BRAZIL: Where the Flag is Always Greener

Notes from Rio
By Sandy Prisant



If America has already seen it's best days, then it's likely the next wave will include the BRIC nations.  The "B" of course, is for Brazil . We recently visited Rio and here are eight things we learned in six days about a new player on the block.

• Economy. Petrobras is the state oil company. It is growing like crazy and finding reserves like crazy. It is not run by sinister, incompetent government lackeys, but sharp oil guys. It is not like 200 Nigerians syphoning off that country's greatest resources. Petrobras is the most important oil company based in the Southern Hemisphere. It already competes with the likes of BP and Shell.  And it is the stalking horse for a country pushing out into the world.
• Image. Last year, this new Brazilian self-confidence was given a flashy, but pricey reward--Rio was voted the host of the expensive 2016 Summer Olympic Games. The first ever in South America.
• Maturity. But this immediately raises questions about whether the new boy on the bock is ready for Primetime.  The language of Brazil is Portuguese. That is not the language of South America and it is not the language of more than 90% of the foreign visitors coming to see The Olympics. "Well,'' you might say, "the 2nd language of Brazilians must be Spanish or possibly English?" But for the most part, the 2nd language is either football (soccer) or dancing. Or both. Any strictly English speaker who knows world- class football can hold an almost coherent conversation  with a Brazilian Portuguese speaker. He only wants to talk about football anyway--not whether Brazil will get a UN Security Council Seat.  But there is still the Olympics problem--Brazilians have historically beeen reticent to adopt other languages--even the Spanish of all their neighbors.  It is obliged to import hundreds of thousands of skilled workers who can speak more international languages.  So how will several million locals be able to meet the tedious, practical and continuous needs of many Olympic guests, expecting to be well-cared for after such an expensive trip? And if that kind of job can't be done well, what does it say about the nation as a near-term international player?
• The stereotype that even some Brazilians dislike, is absolutely valid. Brazil is about football and dancing.  We arrived at our hotel before noon,  and saw no less than 7 games being played on our TV'---from England, Spain, Germany, Italy--and 3 in Brazil.   If you sit in an outdoor restaurant at night, you will eventually see 2 or 3 girls break into impromptu dance to the rhythms of a far-off radio, purely for the girl's honest pleasure.
• Politics.  One Sunday morning we heard a great roar down in the street, below our window.  It was a popular protest against the imminent visit of Iran's President Ahmadinejad.  In what seemed unnecessary, but quite purposeful, Brazil's respected President  Lula Da Silva rushed to tell the world,"It is a very great honor for the people of Brazil  to be visited by the President of Iran."  No Brazilian we spoke with felt honord. Maybe this was some big deal in the works with Petrobras?  There was no obvious explanation for the "Lion of the South" getting into bed with "The Axis of Evil".
• The streets of Rio.  This city does not have great sites to visit, per se. Instead, it draws the visitor to half a dozen fine venues from which one can view the lone majestic site--the panoramic sweep of Rio itself.
• The people. As a capital in development, Rio sorely lacks a middle class.  The "Very, very Haves" jostle in the streets with the "Very, very Have Nots'.  The latter, mostly naked from the waist up, are only wearing shorts and cheap flip flops, doing little.  The "Haves" are wearing very expensive flip-flops and are variously adorned from the waist up in jewelry that exceeds the annual income of any "have not". As in developing countries elsewhere, one can eat very well--but at New York prices.
• The Beaches.  We have visited beaches on 6 continents. The famed Ipanema is possibly the most overrated.  The sand is coarse and full of garbage.  The sea delivers a fierce undertow at the shoreline that quickly flips newcomers.  On the 1st day we arrived, we wondered why the hotel had a roof pool, only two blocks from the beach. By the 2nd day, we understood.

So, has Brazil arrived? There is one clear litmus test--the departure fee at the airport. This is the one sweeping generalization that never fails:  If a government forces you to pay them in hard currency as a charge for simply leaving--after taking $300 from you to get a visa back at the start--then that country cannot yet be taken seriously.

Bottom Line:  when a million learn fluent Spanish, a tenth of that English and when Brazil's economy can make it without airport blackmail, go take a look. The country will get there in the end.

