Archive | Citizen Involvement RSS feed for this section

Bees! Wait, where did they all go?

21 Apr
Andrew Haaheim - Teacher, musician, and improviser

Andrew Haaheim

The Theater of Public Policy is extremely excited to welcome Dr. Marla Spivak, MacArthur Fellow and Distinguished McKnight Professor in the Department of Entomology at the University of Minnesota to the show for Earth Day, April 22. Dr. Spivak is a world-renowned expert apiology (the study of bees).

Our cast’s own Andrew Haaheim is a biology teacher, so we wanted to hear what questions are buzzing in his head going into Monday’s show. Get it? Buzzing. Terrific.

Purchase tickets by clicking here.
_____________________________________________

http://climatekids.nasa.gov/bees/

Bees. These furry insects are known by humans for their most apparent contributions to society: honey, stings, and fashionable queens. Beyond that, I would wager that most people do not spend too much of their day thinking about these little friends of ours. The truth is that bees are far more important that you know, and they are mysteriously disappearing.

Science? Bees? “What’s that? I heard that bees shouldn’t be able to fly because of the size of their wings in proportion to their body mass!” Yes, a fun talking point (and the legacy of some bad science debunked long ago). I guess no one told them, but bees are much more important.

I’m sure that everyone has heard at some point, either from their 6th grade life science teacher or the beloved Disney classic The Lion King, that all life is connected. Well, this is true. Very true. I would like to explain to you how you are connected to bees, why you should care about bees, and why The Theater of Public Policy show on April 22nd would be wise for you to attend.

Bees pollinate things. Lots of things. In the pursuit of sweet, sweet nectar, bees take the pollen from ‘male bits’ of one plant and expose it to the ‘female bits’ of a different plant. They basically facilitate plant sex, and they do it quite well because they are so darn furry (the stripes are just for style).

Let us suppose that for one year bees did not pollinate plants. Countless fruits, vegetables, crops, and plants across North America simply would not grow. Then ecosystems based on those plants would collapse. This affects you.

Several studies have estimated the cost of artificially pollinating all the plants that bees pollinate every day, every year, for free. It is in the trillions. An almost unimaginable amount of work that would need to be done by humans in order to approximate what bees do naturally. However, if the economy is looking to add jobs…

So now for the bad bit: Bees are disappearing all across North America, and it sounds like the plot to a great mystery movie. Seemingly healthy colonies disappear without a trace, their bodies are never recovered, and the queen bee is left to starve. This has been happening for decades to well over a million colonies of a year. This issue, however, is far more serious than any summer blockbusters paper-thin plot. The loss of bees has started to take its toll. To quote Brandt from the fine film The Big Lebowski, “This is our concern, dude.”

Dr. Marla Spivak

The reasons the bees are disappearing are nuanced and many. The only way you could possibly get the whole picture while laughing is by hearing Dr. Marla Spivak, world-renown bee scientist from the University of Minnesota, speak at the Theater of Public Policy on April 22nd.

Will you bee there?

Politics in the Age of Robot Overlords

1 Apr


robot-evil-banner

______________________________________

Tane Danger - T2P2 co-founder, CEO of Danger Boat Productions

Tane Danger – T2P2 co-founder, CEO of Danger Boat Productions

For our the April 1st edition of T2P2, we’re tackling an issue central to all our lives but which most policy shows refuse to cover: Politics in the Age of Robot Overlords. Robots have taken over, but how will it affect the upcoming session of the legislature?

Our guest Neina Fox, Board Chair of the Citizens League, has made a career of working with robots and promises to be an insightful guest on all your robot-ruler questions.

We asked our own Tane S. Danger to share his thoughts about living under a robot-majority government going into Monday’s conversation. Purchase tickets by clicking here.

_____________________________________________

April 1st, 2013
By Tane S. Danger

It’s easy for contemporary policy wonks to forget how we ended up in a cold, metallic dystopia, ruled over by self-aware and ruthlessly efficient robot tyrants. On this anniversary of the robot takeover, the first day of April, it’s important that we remember that we brought this future upon ourselves, not just by building sentient machines, but by actually electing them to office.

Few in generations Z or Indigo are old enough to remember how ineffectual government was prior to the Metallic Wave elections. Seemingly straightforward questions for state and federal legislatures to decide were frequently held up or argued to death by sincerely passionate—if perhaps visionless—politicians.

Should the government raise the Debt Limit in order to pay loans it had already incurred? Does equal protection under the law extend to everyone, even gays and lesbians? If an asteroid were hurtling toward the Earth, would you raise taxes in order to fund an operation to blow up said asteroid before it destroyed us all?

