chief Curator and Wattis Curator of South and Southeast Asian Art, Asian Art Museum

Join Coe for an exciting discussion about the most important, often wondrous, some-times bizarre and occasionally downright vexing items that make up a museum’s special collections. She will be joined by a panel of curators from the Asian Art Museum, Stanford’s Cantor Center for the Arts, the Oakland Museum of California and the San Francisco History Center.

MLF: THE ARTS


Time: 5:30 p.m. networking reception, 6 p.m. program

Cost: $20 standard, $8 members, $7 students (with valid ID)

Program Organizer: Anne W. Smith

Jared Diamond

Professor of Geography, UCLA; Author, Guns, Germs, and Steel and The World Until Yesterday

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Diamond examines how Amazonian Indians, Inuit and other traditional societies have adapted and evolved for nearly 6 million years. He explains what we can still learn from these traditional societies regarding universal human problems like elder care, child rearing, physical fitness and conflict resolution.

Location: Schultz Cultural Hall, Oshman Fam-

ily JCC, 3921 Fabian Way, Palo Alto

Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program,

1 p.m. book signing

Cost: Regular: $20 standard, $12 members, $7

students. Premium (priority seating and copy

of new book) $45 standard, $45 members.

Christina Romer and Keith Hennessey: Bank of America/ Walter E. Hoadley Annual Economic Forecast

Keith Hennessey, Research Fellow, Hoover Institution; Di-rector, National Economic Council Under President George W. Bush; Member, Financial Crisis Inquiry CommissionChristina Romer, Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley; Immediate past Chair, President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers

As we come off an election year and face a series of new and ongoing challenges, don’t miss this lively discussion with two former top presidential economic advisors on where the U.S. and global economies are headed in 2013 and what should be done to put them – and keep them – on track.

Registration required by noon on January 23, 2013. MEMBERS-ONLY +1 paying guest

Location: Ballroom, Hotel Nikko, 222 Mason St.

Time: 11:45 a.m. luncheon, 12:30 p.m. program

Cost: Regular $85 standard, $65 members.

Table pricing: Before Dec. 31, 2012: $800 members; $1,100 standard; $2,500 patrons. After Dec.

31, 2012: $960 members; $1,320 standard; $3,000 patrons. To purchase tables, please contact Mary

Beth Cerjan in the Club’s Development department at (415) 869-5919.

Also know: Underwritten by Bank of America

T H U 2 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T H U 2 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

T H U 2 4 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y F R I 2 5 | S A N F R A N C I S C O

January 24–29


Clean Clothes

Casey Sheahan, CEO, PatagoniaChip Burgh, CEO, Levi’s

From organic cotton to recycled zippers, clothing brands are trying to establish their green credentials with consumers who care about the health of their bodies and the planet. What lies ahead for prod-uct labeling and making the $200 billion U.S. clothing industry more sustainable? Are efforts encouraging consumers to wash their clothes less a smart move or a retailer dodge? Do U.S. brands really monitor their factories in China? Join a conversation with leaders in the effort to run companies that make durable and responsible products.


Time: 11:30 a.m. check-in, noon program,

1 p.m. networking reception


Jack Gallant: Reverse-Engineering the Human Brain

Jack Gallant, Professor of Psychology, UC Berkeley

The human brain is the most sophisticated computer system known to man, capable of impressive feats under challenging natural conditions. Reverse-engineering the brain might enable us to design arti-ficial systems with the same capabilities. Gallant will discuss how this framework could form the basis of practical new brain-reading technologies and inform development of biologically inspired computer vision systems.

MLF: HEALTH & MEDICINE/

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY




Program Organizer: Daniel Trachewsky

Middle East Discussion Group

Make your voice heard in an enriching, provocative and fun discussion with fellow Club members as you weigh in on events shaping the face of the Middle East. Each month, the Middle East Member-Led Forum hosts an informal roundtable discussion on a topic frequently suggested by recent headlines. After a brief introduction, the floor will be open for discussion. All interested members are encouraged to attend. There will also be a brief plan-ning session.

MLF: MIDDLE EAST



Cost: FREE


Winning Retirement Strategies: How to Pay for Everyone Now Living Longer

David Kitaen, CLTCMike Welch, CRPC

Conventional wisdom holds that people should begin collecting Social Security retire-ment benefits as soon as possible, which is age 62. But the “silver tsunami” is here, and 10,000 baby boomers are turning 65 every day and are expected to live longer than any previous generation. Welch will advise those approaching retirement age about strategies for when to begin collecting Social Security benefits to have a significant positive impact. Kitaen will address new long-term care legislation and the long-term care insurance evolution and explain how these developments can help pay the care costs for this longer-living cohort of senior citizens.

MLF: GROWNUPS


Time: 4:45 p.m. networking reception, 5:15 p.m. program



Also know: In association with San Francisco Village

F R I 2 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o M O N 2 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

M O N 2 8 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T U E 2 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

PodcastingSubscribe to our podcasts! Receive

a new program recording each week. It’s free!

For more information, visit commonwealthclub.org/podcast


Young Saviors

Rosemary Davies, Graduate, Berkeley High School’s Green AcademyMike Haas, Founder, Alliance for Cli-mate Education (invited)

Can the next generation save us all? The Alliance for Climate Education has trained nearly 1.5 million high school students around the country on how to reduce their own carbon footprint and engage others to do the same. Davies was one of 40 high school youths from around the world who traveled to the Arctic in 2012 for a transformative experience learning about climate and culture. Come join a conversation about how youth can build a better future, starting now.


Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. program,

7 p.m. networking reception


2013 Silicon Valley Reads: One Book. One Community. Kick-Off Event

Brian Castner, Author, The Long Walk: A Story of War and the Life That FollowsSue Diaz, Author, Minefields of the Heart: A Mother’s Stories of a Son at WarIn conversation with Mike Cassidy, Columnist, San Jose Mercury News

This year’s selections include two memoirs that deal with the invisible wounds of war. The two authors – a soldier and a soldier’s mother – come together to share their per-sonal stories and discuss what happens when soldiers return home from war and must deal with the challenges of readjusting back to civilian life. Castner served three tours of duty in the Middle East and was commander of an explosive ordinance disposal unit in Iraq. Diaz has documented the emotional rollercoaster she experienced during her son’s deployment.

Location: Campbell Heritage Theatre, 1 W. Campbell Ave., Campbell

Time: 7 p.m. doors open, 7:30 p.m. program, 8:30 p.m. book signing

Cost: FREE

Also know: In assocation with the Santa Clara County Office of Education, Santa Clara County

Library and San Jose Public Library Foundation

Adventures in Cross-Cultural Etiquette: How to Avoid Faux Pas in Social and Business Situations

Syndi Seid, Founder, Advanced Etiquette

Come gain tips on how to feel confident meeting anyone from anywhere in the world – advice that can help you win friends, influence people and close deals. Seid is a world-leading expert on interna-tional business and social etiquette and protocol. She travels the world to present her unique learning experiences that offer her audiences new skills they can put into action immediately.

