New NY 23rd

Every child in our Nation has a right to feel safe. To achieve that goal, the President will announce a series of actions to protect our children and their communities.–President DJT

Two “nothing burgers:” Florida’s new gun law and President Trump’s proposals.

Here are President Trump’s proposals:

1. Hardening our schools: The Administration will make sure our schools are safe and secure—just like our airports, stadiums, and government buildings—with better training and preparedness.
2. Strengthening background checks and prevention: President Trump is supporting legislation and reforms to strengthen the background checks system and law enforcement operations.
3. Reforming mental health programs: The President is proposing an expansion and reform of mental health programs, including those that help identify and treat individuals who may be a threat to themselves or others.
4. Keeping the conversation going: In addition to these immediate actions, President Trump is establishing a Federal Commission on School Safety, chaired by Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, to recommend policy and funding proposals for school violence prevention.

None of these is likely to have much effect on firearm violence–they ignore the obvious causes, which include:

• Ineffective regulations
• Too many guns in private hands

Here is what the Florida gun law does:

1. Raises the age to purchase a firearm to 21 from 18;
2. Requires a three-day waiting period for firearm purchases, with some exceptions;
3. Bans the sale or possession of bump fire stocks, which allow a semiautomatic weapon to fire more like an automatic weapon;
4. Gives law enforcement more authority to seize weapons and ammunition from those deemed mentally unfit or otherwise a threat;
5. Provides additional funding for armed school resource officers and mental health services.

This is marginally better that President Trump’s proposal; unlike Trump’s, Florida’s proposal has been signed into law. Any law that helps is welcome. But again is this much too little too late.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/07/politics/florida-rick-scott-gun-bill/index.html

For the  time just before Christmas through New Years I tried not to focus on politics as much as usual. Since the President was playing golf at the Southern White House, and the Cable News Channels were airing reviews of the years major events, and re-airing documentaries, we had time for more joyous events. Lee Marcus of Arkport, who has authored other articles last year, offered this article for us, reminding us of the Upstate New York experiences. Hope we have a Happy 2018.

We are in a deep freeze that may turn out to be unprecedented. It will be costly to keep millions of us warm and safe. We worry that it could be the new normal, winter-wise, due to climate change. And it is so early in the season. With all the Christmas lights and holiday cheer behind us, how will we get through it?

I believe we humans have a store of energy we may have overlooked. Let’s start by thinking about all the calories we consumed over the holidays (ooh-wee!). With a thick pair of socks, boots with good treads, and a walking stick (if not cross-country skis) we have only to bundle up and get out there. Why would anybody want to do that? Because, truth be told, it IS a wonderland out there. They say the Eskimos have umpteen (whoa— 50?) words for snow. That’s because snow has umpteen variations all worth observing. Snow even has umpteen different sounds it makes under your boots, depending on its consistency and depth, the surrounding temperature, whether or not it has been disturbed, and by what: tires, feet, or even warm sunlight, which could have melted the top, making a crust when the temperature dropped again. I love the sound of that crust breaking under my step, whether it’s absolute like a puncture, or more calibrated and radiant, cracking a pristine platform into tilted slabs like so much peanut brittle.

Best of all are snow “stories,” most of them mysteries. Even in a city, you won’t get far on a walk without seeing tracks. In snow, every moving thing lays down a record of its passing, be it vehicle, pedestrian, or critter. There’s the clutter of tracks on a busy sidewalk, and then that one set veering off in a whole new direction. Hmmm. Overnight snow is full of surprises come morning, especially in the wilder areas. It’s obvious to me that the forests and hedges are full of party animals who scamper from all directions to meet in a clearing and dance by the light of the moon. Even if you’re more serious and scientific than fanciful, there’s a lot to see near the woods in the snow.

The deep value of winter, I believe, is how a kind of sensory deprivation, underscored by wicked inhospitality, together force us to focus on detail: being mindful, with each step, to imitate the penguin, so you don’t slip and fall; finding that one ingredient that turns ordinary soup into boundless, savory satisfaction; noticing the pecking order at the bird feeder. You don’t like your predicament, but so many little things make you smile. Our lives are loaded with details we can’t help but bypass during seasons when the Earth is bursting with new life and urgency. Winter slows us down so that Life’s details become foreground for a while, and stillness is, just for now, enough. Our batteries are recharging.

Today, just for a moment, I remembered vividly the trilling of blackbirds—one of the early signs of spring where I live. I won’t hear that sound for weeks to come, I know. But thinking of it, on New Year’s Day, no less, reminds me that winter is only a blanket, not a stain. What’s down inside is hope, and no frost can get to that.