1st in War; 1st in Peace; 37th in Health Care

Probability of death in males 15-60 in US, Australia and Sweden; 1970-2005

(Compiled by US official data and World Health Organization)

By Sandy Prisant

In the week we apparently have decided to adopt collective amnesia and opt for total denial rather than health care reform, don't walk just yet.  Remember that the problems won't be walking away. And remember that left unsolved, they will simply scuttle all the other economic stuff you'd now prefer to think about:

Ranking 37th —

Measuring the Performance of the U.S. Health Care System

Christopher J.L. Murray, M.D., D.Phil., and Julio Frenk, M.D., Ph.D., M.P.H.

New England Journal of Medicine  (6/1/10)

Evidence that other countries perform better than the United States in ensuring the health of their populations is a sure prod to the reformist impulse. The World Health Report 2000, Health Systems: Improving Performance, ranked the U.S. health care system 37th in the world1 — a result that has been discussed frequently during the current debate on U.S. health care reform.

The conceptual framework underlying the rankings2 proposed that health systems should be assessed by comparing the extent to which investments in public health and medical care were contributing to critical social objectives: improving health, reducing health disparities, protecting households from impoverishment due to medical expenses, and providing responsive services that respect the dignity of patients. Despite the limitations of the available data, those who compiled the report undertook the task of applying this framework to a quantitative assessment of the performance of 191 national health care systems. These comparisons prompted extensive media coverage and political debate in many countries. In some, such as Mexico, they catalyzed the enactment of far-reaching reforms aimed at achieving universal health coverage. The comparative analysis of performance also triggered intense academic debate, which led to proposals for better performance assessment.

Despite the claim by many in the U.S. health policy community that international comparison is not useful because of the uniqueness of the United States, the rankings have figured prominently in many arenas. It is hard to ignore that in 2006, the United States was number 1 in terms of health care spending per capita but ranked 39th for infant mortality, 43rd for adult female mortality, 42nd for adult male mortality, and 36th for life expectancy.3 These facts have fueled a question now being discussed in academic circles, as well as by government and the public: Why do we spend so much to get so little?  Comparisons also reveal that the United States is falling farther behind each year (see graph). In 1974, mortality among boys and men 15 to 60 years of age was nearly the same in Australia and the United States and was one third lower in Sweden. Every year since 1974, the rate of death decreased more in Australia than it did in the United States, and in 2006, Australia’s rate dipped lower than Sweden’s and was 40% lower than the U.S. rate. There are no published studies investigating the combination of policies and programs that might account for the marked progress in Australia. But the comparison makes clear that U.S. performance not only is poor at any given moment but also is improving much more slowly than that of other countries over time. These observations and the reflections they should trigger are made possible only by careful comparative quantification of various facets of health care systems.

Of course, international comparisons are not the only rankings that should inform the debate about reforming the health care system. Within the United States, there are dramatic variations among regions and racial or ethnic groups in the rates of death from preventable causes. While aiming to provide solutions to the problems of incomplete insurance coverage and inefficiency of care delivery, health care reformers have given insufficient attention to the design, funding, and evaluation of interventions that are tailored to local realities and address preventable causes of death. The big picture — the poor and declining performance of the United States, which goes far beyond the challenge of universal insurance — will inevitably get lost if we do not routinely track performance and compare the results both among countries and among states and counties within the United States.

Although many challenges remain, the available methods and data are better now than they were when the World Health Organization’s rankings were determined. As part of its reform efforts, the U.S. government should support and participate in international comparisons while commissioning regular performance assessments at the state and local levels.

Experience has shown that whenever a country embarks on large-scale reform of its health care system, periodic evaluations become a key instrument of stewardship to ensure that initial objectives are being met and that midcourse corrections can be made in a timely and effective manner. To be valid and useful, such evaluations cannot be an afterthought that is introduced once reform is under way. Instead, scientifically designed evaluations must be an integral part of the design of reform. For instance, the recent Mexican reform adopted from the outset an explicit evaluation framework that included a randomized trial to compare communities that were introducing insurance in the first phase of reform with matched communities that were scheduled to adopt the plan later. This external evaluation was coupled with internal monitoring meant to enable policymakers to learn from implementation.

