Dear Mr. President

 Dear Mr. President,

So a lot's happened this past week.  You continued to try to seek a compromise with GOP leaders on the infrastructure plan.  You rescinded a Trump ban on immigrant health care.  You signed legislation about anti-Asian hate.  You toured the Ford factory and drove its new electric pickup truck.  You worked with Israel and the Palestinian leaders through Egypt to get a cease-fire in the Gaza conflict.  You spoke with the president of South Korea.  You awarded your first medal of honor to a veteran of the Korean War, and you agreed to send vaccine doses to countries in need of it.  And I'm pretty sure I missed a few million other things in there, too--nominations, the Kennedy Awards, and a memo to Executive Offices regarding your desire for them to begin dealing with Climate Change and finding ways to mitigate it.

Of course, there's also news that your predecessor is going to be running for President again in 2024.

But today I promised myself I'd try to hold an optimistic view of life, and I am hopeful that you're willing to do the same today.  Things are getting better, and while it's taking time for people to get vaccinated, there are likely many people who have had the virus already who believe that they don't need to get the vaccine; after all, they've already had the virus.  From a medical standpoint this makes a lot of sense to me, and I haven't really heard anyone talking about whether those who survived COVID should bother with the vaccine.

What I have seen a lot of people worrying about are people without masks.  It seems obvious, now, that we were eventually going to have deal with this, but maybe the messaging should have been more robust--something from the top down so that it didn't feel like the message was out of place.  And if that wasn't something that was going to be done, not offering that message about masks wouldn't have changed much.  As it stands, many businesses were already planning a return in July to offices; so, giving us that little bit of extra time, while it might have been a nuisance for the government, probably wouldn't have resulted in these problems.

I have the best cat right now, Mr. President.  He's curled up in the little cat spot by the window, getting some sun.  Most adorbable cat!  When do we get to see the new White House kitty?

I think you've got a handle on the things that matter; though, even I have a hard time keeping up with everything you're doing.  I noticed that Vice President Harris is continuing to meet with Hispanic leaders both abroad and here at home, and I think this approach of reaching out and talking to our neighbors is important.  Which makes me feel troubled when I consider our approach to North Korea right now.  They've effectively shut themselves off from the rest of the world, only tending to speak through China these days.  Perhaps we need to redirect our efforts to mediating through China at this point, which I know is also a sore spot.  But we managed to reach the Palestinians through Egypt; so, maybe seeking to work with those countries working with N. Korea will help us break them out of their shell--feel included in global politics.  That said, working to denuclearize with China and Russia and Europe sure would go a long way to perhaps making these other countries feel less threatened.  Maybe involving them in talks about denuclearization would give them a chance to ease some of those fears.  I don't know; just spit-balling here, Sir.  It just feels like we should be doing more to address suffering and injustice--and not just abroad, but here at home, too.  I know we have lawmakers who are ostensibly doing their best in that department, but most people, myself included, have a healthy skepticism when it comes to political leaders doing anything without it somehow benefiting them personally in some way.  And maybe that's not always a bad thing, but even a letter from Katie Porter this past week left me feeling uneasy about her support for getting rid of the minimum tax deduction for charitable donations.  It just feels like she only addressed one aspect of what their law would do--allow people to invest in local, national, and international projects that better our communities.  But it feels like, to me, that this would also allow for some pretty awful stuff, too.  Hell, most of us don't even manage $10,000 in charitable donations in a year let alone more.

Anyway, what I was trying to get at is that politicians tend to only tell one side of the story--the side that makes them look good--while leaving out other details.  And our news outlets aren't asking those questions because it doesn't get ratings and viewership.  But it's the kind of dialogue that our country needs.  We need more outspoken thinkers that are given a broader platform to address these kinds of issues rather than dabbling in the partisan political drama that clouds the conversation.  And maybe they're out there somewhere, but it feels like their voices have been relegated to a hole in the wall somewhere.  Maybe you can find a way to elevate those conversations--a presidential debate club or team or something.  I don't know.  It just feels like we could all benefit from some intelligent conversations being given a spotlight instead of hidden away in colleges, backrooms, and think tanks.  I have these visions of the kind of dialogues that the founders of our country had in pamphlets and salons.  Maybe we live in an era where those kinds of conversations can't be had any more--information moving at a minute-to-minute pace.  But I feel like that's something we sorely need--non-commodified thinkers and speakers willing to delve into the economics and history of issues to present a broader argument for Americans to consider....  Wouldn't that be something?

Oh.  Something I've been thinking a lot about the past week--if we're moving to an electric car economy, we need more infrastructure for fueling up on electricity.  America is a country of movers and drivers.  We value the freedom (and sometimes necessity,) of being able to drive long distances from one end of the country to the other.  If we switch over to hybrid or even full-electric cars, we don't currently have the charging stations to support it--not that aren't tied to specific companies or something else of the sort.  I don't know how gas stations are regulated, or how they became so prevalent in the past; but we do need to look at that and create the charging stations of the future for long-distance travel in this country.  I've heard a lot of people after looking at the state of charging technology that accompanies owning an electric vehicle decide against EV's because the charging stations are so complicated, or cost a fee to use, or are car-company specific (Tesla, for instance.)  This model of and for charging stations isn't compatible with an electric vehicle future.  So start looking at it and get some ideas on how that's going to be addressed; otherwise, that vision is going straight down the drain.

And with Gray's exodus from the window, I get the sense that it's probably time for me to get going for today.  I'm glad that I chose to be optimistic today, Mr. President.  And optimism doesn't need to mean we aren't realistic, either.  Optimism helps us to plan for a better future while realism helps us to see where we've been and where we're starting from.

Oh!  One last thing: I attended a lecture this past week about creating better public policy, but something that one of the guest speaker's mentioned, Sharon Parrott, caught my attention.  She said that incremental change is better than no change at all, and than many of our current public policies today came from incremental changes implemented in the past.  She also mentioned something about pilot programs and the need for more of them.  If we're not able to experiment with ideas, we can't know what will and what won't work; so, consider maybe offering some federal grants for innovative ideas and pilot programs going forward.  This could provide invaluable information that could change and shift public opinion in the future; it's also a great way to collect scientific data.  Also, have you thought about creating a government cryptocurrency?  Or maybe even a global UN cryptocurrency?  An interesting thought--though I've no idea what the pros and cons might be.  Still, if China's creating their own, there must be a way to do it differently that highlights the ways in which it isn't going to be used to monitor and suppress thoughts and creativity in its populous.  I do wonder if it will spur a return to a barter economy in their country for those people who are caught in the cracks of the system, penalized by it, or find their consciences bothered by how its used and distributed.  Maybe our own government cryptocurrency could be used as a way to end poverty.  I dunno.  Just more spit-balling, Sir.  Not always great ideas, but they're in my head nonetheless.

For now, though, I'm going to head off.  I hope your coming week is just as amazing as this last one was, and I look forward to seeing where we end up next week.  Until then, stay safe and keep truckin'.

With vast hope and great optimism,

~~ Jenni