In the brave new world of one-party rule in America, we have a Congress that no longer debates public policy – just rams it through. If a measure looks as if it may fail, it’s slipped quietly into an appropriations bill or some other guaranteed to pass piece of legislation. The REAL ID ACT was inserted into an appropriations bill. New regulations on TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) were casually slipped into the euphemistically named “Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005” aka the 2006 budget. Now those new regulations are coming to light – regulations that NH must comply with by October 1. NH DHHS Commissioner John Stephen brought a proposal to the NH Senate this week.
The Federal government requires the states to increase the number of TANF recipients who are working 30 hours a week by 1, 164, in order to meet the requirement that all states must have 50% of their TANF population employed in any given week.
Now, this doesn’t sound terrible – we all hope that TANF recipients will be able to leave poverty behind and get good jobs. What is curious about the new regulations is what the federal government is willing to consider as “work.” At this moment in time, vocational education and job search programs count as ‘work.” Under the new law, those activities will be limited. Could someone please explain to me how a vocational education program is a bad thing? Learning a trade seems like a ticket right out of poverty and into the permanent workforce. Trade jobs are not easily outsourced. Under the new regulations, internships and community service will count as “work.” Okay – so learning a trade isn’t “work” but volunteering is? That is just ridiculous.
The 1996 welfare reform laws brought sweeping change to eligibility and administration of welfare programs. There was a dramatic decrease in welfare rolls; from 12.2 million to 4.5 million. In the booming economy of the 1990’s, many were able to move out of poverty. There were many jobs that paid a living wage. We hear much about the current booming economy, but the reality is that poverty is on the increase. Real wages are on the decline and good paying jobs are being exported. The gap between the haves and have nots has reached epic proportions. We’ve all read about the Exxon CEO who is earning almost $6000 an hour in retirement. For the rest of the population, increasing numbers of people are hungry and homeless – in fact, Hurricane Katrina seems to have created a permanent refugee population in the southern part of the US.
TANF is a 60 month program. An eligible person may receive only 60 months of benefits in their lifetime. This isn’t the free ride that some portray it as. In NH, the maximum TANF benefit per month for a family of 2 is $556. For a family of 3 the maximum benefit is $625, and for 4 it is $668. Even with food stamps – this is not enough for housing, clothing, and transportation. NH TANF recipients are not buying Cadillacs. The “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” crowd is often comprised of people whom have never had to do any such thing. It’s difficult to dig out of poverty – and this kind of regulation change seems guaranteed to make the process harder.
The new reform measures include $150 million to support programs that encourage marriage and responsible fatherhood. I’m certainly in favor of initiatives that encourage men to be committed and involved fathers – that’s a wonderful thing. Touting marriage as the way out of poverty is bizarre. The surest route to poverty for a woman is childbirth. If we want to eliminate welfare programs and poverty, we’d do well to encourage comprehensive sex ed programs, and encourage the use of contraceptives, instead of trying to make the process ever more restrictive.
We can’t have it both ways. Abstinence only programs are a surefire way of increasing teen pregnancy rates, which in turn increases the poverty rate, and the numbers of TANF recipients. Restricting and eliminating abortion will have the same effect. We need to stop pretending otherwise. The only sure way to avoid poverty is to be born into a wealthy family. Perhaps we should encourage the unborn to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and choose the right parents.
The American dream has moved beyond the reach of many – and as a society we are unwilling to examine this, never mind discuss it. While leafleting on tax day, I heard outrage from a few about their tax dollars supporting “lazy welfare bums.” A very small percentage of our tax dollars actually go to TANF – over half the discretionary budget goes to the Pentagon, in one form or another. That dismissive rhetoric, not even rooted in reality is damaging – and only results in further stigmatizing those who are stuck in poverty.
Do we really want to eliminate poverty? No real steps being taken to do so, just smoke and mirrors. Spending our tax dollars to encourage TANF recipients to get married is silly – even sillier when one considers that we’re going to have to cut them out of vocational education programs. The message for women is clear: Husband = good. Trade = bad. I realize that Commissioner Stephen has a tough task ahead of him. I hope that he and Governor Lynch will encourage other states to call for changes that makes sense – because these new TANF reform laws sure don’t. It seems likely that more women (the ones without potential husbands) will be forced into permanent low wage employment, and a lifetime of poverty.
“There was never a war on poverty. Maybe there was a skirmish on poverty.” Andrew Cuomo
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Thursday, April 06, 2006
NH House says NO to REAL ID ACT
Two weeks ago, Congressman Jeb Bradley had a town hall meeting in his hometown of Wolfeboro. It was a long and contentious meeting. The main concerns of the constituents were the war in Iraq, the budget, the deficit, and Medicare Part D. A man who identified himself as a Kennebec Indian expressed concern that he would soon need a passport to travel to Canada, gently chiding Bradley for a policy he felt wasn’t very neighborly. Congressman Bradley, eager to explain, began to tell this fellow about the REAL ID ACT, and why it was a good thing. A young man leaped up in another part of the room and bellowed, “You mean the National ID Card??” This caused a moment of silence, followed by applause from many in the room. I’ve heard Bradley explain REAL ID as being a way to fight terrorism and root out undocumented immigrants. I’ve never heard him discuss any of the other ramifications of REAL ID – especially the cost.
Right around the same time Bradley was smiling and telling us why Real ID is good, the NH House voted on HB 1582, a bill declaring that NH would not participate in the REAL ID ACT. This bill was heard in the Transportation Committee. The committee didn’t like REAL ID, but decided that NH should comply now, in the hopes of changing it later. The committee voted to recommend the bill ITL (inexpedient to legislate). When it went to the floor for a vote, a number of stirring speeches were made, including one by Representative Neal Kurk who invoked the words Patrick Henry delivered to the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1785. As one representative told me later, “The House was in a rebellious mood that day.” The House voted 217-84 to go against the committee recommendation and refuse to cooperate with the federal government meddling in our state business.
The REAL ID ACT was voted into law last year. After it barely passed the House, it was inserted into a military appropriations bill, to ensure its passage in the Senate. It establishes a federally approved, electronically readable ID card. This card would be required to open a bank account, travel by air, or collect Social Security. Your state driver’s license would have to meet federal ID standards established by the Department of Homeland Security. Those standards have yet to be established. The state DMV would issue this ID, but a far more rigorous process would be required in order to prove citizenship. The DMV employees would verify the documentation, digitalize the information, and store the information. All states would link up these databases – creating a national database.
The REAL ID ACT requires that the cards be electronically readable, but leaves the details to Homeland Security. It will most likely be electronically scannable. They like the idea of embedding RFID chips in the cards. RFID chips emit a radio signal to a transponder, notifying the transponder of its whereabouts. It’s great for tracking luggage at the airport. It will also be handy for the Dept. of Homeland Security to track the location of any one of us. Since Homeland Security has unilateral control over the ID requirements, the requirements will be subject to change at their whim.
The Bush administration estimated this would cost $100 million to implement. Other studies show that this is a woefully low figure. REAL ID compliance will cost Pennsylvania approximately $85 million and Virginia could pay up to $169 million. Estimates show that it will cost as much as $12 million to convert NH – yet the federal government is only giving us $3 million. Guess who will be picking up the rest of the tab for yet another unfunded Bush mandate?