In addition to its technical value, the explicit assessment of reform efforts contributes to transparency and accountability. Such assessments can also boost popular support for reform initiatives that inevitably stir up fears of the unknown. In the polarized political climate surrounding the current U.S. health care reform debate, the prospect of periodic evaluations may help reformers to counter many objections by offering a transparent and timely way of dealing with unintended effects. Built-in evaluations may be the missing ingredient that will allow us to finally reform health care in the United States.

COMEBACK: HOPE IN AMERICA

By Sandy Prisant




Most of Florida Power & Light rate hike rejected


TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (Associated Press) 15 Jan -- State regulators under pressure from politicians and consumer advocates Wednesday rejected more than 99 percent of Florida Power & Light Co.'s request to raise base rates by $1 billion this year and all of a $247 million proposal for 2011.

-----------------------------------

Yogi Berra was right. It ain't over 'til it's over. Just when Sen. Dodd is jettisoning a US Consumer Protection Agency in finance. Just when the President's "body of work" is resulting in poll numbers that look more like those of the man he replaced. Just when Haiti slips light years further away from hope. Just at this moment--a little light shines at the end of the tunnel, in The Miami Herald article quoted above. 



A small group of people and public defenders took on a giant. And won. In real life. In a place where they still can't figure out who won the 2000 election. In a state where a dozen or so local public officials are ousted or arrested for corruption almost every year. This means that a few serious people (albeit with the Governor's implicit support) can still get things done in this age. That's to Florida's credit and a hopeful reminder to the nation.



Having been afforded the opportunity to testify before the Florida Public Service Commission in this matter and then provide line-by-line analysis of Florida Power & Light's combined rate petitions, here are paraphrased excerpts from sworn testimony to the Florida PSC in West Palm Beach, August 2009:




"Commissioners, good evening. My name is Alexander Prisant. I'm a homesteader in Boynton Beach and was previously a manager for the American Electric Power Company, one of the very few utilities in this country a good deal larger than FP&L. Maybe it would be helpful if I gave you a slightly different perspective from what I have been hearing tonight and what is actually happening here.



"Just to quickly cover my credentials, I helped write Congressional testimony for the US House of Representatives that led to the construction of 14 nuclear power plants around Lake Michigan. I was personally responsible for setting up the strategy for the lawsuit against the entire US Environmental Protection Agency and the personal lawsuit against the Director of the EPA in the 1980's. So I am a friend of big power.



"Having said that, I am embarrassed by what is being proposed here and I have been embarrassed by petitioner's presentation. There are a couple of hard truths that need to be talked about. In general, these proposals are outside---and I can only speak for myself personally--but outside of my 30 years of experience, outside of industry norms, and unconscionable without better performance.


"In the several states where American Electric Power operates, I had to make these kinds of presentations to people who demanded proof of performance. The hard fact is that within the industry, at the top level, Florida Power & Light is not considered a leader in best practices.




“The performance of transmission and distribution functions in Florida are not equivalent to many states. I am shocked to hear that in 2009 you folks are still trying to grapple with weather issues. In AEP’s states, we have tornado issues. We had to address those 30-40 years ago. Did Florida not have hurricanes 40 years ago? Instead you want the taxpayers, during a Depression, to take care of them now. No vision at all.




“Next: It is hard for consumers to understand a lot of the technical issues involved; this is a complex industry, but there are red flags that any of us can see. FP&L, in its first bill, offered me insurance at my cost for power surges—which would provide an extra payment to the utility as reward for poor performance, while FP&L avoids all liability.




“What is really scary is that I was offered a similar deal by an electric utility once before—in the Middle East. Does FP&L want to operate to the Middle Eastern standard?




“What specifically is the $1.6 billion in rate hikes over 2 years to be used for? I have heard no specifics tonight. If I walked into a hearing in the state of Indiana, for example, and said: ‘listen guys, I just want to raise my one billion dollar profit up to two billion,’ I’d have been run out with a shotgun.




“As effectively a protected monopoly, with a protected return, FP&L is now asking for a 12.5% ROI. Two things come to mind: First, how many companies of this size in this state have a guaranteed income of 12 or 11 or 10% ROI? I can’t think of any. And I’ve really tried.