Happy New Year

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Would NY-23 Republicans prefer Tom Reed if he had a challenger? We have no idea, because he hasn’t had a serious one. Josh Gottheimer, co-chair with Reed of the Problem Solvers Caucus, does. Gottheimer’s challenger is Arati Kreibich, a progressive whose views are distinctly different from Gottheimer’s. Here is a sample from the article cited:

Gottheimer: “I don’t get into grades. But I’ll say that for right now really where I’m focused is making sure we move forward and getting everything done. I think there’s going to be plenty of time to go back and see what was best, where the missteps were and what things we could have done better and should have done better and where we should have been better prepared.”

Kreibich: “F. Where to begin? … From the beginning the administration, (Trump) in particular, knew what was coming, and not just ignored it, neglected it, but also downplayed it, muzzled the scientists, muzzled the public health experts.”

This entry was posted in Political and tagged Gottheimer, Kreibich, NJ-5. Bookmark the permalink.

Andrew C. McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor, who recently considered running for Congress in New York. He is a Fox contributor and contributing editor for the National Review. He leans right politically. I found this opinion article in The NY Post interesting. A similar article appeared in Newsweek.

McCarthy says DOJ so thoroughly redacted the affidavit that not much was revealed, yet one can speculate. On his first point, he wrote:

Interestingly, one of DOJ’s principal arguments against disclosing the FBI’s warrant affidavit, an argument that plainly persuaded Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, was the need to avoid unfair prejudice to uncharged persons. Of course, the uncharged person at issue here is former President Trump.

It makes little sense that Justice Department officials would be fighting so hard against revealing the sensitive information in the affidavit if they intended to prosecute. If the department indicted Trump, the affidavit would be disclosed to the defense and become public in short order. And if DOJ officials intended to prosecute, they could have charged Trump already. After all, if they had probable cause of crimes justifying a search, then they had probable cause of crimes justifying charges — and the case only got stronger after the search of Mar-a-Lago, which yielded more classified documents.

On the other hand, McCarthy writes that keeping the affidavit secret makes sense if the government doesn’t intend to prosecute.

McCarthy’s second point is this:

I don’t think the Justice Department and FBI want to prosecute Donald Trump on classified-information or document-retention offenses in light of all the considerable downsides of doing so. (I do think they’d like to make a Jan. 6 case against him.) If the former president continues to assail the integrity of law-enforcement officials, however, they might well decide that only a public trial can show who was breaking the law and who was protecting national security.

The downsides McCarthy mentions are these:

• Classified-information and document-retention cases are difficult to prosecute.
• Ordinary difficulties would be magnified in a prosecution of a former president.

It will be interesting to see if Andrew McCarthy is right.

https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-contributor-says-trump-may-talk-himself-criminal-charges-1737580

The article was written by a NY23rd resident who wishes to remain anonymous.

Dailykos released its 2016 most competitive districts list which included our district NY23rd. While other sites such as congressional quarterly named this race as “leans republican” several months ago many things have changed since the first race ratings came out.

First, our dear great Congressman released a web ad disparaging his democratic opponent John Plumb as a carpet bagger for having served in the military. This brought out so much disgust in the people of the Southern Tier, that his campaign staff removed the ad from his facebook wall, a few hours after it went up.

Second this ad not only provoked a rebuke from people in his own district, it led to democrats being able to galvanize the Democratic base within the district to condemn Tom Reed for attacking a veteran.

Seriously the ad was so childish that it accused John Plumb of “working with Ithaca liberals” but not exactly saying what they were working to do together.

Once constituents were introduced to Plumb and his record of having deployed not once but twice to the Middle East, and being a decorated combat veteran, most people rebuked it.

Plus Tom Reed as much as he may not like it, was born outside of District in Joliet Illinois.

Finally Commander Plumb just came out with an endorsement of VoteVets PAC, which is the biggest democratic veteran organization in the country. Most importantly he was endorsed because he puts our national security before politics.

It’s safe to say that the people of the Southern Tier are starting to see that Congressman Reed chooses politics over patriotism, by choosing to insult the flag and veterans all veterans by calling one of their own a carpetbagger for answering the call.

Anita Hill (1991)

There is nothing new under the sun.