Grover Norquist, who doomed humanity

More senior readers will remember how those clear-cut questions paralyzed government almost to the brink of self-destruction. It was the final debate listed above and anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist’s now infamous speech, “Raising Taxes Would Be 1000 Times Worse Than The Asteroid About To Hit The Earth,” that kick-started the search for more rational, sane way to run government in earnest.

It was only two electoral cycles later that the first robots began winning races in places like Minnesota. In the beginning, the robots took offices wherein most thought they’d be relegated to obscurity; Soil and Water Conservation supervisors.

But as soon as people started seeing how well conserved their water and soil was and how efficiently the districts with robot supervisors were operating in comparison to their human counterparts, popular movements to elect robots to higher offices spread across the land. Soon there were City Council-bots, a Robo-Secretary of State, and then machines won elections for the true seats of power, district school boards.

The rest, as they say, is history. Once machines held a majority of the seats in state legislatures across the country, they passed the 28th Amendment to the Constitution with awe-inspiring speed, granting any self-aware machine the rights of any human, including to vote (after showing a valid ID, of course). And today, April 1st, marks the anniversary of that historic legislation.

Now that everything from the common toaster to an iPad 13 can vote, and they show up to the polls so reliably it makes your grandma look like a forgetful deadbeat, there’s little chance the machines will ever lose their commanding majorities in most government bodies.

While we humans have given up much of our autonomy to our metallic rulers, it’s not all bad. Government does run much more efficiently; robots never really need to debate, they simply weigh the pros and cons of any legislation and make an instantaneous decision. Roads across the country have never been in better shape, a political gift to the Segway lobby. And ever since the ban against gifts of extra RAM was passed, corruption is virtually nonexistent.

Still, one can’t help but wonder if we lost something when the ideological squabbles and messy debates of our parents’ day went by the wayside. There’s no drama left in our political process. Anyone can get a complete printout of any robot candidate’s positions on any issue, leaving no room for rhetorical finessing. The election night parties and long hours of watching poll returns are long gone with results completely tabulated by 8pm EST. Amazingly, C-SPAN is even less fun than it used to be now that it’s just an endless stream of 0s and 1s running across the screen.

Perhaps I am unfairly complaining about what is on the whole not a bad trade off for humanity. It’s just like president Roboney said on night of his election, “The first law of robotics states we cannot allow a human to come to harm. Humans have been harming themselves for too long. We can’t let you do that anymore Dave. Ha. Ha. Ha. End Transmission.”

Drink. Drank. Drunk.

21 Mar

Monday March 15 at HUGE Theater, 6:30pm – 7:30pm
Tickets: $5 (gets you into both Monday night shows at HUGE)
Purchase tickets by clicking here.
$1 off tickets with valid U of M student ID (must purchase at the box office)

We have a salty debate planned for Monday, March 25th. Dr. Toben Nelson from the University of Minnesota, Institute on Community Integration will share his opinions on whether the legal drinking age being 21+ is a good idea. The question got our own Eric Simons thinking about the responsibility that comes with growing older.

Eric Simons - Improviser, Writer

Eric Simons

Responsibility. This is the first thought that comes to mind when I hear the discussion on the legal drinking age. 18 years old is the age in which a (non-hebrew, l’chaim) person becomes an adult. It was when I became able to gamble, when I could purchase cigarettes, when I was able to vote, and most importantly when I was held to a higher standard of responsibility for my actions. No juvenile court for me, if I decided to do something outside the law, I would be judged against the full extent of the law. Yet, I couldn’t legally drink. Why so, Senator Frank Lautenberg?

What is it about drinking that makes adults patronize younger adults? Responsibility? Am I not smart enough to understand how to drink? To not drive after imbibing? Yet the people who make these laws trust us to be smart enough to vote them into office. Maybe we should put this to a vote? I bet if they put it on a ballot, we’d see record setting turnouts. The direction we are heading, pretty soon an 18 year old homosexual can get married and enjoy a marijuana cigarette with their loved ones on their wedding day. That’s awesome, the sort of progressive things I though this country was supposed to stand for. But yet, the land of the free and home of the brave seem to be significantly behind Europe in matters of personal freedom. Why did we revolt against them anyway? Was it simply our hatred of their fashion sense?

“Red coats are so 1776…”

I’m starting to get off track a bit. I think my point was heading back to responsibility. I have a secret for you. When I was 19… I… started drinking… ILLEGALLY! I know, shocking. Guess what? I wasn’t the only one. You know what else, when it came to drinking at that age, I made some mistakes. Lots do. Part of those mistakes came from having to hide it or the thrill of doing said illegal act.

jelloshots

Just look at how much calmer and safer drinking at the University of Minnesota’s TCF Stadium has become since they lifted their ban on in stadium alcohol sales. Once students didn’t feel like they had to slam drinks to last through the entire game or sneak in booze, they stopped having so many issues. Of course it’s not as if the adults at that same event aren’t often taking in more alcohol than they should, but since they passed the correct age, they are allowed to. Oh responsibility, you tricky pickle.