“Next, if there is guaranteed rate of return of even half that—I have no background in finance—I guarantee you that within one week I will deliver to this Commission six sovereign wealth funds, three hedge funds and three other major financial groups from around the world that, in this environment, will dive in with both feet for a guaranteed rate of return of 6.25 or 6.125%. Think about it—this is a time when the Chinese and Japanese are having to live with T-bill rates of 2 percent. They would jump at 6%.




If, as FP&L proposes, investors were offered 12% guaranteed, off its customers’ backs, those investors might rightly fear Federal authorities intervening, because there must be something illegal going on.”




Commissioner Edgar: “May I ask you to sum up, please.”




Mr Prisant: “Yes. I will sum up by just saying this: Florida is losing population.


What is going on here?”

How Are We Really Doing? America slides deeper into Depression as Wall Street revels

December was the worst month for US unemployment since the Great Recession began.

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

International Business Editor

The Telegraph, London 

History repeating itself? President Obama has been accused by some economists of making the same mistakes policymakers in the US made in the Great Depression, which followed the Wall Street crash of 1929, pictured Photo: AP

The labour force contracted by 661,000. This did not show up in the headline jobless rate because so many Americans dropped out of the system. The broad U6 category of unemployment rose to 17.3pc. That is the one that matters.

Wall Street rallied. Bulls hope that weak jobs data will postpone monetary tightening: a silver lining in every catastrophe, or perhaps a further exhibit of market infantilism.

The home foreclosure guillotine usually drops a year or so after people lose their job, and exhaust their savings. The local sheriff will escort them out of the door, often with some sympathy –– just like the police in 1932, mostly Irish Catholics who tithed 1pc of their pay for soup kitchens.


Realtytrac says defaults and repossessions have been running at over 300,000 a month since February. One million American families lost their homes in the fourth quarter. Moody's Economy.com expects another 2.4m homes to go this year. Taken together, this looks awfully like Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath.


Judges are finding ways to block evictions. One magistrate in Minnesota halted a case calling the creditor "harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive". We are not far from a de facto moratorium in some areas.


This is how it ended between 1932 and 1934, when half the US states declared moratoria or "Farm Holidays". Such flexibility innoculated America's democracy against the appeal of Red Unions and Coughlin Fascists. The home siezures are occurring despite frantic efforts by the Obama administration to delay the process.


This policy is entirely justified given the scale of the social crisis. But it also masks the continued rot in the housing market, allows lenders to hide losses, and stores up an ever larger overhang of unsold properties. It takes heroic naivety to think the US housing market has turned the corner (apologies to Goldman Sachs, as always). The fuse has yet to detonate on the next mortgage bomb, $134bn (£83bn) of "option ARM" contracts due to reset violently upwards this year and next.


US house prices have eked out five months of gains on the Case-Shiller index, but momentum stalled in October in half the cities even before the latest surge of 40 basis points in mortgage rates. Karl Case (of the index) says prices may sink another 15pc. "If the 2008 and 2009 loans go bad, then we're back where we were before – in a nightmare."


David Rosenberg from Gluskin Sheff said it is remarkable how little traction has been achieved by zero rates and the greatest fiscal blitz of all time. The US economy grew at a 2.2pc rate in the third quarter (entirely due to Obama stimulus). This compares to an average of 7.3pc in the first quarter of every recovery since the Second World War.


Fed hawks are playing with fire by talking up about exit strategies, not for the first time. This is what they did in June 2008. We know what happened three months later. For the record, manufacturing capacity use at 67.2pc, and "auto-buying intentions" are the lowest ever.


The Fed's own Monetary Multiplier crashed to an all-time low of 0.809 in mid-December. Commercial paper has shrunk by $280bn ($175bn) in since October. Bank credit has been racing down a hair-raising black run since June. It has dropped from $10.844 trillion to $9.013 trillion since November 25. The MZM money supply is contracting at a 3pc annual rate. Broad M3 money is contracting at over 5pc.


Professor Tim Congdon from International Monetary Research said the Fed is baking deflation into the pie later this year, and perhaps a double-dip recession. Europe is even worse.