MLF: INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS




Program Organizer: Norma Walden

Solar Flares

Lynn Jurich, President and Co-founder, SunrunDanny Kennedy, President and Founder, SungevityAdditional panelists TBA

Through all the growing pains and political attacks, the U.S. solar industry is still moving ahead. Costs are down, new financing models are removing capital barriers for residential and commercial buyers, and sun energy is no longer just for hippies. What is the solar forecast for 2013? How will the trade spat with China impact the sector? The glut of cheap natural gas promises to undercut renewable energy, yet at the same time it can be a ready complement for when the sun is not shining and the wind isn’t blowing. Join us for a spin around the sun.

Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. program, 7:00 p.m. networking reception


Cost: $20 standard, $12 members, $7 students (with valid ID)

T U E 2 9 | S a n F r a n c i s c o W E D 3 0 | S i l i c o n V a l l e y

T H U 3 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T H U 3 1 | S a n F r a n c i s c o

January 29 – February 07


Leonard Susskind: The Theoretical Minimum – What You Need to Know to Start Doing Physics

Felix Bloch Professor in Theoretical Physics, Stanford University; Director, Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics

Ever wish you knew more about physics? Want to know how to think like a physicist? Here is your chance. Come listen to world-class physicist Susskind, a father of string theory, to discuss the Theoretical Mini-mum – an alternative to the conventional go-to-college method. Susskind will discuss what you need to know to start doing physics and provide a tool kit for amateur scientists to learn physics at their own pace.

MLF: SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY




Program Organizers: Chisako Ress and Earl Ruby

Driving Growth

Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense FundRhonda Zygocki, Vice President of Policy and Planning, Chevron

A flood of natural gas released by hydraulic fracturing is turning energy markets up-side down. How will that affect the way the country powers its economy and moves around people and goods? Many countries are investing in clean fuels and putting a price on carbon emissions. Will the United States also start to price fuels to include their full costs? How will that impact the economy? Join us for a broad conversation with leaders of one of the country’s biggest energy companies and one of the world’s largest environmental organizations.


Time: 5:30 p.m. check-in, 6 p.m. program, 7 p.m. networking reception

Cost: $20 standard, MEMBERS FREE, $7 students (with valid ID)

Nob Hill Walking Tour

Nob Hill became an exclusive enclave of rich and famous West Coasters who built large mansions in the neighbor-hood. Residents included prominent ty-coons such as Leland Stanford and other members of the Big Four. Highlights include the history of four landmark hotels: The Fairmont, Mark Hopkins, Stanford Court and the Huntington. Visit the city’s largest house of worship, Grace Cathedral, and discover archi-tectural tidbits and anecdotes about the railroad barons and silver kings. Enjoy a true San Francisco experience of elegance, urbanity, scandals and fabulous views.

Location: Meet in front of the Stanford

Court Hotel, 905 California St.

Time: 1:45 p.m. check-in, 2–4:30 p.m. tour


Also know: Limited to 20. Must preregister.

Tour operates rain or shine.

M O N 0 4 | S a n F r a n c i s c o T U E 0 5 | S a n F r a n c i s c o


Join The ClubMembership is open to all. Support

for The Club’s work is derived principally from membership dues.

For more information, visitcommonwealthclub.org/join

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIPPublication title: The Commonwealth. ISSN: 0010-3349. Filing date: October 3, 2011. Issue Frequency: Bimonthly. Number of issues published annually: 6. Annual subscrip-tion price: $34. Location of office of publication: 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Location of office of general business office: 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Name and address of Publisher: The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Editor: John Zipperer, Com-monwealth Club, 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Managing Editor: Sonya Abrams, Commonwealth Club, 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Owner: The Commonwealth Club of California, 595 Market St., 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA 94105. Known bondhold-ers, mortgages and other security holders: None.EXTENT AND NATURE OF CIRCULATIONAvg. No. Copies Each Issue During Preceding 12 Months: Total number of copies (net press run): 11,437. Paid/Requested Outside County Subscriptions: 10,762. Paid In-County Subscriptions: None. Sales Through Dealers & Carriers: None. Other Classes Mailed Through USPS: None. Total Paid Distribution: 10,762. Free Distribution by Mail: None. Free or Nominal Rate Distribution Outside the Mail: 575. Total Free or Nominal Rate Distribution: 575. Total Distribution: 11,337. Copies not Distributed: 100. Total: 11,437. Percent paid and/or requested circulation: 94.93 percent. No. Copies Single Issue Published Nearest to Filing Date (October/November 2011): Total number of copies (net press run): 11,360. Paid/Requested Outside County Subscriptions: 10,760. Paid In-County Subscrip-tions: None. Sales Through Dealers and Carriers: None. Other Classes Mailed Through USPS: None. Total Paid Distribution: 10,760. Free Distribution by Mail: None Free or Nominal Rate Distribution Outside the Mail: 500. Total Free or Nominal Rate Distribution: 500. Total Distribu-tion: 11,260. Copies not Distributed: 100. Total: 11,360. Percent paid and/or requested circulation: 95.56 percent. I certify that the statements above are correct and complete. John Zipperer, Vice President of Media & Editorial, October 3, 2011.


Subscribe to our podcasts on iTunesThe Commonwealth Club: Putting you face to face with today’s thought leaders

Don’t miss any important speeches


AMBASSADOR

SEYED MOUSAVIAN

Visiting Research Scholar,

Woodrow Wilson School of Public

and International Affairs, Princeton

University; Author, The Iranian

Nuclear Crisis: A Memoir

PHILIP YUN Executive Director,

Ploughshares Fund — Moderator

Mos

que

phot

o by

Xav

ier A

llard

/ F

lickr

, mis

sile

pho

to b

y m

egoi

zzy

/ Fl

ickr

A s the head of the Foreign Rela-tions Committee of the Iran Na-tional Supreme Security Council from 1997 to 2005, I am fully

convinced that Iran is not after the nuclear bomb. The elimination of weapons of mass destruction and the establishment of a zone free from such weapons in the Middle East are important elements of Iran’s national security doctrine.

Nevertheless, Iran’s nuclear program has remained the number one political dilemma of the United States for the past decade. Nine years of negotiations between Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany – known as P5+1 – on the nuclear issue have failed and will likely continue to do so as long as hostilities between Iran and the United States persist.

With a dismal track record, the interna-tional community and Iran have once again returned to the negotiations table over Iran’s nuclear program. In the past month they

have held talks in Istanbul, Moscow and Baghdad that have created a momentum with very little in substance while the United States has already begun an economic, po-litical, cyber and covert war with Iran.

It’s conceivable that the U.S.-Iran rela-tions will reach a turning point on the nuclear issue within a year. Without sub-stantial progress on the diplomatic front, the chance for a unilateral Israeli or a joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign aimed at de-stroying the uranium nuclear program could

become a probability. It’s therefore critically important for a better understanding of the Iran-U.S. dispute on nuclear and weapons of mass destruction in an effort to reorient the current diplomatic trajectory.