A brief review: our Congressional delegation voted in favor of an electronically readable ID card that must comply with unknown standards set by the Dept. of Homeland Security. The data gathered by the DMV will be put into a database, which will be part of a nationally linked database. Anyone who swipes the card through an electronic device will have all the information contained in the card. The cards may also have tracking chips embedded in them. The federal government has set aside an insufficient sum for state DMVs to make the transition. Bottom line friends – we’re getting a National ID card, our personal information will be in a national database – and we’re going to pay for the privilege!
Bravo to the NH House for voting in favor of HB 1582. REAL ID is going to be an expensive violation of our privacy. Anyone who doesn’t think that a national database provides a wonderful opportunity for hacking, identity theft, and selling of information is unconscious. The threat of terrorism must not be used to manipulate us into sacrificing our civil liberties and our privacy. REAL ID goes into effect in 2008. There is still plenty of time to stand up and say NO. Other states will very likely be emboldened to do the same. To suggest that we comply now and change it later is weak and cowardly. Trying to change a system afterward is difficult and costly. Far better to not implement it in the first place. If non-compliance means we can’t enter federal buildings, I guess that means we won’t need to be paying federal taxes, either. It’s about time we rebel against the constant threats to our civil liberties and our privacy. NH is just the state to lead that rebellion.
The NH Senate will be hearing HB 1582 on Monday, April 10th, at 1 pm. There will be a press conference with NH Caspian at noon in the lobby of the Legislative Office Building on N. State St. NH Caspian is an organization working against electronic tracking devices and other invasions of privacy. You can learn more about them at nhcaspian.org . Let’s encourage our state senators to stand tall and vote for HB1582.
“I don’t believe that the people of New Hampshire elected us to help the federal government create a national identification card. We care more for our liberties than to meekly hand over to the federal government the potential to enumerate, track, identify, and eventually control.” NH State Representative Neal Kurk
This should appear in the Conway Daily Sun on April 7, but there are no guarantees when it comes to my work. I also feel compelled to say that this may be the only time I ever agree with Representative Neal Kurk.
Right around the same time Bradley was smiling and telling us why Real ID is good, the NH House voted on HB 1582, a bill declaring that NH would not participate in the REAL ID ACT. This bill was heard in the Transportation Committee. The committee didn’t like REAL ID, but decided that NH should comply now, in the hopes of changing it later. The committee voted to recommend the bill ITL (inexpedient to legislate). When it went to the floor for a vote, a number of stirring speeches were made, including one by Representative Neal Kurk who invoked the words Patrick Henry delivered to the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1785. As one representative told me later, “The House was in a rebellious mood that day.” The House voted 217-84 to go against the committee recommendation and refuse to cooperate with the federal government meddling in our state business.
The REAL ID ACT was voted into law last year. After it barely passed the House, it was inserted into a military appropriations bill, to ensure its passage in the Senate. It establishes a federally approved, electronically readable ID card. This card would be required to open a bank account, travel by air, or collect Social Security. Your state driver’s license would have to meet federal ID standards established by the Department of Homeland Security. Those standards have yet to be established. The state DMV would issue this ID, but a far more rigorous process would be required in order to prove citizenship. The DMV employees would verify the documentation, digitalize the information, and store the information. All states would link up these databases – creating a national database.
The REAL ID ACT requires that the cards be electronically readable, but leaves the details to Homeland Security. It will most likely be electronically scannable. They like the idea of embedding RFID chips in the cards. RFID chips emit a radio signal to a transponder, notifying the transponder of its whereabouts. It’s great for tracking luggage at the airport. It will also be handy for the Dept. of Homeland Security to track the location of any one of us. Since Homeland Security has unilateral control over the ID requirements, the requirements will be subject to change at their whim.
The Bush administration estimated this would cost $100 million to implement. Other studies show that this is a woefully low figure. REAL ID compliance will cost Pennsylvania approximately $85 million and Virginia could pay up to $169 million. Estimates show that it will cost as much as $12 million to convert NH – yet the federal government is only giving us $3 million. Guess who will be picking up the rest of the tab for yet another unfunded Bush mandate?
A brief review: our Congressional delegation voted in favor of an electronically readable ID card that must comply with unknown standards set by the Dept. of Homeland Security. The data gathered by the DMV will be put into a database, which will be part of a nationally linked database. Anyone who swipes the card through an electronic device will have all the information contained in the card. The cards may also have tracking chips embedded in them. The federal government has set aside an insufficient sum for state DMVs to make the transition. Bottom line friends – we’re getting a National ID card, our personal information will be in a national database – and we’re going to pay for the privilege!
Bravo to the NH House for voting in favor of HB 1582. REAL ID is going to be an expensive violation of our privacy. Anyone who doesn’t think that a national database provides a wonderful opportunity for hacking, identity theft, and selling of information is unconscious. The threat of terrorism must not be used to manipulate us into sacrificing our civil liberties and our privacy. REAL ID goes into effect in 2008. There is still plenty of time to stand up and say NO. Other states will very likely be emboldened to do the same. To suggest that we comply now and change it later is weak and cowardly. Trying to change a system afterward is difficult and costly. Far better to not implement it in the first place. If non-compliance means we can’t enter federal buildings, I guess that means we won’t need to be paying federal taxes, either. It’s about time we rebel against the constant threats to our civil liberties and our privacy. NH is just the state to lead that rebellion.
The NH Senate will be hearing HB 1582 on Monday, April 10th, at 1 pm. There will be a press conference with NH Caspian at noon in the lobby of the Legislative Office Building on N. State St. NH Caspian is an organization working against electronic tracking devices and other invasions of privacy. You can learn more about them at nhcaspian.org . Let’s encourage our state senators to stand tall and vote for HB1582.
“I don’t believe that the people of New Hampshire elected us to help the federal government create a national identification card. We care more for our liberties than to meekly hand over to the federal government the potential to enumerate, track, identify, and eventually control.” NH State Representative Neal Kurk
This should appear in the Conway Daily Sun on April 7, but there are no guarantees when it comes to my work. I also feel compelled to say that this may be the only time I ever agree with Representative Neal Kurk.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Controversy in Concord
I was coming around the corner on State St, in Concord, heading down a side street next to the State House. I nearly crashed into a small, scruffy man who had a big cigar stuffed in his face. He was carrying a sign that read, “NO MORE NANNY STATE.” I was surprised, and delighted to find that the libertarians were finally expressing an opinion about the constitutional amendment that would ban recognition of any same sex union in NH. “It’s about time,” I thought to myself. “Libertarians spout off about privacy rights, but never seem to take any action. This is great.”
I was wrong, of course. The House was voting on a bill that would ban smoking in restaurants, and that’s what the anti-nanny staters were up in arms about. The right to kill folks with second hand smoke (in the name of the rights of the individual or business owner) is worth fighting for – but civil rights are not. It’s too bad. They might have broader appeal and credibility if they walked their talk more often, and on more issues.