This has not stopped an army of commentators is trying to bounce the Fed into early rate rises. They accuse Ben Bernanke of repeating the error of 2004 when the Fed waited too long. Sometimes you just want to scream. In 2004 there was no housing collapse, unemployment was 5.5pc, banks were in rude good health, and the Fed Multiplier was 1.73.


How anybody can see imminent inflation in the dying embers of core PCE, just 0.1pc in November, is beyond me.


Mr Rosenberg is asked by clients why Wall Street does not seem to agree with his grim analysis.


His answer is that this is the same Mr Market that bought stocks in October 1987 when they were 25pc overvalued on Shiller "10-year normalized earnings basis" – exactly as they are today – and bought them at even more overvalued prices in 2007, long after the property crash had begun, Bear Stearns funds had imploded, and credit had its August heart attack. The stock market has become a lagging indicator. Tear up the textbooks

A Fairy Tale to Failure

By Sandy Prisant

Do you believe in fairy tales? How about “The Emperor’s Suit of Clothes”? You have to decide right now, because just at the moment the whole Washington establishment, is madly spinning a new suit of clothes for the Emperor, in the form of a Health Care fable for the nation.

It feels like 2nd grade. We’re all gathered around as most of Washington---pundits and politicians full of self-congratulations—opens the big storybook and spins the fable.

Just as in Hans Christian Andersen’s story, some of us are dubious about what the Emperor’s minions are telling the people. So Washington has come up with a new twist on Andersen, meant to thwart all possible opposition. It’s the ultimate defense: “It doesn’t matter what’s wrong with this bill; don’t think about all the self-serving riders the insurance industry added,” Washington says, “anything is a good, first baby step.”

Really? Real-world history says things don’t work that way. The well-documented record of legislative bodies (elected and unelected) confirms: nations, including the US, rarely build effective programs in steps, bill by bill. Especially when (unlike Medicare and Social Security) the very architecture of this bill leaves little room for expansion and true reform.

Many individual Acts by the President or Congress have included expansion of policy in planned stages, but usually the main milestones for such expansion are set down in a single document and decision.

Policy ideas that were weak compromises--often sold to the nation as “good first steps”--have not been:

}It took over half a century for the Supreme Court to move from the “Separate But Equal” baby step to real equality through “Brown vs. Board of Education.”

}Drafting the Constitution quickly produced the Bill of Rights, but in general, human rights have not expanded for Americans in the ensuing centuries. And bills like the Patriot Act have actually set them back. For all our proud independence, we still do not have the right to privacy fixed in law. Nor total sexual freedom among consenting adults. HIPAA laws limiting access to medical records seem to now keep them only from the patients themselves.

}It took over a century from the creation of our democratic republic to move from voting by certain classes of men, to voting by certain women. And then another half-century to finally establish voting by everyone.

When the country is really serious about something, it takes clear action: for the most part, wars, financial regulation (Glass-Steagall Act (1933), that Patriot Act, and the abolition of slavery each were enacted in one fell swoop.

So when someone tries to tell you the current Health Bill is “a great first step”—or even “a great baby step we can build on”, think about whether legislative history suggests these are credible claims.

And think about what would happen if we let this step-by-step fantasy play out. Look at the challenges facing such a scenario:

1. First, everyone will say we must be sensible and see how this bill works out. It’s in-built timetable assures we won’t have a new system “up and running” to know what’s not working until at least 2025. That’s four Presidential elections and at least 3 Presidents from now.

2.Last week, National Public Radio reported the results of a cost study on the current draft bill. According to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the average employer-provided health insurance policy is currently on track to cost about $31,000 in 2019. The Foundation projects average family income at $50,000. This is not a misprint. Over 60% of income will go to pay health premiums based on the current Congressional drafts.

3. Put aside the 30 million extra premium payers in this bill for a moment. What stakeholder with leverage will stand up for the final 8-12% uninsured in 2025, to meet this President’s pledge of universal coverage?

4. What stakeholder with leverage will stand up for an absolute cap on health spending growth in 2025 when the President promises the failure to control overall costs will destroy our recovery before then?

5. What stakeholder with leverage will get health professionals to make the slightest financial sacrifice to achieve affordability in the system?