In reality, Iran’s nuclear program is a sub-sidiary issue of relations [between Iran and the West], specifically, Iran-U.S. relations; while Iran-U.S. relations also is a subsidiary issue of Iran-Israel issues – conflict between Iran and Israel.

On the nuclear issue, talks between Iran and Germany, France and the United Kingdom in 2003-2005 failed because the United States was not on board. Agreements between Iran, Turkey and Brazil in May 2010 failed because of the U.S. objection. The Russian step-by-step proposal in the summer of 2011 failed because the United States declined. Even the recent talks in Istanbul, Baghdad and Moscow failed because the United States was not ready to compromise on two major issues in response to Iran’s overtures: first, recognizing the

IRAN BOMBAND

THE

A former Iranian nuclear negotiation insider offers a plan to encourage both sides to strike a deal. Can the two long-time adversaries strike a grand bargain? Excerpt from “Iran’s Nuclear Dossier: Threat or Opportunity for U.S. Relations?,” September 5, 2012.

“With a dismal track record, the

international community

and Iran have returned to

the negotiations table.”


legitimate rights of Iran under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weap-ons (NPT), and second, gradually lifting the sanctions.

That’s why I always have advocated a realistic dual-track policy. First, a bilateral talk between Iran and the United States on a comprehensive package, including all bilateral, regional and international is-sues – a direct talk between Iran and the United States. The second track [would be a discussion] between Iran and the P5+1 on the nuclear issue. These are the two tracks I believe would need to be held in parallel, otherwise Iran’s talk with the P5+1 would not work.

Iran-U.S. talks

Despite harsh rhetoric, President Mah-moud Ahmadinejad has reached out

to the United States more than all previous Iranian presidents since 1979, because he has had a freer hand toward rapprochement with the United States. During this time he has written letters to both presidents

– George W. Bush and Barack Obama, including congratulating the latter on his electoral victory in 2008 – while his U.S. counterparts have never responded to him.

Right after the Iranian presidential election in 2009, Ahmadinejad, sent a

message to Barack Obama – via Mohamed ElBaradei, the former head of the Inter-national Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – that he wanted direct talks with the United States and was ready to cooperate and help the United States in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

President Barak Obama also made some unprecedented diplomatic gestures toward Iran, raising hopes that the animosities that have plagued U.S.-Iran relations for the past three decades might be overcome, and rapprochement achieved. President Obama’s call for engagement without precondition or threat was a first for any American president since Iran’s 1979 revolution. Hence, Obama’s initial gesture was met with positive signs from Tehran, and Obama sent two letters to Iran’s Su-preme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who responded.

Despite these unprecedented efforts by both presidents, engagement has failed thus far and will continue to fail as long as both sides undermine it with [another kind of ] dual-track approach. Official statements, and now diplomatic papers released by WikiLeaks, show that since early on in Obama’s tenure, even as the administration spoke of rapprochement, the United States continued the Bush administration’s policy of increasing pressures on Iran through new

“Engagement has failed

thus far and will continue

to fail as long as both sides undermine it with a dual-track appraoch.”

YUN: Tell us the motivation of why it was important to write this book.MOUSAVIAN: In Iran they know I have been advocating for 30 years good rela-tions between Iran and the United States – Iran and the West. The problem is the lack of understanding on both sides. The

second major problem is mistrust, but mistrust is mutual. Americans and

Western countries need to understand why Iran cannot trust the West; they

have their own legitimate reasons. Likewise, Americans and Western countries cannot trust Iran, and the Iranians also should understand why. Being here, I thought maybe the most

important job that I can do is to write a book on the nuclear issue – as far as the nuclear

issue is the Issue Number One for the U.S. and international community – to present the perspective and point of view of the Iranians for American public opinion and politicians, to facilitate a possible peaceful

solution for the Iranian nuclear crisis.YUN: What do you say to those Americans who argue that a deal with Iran is really useless and that the Iranian government cannot be trusted? MOUSAVIAN: A lot of people say there is no use to trust Iran, and in Iran also they say there is no use to trust the United States. But my point is this: Iranians have approached the United States during all adminis-trations, for a comprehensive package, a comprehensive deal. The three top nuclear negotiators since 2003 have sent the message to the White House that we want a grand bargain with you; we want a comprehensive deal and relationship with you, including the nuclear. But the United States has declined. The United States has never proposed to Iran a comprehensive package. My point is this: first try, at least once, after 33 years, a comprehensive package – including terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, the peace process, Israel, human rights and democracy – all these major points for the United States. Iranians also have their own shopping list, and the United States should be prepared to address Iranian concerns. If it fails, then come to your public

Question & Answer Sessionwith Philip Yun, executive director of Ploughshares Fund



sanctions, hinting at a readiness to take mili-tary action, and supporting covert sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program. During Obama’s engagement policy, the United States has taken the toughest policies to date against Iran – the most far-reaching sanctions and legislation in the history of Iran-U.S. rela-tions – by securing four United Nations Security Counsel-sanctioned resolutions, specifically Resolution 1929, [which in-cludes] the most comprehensive sanctions the international community has ever ap-proved against Iran; orders from the U.S. Navy for all units under its command to re-label the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf; sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program through spying and covert actions; and orchestrating international pressure on Iran to impose additional unilateral sanctions beyond the role of the current U.N. sanctions.

U.S.-led sanctions against the Iranian oil industry are costing $133 million a day. Following the [U.S.] congressional election in [2010], the director of a Tel

Aviv-based Middle East economic and political analysis company called on incoming Republican members of Con-gress to support President Obama’s Iran policy because, as he said,“Obama has done more to undermine Iran over the

course of two years than George W. Bush did in eight years.”

In response to the U.S. dual-track poli-cy, an Iranian leader noted, “They say that they have extended their arm toward Iran. What kind of hand? If it’s an iron hand concealed with a velvet glove, then it will

not make any good sense.” These actions have made the Iranian side believe that Obama’s talk of engagement with Iran is just talk and have also raised the cost for the Iranian side to approach the United States for rapprochement.

Iran, meanwhile, has pursued a dual track of its own. Ahmadinejad has sabotaged his engagement policy with inflammatory rheto-ric that has antagonized the United States and its allies – questioning the Holocaust, suggesting that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 were a U.S. government conspiracy and that Israel must be erased from the page of history. Such rhetoric has also increased the political cost tremendously for American politicians if they were seen to be soft on Iran. This approach – the dual track – has been counterproductive and has left the impression in Tehran and Washington that the other side has no real interest and intention in thawing relations. Therefore, due to the dual-track approach, both sides are confused about whether engagement is, for the other side, a strategy or a tactic.

“[Iran’s negotiators] have

sent the message to the

White House that we want

a grand bargain with you.”

and say that it doesn’t work to try, because the United States has never tried.YUN: In a recent op-ed, you gave 20 reasons not to at-tack Iran and you were quite explicit in calling a military strike idiotic. Why is this the case, and do you fear that a strike can happen within the next six months or so?MOUSAVIAN: I don’t want to see the United States as a warfare country. I really don’t know what the United States gained by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. What was the excuse? Weapons of mass destruction – it was a lie. Who did it? I don’t know. The war on terror against Al Qaeda and the Taliban – after 10 years now, the United States is doing its best to negotiate with the Taliban how to manage Afghanistan. If that was your objective, you could have done it at the beginning. [Laughter and applause.]