The NH House did vote for the smoking ban. This controversial vote has a lot of folks up in arms about the rights of the individual and the business owner. The health of workers is always dismissed, as apparently those underpaid restaurant employees have unlimited choices about where they work. So diners and drinkers can choose to go to a non-smoking establishment, and employees can choose to work elsewhere. Heck, let’s go whole hog – and eliminate the board of health. Surely those pesky health inspections to make sure that a kitchen is clean and free of rat droppings are the sort of inconvenience that a business owner shouldn’t be forced to endure. After all – the customer can choose to go elsewhere, where rat feces aren’t a side dish.
NH makes a ton of money peddling death in the form of individual choice. Spare me the rationalizations about junk food and alcohol. Most people do not drink to excess, and alcohol has a positive health benefit for some – that healthy glass of red wine. If someone eats fast food until they die the rest of us won’t die from being exposed to them.
Cigarettes have no redeeming value – it’s a product that when used as directed causes disease and ultimately death. NH has the lowest tobacco taxes in New England. We want to sell you some foul smelling death – it’s one way we fund our state government. We’d rather kill you than tax our own millionaires, thank you very much. Naturally we’d rather you come from out of state to buy, because we don’t want to pay for your exorbitant health care costs as you sicken and die.
I was surprised by this vote. I’ve seen the tobacco lobbyists working the House in the past, with great success. I lived in California when the smoking ban was enacted, and it didn’t hurt business there, and it won’t here. There will be plenty snorts and sighs about the erosion of the rights of the individual. I wish those folks were a little less concerned about smoking, and a little more concerned about the Bush administration eavesdropping on American citizens. That’s a bigger outrage than banning cigarettes. It is a shame that the “ownership society” validates the conservative myth of the rugged individual. We are increasinongly less concerned the greater good, to our societal detriment. The anti-nanny staters can relax; it’s unlikely that this bill will pass the NH Senate. Senate campaigns are hugely expensive, and the tobacco lobby is strong, persuasive, and carries a big checkbook.
The House also voted that CACR34, the proposed amendment to the NH Constitution that would refuse to recognize any same sex union, was inexpedient to legislate, or ITL. The vote was 207 to 125 against tinkering with the state constitution.
This is a huge victory for civil rights and just plain sensible thinking. The amendment was proposed to give right wingers a chance to weigh in on same sex marriage in an election year – and to use it to stir up the basest of their base. As has been said aplenty, using the constitution to deny rights to a minority group is reprehensible.
A lot of grumpy right wingers are unhappy about this vote – because the issue “should be decided by the people.” These are folks who apparently wanted this to be a big, ugly divisive issue in an election year. Given that NH law already prevents same sex marriage, this was an unnecessary bit of theatrical display, and our state representatives voted very sensibly to scuttle it. We the people had plenty of opportunities to lobby our legislators about it. In fact, this vote gives me the opportunity to do something I have never done before – congratulate the entire Carroll County District 1 contingent on their vote. Carolyn Brown, Tom Buco, Gene Chandler, and Howard Dickinson all voted against this bad bill, and so did Harry Merrow in district 3. Representatives Philbrick, McConkey, and Babson voted in favor constitutional amendment. The whole roll call vote is available at the state house website: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/ .
Our district 1 representatives deserve our thanks, so don’t be stingy! A thank you from you is going to mean more to Gene Chandler than one from me, no matter how sincere mine may be.
“If you let us marry each other, we will stop marrying you.” Jason Stuart – gay comedian
This column should appear in the March 24 edition of the Conway Daily Sun, though one can never be sure.
I was wrong, of course. The House was voting on a bill that would ban smoking in restaurants, and that’s what the anti-nanny staters were up in arms about. The right to kill folks with second hand smoke (in the name of the rights of the individual or business owner) is worth fighting for – but civil rights are not. It’s too bad. They might have broader appeal and credibility if they walked their talk more often, and on more issues.
The NH House did vote for the smoking ban. This controversial vote has a lot of folks up in arms about the rights of the individual and the business owner. The health of workers is always dismissed, as apparently those underpaid restaurant employees have unlimited choices about where they work. So diners and drinkers can choose to go to a non-smoking establishment, and employees can choose to work elsewhere. Heck, let’s go whole hog – and eliminate the board of health. Surely those pesky health inspections to make sure that a kitchen is clean and free of rat droppings are the sort of inconvenience that a business owner shouldn’t be forced to endure. After all – the customer can choose to go elsewhere, where rat feces aren’t a side dish.
NH makes a ton of money peddling death in the form of individual choice. Spare me the rationalizations about junk food and alcohol. Most people do not drink to excess, and alcohol has a positive health benefit for some – that healthy glass of red wine. If someone eats fast food until they die the rest of us won’t die from being exposed to them.
Cigarettes have no redeeming value – it’s a product that when used as directed causes disease and ultimately death. NH has the lowest tobacco taxes in New England. We want to sell you some foul smelling death – it’s one way we fund our state government. We’d rather kill you than tax our own millionaires, thank you very much. Naturally we’d rather you come from out of state to buy, because we don’t want to pay for your exorbitant health care costs as you sicken and die.
I was surprised by this vote. I’ve seen the tobacco lobbyists working the House in the past, with great success. I lived in California when the smoking ban was enacted, and it didn’t hurt business there, and it won’t here. There will be plenty snorts and sighs about the erosion of the rights of the individual. I wish those folks were a little less concerned about smoking, and a little more concerned about the Bush administration eavesdropping on American citizens. That’s a bigger outrage than banning cigarettes. It is a shame that the “ownership society” validates the conservative myth of the rugged individual. We are increasinongly less concerned the greater good, to our societal detriment. The anti-nanny staters can relax; it’s unlikely that this bill will pass the NH Senate. Senate campaigns are hugely expensive, and the tobacco lobby is strong, persuasive, and carries a big checkbook.
The House also voted that CACR34, the proposed amendment to the NH Constitution that would refuse to recognize any same sex union, was inexpedient to legislate, or ITL. The vote was 207 to 125 against tinkering with the state constitution.
This is a huge victory for civil rights and just plain sensible thinking. The amendment was proposed to give right wingers a chance to weigh in on same sex marriage in an election year – and to use it to stir up the basest of their base. As has been said aplenty, using the constitution to deny rights to a minority group is reprehensible.
A lot of grumpy right wingers are unhappy about this vote – because the issue “should be decided by the people.” These are folks who apparently wanted this to be a big, ugly divisive issue in an election year. Given that NH law already prevents same sex marriage, this was an unnecessary bit of theatrical display, and our state representatives voted very sensibly to scuttle it. We the people had plenty of opportunities to lobby our legislators about it. In fact, this vote gives me the opportunity to do something I have never done before – congratulate the entire Carroll County District 1 contingent on their vote. Carolyn Brown, Tom Buco, Gene Chandler, and Howard Dickinson all voted against this bad bill, and so did Harry Merrow in district 3. Representatives Philbrick, McConkey, and Babson voted in favor constitutional amendment. The whole roll call vote is available at the state house website: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/ .
Our district 1 representatives deserve our thanks, so don’t be stingy! A thank you from you is going to mean more to Gene Chandler than one from me, no matter how sincere mine may be.