One way to understand the Ford/Kavanaugh controversy is to recall the Hill/Thomas struggle. Here is a brief excerpt from a  contemporary account:

According to sources who’ve seen the (1991) FBI report, nothing in it contradicted Hill’s story except nominee Thomas, who denied any harassment.–National Public Radio

Thomas’ nomination was nevertheless confirmed.

https://jwa.org/node/18888

The demise of the GOP (and why)

Norbrook’s Blog

Over the past month and change, I’ve watched various factions within the Republican Party have a meltdown over Donald Trump’s success in the Republican primaries.  While he was once seen as a fringe candidate, someone who was running for to stroke their own ego and gain publicity, his winning primaries and delegates to the point where he is likely to be the party’s nominee is causing real panic.   There’s now talk of a brokered convention, or massaging the rules to deny him the top  spot on the ballot.   The party establishment is horrified by him, not just because they think he’s not a “true conservative,” but because he’s saying things that are outrageous.  In “normal years” those would be a campaign killer, but instead it only builds his popularity with primary voters.   They shouldn’t have been surprised by that.

View original post 311 more words

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

In Joseph Heller’s novel, everything that sounds good has a catch that means it is too good to be true, at least for you. Politics is like that; here are some examples:

• The President can be impeached, but only after committing a “high crime”–too late to prevent it.
• The President can be removed under the Twenty-fifth Amendment if disabled, but only if the entire cabinet appointed by the President agrees.
• The Constitution should be taken literally, but “a well organized militia” can be ignored.
• The Constitution should be taken literally, but “corporations are persons under the law.”
• The Constitution should be taken literally, but corporate funded campaign advertising is “speech.”
• The First Amendment guarantees “Freedom of the Press,” but the NY Times had better shut up.
• Civil rights are important, but not if your rights conflict with someone’s religious views.
• Separation of Church and State is important, but it’s ok for taxpayers to pay for religious education.
• States’ rights are important, but should be overridden when fracking is at issue.
• You can have “access” to health care, but you can’t afford it.
• You can have a tax cut, if the rich and super rich get a bigger one.
• You can have a tax cut, with an offsetting cut to SS and Medicare benefits.
• Social Security and Medicare can be saved, only if benefits are cut.
• Women’s health care is important, but not if Planned Parenthood is the provider.
• Environmental protection is important, but not if protection affects profits.
• Conflict of interest rules apply, but not if you are very rich.
• Nepotism is wrong, but not if you are President.

I think I could go on; perhaps readers will suggest more.

This entry was posted in Congress, Political, President and tagged Catch 22. Bookmark the permalink.

This article was written by Ruth S. Young of Horseheads. Some newspapers would not print it because of its length.

Senator O’Mara says the southern tier has a strong foundation upon which to build. Chemung County is at the bottom of the heap in public health; number 60 out of 62 counties in N.Y. State. Cornell Cooperative Extension of Chemung County is seeking grant funding to start a poverty reduction program next summer in one Elmira neighborhood. This program is said to be working in developing countries such as Paraguay. If granted, this is the first time it will be tried in the U.S.A. An October sixth newspaper article about “The State of the Child in Chemung County” indicates that people have jobs but the jobs do not pay enough to keep it together even when both partners are working. Children are suffering here physically and emotionally.

We have just made it through the hottest summer ever recorded on Planet Earth since 1880 when global climate records were started. A serious drought that devastated many of our farms has ensued. I will never forget the town hall meeting in Horseheads where Mr. O’Mara and Mr. Friend told us that Climate Change was probably not a reality and if it was, had not been caused by human behavior. Peer reviewed science has no impact on their thinking.

There are hundreds of thousands of tons of frack waste pouring into N.Y. State; much of it landing in the Chemung County landfill. Mr. O’Mara and Mr. Friend have not raised a finger in protest. Mr. O’Mara chairs the N.Y. State Senate Environmental Conservation Committee thanks to Dean Skelos, and yet two years ago his swing vote killed a bill that would have banned fracking waste imports. This year he has disallowed the Environmental Conservation Committee from voting on a bill that would have required frack waste to be regulated as hazardous if it met health risk criteria. Tom O’Mara was a strong opponent of the statewide fracking ban and is a salaried partner at Barclay Damon, a large law firm with many clients in the fracking, waste disposal, pipeline, and power generation industries. It would be interesting to know how many of the land owners with fracking contracts who got stiffed by the gas companies for royalties unpaid have been helped by the Barclay Damon law firm. Facts are from Peter Mantius, an excellent investigative reporter.