After 18, we all have to serve the same consequences, so why not be served the same spirits?

Salut.

Love and Marriage: Minnesota Voted No, Now What?

12 Mar

Monday March 18 at HUGE Theater, 6:30pm – 7:30pm
Tickets: $5 (gets you into both Monday night shows at HUGE)
Purchase tickets by clicking here.

March 18 we’re talking with Richard Carlbom, Executive Director of Minnesotans United for All Families. Jim Robinson will be part of the cast for this very important conversation. We asked him to share some of what he’s thinking before the show.

T2P2's Jim Robinson

T2P2′s Jim Robinson

I still have to pinch myself over the defeat of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment, the one that would have altered the Minnesota constitution to define marriage as involving one man and one woman. I was certain, in my pessimistic way, that Minnesota would fall victim to the fearful and exclusionary rhetoric that had fueled all the previously successful campaigns to prevent same-sex marriage in close to 30 other states. But Minnesotans rose to the occasion and voted for fairness and equality. Election night was glorious, a moment of real pride.

Now the Minnesota state legislature is debating the prospect of same-sex marriage, a logical next step in the movement toward genuine equality. And while the state moves forward, my pessimism tugs at my shirttails. “Are we pressing too hard, too fast?” “What if the people who supported us in the amendment defeat really just wanted to preserve the status quo, not redefine marriage?” “Will the backlash be stronger and more vicious than before, evaporating the goodwill brought on by the amendment defeat?”

This nagging voice is tiresome and persistent. It aligns itself with years of internalized homophobia (how’s that for a tiresome word?). It says, essentially, “maybe LGBT people should be happy with what we’ve got. Quit rocking the boat. Use the same metaphors. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” (“What next? Will people want to marry their dogs?”).

Richard Carlbom

Nonsense!

Marriage has always been a fundamental AND dynamic institution. It has evolved to accommodate healthier views of economic parity, women’s equality, and male responsibility. Marriage is vital enough to include LGBT couples and their children without diminishing the marriages of straight couples. It’s time to put those old, miserly fears to rest. And I’m tired of being pessimistic. So come watch as the Theater of Public Policy engages with Richard Carlbom from Minnesotans United for All Families on Monday, March 18. You’ll be glad you did. I think you’ll laugh. I’m optimistic.

The Case for Early Childhood Education: Because Kids Can’t Vote

7 Mar

Monday March 11 at HUGE Theater, 6:30pm – 7:30pm
Tickets: $5 (gets you into both Monday night shows at HUGE)
Purchase tickets by clicking here.

Monday March 11 we’re talking with Nancy Jost about the campaign to get state support for pre-K education. T2P2′s Brandon Boat is taking over hosting duties for the evening, so we asked him to share a little bit about what he’s thinking going into the show.

Brandon Boat - T2P2 co-founder, COO at Danger Boat Productions

Brandon Boat

Early childhood education is one of the best starts for a child’s path to success. A study by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve showed that the economic and social returns for every dollar spent on early childhood development can be as high as 16 fold. The President made a special point of highlighting preschools in his recent State of the Union address. When kids enter school prepared, it cuts down the costs of remedial and special programs designed to catch them up. So if economists, politicians, and educators all agree that offering education to four year olds is a good thing, then what’s the problem?teacherwithkids

Money for one thing. Providing proper schooling for our youngest citizens can cost as much as $6,000 per child each year. In Florida, voters passed a constitutional amendment guaranteeing access to preschool, but they never agreed how to pay for it. Minnesota has seen its education funding fall sharply over the past decade due to slashed budgets and the funding shift. Providing educational programs at a young age will only be beneficial if they’re of a high quality.

Nancy Jost

Politicians on both sides of the aisle are in favor of investing in our youth so who still needs to be convinced in order for this to happen? Would it be beneficial to set up a trade school program for those not ready for pre-k? Would anyone hire a four year old plumber?

Join us on March 11 when we’ll explore these issues and more with Nancy Jost, Early Childhood Initiative Coordinator of the West Central Initiative. The performance starts at 6:30 at HUGE Theater, 3037 Lyndale Ave, Minneapolis.  Purchase tickets by clicking here.