“If you let us marry each other, we will stop marrying you.” Jason Stuart – gay comedian
This column should appear in the March 24 edition of the Conway Daily Sun, though one can never be sure.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
A Hive of Glass
Jackson is a nice little town. Colleagues from around the country are amazed when I tell them I live in a town with a two room schoolhouse. Jackson has a long history of hospitality. In the 1800’s, Jackson provided lodging for visitors to the area. There were hotels, boarding houses, and cottages. Families would come by train and spend the entire summer here. World War II put an end to those summers, and some of the grand hotels were boarded up for decades afterward. When I was a child visiting the area, Gray’s Inn and the Wentworth were quietly moldering. A fire claimed Gray’s Inn, but the Wentworth was mercifully restored. We are small, we are quaint, and many of our historic buildings are still standing, well used, and lovely. We want to keep that, and rightly so.
The unrestrained (and unsightly) growth and sprawl in Conway is spreading north, which is a matter of concern for those of us living north of the once scenic vista. A good master plan and good zoning regulations are important. Having no zoning can lead to disaster, as we’ve seen in Tamworth. This year the Jackson Planning Board has proposed the addition of something called “performance zoning,” which would be applied only to the “business overlay district,” which is essentially the area from the Bartlett town line north to the intersection of 16 and 16A, including the business “loop.” Performance zoning is being touted as being the kind of flexible regulation that would help us preserve the integrity and rural character of our town. Performance zoning sets two types of criteria for a project, absolute and relative. There are 10 absolute criteria that a project would have to meet, and 22 relative criteria. The relative criteria are judged on a point basis, and the points are scored: positive, negative, or neutral. The relative criteria seem to have been cut and pasted from some other town’s zoning regs. Points are awarded or subtracted for building sidewalks. (Psst – we have those already). Points are awarded or subtracted for of street parking behind or beside a building. (Pssst – restaurants need to have parking right out in front where it’s visible.) Clearly these criteria were not designed specifically for Jackson. Clearly this isn’t so flexible, either.
The new regulations would apply to commercial use developments, cluster single family developments, multi-family residential developments, and multi-family buildings in excess of two dwelling units, in the village overlay district. It’s curious that the planning board would encourage residential development in the commercial zone. Every town needs a center, if there is to be community. Norman Rockwell painted quaint little towns, and in those paintings there are businesses; barber shops, diners, and stores. Those hotel rooms bring folks to town that spend money in the restaurants and shops, and go home, without becoming a tax burden. The businesses, in turn, donate gift certificates and other services for fundraisers and charities. They also provide employment and a gathering place for folks in town to meet and chat. As time goes on, and climate change affects our area even more, having small, one of a kind businesses in the loop can only be an asset to the town.
The “development” of downtown Jackson should be done with the utmost care. Unfortunately, the performance zoning regulations we’ll be voting on next week are not the tools we need. Other NH towns have performance zoning in place, but they are in urban areas – like Bow. The Jackson Planning Board is not elected. They are appointed by the selectmen. No one has oversight over them. There are no checks and balances in place. Under the proposed zoning changes, a project would go to the planning board for approval. If it is not approved, there would be no appeals process. An appeal would go straight to superior court. So, a property owner in the loop would be paying double in an appeals process – paying for his/her own lawyer, while paying taxes going to the town lawyer. This only applies to businesses in the loop. Businesses outside of the “overlay district” would be paying the same taxes and allowed greater flexibility for development or projects on their property. Conceivably, the Wildcat Tavern could be denied a permit to build the same woodshed that would be permitted at the Christmas Farm Inn. This is not only unneighborly, it’s downright discriminatory.
It’s unfortunate that the proposed changes have been done so hastily. Local business owners were not involved in the discussion, or the writing. In fact, in the narrative, property owners on the loop are referred to as “an imminent threat.” That kind of divisive language isn’t going to help maintain the sense of community Jackson has always enjoyed. The haste is based on fear of “people from away” building big ugly things. There was a rumor that a downtown property might be sold, and developed as a hotel. Instead of making that a positive thing, the selectmen and planners chose to go on the defensive. Wal-Mart can’t build in Jackson. Neither can a big hotel chain. Jackson has no town septic, and has some stringent limits on what goes into the soil. That provides a huge measure of protection. Bow adopted performance zoning when they put in town water and septic.
A single family mcmansion could be built in the overlay district, without having to apply to the performance zoning guidelines. A huge tacky pink stucco structure, looking completely alien to the village – larger than life and twice as ugly– and as a single family dwelling, it would not be prevented. In fact there isn’t anything in the zoning as it’s written that addresses how a building looks, or how it is landscaped. Regulations stipulating look, superior construction materials, energy efficiency, and landscaping would make sense. What the planning board has given Jackson voters, with the endorsement of the selectmen, does not make sense.
We have a choice. We can move forward in haste and get something that discriminates against some property owners, something that isn’t specific to our town, something that creates divisiveness and discord – and we can try to change it afterward. Or we can vote NO on performance zoning, and begin the process again, this time with input from business owners and other interested folks. We can create a plan that is specific to downtown Jackson, one that builds community and fosters goodwill. Hardly a difficult choice, is it? See you at the polls.
A village is a hive of glass, where nothing unobserved can pass.” Charles H. Spurgeon
From the March 10, 2006 Conway Daily Sun. Get out and vote, fellow Jacksonites!
The unrestrained (and unsightly) growth and sprawl in Conway is spreading north, which is a matter of concern for those of us living north of the once scenic vista. A good master plan and good zoning regulations are important. Having no zoning can lead to disaster, as we’ve seen in Tamworth. This year the Jackson Planning Board has proposed the addition of something called “performance zoning,” which would be applied only to the “business overlay district,” which is essentially the area from the Bartlett town line north to the intersection of 16 and 16A, including the business “loop.” Performance zoning is being touted as being the kind of flexible regulation that would help us preserve the integrity and rural character of our town. Performance zoning sets two types of criteria for a project, absolute and relative. There are 10 absolute criteria that a project would have to meet, and 22 relative criteria. The relative criteria are judged on a point basis, and the points are scored: positive, negative, or neutral. The relative criteria seem to have been cut and pasted from some other town’s zoning regs. Points are awarded or subtracted for building sidewalks. (Psst – we have those already). Points are awarded or subtracted for of street parking behind or beside a building. (Pssst – restaurants need to have parking right out in front where it’s visible.) Clearly these criteria were not designed specifically for Jackson. Clearly this isn’t so flexible, either.
The new regulations would apply to commercial use developments, cluster single family developments, multi-family residential developments, and multi-family buildings in excess of two dwelling units, in the village overlay district. It’s curious that the planning board would encourage residential development in the commercial zone. Every town needs a center, if there is to be community. Norman Rockwell painted quaint little towns, and in those paintings there are businesses; barber shops, diners, and stores. Those hotel rooms bring folks to town that spend money in the restaurants and shops, and go home, without becoming a tax burden. The businesses, in turn, donate gift certificates and other services for fundraisers and charities. They also provide employment and a gathering place for folks in town to meet and chat. As time goes on, and climate change affects our area even more, having small, one of a kind businesses in the loop can only be an asset to the town.
