Congress, spend a weekend in D.C.

Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to congratulate members of Congress who return to their home districts each week.

Sure, it sounds virtuous. "I don't stay in Washington any more than I have to," the line often goes. "I'd rather be home, keeping in touch with the people I represent."

But a couple of veteran observers say this commuter mentality contributes mightily to the animosity and gridlock that keeps Congress from working together for the good of the nation.

Bob Beckel and Cal Thomas co-write a column called "Common Ground" for USA Today. Beckel is a political liberal, Thomas a conservative. The pair were in Charlotte last week to speak to the Hood Hargett Breakfast Club.

They are funny as a pair, the political odd couple. Their put-downs fly as freely as you'd expect on any political talk show (here's a taste from another appearance). But they are deadly serious about their friendship beyond politics, and they make a point of showing that to their audience.

One problem with Washington, they say, is that nobody goes out of their way anymore to build bipartisan friendships. Our elected representatives fly in on Tuesday, vote on bills they often haven't read, then fly out again on Thursday.

There was a time when politicians lived in Washington. They mingled socially, met each other's spouses, talked about their children. They got to know one another as human beings and, in the process, found that common ground. This sometimes led to a common courage to find solutions to the nation's problems, despite their differences.

This notion at first struck me as quaint, if not naive. Could the problems of Congress really be helped with a few more backyard barbecues?

But we all know the penchant people have for demonizing other people who are not like them, people that they don't actually know. In grade school, it leads to bullying. In grownups, it surfaces as ugly episodes of racial and class prejudice.

So, why should we expect anything but a pathetic outcome when politicians wall themselves off from their political opponents? The opponent equals the enemy, someone to be despised and ridiculed. Is it any wonder that each party would rather run the country aground than be caught crafting a compromise?

Of course, they act this way in part because they think this is what voters expect. And that was a parting point from Beckel and Thomas. Change won't come first in Washington. It has to start in places like Charlotte.

Seek out someone you disagree with politically and start a conversation, they said. Keep talking until you understand why that person holds those convictions. Find out what you have in common and find ways to build on that.

It's fashionable these days for members of Congress to hold "town meetings" in their districts. Often, these end up as partisan affairs, bordering on pep rallies. I'm imagining a town meeting of a different kind.

Our representatives are invited to appear together, Democrats and Republicans, alike. The audience consists of pairs of people already having conversations about their political differences -- already seeking common ground.

Would the expectations of that audience be different? Would those voters say, "Sure, go ahead, work with your political adversaries for the sake of the nation?"

Of course, one conversation, or even one town meeting, won't provide enough cover for a politician to safely cross the line and talk. But we have to start somewhere.

Your members of Congress need a new role model if they are to break out of this cycle of destructive politics. And that role model is you.

Reach Rick Thames at rthames@charlotteobserver.com or 704-358-5001.

Let's all learn from "Death at the Track"

Care to guess who documents deaths in auto racing across America?

Not the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Not the National Transportation Safety Board. Not even the International Council for Motorsport Safety.

Only the staff of the Charlotte Observer works each year to establish how many people die at auto racing events – both drivers and fans.

The Observer has been doing this for 10 years. And here is why it matters.

A decade ago, this in-depth reporting opened the eyes of the racing world to a wider concern for safety even as it mourned the death of NASCAR legend Dale Earnhardt.

Earnhardt, it turned out, was one of at least 260 people who had died in U.S. auto racing between 1990 and 2001. That included 29 spectators, among them, five children.

The statistics shocked racing insiders.

"That is not acceptable," said H.A. "Humpy" Wheeler, then president of Lowe’s Motor Speedway. "This is something the industry has to deal with. We have a moral obligation."

Said Indy racing champion Mario Andretti: "Now maybe we should spend even more time and energy in making cars safer."

Because we still count the deaths, we are also able to report some good news today in a Page 1 story.

Since Earnhardt’s death, no drivers or spectators have died in NASCAR’s three National series – Sprint, Nationwide and Camping World truck. That compares to 10 deaths in the decade prior to Earnhardt’s death.

Clearly, NASCAR has become more proactive about safety. The statistics show it.