6. What stakeholder in 2025 will stand up and say ‘60% health premiums that deny us food and shelter must be cut in half’?

7. Finally, what stakeholder with leverage will ever say: ‘This country is based on competition. American health reform MUST include competition, not within, but independent of existing health insurers’?

Now ask yourself: is it realistic to think any of this scenario could retroactively fix the structural flaws that make it impossible to expand or build the current drafts into an efficient, American-style solution, through baby steps.

Is it ever likely we’ll achieve health reform success in parts? Effective, economic national health systems exist on every inhabited continent. All were created whole-cloth, through single acts that did not cost an arm and a leg. Please remember that in the late 40’s, when Britain was still on rations and on its knees, an affordable, universal health system with cost controls, was set up in a very short time. This is fact, not fable.

Why is America the only nation incapable of looking over a score of long-successful health systems and choosing one that’s already proven and adapt it to best suit us?

Either we do this or we are doomed to a failure we cannot afford. Think not? Eerily, over 170 years ago, Hans Christian Andersen sent a message for our time:

Andersen wrote in his fairy tale: “What a splendid idea," thought the Emperor. "What useful clothes to have. If I had such a suit of clothes I could know at once which of my people is stupid…”

Bottom Line: What’s happening now is a distraction. This is not about Congressional negotiations. With great sadness, we must face these facts. Will the Emperor prevail or will we be as wise as the people at the end of the fairy tale, by seeing the truth...

And starting over.

Footnotes:

"Health Cuts With Little Effect On Care,"The New York Times, December 30,2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/business/economy/30leonhardt.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

1. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Public Plan," The New York Times, December 19, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85859&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=5


"The House Bill and the Senate Bill," The Now! Blog, December 21, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85861&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=6

"Why We Need a Public Health-Care Plan," The Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124580516633344953.html

"Why a public health insurance option is key to saving costs," Economic Policy Institute, June 25, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85866&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=7

2. "Assessment of Affordability Provisions in the Exchange in House (H.R. 3962) and Senate (H.R. 3590) Health Reform Bills," Health Care for America Now
http://hcfan.3cdn.net/46590729111c307ccc_lom6b3a6r.pdf

"Finishing Reform Right: Fixing affordability before the President signs a health care bill," The Now! Blog, December 22, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85867&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=8

"Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Individual Mandate," The New York Times, December 19, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85860&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=9

"The House Bill and the Senate Bill," The Now! Blog, December 21, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85861&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=10

"Senate health bill is launch pad," Jacob Hacker, December 22, 2009 http://www.po/litico.com/news/stories/1209/30871.html

3. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Abortion," The New York Times, December 19, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85862&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=11

4. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Paying for the Proposals," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85863&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=125.

"Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Insurance Regulations," The New York Times, December 19, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85736&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=136.

"H.R. 3962, Affordable Health Care for America Act," Congressional Budget Office, November 20, 2009 http://cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10741

"Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," Congressional Budget Office, November 18, 2009
http://cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10731

"REPORT: How the Senate Bill Compares to Other Reform Legislation," Think Progress, November 19, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85670&id=18398-17397961-OzOYRBx&t=14

Galapagos #2: Survival Against All Odds

Photos: Tracy & Sean Haling

By Sandy Prisant

One species that Darwin did not directly study in his time in the Galapagos was our own.

Thankfully, the Ecuadorian government has remedied this omission. It requires every visitor, prior to departure to drop in on a straightforward, historic presentation of mankind and its buffoonery in the unfolding Galapagos saga. Nothing as sinister as reliving Nazi camps at the Holocaust Museum. Here, we just come off as a race of imbeciles.

What Darwin did not envision in his revolutionary, evolutionary theory about the natural order of life, was how hard human kind would work to undermine everything he discovered, even though the first hint of ourselves as the main threat, came with the very first discovery of the Islands.

An expedition led by the 4th Bishop of Panama stumbled upon the Galapagos in 1535. His first report suggested colossal stupidity. Fray Tomas de Berlanga (Bishop from 1530-1537) wrote back to Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain:

“…many sea lions, turtles, iguanas, tortoises; many birds like
those from Spain, but silly that they didn’t know how to
flee and many were caught by hand…”

It’s important to put those comments in context. Darwin’s work had the effect of questioning Divine Creation. Essentially he was challenging theological dogma that pre-dated him by almost two millennia.