The “development” of downtown Jackson should be done with the utmost care. Unfortunately, the performance zoning regulations we’ll be voting on next week are not the tools we need. Other NH towns have performance zoning in place, but they are in urban areas – like Bow. The Jackson Planning Board is not elected. They are appointed by the selectmen. No one has oversight over them. There are no checks and balances in place. Under the proposed zoning changes, a project would go to the planning board for approval. If it is not approved, there would be no appeals process. An appeal would go straight to superior court. So, a property owner in the loop would be paying double in an appeals process – paying for his/her own lawyer, while paying taxes going to the town lawyer. This only applies to businesses in the loop. Businesses outside of the “overlay district” would be paying the same taxes and allowed greater flexibility for development or projects on their property. Conceivably, the Wildcat Tavern could be denied a permit to build the same woodshed that would be permitted at the Christmas Farm Inn. This is not only unneighborly, it’s downright discriminatory.
It’s unfortunate that the proposed changes have been done so hastily. Local business owners were not involved in the discussion, or the writing. In fact, in the narrative, property owners on the loop are referred to as “an imminent threat.” That kind of divisive language isn’t going to help maintain the sense of community Jackson has always enjoyed. The haste is based on fear of “people from away” building big ugly things. There was a rumor that a downtown property might be sold, and developed as a hotel. Instead of making that a positive thing, the selectmen and planners chose to go on the defensive. Wal-Mart can’t build in Jackson. Neither can a big hotel chain. Jackson has no town septic, and has some stringent limits on what goes into the soil. That provides a huge measure of protection. Bow adopted performance zoning when they put in town water and septic.
A single family mcmansion could be built in the overlay district, without having to apply to the performance zoning guidelines. A huge tacky pink stucco structure, looking completely alien to the village – larger than life and twice as ugly– and as a single family dwelling, it would not be prevented. In fact there isn’t anything in the zoning as it’s written that addresses how a building looks, or how it is landscaped. Regulations stipulating look, superior construction materials, energy efficiency, and landscaping would make sense. What the planning board has given Jackson voters, with the endorsement of the selectmen, does not make sense.
We have a choice. We can move forward in haste and get something that discriminates against some property owners, something that isn’t specific to our town, something that creates divisiveness and discord – and we can try to change it afterward. Or we can vote NO on performance zoning, and begin the process again, this time with input from business owners and other interested folks. We can create a plan that is specific to downtown Jackson, one that builds community and fosters goodwill. Hardly a difficult choice, is it? See you at the polls.
A village is a hive of glass, where nothing unobserved can pass.” Charles H. Spurgeon
From the March 10, 2006 Conway Daily Sun. Get out and vote, fellow Jacksonites!
Contrived Hysteria
Thanks to an ever-changing schedule, and a few days in bed with a truly evil cold, I’ve been able to catch more of the winter Olympics than usual this year. I grew up in a family of skiers, and the winter games were far more important to us than the summer ones. During the downhill this year, I heard the name Jean Claude Killy invoked a few times, and remembered the Killy slalom skis my father got a deal on one year. They were 220’s – a length that seems preposterous in the world of equipment we have today. The footage of the Alps in Italy has been gorgeous, and seeing actual snow on the ground was nice too. In Jackson, we have no cross country skiers on the golf course this week, only disappointing patches of brown. It’s bad for the local economy, and the general morale. I look forward to the day when the US begins to take global climate change seriously.
I couldn’t stay in bed forever, as attractive as that may have seemed early in the week. The real world beckoned (in the form of my boss) and propelled me back to the wonderful world of the NH legislature.
Last week in Concord, a state rep told me that the legislature has a record number of bills to deal with this year, more than they’ve ever had before. That’s particularly unusual in the non-budget years, when the load is usually a little lighter to make room for the campaigning that needs to be done every two years. Despite this unusual burden, Police Chief Garret Chamberlain of New Ipswich was invited to address the legislature this week, to discuss his experiences with undocumented immigrants. Chamberlain is the vigilante chief who is making a name for himself by attempting to become a one-man immigration department in NH. Chamberlain is much beloved on white nationalist web sites, where they speak reverently of his desire to send brown skinned people “back where they belong.” Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who hopes to ride a very white horse to the White House, came to NH to give him an award a while back.
There are a number of bills this year that deal with immigration issues. A handful of legislators from the Hudson area seem to feel that jailing undocumented immigrants merely for being here, and requiring police and DMV clerks to become offshoots of the INS is a good use of NH resources. Despite the contrived hysteria around immigration, only seven legislators turned out to hear Chamberlain speak. He told the assembled few that “anyone who enters the US illegally is a direct threat to the national security of the US.” Chamberlain also told the few that NH is home to anywhere from 8,000 to 20,000 undocumented immigrants. The Police Chief of New Ipswich isn’t afraid to engage in hyperbole, it seems. The Pew Hispanic Institute estimates that there may be as many as 4,800 undocumented people in NH – the lowest percentage of any state.
There is certainly a need to examine our federal immigration policies, in a calm, reasoned, and respectful way. Unfortunately, it looks as if the GOP is going to use immigration as a wedge issue in the 2006 and 2008 campaigns. They can’t boast of success in Iraq, they’re mired in controversy and corruption, and they’ve created record deficits. The Medicare prescription drug program is a disaster, the much-touted economic recovery isn’t really happening, more Americans are losing health insurance and good paying jobs are disappearing. The answer seems to be to campaign against same sex marriage, choice, and immigration – or bigotry, misogyny, and racism. Not an attractive package, but it may be all they’ve got.
That only seven legislators turned out to listen to Chamberlain is a good sign. Hopefully our NH legislature will choose to deal with the bills before them calmly, rationally, and without racial prejudice. There are a number of groups nationally who are signing on to the White Ribbon Campaign, where they promise to have a sane national dialogue about immigration. You can see who has signed on at whiteribbon.org
Last week, SB316 cleared the NH senate. This bill calls for hospitals to supply interpreters for persons not fluent in English, upon request. It makes sense – a person who isn’t able to converse fluently with a doctor might have to make a number of costly visits before they receive the care they need. That would be a relatively good outcome. A person who could not make himself understood could die from the lack of proper treatment. Spending a few bucks on an interpreter versed in medical language could save thousands in medical costs. This is a chance for the legislature to mandate paying for the ounce of prevention instead of the pound of cure.
This week, HB1492 was heard by the NH House Judiciary committee. This bill would give “immunity from liability to pharmacists who refuse to dispense an emergency contraceptive pill.” The mind boggles at the concept of offering liability protection to people who refuse to do their jobs. It is the job of a pharmacist to dispense medication as directed by physicians. It is not their job to impose their beliefs on the female population.
This bill, if passed, would provide a very slippery slope for other forms of medication that pharmacists might feel “morally” opposed to, including drugs for HIV treatment, anti-depressants, and psychiatric medication. If a pharmacist has such strong beliefs that they cannot fill prescriptions, it is time for them to move on to a new career.