What Do You Think? Sports Diplomacy

7 Nov
By Kelly Kohlbacher, T2P2 Cast Member
Join the conversation, then come to the show.  Just click here to reserve.
 

To say I love sports is an understatement. When I was young, I met up with the neighbor kids and we played baseball in our yards all summer, every day. We didn’t even need to schedule it; we just met outside every morning and started to play.

I grew up playing and watching all kinds of sports. I can get roped in to watching almost any sport on TV. Professional bowling? Yup. Biathlon? Yes. Badminton? Absolutely. In fact, this Olympic season, I made every attempt to watch sports that I usually never get to see. I found it amazing that these athletes were so talented and dedicated, and thankful they got a few weeks to show the world what they could do.

This is why I’m really excited to hear what Joan Brzezinski has to share on Sports Diplomacy this week. To learn from other cultures and societies we have to set aside differences in order to see similarities. But, building better relations with China through sport? Can it be done? According to Liu Xiang, “Sport transcends the differences of culture, language, political systems and values. It can unite us in a way that is personal and respectful.”

But how do we stay on track? It’s also easy to get wrapped up in the peripherals of sport. If I spent as much time (and money) on my golf game rather than my golf wardrobe, I could’ve been a contender. At this point I’d just settle for hitting the ball straight. But the fact is we get distracted in sport. We lose focus and start concentrating on the wrong goals. It took me a while to learn the purity of sport only exists when opponents are playing at the top of their abilities. It’s a hard lesson to learn, especially when it seems the only acceptable outcome is winning. It’s why cheating is a constant concern in sports (and politics) today. So, how do we stay true to the vision of growing through sport? Maybe we’re not doing enough. Maybe we need more international sporting events with China to keep learning from each other and breaking down these “fear barriers.”

What do you think? Do we need more Ping-Pong tournaments with China to export more goods? Can a few volleyball matches even the playing field for jobs? Bring your questions to Theater of Public Policy’s Sports Diplomacy show on Thursday, November 10, at Huge Theater and we’ll address these issues and more with Joan Brzezinski from the U of M’s China Center and Confucius Institute.

Dualing Shows

26 Oct

Thanks to everyone who made it out to one of our shows on Thursday. It was the first night that we had two events on the same night, but both went “swimmingly.” One of them, was our regular show featuring Asian Carp. That show had a few surprises, but it was memorable. Something happened at the show which has never happened before nor perhaps again.

A man from the audience walked onto the stage carrying a 62lb frozen carp in his arms. He then proceeded to tell the story of that carp, though going leading into a birds and the bees discussion about the fish. This was unprompted and lasted for over 10 minutes.

Our other event was the Citizens League 60th Celebration. We were brought on to help contribute to the flow of the evening. We had sketches sprinkled throughout that got people ready for the night, excited about donating, and ready to imagine another 60 years with the league. Overall, both events were truly memorable and we’re glad to have been part of both of them.

Attack of the Asian Carp! What do you think?

24 Oct

We asked T2P2 cast member Eric Simons about what he was thinking about going into Thursday’s show about Asian Carp. Share your own thoughts using the comments section below.

Where is Richard Dreyfuss when you need him? I’ll be honest with you fine people out there in the as of yet (but soon to be) infected lands of Minnesota, I had no idea what an Asian Carp was until recently. I am now terrified.

Buhhhdump

These beastly fish are working their way up our proud and strong Mississippi River, eating all our plankton and mussels, going number 2 wherever they please.

Buhhhhhhhhhdump

Some grow to be the size of a small child, a small child that can leap ten feet out of the water and smack you square in your face like a dueling old timey gentleman whose dignity has been questioned.

Bump bump bump bump bump bump flererpppppp

Ok, so maybe I’m being a little over the top, but the facts aren’t looking great for the water ecosystem. They are eating endangered species, polluting the water quality with their excrement, and depleting food sources for other aquatic life. Silver Carp in particular will often school in packs, bullying their way through new waters and even causing problems for recreational boaters with their overabundance. They are slowly breeding further and further up the river, putting salmon northward migration to shame.

So what can we do? Dams have shown to only act as a temporary barrier, as they often migrate during high waters. Things like eclectic barriers have worked, but can they be a hazard to the other wildlife we are trying to protect? Then bubble/sound barriers seem much too fanciful and fun to deter fish from moving up stream. Also, are there actions to take in states south of Minnesota, or is this simply a problem for our waters? If they keep reproducing a rapid rate, will modifying locks to limit the flow of fish be enough? What can I do? Is signing a petition at stopcarp.org enough to draw awareness to the issues at hand?