It was the great irony of Darwin’s life. He had rejected science by dropping out of medical school at Edinburgh University, to study theology at Cambridge--with the intent of becoming a clergyman in the Church of England. He wound up becoming the scientist who upset the theological apple cart.

Much of the Church’s basic teaching about man’s divine nature, particularly at the time of Fray Tomas De Berlanga, focused on our species and our planet as the center of everything. The argument went that God gave humans special gifts, precisely so that we could dominate all other species. So that we could in turn be at the center of the center—if not gods ourselves, Princes of the Universe, at least.

So by simply observing the finch and finding 13 subspecies, with beaks adapted to different conditions on different islands, Darwin was not just doing a modest study, as part of a 4-year mapping and nature expedition. He was indirectly questioning the very premise underlying much of Church ideology. He was, based partly on just five weeks in the Galapagos and only 19 days on land, questioning the very essence of divine creation.

And what better support could Darwin have had beforehand to make his point, than from the Church itself. In this case, through a pioneering bishop whose own divine creation does not seem to have been dealt from a full deck.


While the Englishman’s work had an unprecedented impact on Western thought, little of that stunning new understanding of life helped to protect the Galapagos. In the centuries after the Bishop’s visit, at least a half-dozen destructive attempts to mercilessly exploit the islands and their peaceful inhabitants all ended in commercial and ecological disaster. From the slaughter of 250,000 (98%) of the giant tortoise population to the slaughter of men in the misguided creation of a first prison colony in the 19th century that failed , to an even more misguided concentration camp in the 20th century. Unsurprisingly that, too, failed after another brutal uprising.

But that wasn’t the half of it. How incompetent has man been as stewards of this global treasure?
Before and after, let us count the ways:

1800’s—Ill-conceived sugar plantations that produced few crops but great environmental damage.

1830’s—Ill-conceived dye production that produced greater environmental damage.

1860’s---The Great Powers (including the US), tried to rape the Islands, smash and
grab the resources and wrest them from Ecuador. (So much for the Monroe Doctrine,
both politically and ecologically.)

1927-28---Norwegians are urged to colonize the Galapagos in the late 20’s. The
Ecuadorian government described their attempts at commerce and settlement as
leading them to become “disillusioned and sick from loneliness”. The majority of these
brave pioneers fled back to Norway in less than a year.

1929---The final attempt at emigration turned paradise into a sordid,
violent Peyton Place, as Europeans brought all their desires and neuroses with them.
It led quickly to adultery among the few families, broken homes, and mysterious
disappearances at the turn of the decade. The blue-footed booby had never seen
the likes of such gross behavior. Photo: Susan Prisant

The Bottom Line: As the government now openly admits in it’s museum presentation:

“close to four centuries of exploitation of the natural riches of the Galapagos did not only cause deterioration in the environment, but also ended with tragic cost in human lives.”

And yet, against all odds, the Galapagos have managed to overcome mankind’s destructive influence. While Hawaii struggles to sustain 5 (five)% of its indigenous species, the Galapagos have managed to hold on to 95% of theirs.

It is not Darwin that should attract you to these islands. It is all those species that attracted him as well. Species which have each figured out how to find a decent, tolerable place within their world.

Leaving only the “divinely created” human race—masters of all they survey—utterly adrift.

The Galapagos Islands: Lessons From the Locals

All Photos: Sean & Tracy Haling

By Sandy Prisant

Santa Cruz Island, Ecuador—In less than four hours you can escape the empty calories of American politics and arrive in Ecuador—where the jewel in the crown is the Galapagos Islands.

Don’t misunderstand. Ecuadorian politics are full of empty calories, too. (Now, wide-ranging daily blackouts are causing havoc everywhere in the country—the direct result of 20 years’ gross negligence in maintaining/expanding the national electric grid.) After all, this was one of those Banana Republics.

But that electricity havoc is in the regions dominated by man and his ways. In the Galapagos, 550 miles offshore in the Pacific, and the one Federal State largely controlled by wildlife, there is a calm, serene and rational world. The difference is striking. Here, there really is the Law of the Jungle. No pretense. Mother birds abandon their eggs to save themselves. Bluntly, cute things are eating other cute things the whole time. But there is no neuroses about it.