We are truly blessed in NH to have incredible access to our state legislators. They have listed phone numbers. They are always willing to hear our thoughts on legislation, or our concerns. Other states aren’t this fortunate. I was recently called to task by a solon that was unhappy with the way I was portraying legislators. Many of our 400 legislators are people whose names you will never hear, people who work darned hard for that princely sum of $100 that they earn annually. We should all (including me) give them credit for their service, far more often than we do.
“I want you to know that at dinner that evening I gave special thanks for you and the many other wonderful Americans who work with me in the struggle to secure our nation's borders, and the struggle to preserve our national identity, against the tide of illegal immigrants flooding the United States." Tom Tancredo in a letter to his Team America PAC
Published in the February 23, 2006 Conway Daily Sun.
(clearly I was a little behind)
I couldn’t stay in bed forever, as attractive as that may have seemed early in the week. The real world beckoned (in the form of my boss) and propelled me back to the wonderful world of the NH legislature.
Last week in Concord, a state rep told me that the legislature has a record number of bills to deal with this year, more than they’ve ever had before. That’s particularly unusual in the non-budget years, when the load is usually a little lighter to make room for the campaigning that needs to be done every two years. Despite this unusual burden, Police Chief Garret Chamberlain of New Ipswich was invited to address the legislature this week, to discuss his experiences with undocumented immigrants. Chamberlain is the vigilante chief who is making a name for himself by attempting to become a one-man immigration department in NH. Chamberlain is much beloved on white nationalist web sites, where they speak reverently of his desire to send brown skinned people “back where they belong.” Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who hopes to ride a very white horse to the White House, came to NH to give him an award a while back.
There are a number of bills this year that deal with immigration issues. A handful of legislators from the Hudson area seem to feel that jailing undocumented immigrants merely for being here, and requiring police and DMV clerks to become offshoots of the INS is a good use of NH resources. Despite the contrived hysteria around immigration, only seven legislators turned out to hear Chamberlain speak. He told the assembled few that “anyone who enters the US illegally is a direct threat to the national security of the US.” Chamberlain also told the few that NH is home to anywhere from 8,000 to 20,000 undocumented immigrants. The Police Chief of New Ipswich isn’t afraid to engage in hyperbole, it seems. The Pew Hispanic Institute estimates that there may be as many as 4,800 undocumented people in NH – the lowest percentage of any state.
There is certainly a need to examine our federal immigration policies, in a calm, reasoned, and respectful way. Unfortunately, it looks as if the GOP is going to use immigration as a wedge issue in the 2006 and 2008 campaigns. They can’t boast of success in Iraq, they’re mired in controversy and corruption, and they’ve created record deficits. The Medicare prescription drug program is a disaster, the much-touted economic recovery isn’t really happening, more Americans are losing health insurance and good paying jobs are disappearing. The answer seems to be to campaign against same sex marriage, choice, and immigration – or bigotry, misogyny, and racism. Not an attractive package, but it may be all they’ve got.
That only seven legislators turned out to listen to Chamberlain is a good sign. Hopefully our NH legislature will choose to deal with the bills before them calmly, rationally, and without racial prejudice. There are a number of groups nationally who are signing on to the White Ribbon Campaign, where they promise to have a sane national dialogue about immigration. You can see who has signed on at whiteribbon.org
Last week, SB316 cleared the NH senate. This bill calls for hospitals to supply interpreters for persons not fluent in English, upon request. It makes sense – a person who isn’t able to converse fluently with a doctor might have to make a number of costly visits before they receive the care they need. That would be a relatively good outcome. A person who could not make himself understood could die from the lack of proper treatment. Spending a few bucks on an interpreter versed in medical language could save thousands in medical costs. This is a chance for the legislature to mandate paying for the ounce of prevention instead of the pound of cure.
This week, HB1492 was heard by the NH House Judiciary committee. This bill would give “immunity from liability to pharmacists who refuse to dispense an emergency contraceptive pill.” The mind boggles at the concept of offering liability protection to people who refuse to do their jobs. It is the job of a pharmacist to dispense medication as directed by physicians. It is not their job to impose their beliefs on the female population.
This bill, if passed, would provide a very slippery slope for other forms of medication that pharmacists might feel “morally” opposed to, including drugs for HIV treatment, anti-depressants, and psychiatric medication. If a pharmacist has such strong beliefs that they cannot fill prescriptions, it is time for them to move on to a new career.
We are truly blessed in NH to have incredible access to our state legislators. They have listed phone numbers. They are always willing to hear our thoughts on legislation, or our concerns. Other states aren’t this fortunate. I was recently called to task by a solon that was unhappy with the way I was portraying legislators. Many of our 400 legislators are people whose names you will never hear, people who work darned hard for that princely sum of $100 that they earn annually. We should all (including me) give them credit for their service, far more often than we do.
“I want you to know that at dinner that evening I gave special thanks for you and the many other wonderful Americans who work with me in the struggle to secure our nation's borders, and the struggle to preserve our national identity, against the tide of illegal immigrants flooding the United States." Tom Tancredo in a letter to his Team America PAC
Published in the February 23, 2006 Conway Daily Sun.
(clearly I was a little behind)
The Single Digit Peace Sign
I want to be on time, but I often fail. So, I was a little late, heading across the street to hear the testimony on CACR-34, the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. As I reached the State House I could see that something was missing. The crowd of anti-gay activists, waving ugly signs was absent. Maybe the cold renders their vitriol glands sluggish, and they hibernate for the winter. Whatever the reason, it was nice not to see them.
There were nearly 300 people in Representatives Hall to testify, listen, and offer support to one side or the other. Everyone was behaving like grown ups. There was no wailing or gnashing of teeth. This time the testimony had a different flavor, because folks were there to discuss a potential amendment to the NH constitution. A constitutional amendment is serious business, and that was reflected in most of the testimony.
The news coverage of the hearing was more than a little one-sided. Every report I heard mentioned that there were many ministers present – but then played news clips from anti-gay ministers. No one reported the numerous ministers (and at least one rabbi) who spoke against the amendment. That included NHPR. So much for the on-going myth of the “liberal” media.
The proposed amendment is the redundant cherry on top of the 2 laws NH already has in place. One forbids same sex marriage. The other states that NH won’t recognize same sex marriages or civil unions from other states. One might think those laws would be all that we needed to deny our gay brothers and sisters equal rights. One would be failing to consider the fact that this is an election year – and this whole amendment was cooked up as a platform for bigoted legislators to bellow from. It will also provide a lot of opportunities for the rest of us to fight with our neighbors. We don’t have enough unpleasantness, apparently, to satisfy some members of the legislature. We need a big, expensive fight that will create a lot of divisiveness.
No matter how anyone feels about same sex marriage, using the NH Constitution as a way of punishing a minority group is wrong. The constitution has traditionally clarified, or enhanced the rights of NH residents. To use it for the purposes of denying rights would be a mistake. It also goes against the whole NH “live free or die” philosophy. Most NH residents are not window-peeping perverts obsessed with the sex lives of others. We’re far more interested in what kind of folks our neighbors are, not what they do behind closed doors. Call your legislators and urge them to vote against this nasty bit of business.