Those numbers also illustrate the value of journalists who are committed to looking out for their communities.

One of them has been our sports editor, Gary Schwab.

For years, Schwab was haunted by a tragedy at a 1995 race in Charlotte that was designed to give relatively new drivers experience on a big track. A driver died, the track was cleaned up and the race was restarted in 33 minutes.

"That moment stayed with me," Schwab recalled. "It just didn’t seem to be the right response to a tragedy of that magnitude."

Schwab eventually teamed up with another Observer journalist, Liz Chandler. The two of them began searching for random reports of other deaths. Gradually, they documented 20, then 40, then 60.

By the time Earnhardt died, our journalists knew there was an important story to tell. The Observer committed a team of more than 30 people. They documented the 260 deaths over 11 years. More important, they discovered how many of those deaths might have been prevented.

You have to pause to imagine what this team faced. There was no clearinghouse for statistics like this. No report you could request. To complicate things, media often gave little notice to on-track deaths. Wasn’t that to be expected in the world of racing?

Our library manager, Marion Paynter, used resourceful search terms to track down reports of deaths in various databases. Combinations like "racing," "freak accident" and "he died doing what he loved."

Our computer-assisted reporting expert, Ted Mellnik, created our own database to organize what we found. Reporters collected as many of 18 pieces of information about each fatality.

A lot has happened since we published that initial report, called "Death at the Track." As you’ll read today, head-and-neck restraints are now required at racing’s top levels. NASCAR tracks are outfitted with energy-absorbing walls. And drivers race in newer, safer cars.

Meanwhile, we keep counting. Thanks to technology and experience, our searches are now more sophisticated. And each time we find another death, it is entered into our database.

"The death count is probably still low," Schwab said. "Deaths at small tracks often don’t get much attention. But in doing searches over the past 10 years, we haven’t found any list on U.S. deaths that is as complete as this one."

In fact, a major safety equipment manufacturer recently asked permission to use the database for its research. We’ll go one better. In hopes that it will add to everyone’s understanding of this issue, we’ve posted the updated database at Charlotteobserver.com and its sister site, Thatsracin.com. It is searchable for data on 474 deaths in racing since 1990.

On Friday, we will report on a new concern emerging from those numbers. Deaths continue at an alarming rate at small tracks across the country even as safety has improved at the top levels of racing.

"That number is striking," said Peter St. Onge, one of the journalists on the story. "The number of deaths has actually increased."

People interviewed say they hope the safety improvements at NASCAR will eventually trickle down to these smaller tracks.

We hope they are right. And we’ll keep watching.

Reach Rick Thames at rthames@charlotteobserver.com or 704-358-5001

We heard your concerns on e-mail lists

The Observer has decided that it will not use e-mail address lists obtained from local municipalities to invite citizens’ input on news coverage.

We are shelving this idea after hearing concerns from some on the lists that the e-mails would not be welcome. Please reconsider, you said.

And so we did. The last thing we want to do is to discourage anyone who actively seeks information from his or her government. That kind of interest is good for our community, and should only be encouraged.

We apologize to all who were offended. While we did not view these invitations as a “commercial use” of the e-mail lists, we respect the concerns of those who did.

For those new to this issue, here is some background: On Saturday, I wrote that we have made public records requests for lists of e-mail addresses compiled by Mecklenburg County municipalities. The owners of those addresses submitted them so they could receive alerts, updates and newsletters.

We made our requests after the city announced early this month that it would seek to restrict access to the lists. The city’s lobbyist said there was concern that e-mail spammers might seek to use them. The lists would still be public record, but governments would not have to provide electronic or paper copies.

As I said Saturday, we feel a responsibility to see this “public record” before legislators move to restrict access to it. Very often, you only understand the value of a record being public once you’ve seen it. And this is something we have never examined before.

This was, and still is, our primary reason for asking for the e-mail lists.

But I also noted that we presumed the people on the lists to be especially civic-minded. And we had considered inviting them to become part of a growing pool of citizens who advise us on our news coverage. This idea especially offended some e-mail subscribers.

“I signed up for information about road closings from the city,” one subscriber wrote. “This is emergency information. To even receive one unsolicited e-mail from The Observer, even just asking for input, is unacceptable.”