Yes, I know, underneath our suits we’re running the same Jungle-based system, but somehow, it’s not the same. Rather than harmony and effectiveness, our revered free will and political liberties have given us unsolvable Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and an inability to engage each other in discussion on profound social issues:

1. Congressional members have government health coverage they shamelessly deny to the very people they were allegedly elected to serve. We’ve been patiently awaiting a real solution since the 1st national health bill was proposed in 1917.

In the Galapagos, no vermillion fly catcher, no sea lion has had anything vital awaiting action since 1917.

2. Years too late, we still don’t know how to kick-start a real legislative discussion on the first timid attempts to control a small fraction of carbon emissions.

In the Galapagos, not a single species needs to burn carbon to function. When its cold, marine iguanas pile up--lying on top of each other to keep warm, for the common good (a concept we’ve relegated exclusively to campaign speeches). When it’s too hot for a pregnant sea turtle to come ashore, they simply hover in the cool Pacific, a few feet out, waiting patiently for the sun to go down and the temperature to drop below 70F naturally, so they can come ashore safely and build their nests.

I’m unaware of other species that need to make unrecyclable waste or burn fossil fuels to survive or flourish. Not even ones like the woodpecker finch here, that use tools. Why is that?

3. And in the “the community of nations”—our specie’s own system—corruption thrives. From corruption we know about in Afghanistan. To corruption we don’t. Ecuador for example. As ire and shame rise with the electricity fiasco, there are a million excuses. One features the international shrug of helplessness, accompanied by the lament, “Ecuador is poor.”

And then one day I met a man who has lived his life in the Galapagos. Just a normal man. But he was adamant.

“Ecuador is NOT poor. Ecuador is rich. In natural resources and corruption.”

Possibly he’s been effected by all the creatures literally around him—none of whom are corrupt; none of whom risk the future of their tribe for personal gain.

We often hear our own failings glossed over with the words, “it’s a messy system, but we’re free.” Well, we’re now reaching the point on a dozen fronts that make “messy” a poor euphemism for melting ice caps and a melting middle class.

The word “free” is losing meaning, too. The unspeakable fact is we’ll never return to 5% unemployment. (And if you can’t work, you can’t eat and that leaves little room for new ideas or creative individual action.)

So here’s the balance sheet: on the one hand we have thousands of species, most having prospered for eons longer than humans have existed, by doing sensible things every day—no frills, or greed or egos.

On the other hand, we have just one race in which a few hundred years ago, some presumed wise leaders gave away all of Manhattan for beads. And less than a decade ago, almost 50% of American voted to get 2% of them a tax cut. Such folly does not occur within species endemic to the Galapagos.

What really makes places like this so rare and appealing to us is that we are in the presence of other sentient beings who act without guile, contempt or hubris in their dealings with others. It’s not only unique to have a giant tortoise and every other species one foot away from you and not hiding. It’s also that they do not, unlike humans, change behavior in any way. Not scaring you or impressing you or wanting a damn thing from you. No contempt. No fraud. No games. In short, none of the falseness that informs initial meetings between most humans. It is this that is the most rare of experiences and actually explains why tourism to these volcanic islands doubled in recent years. And then doubled again.

It is what we crave and cannot find amongst our own kind, anywhere. This difference begins with all other species naturally or through evolution, being able to live in complete harmony within their environmental system; where all is based on rational, efficient instincts that allow the system—their world—to flourish. Every penguin, every finch looks energetic and well-fed. Apparently their system is in balance.

Only we are evolving in exactly the opposite direction, allowing less and less in our lives—and theirs—to thrive. Why is this happening?

In explaining what went wrong with the US economy, former Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan testified that it was shockingly simple: “It never occurred to me that CEO’s and CFO’s would not act in a rational manner and in the best interests of their companies. All Fed policies hinged on that one premise.”

If Mr. Greenspan had spent 5 weeks here as Darwin did, it might have helped.

For sadly, the Federal Reserve could only work on Greenspan’s premise if it were purpose-built for the rational, efficient locals of the Galapagos.