This is exactly the reason I see that this would be a disaster for the United States, for Iran and for Israel to go to the fourth war against Muslim countries in the region. First of all, if the target is the Iranian nuclear program, it may delay, but you will never be able to remove Iranian nuclear technology because this is homemade. They have technology, they have knowl-edge, and if you destroy one facility, they would build tomorrow another facility.

This is not the way, and I think the main loser would be Israel. Already Israel is isolated worldwide,

and another war pushed by Israel would create more hatred toward Israel. America and Israel are doing their best to introduce Iran as Threat Number One in the Middle East. I understand why. But a poll by the Arab Institute covering 86 percent of Arab countries in 2011 shows that 94 percent of Arab people consider the United States and Israel as the number one threat, only 6 percent consider Iran.YUN: For those people here in the audience and those listening on television and radio, what do you want them to take away from your remarks here this evening?MOUSAVIAN : To end hostilities. Thirty-three years of hostil-ity between Iran and the U.S. is enough. Enough is enough. Do we want to con-tinue hostilities for another 33 ye a r s ? It doesn’t work.

Question & Answer Sessionwith Philip Yun, executive director of Ploughshares Fund



agree on a face-saving solution where Iran would adhere to all international nuclear conventions and treaties at the maximum level of transparency defined by the IAEA, to ensure the peaceful nature of Iranian nuclear activities and also to assure the internation-

al community that the Iranian nuclear p rogram wou ld remain forever not only peaceful, [but that] Iran would be committed forever to be a non-nuclear weapon state.

In reward, the United States would also agree to recog-nize the legitimate rights of Iran under

NPT for enrichment and lift the sanctions gradually. This framework can be realized in future nuclear talks through a step-by-step plan based on NPT, mutual confidence building, and appropriate reciprocity as agreed in the Istanbul talks in April 2012.

And my last point: To ensure a long-term sustainable solution, the United Nations Security Council, in cooperation with regional powers, should proactively pursue the elimination of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. This is the best, most sustainable and durable solution for all Middle Eastern countries.

A way out

To revive relations between Washington and Tehran, the following principles

can facilitate a constructive engagement policy. [These are] the measures which I propose that Tehran and Washington should take, at least during engagement policy and negotiations: First, dual-track ap-proaches are ceased for the period of negotiations; sec-ond, the language of threats and harsh rhetoric is set aside; third, hostile ac-tions, sanctions and other forms of co-ercive pressures are put on hold. To agree on a comprehensive agenda – this is what Iran wants – including all bilateral, regional and international issues demonstrating the entire game plan, but implemented through a phased-approach plan – this is what the United States wants – this is the mixed approach, a comprehensive package implemented in a phased approach; this is the way out.

Such a skillful approach will only be pos-sible if and when Tehran and Washington can isolate internal and external spoilers. The framework on the nuclear dilemma is that on the nuclear issue, Iran and P5+1 can

Phot

o co

urte

sy o

f Nam

e na

me

Club Leadership

Karin Helene Bauer

Hon. William Bradley

Dennise M. CarterRolando Esteverena

Steven Falk

Amy Gershoni

Heather M. Kitchen

Amy McCombs

Hon. William J. Perry

Ray Taliaferro

Nancy Thompson

ADVISORY BOARD

Dan AshleyMassey J. BambaraRalph Baxter Dr. Mary G. F. Bitterman**

Hon. Shirley Temple Black*John L. BolandJ. Dennis Bonney*Michael R. Bracco Helen A. BurtJohn Busterud*Michael CarrHon. Ming Chin*Dennis A. Collins Mary B. Cranston**Dr. Kerry P. CurtisDr. Jaleh DaieEvelyn S. Dilsaver Joseph I. Epstein*Jeffrey A. FarberDr. Joseph R. Fink*Carol A. Fleming, Ph.D.Leslie Saul GarvinWilliam German*Dr. Charles GeschkeRose Guilbault**Jacquelyn HadleyEdie G. HeilmanHon. James C. HormelMary HussClaude B. Hutchison Jr.*Dr. Julius Krevans*John LeckroneDon J. McGrath

Frank C. MeerkampRichard Otter*Joseph Perrelli*Hon. Barbara PivnickaHon. Richard PivnickaFr. Stephen A. Privett, S.J.Dr. Mohammad H. QayoumiToni Rembe*Victor A. Revenko*Skip Rhodes*Dr. Condoleezza RiceBrian D. RileyFred A. RodriguezRenée Rubin*Robert Saldich**Joseph W. SaundersGeorge M. ScaliseLata Krishnan ShahConnie Shapiro*Charlotte Mailliard ShultzGeorge D. Smith, Jr.James StrotherHon. Tad Taube Charles TraversRobert WalkerDaniel J. Warmenhoven Nelson Weller*Judith Wilbur* Dr. Colleen B. WilcoxDennis Wu*Russell M. YarrowJed York

* Past President ** Past Chair

BOARD OF GOVERNORS

Board Chair Maryles Casto

Vice Chair Anna W.M. Mok

Secretary William F. AdamsTreasurer Lee J. Dutra

President and CEO Dr. Gloria C. Duffy

OFFICERS OF THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB OF CALIFORNIA

Seyed Mousavian (left) told Ploushares Fund’s Philip Yun he thinks there is a peaceful resolution possible.

“Thirty-three years of hostility between

Iran and the United States

is enough. Do we want

to continue hostilities for

another 33 years?”


In 2010 and 2011, The Commonwealth Club organized a special series of programs exploring the burgeoning field of social entrepreneurship. Directing the series was Ruth Shapiro, the Club’s social entrepreneur in residence and

the principal of consulting firm Keyi Strategies. She used her background in the subject matter to bring together leading voices in the world of social entrepreneurship, and now she’s put those voices down on paper to reach an even bigger audience.

On the occasion of the publication by Stanford Univer-sity Press of The Real Problem Solvers: Social Entrepreneurs in America (see commonwealthclub.org/problemsolvers), Common-wealth magazine editor John Zipperer spoke with Dr. Shapiro about her project. The book will be officially launched at The Commonwealth Club on December 11 (see page 34), and proceeds from its sale will benefit the Club.

ZIPPERER: What was the genesis of your Social Entrepreneurship in America series at The Commonwealth Club?SHAPIRO: I had been living abroad; when I came back to the Bay Area, I started speaking about being a social entrepreneur. It became clear that, though the term is used, it’s not always used to mean the same things. I thought if I was unclear about the different uses and definition of the term, likely others would be as well.

So I approached [Common-wealth Club President] Gloria

Duffy and asked her if she would be interested in do-ing a whole series on this subject at the Club. She agreed. I was very keen not only to focus on the entre-

preneurs themselves but on different individuals, orga-nizations and perspectives that comprise the social

entrepreneurship ecosystem.ZIPPERER: Tell us about the book, The Real Problem

Solvers. Whom do you hope to reach with it?