We hear you. Most people who signed up for government e-mails did not know that their addresses would become part of the public record. Information alerting them of this either didn’t exist or was hard to find on the municipal sites. In fact, one town’s site erroneously told people who signed up that their addresses could be kept confidential.

We have many other ways to invite people to advise us on our journalism. If you are interested, please e-mail reader engagement editor Cindy Montgomery at cmontgomery@charlotteobserver.com.

I also want to reiterate that the Observer will not convert these lists for commercial purposes or share them with others. They will be used solely for journalism, namely to determine their relevance as a public record.

Thanks to all who weighed in with your thoughts on this. We heard you, and we promise to keep listening.

Reach Rick Thames at rthames@charlotteobserver.com or 704-358-5001.

E-mail lists used only for journalism

Did you know that when you sign up for e-mail alerts from your local government, your e-mail address becomes a public record?

To be honest, we had not thought about that, either. In fact, this only occurred to our newsroom when the City of Charlotte announced earlier this month that it would ask the N.C. legislature to restrict access to such e-mail lists in its upcoming session.

The city’s lobbyist, Dana Fenton, said the city would propose that the list remain public record, but a record that could only be inspected on site. The city could turn down requests for electronic or paper copies.

This, said Fenton, would make it more difficult for an e-mail spammer to use the addresses.

We’re all for less spam. But we felt a responsibility to at least see this "public record" before legislators moved to restrict access to it. Why?

In many cases, you can only understand the value of a record being public once you’ve seen it. And this was something we had never examined before.

It also occurred to us that many people who signed up were clearly engaged with their communities, given that they were interested in receiving government e-mails. We immediately thought of two ways they could help us in our coverage of their public officials:

They could tell us from experience if this government e-mail service was useful. Did it provide the information that they need?

If they were interested, they could also become part of a growing number of citizens who are lending their perspectives and expertise to help us produce better journalism.

To date, nearly 1,500 people have accepted our invitation to be part of the Carolinas Public Insight Journalism Network. They have assisted us on a variety of stories, including the quality of local cell phone service, the state of the economy, the upcoming revaluation of Mecklenburg County property and last November’s election. (For more on this program, go to www.charlotteobserver.com/publicinsight.)

If people were not interested in advising us, we simply wouldn’t contact them again. And in no instance would their e-mail addresses be published in our newspaper or on our website, used commercially or passed on to anyone else. This was solely about journalism.

In hindsight, we should have been clearer as we made our requests, and we apologize for raising concerns.

While the state’s open records law does not require citizens to explain why they want a public record, several governments that we contacted feared that we wanted the lists for commercial purposes. This led some governments to warn people that their e-mail addresses were being given to the Observer.

To further confuse matters, our requests were submitted by Steve Gunn, who formerly worked exclusively in our newsroom, but in January moved to the Observer’s Interactive Division.
In his new role, Steve works with the newsroom as well as with other divisions in the company.

The city’s notice about our equest went to about 20,000 e-mail addresses Thursday. By Friday, about 100 people had contacted us, asking for more explanation. About half of them asked that we not contact them.

"I still find this an unethical use of the law," wrote one e-mailer who didn’t want to be contacted.

However, many appeared satisfied once they understood our intentions.

"Based on what you shared there is no need to put my name on the ‘remove’ list," said another. "I’ll review what you send and take it from there."

If you have concerns, Steve would like to hear from you. You can reach him at sgunn@charlotteobserver.com or 704-358-5077.

If you want to join our Public Insight Journalism network, please e-mail Cindy Montgomery at cmontgomery@charlotteobserver.com.

View the Observer in our E-edition

Our offer of free access to the electronic edition of the Charlotte Observer has proven so popular that we are extending it one more day.

No need to go without your morning newspaper even if icy roads delay delivery today. Or, for that matter, if you’d rather not skate down your driveway.

Simply call up our E-edition. It is an exact replica of today’s newspaper, adapted to your computer screen. See the easy instructions below.

More than 2,000 readers took advantage of the E-edition by early Tuesday afternoon. Most who contacted me about the experience said they still like the look and feel of real paper, but the E-edition was an intriguing alternative.