These problems do not make for a strong foundation. Mr. O’Mara and Mr. Friend have forgotten what really forms a strong foundation. Healthy children with good quality schools, living wage jobs, clean air and water uncontaminted with microbeads and toxic waste leaking from dumps, and energy efficiency built into every home make for strong foundations of communities. As our present representatives, we wish they were better acquainted with these concepts. Since they are not, we are thankful to have good alternatives to vote for on November 8^th.

Sen. O’Mara is being challenged by Leslie Danks Burke in the 58th Senatorial District. (Chemung, Schuyler, Steuben, Yates and part of Tompkins Counties). Rep. Friend is being challenged by Bill Batrowny to represent the 124th Assembly District, which includes Tioga and parts of Chemung  and Broome Counties.

Robert Stone recently made a movie, Pandora’s Promise, which reportedly argues that nuclear power is a reasonable and necessary major source of electrical energy while slowing global climate change. I have not seen Pandora’s Promise and will not discuss it here; I plan instead to relate my brief and dated experience with nuclear power and explain my position on it.

I have in hand a work of non-fiction — We Almost Lost Detroit — by John G Fuller copyright 1975. This work was controversial when published and is certainly out-of-date. Nonetheless I consider the 1975 experience instructive: technology has changed, but human nature hasn’t.

I worked as a junior engineer for Detroit Edison in 1966, the year of the accident at the new and innovative Enrico Fermi generating plant.  I wasn’t involved in nuclear engineering or power generation, but I knew something about the Fermi plant which was located between Detroit and Toledo about 30 miles from each city.  At the time there was great interest in nuclear power. In 1954, Lewis Strauss had famously predicted that atomic power would make electricity “too cheap to meter.”  The managers at Detroit Edison were certainly interested in generating power cheaply to increase profits, but they had a concern — they wanted to design and own these profitable generating stations, and they wanted to keep the Federal Government out of their business.

Utility executives are generally very conservative, as were managers at Detroit Edison, but in this case they acted rashly deciding to build a fast breeder reactor unlike any other. The following may have been considerations:

1. Fast breeder reactors were said to produce more fuel than they consume.  Fuel cost is crucial for electric generation, so this prospect was very appealing.
2. Fast breeder reactors produce plutonium; the utility hope to sell plutonium to the government for bombs for an extra profit.
3. Engineers and managers were overconfident of their abilities to manage new technology.

A number of obstacles to construction threatened the project:

• In November, 1955, an accident at the AEC’s EBR1 reactor, which was a small scale prototype for the Fermi project, heightened safety concerns.
• In June, 1956, the AEC’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards recommended against the project.
• The WASH-740 study, released in March 1957, raised the estimate of damage from a worst case accident.
• In October, 1957, and accident at the British Windscale reactor 300 miles from London caused consternation.
• There was no feasible evacuation plan for a wide area around the Fermi plant.
• Insurance to cover accidents was unavailable until Congress let the project off the hook with the Price Anderson Act which limited the companies exposure.

In spite of the above, the project went forward as political interests swamped technical concerns.  Walker Cisler, the president of Detroit Edison, told the press that the safety issue was a subterfuge, opponents of the plant wanted to keep atomic power development in the hands of the government: the road to a socialist state.

The Fermi plant would be expensive, so the utility elected to cut costs:

• The containment building was designed to contain an explosion of 500 tons of TNT. This wasn’t the worst case scenario, but a stronger design was prohibitively expensive.
• The 1955 EBR1 accident would have been worse if there had not been a way to dump the plutonium blanket around the core.  This feature was omitted from the Fermi design as too costly and complex.
• Thermocouples were omitted from three fourths of the fuel rods for cost savings.  When the October, 1966 accident occurred, the lack of temperature data from the fuel rods lacking thermocouples became important.

Incredibly, the Fermi plant was to be built first and tested afterwards: there was no comparable prototype.  It failed during initial testing and never produced power commercially.

Technically, nuclear power might be made safer.  Physicist Richard Feynman reportedly proposed a nuclear reactor that could not melt down or explode; more recent intrinsically safe designs have been promoted. But intrinsically safe designs can’t fully compensate for human mistakes and folly — Three mile island, Chernobyl, and Fujishima as well as the Fermi plant are cases in point.

Here then is my opinion — private for-profit interests should never be responsible for nuclear power plants because the profit motive is sure to trump safety.  Nor should government be responsible — Congress can’t be counted on to act responsibly.  Nor would I trust an independent public authority like the FED, NASA, or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission unless it could be made completely immune to political pressure.  Plants may be made safer, but the potential for human mistakes should never be discounted.

http://www.thenation.com/article/174733/pandoras-terrifying-promise-can-nuclear-power-save-planet