This past Wednesday, President Bush spoke at a NH Business and Industry Association luncheon in Manchester. He was in town to talk to the NH BIA about his budget cuts; tax breaks for millionaires, and of course, to cheer about the booming economy. It is booming, for the wealthiest one percent. On a very cold day, a hundred people gathered across the street to protest the president. I spoke with several people who had never participated in a protest before – average folks who just felt compelled to be there. A lot of people were concerned about health care, and nervous about having no insurance. Some college students voiced concerns about the cuts to the low interest student loan programs – cuts that will add over $2000 to their debt load. The cuts in the recently passed budget reconciliation package were frightening enough, but the cuts proposed for 2007 are terrifying to many who were there. Somehow cutting food programs for seniors, in order to give the Pentagon even more money didn’t seem to reflect the values of those present outside the Radisson Center on Wednesday.
One young man asked me if I thought that standing around outside with signs was accomplishing anything. My answer was yes. It is worthwhile to stand up and be counted, now and again. The majority of those driving by honked, cheered, and waved. The protestors were a symbol of hope for them. As they drove by, they knew they weren’t alone – the way that one can often feel living in this red state. And for those who angrily drove by waving the single digit peace sign – we were providing a public service by giving them someone else to hate. To be a symbol of both hope and hatred can be oddly satisfying. Some days, that’s enough reason to go outside and hold up a sign.
“The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naive and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair.” H.L. Mencken
This was published in the February 10, 2006 Conway Daily Sun.
There were nearly 300 people in Representatives Hall to testify, listen, and offer support to one side or the other. Everyone was behaving like grown ups. There was no wailing or gnashing of teeth. This time the testimony had a different flavor, because folks were there to discuss a potential amendment to the NH constitution. A constitutional amendment is serious business, and that was reflected in most of the testimony.
The news coverage of the hearing was more than a little one-sided. Every report I heard mentioned that there were many ministers present – but then played news clips from anti-gay ministers. No one reported the numerous ministers (and at least one rabbi) who spoke against the amendment. That included NHPR. So much for the on-going myth of the “liberal” media.
The proposed amendment is the redundant cherry on top of the 2 laws NH already has in place. One forbids same sex marriage. The other states that NH won’t recognize same sex marriages or civil unions from other states. One might think those laws would be all that we needed to deny our gay brothers and sisters equal rights. One would be failing to consider the fact that this is an election year – and this whole amendment was cooked up as a platform for bigoted legislators to bellow from. It will also provide a lot of opportunities for the rest of us to fight with our neighbors. We don’t have enough unpleasantness, apparently, to satisfy some members of the legislature. We need a big, expensive fight that will create a lot of divisiveness.
No matter how anyone feels about same sex marriage, using the NH Constitution as a way of punishing a minority group is wrong. The constitution has traditionally clarified, or enhanced the rights of NH residents. To use it for the purposes of denying rights would be a mistake. It also goes against the whole NH “live free or die” philosophy. Most NH residents are not window-peeping perverts obsessed with the sex lives of others. We’re far more interested in what kind of folks our neighbors are, not what they do behind closed doors. Call your legislators and urge them to vote against this nasty bit of business.
This past Wednesday, President Bush spoke at a NH Business and Industry Association luncheon in Manchester. He was in town to talk to the NH BIA about his budget cuts; tax breaks for millionaires, and of course, to cheer about the booming economy. It is booming, for the wealthiest one percent. On a very cold day, a hundred people gathered across the street to protest the president. I spoke with several people who had never participated in a protest before – average folks who just felt compelled to be there. A lot of people were concerned about health care, and nervous about having no insurance. Some college students voiced concerns about the cuts to the low interest student loan programs – cuts that will add over $2000 to their debt load. The cuts in the recently passed budget reconciliation package were frightening enough, but the cuts proposed for 2007 are terrifying to many who were there. Somehow cutting food programs for seniors, in order to give the Pentagon even more money didn’t seem to reflect the values of those present outside the Radisson Center on Wednesday.
One young man asked me if I thought that standing around outside with signs was accomplishing anything. My answer was yes. It is worthwhile to stand up and be counted, now and again. The majority of those driving by honked, cheered, and waved. The protestors were a symbol of hope for them. As they drove by, they knew they weren’t alone – the way that one can often feel living in this red state. And for those who angrily drove by waving the single digit peace sign – we were providing a public service by giving them someone else to hate. To be a symbol of both hope and hatred can be oddly satisfying. Some days, that’s enough reason to go outside and hold up a sign.
“The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naive and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair.” H.L. Mencken
This was published in the February 10, 2006 Conway Daily Sun.
Correcting Corrections
Driving around the state gives me a chance to catch up on the news. Last week I heard a number of stories – some good and some bad- about New Hampshire. One of the disturbing stories concerned the abuse of prisoners and prison employees. In the past 6 years, NH has paid out more than $700,000 to settle lawsuits or honor jury awards in at least 8 cases alleging rape and sexual harassment. Most disturbing was the fact that a 2002 state audit warned prison officials that they needed to “drastically” improve the way they treated sexual misconduct, or the lawsuits and complaints would continue.
One case involved a $140,000 settlement in the case of a female inmate who was raped by a corrections officer at the women’s prison in Goffstown. She was serving a 30 day sentence for DWI. The other cases involved employees alleging harassment or assault on the job. In one case, the family of a former corrections officer was awarded $99,000, after he committed suicide. Before he died, he’d filed a lawsuit alleging he had become suicidal after being sexually assaulted by his supervisor.
Last week, a new claim was filed against former Sgt. Douglas Tower, accusing Tower of sexually assaulting 3 women at the Shea Farm halfway house in Concord. The week before Tower was arrested on charges that he raped 4 female inmates. That’s a total of 7 charges against Tower so far – and authorities say there may be additional charges. Tower says that women at Shea Farm flirted with him, and dressed provocatively. His lawyer argued that these allegations are made by felons, and therefore unreliable. One woman said Tower raped her in his office, after signing papers granting her a visit with her children, telling her “she owed him one,” and she better not say anything or she’d get sent back to the women’s prison. He also told her that investigators hadn’t believed a female corrections officer who accused him of inappropriate behavior, so if they didn’t believe an officer, they were not going to believe an inmate.
It’s an old story, unfortunately. As long as there have been prisons there have been abusers. Some gravitate to the work, and some are changed by the situation. In prison, corrections officer have complete power over inmates. That kind of power, combined with the dehumanization of prisoners can lead to ugly behavior.
In 1971 an experiment was done at Stanford University, by Professor Phillip Zimbardo. Zimbardo ran an ad asking for volunteers for a study that would last 2 weeks, and paid $15 a day. Over 70 men answered the ad. After interviews and psychological tests, the two dozen most average and healthy men were chosen. They were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners. The prisoners were “arrested” at their homes, booked at a real jail, then blindfolded and taken to a makeshift prison in the basement of Jordan Hall at Stanford.