SHAPIRO: This book was written as a thoughtful, substantive intro-

duction to the notion of social entrepreneurship. I wanted to

include different voices from the ecosystem around it, so it includes people on the front lines, solving social problems in en-trepreneurial ways; it

includes funders who are providing the financial support for them to do their work; it includes investors who are thinking about looking at social applications with an in-vestment model in mind; and it includes thinkers who are thinking about what is the meaning of these changes that are being brought about and what are the implica-tions for addressing changes going forward. And lastly it includes people I consider champions; it includes Muhammad Yunus, who first created an enterprise providing microloans and credit for the poor in Bangladesh, a concept that has grown into a global phenomenon; and Bill Drayton, who coined the term social entrepreneur to mean the person who was taking the passion and rigor of an entrepreneur and applying it to a social problem.

These are among the key voices from the field in one volume. By reading this book, you get a very good understanding of the breadth and depth of the term social entrepreneurship and how people are applying it.ZIPPERER: How did you get interested in social entrepreneurship?SHAPIRO: I thought of myself as a social entrepreneur because I had created an organization in Asia that had never existed before and was a new way to address societal issues. When I came back to California and I described myself as a social entrepreneur, I met with a fair amount of resistance to the notion that I was one. So I thought, If not me, then who? That’s what I sought to answer through this exercise.ZIPPERER: How does America fare compared to other countries in terms of social entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurship?SHAPIRO: The notion of social entrepreneurship has really caught on in the Bay Area particularly, and I think it’s because of Silicon Val-ley. First, it’s because this is a part of the United States that embraces risk and has an appetite and a structure for supporting people with new ideas and helping them to succeed. Second, the ethos of Silicon Valley is to look for a new technology or an intervention that brings about paradigm-shifting change. Many social entrepreneurs are try-ing to scale their ideas and bring about systemic change.

There’s an interesting correlation between developing a new product in Silicon Valley and developing a new solution in the social space. It correlates – not 100 percent, but well enough that a lot of the energy and skills and thinking that are evolving in Silicon Valley can be applied to the social entrepreneurship space as well.

Phot

o by

Son

ya A

bram

s

THE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEUR REVOLUTIONQ&A with DR. RUTH A. SHAPIRO Author, The Real Problem Solvers: Social Entrepreneurs in America

SOCIAL ENTREPRENEUR:

The person taking

the passion and rigor

of an entrepreneur

and applying it to a

social problem.


The first woman to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court discusses her past, the courts and why the younger generations need to become more politically engaged. Excerpt from “Justice Sandra Day O’Connor,” October 22, 2012.

SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR Former Justice, U.S. Supreme Court

in conversation with DR. MARY BITTERMAN President, Bernard Osher Foundation; Past Chair, Commonwealth Club’s Board of Governors

Photo by Ed Ritger

O’CONNOR: There’s nothing like ranch life to toughen you up a little bit. I mean, if it’s a remote ranch like ours [when I was growing up] – we were 35 miles from the nearest small town. If something went wrong, there was no Yellow Pages and no phone to call, so you had to do it yourself.

BITTERMAN: You graduated third in your class at Stanford Law School. But in trying to get a legal position, it was very difficult, and you ended up in a secretary position. Share that. O’CONNOR: I was offered a secretary position, but I didn’t take it. I met my

husband-to-be in law school and he was a year behind me. I graduated, and he still had a year to go. We decided to get married out on the Lazy B Ranch. It was a difficult time, because we both liked to eat. That meant one of us had to work and he was still in school, so that one was me.

CITIZENSANDRA


Photo by Ed Ritger

I was out of law school, and my class-mates from Stanford all had well-paid jobs in the big firms up here in San Francisco, earning their livings as distinguished law-yers. There were at least 40 names of law firms and phone numbers on a bulletin board saying “Stanford law graduates, call us. We’d like to talk to you about possible employment.” I called every telephone number on the bulletin board. Not a single one of them would give me an interview. They wouldn’t even talk to me.

I said, “Why won’t you talk to me?” They said, “Well, we don’t hire women

lawyers.” “Why not?”“We just never have and our clients

wouldn’t stand for it.”

I heard that the county attorney in San Mateo County once had a woman lawyer on the staff. I thought, “Well, if he’s had one, he can have another.” I wrote him and made an appointment to go see him. He was very nice. To this day the voters elect the county attorney in the counties. Elected officials are always gladhanders: They’re always glad to meet you. He welcomed me and we sat and talked and he looked at my resume, but he said, “I did have a woman here one time on the staff. She did a good job. I’d be happy to have another, and you’ve got a good resume, but I get my money from the county Board of Supervisors. I’m not funded to hire another deputy. But let me show you around the offices since you’re here.”

He walked me around the office and, sure enough, every office was occupied. He said, “Thanks so much for coming around.” I explained to him that it was very important to me to get a job. I said, “I know you don’t have any money. I’ll be willing to work for you for nothing if you will let me work in your office until such time as the supervisors give you a little more money. I met your secretary. She’s very nice and there is room in her office to put a second desk, if she wouldn’t object.”

That was my first job out of law school. No pay and I put my desk in with the secretary. I loved my job. I got to answer vari-ous questions that were posed by the district attorney, his deputies and the different agencies of the county. I loved what I was doing. It was all right, except the pay was a little slender.BITTERMAN: As we move forward, give everyone a sense of meeting with President Reagan, and the stir the information about your appointment caused on the Lazy B, in Arizona and the nation.O’CONNOR: It was a shock that President Reagan ended up hiring a cowgirl from Arizona to go on the U.S. Supreme Court as the first woman to serve. He sent a couple of people out to Arizona to check my record. I held various public offices in Arizona and there was plenty about me in old newspapers. They had to check it all out. No Google at that time.

They spent time checking me out. Then I met the people who were sent out to check on me. It wasn’t too long afterward that I was sitting in my chambers at the court of appeals in Arizona, and the phone rang. It was the White House calling. President Reagan said, “Sandra?”

“Yes, Mr. President.”“I’d like to announce your nomination

for the U.S. Supreme Court. Is that all right with you?”

I didn’t know what to say to that. “Yes, Mr. President.” I had to go home that af-ternoon and tell my husband. “You won’t believe the phone call I had today.” It certainly affected his life more than mine.