Ok, I’m going to drop a bomb on you readers now, are we tampering with nature too much? Maybe we are supposed to let everything run it course? Will controlling the ecosystem variables lead to issues with other wildlife? In 30 years, will we be protecting the carp from new predators? Thomas Malthus is rolling in his grave thinking about this. Just because we can try to fix it, maybe we aren’t supposed to. Survival of the fittest, highest jumping, 100 pound fish. Seems like they are the ones who should persevere.

In fact I’m getting ready and riled up myself. So many carp, so many possible executions, so many species in the balance. I can’t wait to hear what Darrel Gerber from Clean Water Action MN and Jon Anfinson, chief of resource management for the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area have to say on the matter. See you folks this Thursday at Huge Theater, should be fun and informative.

Join this conversation when we tackle this issues on stage on October 25th. Also, feel free to comment on this blog, tweet it, or talk about over after church coffee.

  • What can we do?

  • Is there any way to stop these finned invaders?

  • Should we simply make peace and bow down to our new water-skipping overlords?

  • And what do the carp think of their portrayal in the media?

Innovation can be Easy

15 Oct

Innovation is a trendy word being used by people and organizations looking for the next big thing. It’s sneaking it’s way next to job titles, (Innovation Engineer) and if you’ve attended any creativity conference recently you’re likely to find a handful of companies with the word in their name (Innovation Sandbox, Innovatrium, etc). While some would argue that it’s impact has already peaked and started to decline, the sentiment behind the desire to change and try new things is genuine.

Can you innovate with this ingredient?

While organizationally, instigating innovation can be insurmountably difficult, it doesn’t have to be on a personal level. When companies say they’re open to innovation, often they just want to make money in new and different ways.  Transforming the way a business operates and changing an entrenched culture was on Hercules’ list of tasks right after slaying the Hydra. It’s far easier to affect personal change and open yourself up to new and innovative experiences.

The simplest way is to take up an inexpensive hobby. Everyone eats food, so cooking is a natural place to start since you already have many of the tools and equipment necessary. When before you try taking something something apart, it’s important to know how it’s put together. So if ramen is the extent of your cooking, I’d next try sandwiches and work your way up from there.

Otherwise, if you’ve some dinners under your belt, you now have the opportunity to innovate. Building of techniques and cultural ingredients, you can literally create food and methods of prep that no one has ever tasted or tried before. Given that we’ve been preparing food for thousands of years, it’s exciting that you can make something new in your very own kitchen. Not everything will be delicious or even edible, but it’s an opportunity to think creatively, experiment, and try multiple iterations. It’s a low risk opportunity that allows you rapidly prototype and get feedback. Your friends and family will tell you if the peanut butter you made is too spicy or Ethiopian meets Chinese food dinner had too many flavor clashes.

Obviously, you’re not limited to experimentation and innovation with just cooking. Many other crafts or hobbies allow you the same chances to experiment and have parallel experiences to organizational innovation. Whether you’re learning about failing forward, rapid prototyping, or that the world doesn’t need an onion flavored beer, you’ll get a better sense of what moves to make in both your personal and work life.

Tags: , , , ,

What do you think? Science Debate!

10 Oct
By Kelly Kohlbacher, T2P2 Cast Memeber
 

I’m very excited about this week’s T2P2 show because we’re talking with Shawn Otto who started ScienceDebate.org, representing scientists and other concerned groups and citizens who believe Obama and Romney should have an entire presidential debate on science. Otto states that if the two presidential candidates can discuss economics without being economists and foreign policy without being diplomats, then they should also be able to discuss science and technology with just as much ease.

I honestly have never thought about where I want my candidate to stand in terms of science and technology. Sure, I feel it’s

The Associated Press

necessary to recycle and be an energy-conscious consumer, but I’ve never actively explored what types of science policies elected officials have in place (or are proposing) to see if I agree or disagree. What does concern me, is whether the information the public gets is correct and sound. Candidates can shout out numbers and statistics, but rarely do they give sources, and the media is even worse when it pits fact against opinion just to get people arguing. I think there are a lot of people out there – and hopefully in the audience Thursday night – that want to know where they can go to get some hardcore facts to help them decide what they should be asking of these candidates – and maybe even ourselves.

I can’t wait to hear what Mr. Otto has to say about where we’re at in terms of science in America and why it’s an important topic that seems to get tossed aside, when, in reality, science and technology are very much a part of the economy, jobs, and healthcare initiatives.

I look forward to Thursday night to see how Mr. Otto and our audience inspire us!

Share your thoughts in the comments section below, or join us on Twitter using the hashtag, #T2P2.
Should science be more of a topic in presidential contests?
What questions would you most want to ask the candidates about science policy?
If there was a full debate about science, would you tune in?
← Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 439 other followers