“Thank you,” said one commenter. “After flipping through it (the E-edition) I do find it to be user friendly – and I like the look of a “real” newspaper.”

There was some disappointment. Wouldn’t you know, our vendor for the E-edition experienced a brief server problem at mid-morning, which prevented some from signing on until later. Also, some readers were chagrined that the E-edition is designed for PCs, but not smartphones or iPads.

“I want to read on iPad and iPhone,” said one commenter. “Get that going and you may have something.”

The iPad, maybe. But remember, the E-edition is a replica of an actual newspaper. For screens the size of an iPhone you are better off with a special iPhone application of the Observer. We released that a few weeks ago and it is enormously popular (you can download it to your iPhone at Apple’s app store at no charge).

We are developing an iPad application, but it won’t appear as a replica of the newspaper, either.

What’s the advantage of an E-edition? For many people, a newspaper remains the most representative record of that day’s events. They like how it is organized. They like its definitive nature.

Think about it. When we experience a historic day, people don’t fall all over themselves to take a snapshot of their favorite news web site. They want their own copy of that day’s newspaper. The printed front page still reflects their place and time.

The E-edition holds this same edge. On top of that, you can electronically search it and print out any portion of it. You can even shrink or enlarge what you print. If the Sudoku or crossword puzzle give you writer's cramp, make them bigger!

Here’s how to make use of the E-edition today. Go to:

https://subscriberservices.mcclatchy.com/char/ELogin.asp

When asked for a phone number, type in 704-358-0108. For the home address, type the number 600. Then apply the security code as provided.

If you need further assistance, operators are waiting at 800-532-5350.

I again want to thank our carriers for driving bravely through the snow and ice to get the Observer delivered. I also want to thank you for your patience in instances when we have experienced problems.

And we can all be thankful for the sun as soon as it returns.

(The E-edition is regularly available to print subscribers for an additional $1 a month, and to non-print subscribers for $5.99 a month.)

Observer E-edition is free today

If the icy weather disrupted delivery of your printed Charlotte Observer today, we invite you to try our electronic edition at NO charge.

That also goes for single copy buyers who can’t get to a news rack.

Our E-edition is an exact replica of that day’s printed newspaper. If you have not tried it, I think you will be pleased at how easy it is to virtually “turn the pages.” It also has the added advantage of search.

It is easy to get the E-edition on your home computer. Simply go to:

https://subscriberservices.mcclatchy.com/char/ELogin.asp

When asked for a phone number, type in 704-358-0108. For the home address, type the number 600. Then apply the security code as provided.

If you need further assistance, operators are waiting at 800-532-5350.

While our carriers are working hard to maintain delivery, it is inevitable that we will experience problems in some areas as a result of the ice. We sincerely apologize if this happens to you.

Please feel free to try the E-edition as an alternative. And if it is your first time, let me know what you think of the experience.

(The E-edition, by the way, is regularly available to print subscribers for an additional $1 a month, and to non-print subscribers for $5.99 a month.)

iHave good news for iPhone users

Here’s some special holiday cheer for iPhone users. The iPhone application for charlotteobserver.com is in.

You can download it now at no charge at the online iTunes applications store. Let me know how well it works for you.

For people with Blackberrys, Androids, Evos and other smartphones, we continue to provide an excellent mobile phone Web site. Simply direct your phone to www.charlotteobserver.com and it will automatically lock in to the site.

I’m an Android user, and I find our mobile web site very useful. In the near future, we expect to roll out specialized apps for the Android and other popular phones.

If you’ve stayed with me this far and aren’t sure what I’m talking about, thank you. And now I’ll try to explain.

Basically, a smartphone is any phone designed to give you access to the Web. (About one out of every four cell phones in the United States is now a smartphone. By this time next year, it’s expected to be one out of every two.)

Each brand of smartphone has its own set of specialized features. To take advantage of those features when accessing a Web site (like www.charlotteobserver.com), you must download an application designed for both the site and that phone.

We now have that special application for iPhone users who come to charlotteobserver.com. We hope you enjoy it.