I think what interested Ronald Reagan was my life as a cowgirl. He loved to ride horses. He kept horses all of his life. Even in the White House he kept a couple of horses down on Rock Creek Park where the park rangers keep their horses. He loved ranch life and loved horseback riding. I think that’s what he liked about me. I don’t know if it was my legal ability. BITTERMAN: If we look now at the bench, three of the justices are women.O’CONNOR: It’s incredible. I go in the courtroom today and look up and

see three women. It’s astounding to me. It took [many] years to get one on the bench, so it’s pretty amazing.B I T T E R M A N : Can you ever imag-ine that the court could be predomi-nantly women?O’CONNOR: Of

course I can! They like to work hard. They’re used to it.BITTERMAN: Your quarter century on the bench saw you as a proponent of clear thinking, civility, compromise when it was essential, and as David Gergen in a recent interview with you put it, “the sensible center.” How people yearn and lust for a sensible center these days. Yours was often the determining vote in a 5-to-4 decision. I know that you’re not allowed to opine on any matters currently before the Court – and many people also want to know if you’d like to predict the out-come of the presidential election, which

“My first job out of law

school: No pay, and I

put my desk in with the

secretary. It was all right,

except the pay was slender.”


occurred to me you may want to pass on. Certainly people are, in many cases, familiar with your majority opinions. I’m wondering if you might comment on the importance of the dissent, and maybe speak to one of your dissenting opinions you authored, in Kelo v. City of New London in 2005. O’CONNOR: On the Supreme Court, of course, every case the court accepts for decision that is orally argued at the court results in a written opinion, or several, at the time that the decision is released so that the public can see them.

In some of the cases, a fairly high per-centage, the court is not unanimous. In the last term, something in the neighborhood of 30 percent had dissenting opinions.

When there are separate opinions, you will have an opinion for the majority, and you can have separate writing by other justices. There will be a dissenting opinion and sometimes all of the justices will join the dissent, though it could be you’ll have a single dissent and separate opinions. Not every justice writes in every case. If you can join a circulating majority opinion, you don’t have to say anything else. You can join a circulating dissenting opinion. But for some reason, if you want to add something to the majority side, you can ask for the writer to include it. If the writer does not, you may want to write separately. You can join a dissenting opinion, or you can write your own dissenting opinion, or a concurring opinion.

Much of the justices’ time is spent writ-ing opinions. The work of the court is then expressing these written opinions. It’s very interesting to follow them if it’s an issue you care about. It makes for very good reading. I hope all of you, at least on occasion, take advantage of the opportunity to look at and read these opinions in a given case that you’re interested in. BITTERMAN: Would you speak to the goals you would hope to be accomplished by iCivics.org?O’CONNOR: I’ve been concerned for some time about how not enough people in our country are registering to vote when they can. About how not enough of those who are registered to vote do vote and make their voices known in our country. It

1 2

1 Sandra Day O’Connor being sworn in by Chief Justice Warren Burger while her husband John O’Connor looks on, Sept. 25, 1981. 2 President Reagan with Justice O’Connor, July 15, 1981. 3 Charlotte Mailliard Shultz, O’Connor, Glo-ria Duffy, and Mary Bitterman. 4 Only four women have served on the Supreme Court of the United States. From left to right: Justice Sandra Day O’Connor (Ret.), Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Justice Elena Kagan in the Justices’ Conference Room, prior to Jus-tice Kagan’s Investiture Ceremony on October 1, 2010. 5 At the Club, O’Connor stressed the need for young people to become politically engaged. 6 A sold-out crowd, including 200 students, came to see Justice O’Connor.

3 4

5 6 Phot

os: 1

. cou

rtes

y U

.S. N

atio

nal A

rchi

ves;

2. c

ourt

esy

Whi

te H

ouse

Pho

togr

aphi

c O

ffice

; 4. b

y St

eve

Bett

eway

; 3., 5

., 6. b

y Ed

Ritg

er


seemed to me that we were falling down on educating people on how our government works and how every one of us is part of it.

The framers of our Constitution did a pretty darn good job when they wrote our Constitution and developed a system of government with three branches. We owe them enormous thanks; but to make it work, each of us has to participate in our [own] way. That means that when we’re eli-gible to vote, we need to register to vote, we need to cast that vote and we need to care about what happens in our governmental entities: our city, our county, our state and our national government. That’s how we participate, and it really does matter. I hope that every young person here is planning on being a participating citizen the minute you’re eligible. BITTERMAN: In one of your recent in-terviews, you were mentioning people who are preparing themselves for citizenship tests. So many people look at the materials and say, “My goodness, I wouldn’t be able to answer this.”O’CONNOR: If you’ve come here from Mexico or France and you want to become a citizen, you have to take a citizenship exam and it’s hard. They ask terribly hard questions. If you haven’t studied up a lot, you couldn’t pass that test. It’s amazing how much you have to be able to answer to become a citizen. But if you just have been born here, gone to school here, you’re already a citizen, you don’t have to know much at all. It’s just amazing. BITTERMAN: What do you consider your most difficult decision during your tenure in the court?O’CONNOR: Do you remember Bush v. Gore? That was pretty hard.BITTERMAN: A lot of these questions are from people in law school. Any tips for them?O’CONNOR: Study hard. Don’t think it’s just going to come. And you’re not going to learn everything you need to know just by going to class, but you better go to class. Do the reading that you’re supposed to read. Become a part of how our nation functions. I thought law school was challenging, but it also opened my eyes. All of a sudden I started learning why certain things are the way they are. It’s because of legal decisions and legal action taken by our legislative branches that instruct us in what we can

BITTERMAN: One student says the class is studying judicial activism and judicial restraint. What is your opinion on this?O’CONNOR: It seems to me that at a Supreme Court level, whether it’s a state supreme court or the U.S. Supreme Court, the decision made by that court is going to be the governing principle [going] forward in that particular legal issue. You want to be very careful about not reaching out too broadly. In my opinion, all these decisions should be written to solve the issue that’s actually before the court, and not try to write some sweeping principles of law that are going to decide all kinds of things in the future that aren’t before you at that time. I think it’s better for judges at the appellate level to write narrower opinions that deal with the specific issue in the case and not make broad rules that you don’t know how they will affect us in the future. I think it’s best to write narrowly.BITTERMAN: What about your views on elected versus the appointment of judges?O’CONNOR: Many of our states elect their state judges, rather than have them appointed. When the framers of our Con-stitution developed our system, all federal judges are nominated by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Senate has to approve that selection by the president. That’s a good system for judges in my opinion. It has served our country well through the years.

Many states don’t follow that example. They have popular election of all their state judges. That means that candidates run and they need campaign contributions to pay for their ads and their signs. Who contributes money to them? It’s the lawyers that are most likely to appear before them in court. What kind of a system is that? You’ve got some attorney that you know full well is going to be back before that judge representing different clients. He wants to be in the judge’s good graces, so he gives him a big campaign contribution. That is not the system we should have.

California still elects some of its judges. You shouldn’t do that. You should change that. A number of our states do it for their Supreme Court all the way down. It’s really shocking to me that, after all these years, we still have so many elected judges. That’s not good. I’ve spent some time in my retire-ment years talking about this problem and

and can’t do. It’s just fascinating to go to law school and all of a sudden learn how we got where we are and why it’s like it is. That’s a great privilege to go to law school. BITTERMAN: Do Supreme Court justices ever regret decisions they’ve made? If so, what can they do about it?O’CONNOR: If you’re a person that likes to look back and say, “Oh my gosh, did I do the right thing last weekend when I went out instead of staying home and studying?” If you’re that kind of person and you’re on an appellate court, maybe you’re going to look back at opinions you wrote and ask yourself, “Did I do the right thing?” I’m not that kind of a person. I put my effort in at the front end. If I have a decision to make, I find out everything I can, pro and con, make the decision and move on. I don’t go back later

and say, “Oh my gosh, do you think I was right?” But if you do, there isn’t a lot you can do about it if you’re on the Supreme Court. The decision will have been made. Maybe you can stay on the court long enough that some aspect of it would come up again sometime and you can say, “Oh, we ought to take that [case] and change that decision that was wrong.” I’ve had that happen, but that wasn’t the game I played.BITTERMAN: As the first woman on the high court, did you encounter any awk-wardness on the part of your colleagues?O’CONNOR: No. There are nine members on the court. It’s possible that the court can divide rather evenly among the nine. At the time I was nominated, they were finding that they were divided on issues coming to the court. The members were glad to get a ninth justice, male or female. They were welcoming. We got along fine. I felt no resentment at all among any of my colleagues that I was there and I was a woman. Of course, we didn’t have a women’s restroom back on the floor where the justices were. That created a problem.

“I hope that every young

person here is planning on

being a participating citizen

the minute you’re eligible.”


writing a little bit about it. I feel strongly about it. I don’t think that’s a good system. BITTERMAN: Do Supreme Court jus-tices, given their political or party leanings, influence the outcome of cases that come before the court? O’CONNOR: I’m sure it does at some level. If you happen to be someone who believes strongly, for example, in state rights and that more responsibility should be at the state level, and you have a decision to make that involves looking at some state law that the petitioning party before you in the court says is beyond the power of the state, you might be more sympathetic to the defense. That’s understandable. There are some issues where you may have written in other decisions about your understanding of some particular provision. Then it comes up in a later case; probably you’re going to look back at what you already said before in some other context and be affected by that. BITTERMAN: You had a long and won-derful marriage. How did your husband, who was trained as a lawyer as well, deal with your extraordinary prominence and success?O’CONNOR: He was just wonderful about it. I ask myself that question. How

works all the way through high school. It even works for adults if you’re a dum-dum, so get on it.

I’ve kept it free; it costs the schools noth-ing to use it. The young people learn a lot by playing the games and they enjoy it. I want you, as parents and grandparents, to make sure that your children’s schools know about iCivics.org. BITTERMAN: That’s not a request. It’s an instruction.O’CONNOR: That’s a court order.BITTERMAN: You’ve been so influential in your career, opening up tremendous doors of opportunity. Who has had the greatest influence on you?O’CONNOR: I just respected my parents so much. They were fabulous. I think that had to be it. They were super. They lived on a remote ranch, and who would have ever thought that their daughter would be the first woman member of the Supreme Court?

They came back for the swearing in, and by that time my mother was suffering from Alzheimer’s. She didn’t know who was who. On the day of the swearing in, she met President Reagan and she said, “I think I’ve seen you some place before.” So I said, “That’s right,” and I tried to push her on. It was a great event for them. It meant that everyone they’d ever known their whole lives then wrote them a let-ter and said how interesting that their daughter went on to court. It brought a lot of mail and contact to them, and with the isolated lives that they lived it was nice for them. BITTERMAN: When people are ap-pointed to positions for life, sometimes the question is raised, should positions be appointed for life, or should there be a limited term? Do you have thoughts on that in the high court?O’CONNOR: The framers of the Constitu-tion didn’t set a term limit, and it’s worked out pretty well so far. I thought it was time for me to step down and I did, but I wasn’t required to do it. BITTERMAN: The people you sat with on the bench – do you stay in close touch with many of them?O’CONNOR: I do. I keep an office at the Supreme Court to this day. I agreed to sit as a judge with a number of the Federal Courts of Appeal. We have 14 Federal Cir-

could he put up with all that he put up with? Because it was a lot for a man to reckon with, to have a wife in a position like mine. He was just fantastic about it. He was totally supportive at every step of the process. I called him when President Reagan called me and I said, “John, the president just called and he wants to put me on the U.S. Supreme Court. What do you think about that? What should I do?”

“Well, you have to say yes!”He was amazing. He was so outgoing

and so open and so decent about accept-ing all these things that I did. I wish every woman who is getting married could marry someone as wonderful about letting her do what she wants to do as I did when I mar-ried John O’Connor. He was great.BITTERMAN: Someone has written in that their 10-year-old son loves iCivics.org and describes it as “addictive.” O’CONNOR: I’ve been concerned for a long time by the fact that schools in our country, generally speaking, are not teach-ing young people much about how our government works.

We’ve had our students tested against students from other countries and we don’t do very well on math and science; we’re down in the middle somewhere. We have a lot of effort going on now to try to increase the capacity of our students and teach them more about math and science. In the process schools have focused on things other than civics, which is teaching us how our govern-ment works, and how we’re a part of it, how we have three branches and how the whole thing operates.

I think it’s terribly important that we continue to educate every generation about how the government works at different levels and how we are part of it. This really matters. With the help of others I started this website called iCivics.org. We did it

with games that the user plays. They play the game and in the process they learn how it works and what the principles are in that par-

ticular issue. The games are fun to play. It’s designed

primarily for the middle school

level, but it

“It’s fun to work where there

is still quite a bit of room

for going forward,

making new discoveries and

setting new boundaries.”


cuit Courts of Appeal in this country, and I voluntarily sit with many of them on occa-sion to hear and decide cases in that circuit. Some of them need a little help, so I will go and sit on some cases. I’m going in a week or 10 days back to New York City, where I’ll be sitting with the Second Circuit on some cases there. I’ve kept up with what the courts are doing.BITTERMAN: Another thing from your wonderful book is a quotation from Wal-lace Stegner about frontiers, because many people think of you not only as leader but also as a great pioneer.

Frontiers free people from artificial re-straints and throw them into contact with clean nature, contributing to a generosity, openness, independence and courage un-known to the over-civilized. The descriptors he listed – generosity, openness, indepen-dence and courage – have all been applied to you as a public servant, as an associate justice of the Supreme Court, as a distinguished American and as an educator. With our frontiers rapidly disappearing, how can we provide opportunity for people to acquire these important virtues?O’CONNOR: Whatever we do, we have frontiers. If you’re fully employed in things with which we’re all familiar in our society, you still have frontiers in the sense that no particular profession has been so fully developed that there aren’t still frontiers out there, places you can go beyond what has been done so far. There are frontiers in every walk of life, in every profession and business. It’s good to know what those frontiers are.

If you have the capacity to try to improve or enhance those frontiers in some way, do it. Try it.

Young people particularly need to look at that when they choose a line of work or what they want to do. I think it’s fun to work in some area where there is still quite a bit of room for going forward, making new dis-coveries and setting new boundaries. That’s true of most things, because we learn more and then that opens still new avenues. Look at the medical field, look at the scientific field, you discover one thing and that leads to many more discoveries. There is always room for going forward.

This program was made possible by the generous support of Bank of America.

Save 20% by purchasing your table before December 31Table Prices Members Non-Members PatronsBefore Dec. 31, 2012: $800 $1100 $2500 After Dec. 31, 2012: $960 $1320 $3000

Featuring:Keith Hennessey, Research Fellow, Hoover Institution; Director, National Economic Council Under President George W. Bush; Member, Financial Crisis Inquiry CommissionDr. Christina Romer, Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley; Immediate Past Chair, President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers

To reserve your table today, contact Mary Beth Cerjan at [email protected] or (415) 869-5919

BAY AREA BUSINESS LEADERS:

Get your place at the table for theEconomic Event of the YearTwo top economists will give you and your clients high-level insight into the economy in 2013

2012 Bank of America • Walter E. Hoadley Economic Forecast LuncheonHotelNikko, San Francisco, January 25, 2013

putting you face to face with today’s thought leaders


Elder financial abuse is rampant in this country. That a sitting Alameda County Superior Court Judge, Paul David Seeman, was charged this summer with stealing the assets of an elderly

neighbor underlines the problem. If a judge is not able to act appro-priately in handling the financial affairs of an elderly person, then how can average citizens be expected to behave well?

Both of my parents were victims of elder financial abuse. My father was conned by an attorney who created a trust for him, made himself my father’s executor and successor trustee, created an apparently bogus charity with himself as chair of the board, and directed all my father’s assets to this supposed charity. We were able to recover a fraction of my father’s estate through the courts. After this person did something similar with another family and questions were raised about whether any of the funds have been used for charitable purposes, he is under investigation by the California attorney general.

My mother was victimized by a family member living with her who gained access to her credit cards and electronic access to her bank account. Suffering from a shopping/hoarding/spending disorder, this individual used her funds to buy costly items and travel the world at my mother’s expense while her home, her health and her assets deteriorated. We won a lawsuit to bar the abuser from our mother’s affairs, just in time to arrange overdue heart surgery for our mom and secure her finances for her needs. She is now living safely and happily with my sister, and her funds are used to provide her with the very best care available. This outcome took two years in court and huge legal costs to accomplish, and we are still sorting out the mess the abuser made.

These are just a couple of the kinds of scams and behaviors through which elders are being victimized. But there are seemingly endless varieties of elder financial abuse. Many people I know are dealing with this problem in their families. I have a friend whose mom lives on their family’s rural land in Vermont. A neighbor got her mom to sign an easement across her property allowing him to run logging trucks right by her house. Her mom had no idea what she was signing, and my friend had to bring an attorney from Chicago, where she lives, to fight the easement.

For everyone like this friend and my family who have the funds to fight the abuse of their parents, there are many families who are not so lucky. I know a wonderful man, a retired firefighter, whose mentally ill sibling moved in with his beloved mother, taps his mother’s limited funds for her own use and will not let anyone else in the family see his mother, who suffers from dementia. My friend initially tried to set up a conservatorship to protect his mom, but on learning the costs and time it would take through the court process, being of modest means, he realized sadly that he could not do anything to change the situation.

One of the saddest things is that the financial designs of abusers, if they live with seniors and are responsible for their care, can lead to emotional and physical abuse, isolation of the senior from other family members and friends, even denial of medical treatment. The financial abuser exerts his or her will on the senior through these methods, to gain or keep control of the senior’s finances. Ninety-year-old actor Mickey Rooney gave startling

testimony before the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging in 2011 about his financial, emotional and physical abuse at the hands of relatives.

Why is this problem occurring so frequently now? The extended lifespans of seniors is part of the cause. People are frequently living into their 80s and 90s. But the aging brain deteriorates, causing diminished capacity, loss of executive function and vulnerability to undue influence by those who have designs on the seniors’ assets. And yet many seniors remain in charge of their finances into their 80s and 90s. In essence, some seniors are outliving their mental capacity to manage their affairs, making them easy targets for financial abuse. Yet, tragically, their longer lifespans actually increase their dependence on secure financial assets.

Our society and institutions have not caught up to the widespread prevalence of this problem. Modest legal and financial protections that have been enacted are not very effective. The courts are increasingly seeing elder abuse cases, but the costs of effectively dealing with the problem through the civil court system are prohibitive for the average citizen. Many in our society are not clear about the ethical and legal requirements for handling the affairs of seniors.

These are problems that must be discussed and better solutions must be found. We’ll be talking about this more in the coming year, at The Commonwealth Club.

Phot

o co

urte

sy o

f Glo

ria D

uffy

InSightwith DR. GLORIA C. DUFFYPresident & CEO, The Commonwealth Club

Protecting Our Seniors

“The abuser exerts his or her

will on the senior to control

the senior’s finances.”

For a complete listing of all our 2013 destinations, visit www.commonwealthclub.org/travel

Wow. Wow. Wow.Over the top!Just outstanding!

The group was just the right size.

This was my first trip with the Commonwealth Club,and I can’t waitto try another.

Thank you for making my life better.

Exceeded Expectations. Couldn’t imagine a better trip.

We met great people we hope to see at future Club events.

This is the best educational trip I have ever taken!

Commonwealth Club travelers never fail to be an interesting and stimulating group.

The guide was outstanding. Didn’t hear a question she could not answer.

Excellent travel mates!

I have never had such access to so many intelligent, articulatespeakers/lecturersin such a short time.

Photos by David Coleman and Kristina Nemeth

PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID IN

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA

The Commonwealth Club of California595 Market Street, 2nd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105

Purchase event tickets at

commonwealthclub.org

or call (415) 597-6705

or (800) 847-7730

To subscribe to our free weekly

events email newsletter, go to

commonwealthclub.org and click on

“MY CLUB ACCOUNT” in the menu at

the bottom of the page.

Jared Diamond Annual Economic Forecast

Simon Winchester

Professor of Geography, UCLA; Author, Guns, Germs, and Steel and The World Until Yesterday

Journalist; Author, A Crack at the Edge of the World and Skulls: An Exploration of Alan Dudley’s Curious Collection

for event details, see page 37




Pulitzer Prize-winning author Dia-mond examines how Amazonian Indi-ans, Inuit and other traditional societies have adapted and evolved for nearly 6 million years. He explains what we can still learn from these traditional societies regarding universal human problems like elder care, child rearing, physical fitness and conflict resolution.

The renowned writer and raconteur whose books on the 1906 earthquake, Krakatoa and the Oxford English Dic-tionary captivated readers worldwide, now presents a spellbinding exploration of an obsessive collector of what some may call the macabre: more than 300 animal skulls, including amphibians, birds, fish, mammals and reptiles.

PROGRAMS YOU WON’T WANT TO MISS

January 25

January 22/23

January 24

December 5

A Whole-istic Approach to Capitalism

John Mackey CEO, Co-founder, Whole Foods Market; Co-author, Conscious Capitalism

Iconic CEO and co-founder Mackey is known for his all-natural approach to a mega chain of grocery stores, Whole Foods. The market for competitive advantage is changing. Find out more about the Whole Foods story from the man himself.

keith hennessey Research Fellow, Hoover Institu-tion; Director, National Economic Council Under President George W. Bush; Member, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

christina roMer Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley; Immediate Past Chair, President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers

The Commonwealth

Documents

Transcript of The Commonwealth