Those assigned to be guards were given uniforms, and told that they were not to use violence, but their job was to maintain control of the prison. On the second day of the experiment, the prisoners staged a rebellion. After it was successfully quelled by the guards, according to Zimbardo, “they steadily increased their coercive aggression tactics, humiliation, and dehumanization of the prisoners. Staff had to frequently remind the guards to refrain from such tactics.” The worst instances occurred in the middle of the night when the guards thought no one was watching. Prisoners were forced to clean out toilet bowls with their bare hands or act out degrading scenarios. (Naked human pyramids anyone?)
The experiment came to a halt on the fifth day, when Christina Maslach came in. Maslach had just received her doctorate in psychology, and was dating Zimbardo. She had agreed to do subject interviews. When she saw “guards” leading prisoners with paper bags over their heads to the bathrooms, she was horrified. She told Zimbardo that what they were doing was wrong – and he eventually agreed that he and all of the others had been corrupted by the experiment. Maslach’s career led her into researching the process of dehumanization, how people responsible for the care and treatment of others can come to view them as objects. It surely didn’t take long in the Stanford experiment.
The first “prisoner” released from the experiment went on to become a prison psychologist. Zimbardo studies the social psychology of madness in groups and cults. He has mixed feelings about the ethics of his experiment. He’s also disappointed that the study didn’t bring about the kind of changes he’d hoped for in prisons. If anything, US prisons have become even less humane in the last 25 years.
Without clear guidelines, careful supervision, and ongoing training and education, corrections officers can come to regard their charges as objects deserving of degradation and humiliation. They can revel in their own power over those entrusted to their care. The 2002 audit done in NH revealed that sexual harassment investigators received little training and took longer than average to respond to complaints; the record keeping was extremely poor and made tracking complaints nearly impossible; and that inmate prison manuals did not sufficiently explain how inmates could make reports or complaints. The employee manual prohibited sex with other employees, but not with inmates.
This is an ugly situation, and one that the NH Corrections Dept. must clean up at once. It’s time to get out the big broom and sweep out the predators and deviates that may still be working in NH prisons. It’s long past time to question the concept of having male corrections officers in female prisons. It’s time to make policy and personnel changes. It’s time for all of this to see the light of day. We are as sick as our secrets.
A day or so after I first heard this story, I heard another – that an additional 500 beds need to be added to the NH state prison system. We should all be asking what, exactly we are building, and why.
“Evil is knowing better, but willingly doing worse.” Phillip Zimbardo
This ran on January 27, 2006 in the Conway Daily Sun.
One case involved a $140,000 settlement in the case of a female inmate who was raped by a corrections officer at the women’s prison in Goffstown. She was serving a 30 day sentence for DWI. The other cases involved employees alleging harassment or assault on the job. In one case, the family of a former corrections officer was awarded $99,000, after he committed suicide. Before he died, he’d filed a lawsuit alleging he had become suicidal after being sexually assaulted by his supervisor.
Last week, a new claim was filed against former Sgt. Douglas Tower, accusing Tower of sexually assaulting 3 women at the Shea Farm halfway house in Concord. The week before Tower was arrested on charges that he raped 4 female inmates. That’s a total of 7 charges against Tower so far – and authorities say there may be additional charges. Tower says that women at Shea Farm flirted with him, and dressed provocatively. His lawyer argued that these allegations are made by felons, and therefore unreliable. One woman said Tower raped her in his office, after signing papers granting her a visit with her children, telling her “she owed him one,” and she better not say anything or she’d get sent back to the women’s prison. He also told her that investigators hadn’t believed a female corrections officer who accused him of inappropriate behavior, so if they didn’t believe an officer, they were not going to believe an inmate.
It’s an old story, unfortunately. As long as there have been prisons there have been abusers. Some gravitate to the work, and some are changed by the situation. In prison, corrections officer have complete power over inmates. That kind of power, combined with the dehumanization of prisoners can lead to ugly behavior.
In 1971 an experiment was done at Stanford University, by Professor Phillip Zimbardo. Zimbardo ran an ad asking for volunteers for a study that would last 2 weeks, and paid $15 a day. Over 70 men answered the ad. After interviews and psychological tests, the two dozen most average and healthy men were chosen. They were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners. The prisoners were “arrested” at their homes, booked at a real jail, then blindfolded and taken to a makeshift prison in the basement of Jordan Hall at Stanford.
Those assigned to be guards were given uniforms, and told that they were not to use violence, but their job was to maintain control of the prison. On the second day of the experiment, the prisoners staged a rebellion. After it was successfully quelled by the guards, according to Zimbardo, “they steadily increased their coercive aggression tactics, humiliation, and dehumanization of the prisoners. Staff had to frequently remind the guards to refrain from such tactics.” The worst instances occurred in the middle of the night when the guards thought no one was watching. Prisoners were forced to clean out toilet bowls with their bare hands or act out degrading scenarios. (Naked human pyramids anyone?)
The experiment came to a halt on the fifth day, when Christina Maslach came in. Maslach had just received her doctorate in psychology, and was dating Zimbardo. She had agreed to do subject interviews. When she saw “guards” leading prisoners with paper bags over their heads to the bathrooms, she was horrified. She told Zimbardo that what they were doing was wrong – and he eventually agreed that he and all of the others had been corrupted by the experiment. Maslach’s career led her into researching the process of dehumanization, how people responsible for the care and treatment of others can come to view them as objects. It surely didn’t take long in the Stanford experiment.
The first “prisoner” released from the experiment went on to become a prison psychologist. Zimbardo studies the social psychology of madness in groups and cults. He has mixed feelings about the ethics of his experiment. He’s also disappointed that the study didn’t bring about the kind of changes he’d hoped for in prisons. If anything, US prisons have become even less humane in the last 25 years.
Without clear guidelines, careful supervision, and ongoing training and education, corrections officers can come to regard their charges as objects deserving of degradation and humiliation. They can revel in their own power over those entrusted to their care. The 2002 audit done in NH revealed that sexual harassment investigators received little training and took longer than average to respond to complaints; the record keeping was extremely poor and made tracking complaints nearly impossible; and that inmate prison manuals did not sufficiently explain how inmates could make reports or complaints. The employee manual prohibited sex with other employees, but not with inmates.
This is an ugly situation, and one that the NH Corrections Dept. must clean up at once. It’s time to get out the big broom and sweep out the predators and deviates that may still be working in NH prisons. It’s long past time to question the concept of having male corrections officers in female prisons. It’s time to make policy and personnel changes. It’s time for all of this to see the light of day. We are as sick as our secrets.
A day or so after I first heard this story, I heard another – that an additional 500 beds need to be added to the NH state prison system. We should all be asking what, exactly we are building, and why.
“Evil is knowing better, but willingly doing worse.” Phillip Zimbardo
This ran on January 27, 2006 in the Conway Daily Sun.
Friday, January 13, 2006
Broader Discussions Needed
The yellow and blue hoods are back on the parking meters in Concord, signifying the legislature is back in session. Hearings have begun, and a certain amount of chaos reigns in the early weeks – akin to the returning to school after having the summer off. Our solons will be dealing with a number of hot topics this year, including health care (a perennial issue) and the new, hot topic of immigration.
NH is a small, but growing state. We have 1.3 million residents, according to our last census. Approximately four percent of our population is comprised of people of color. The 2000 census figures show our state to be 96 percent white. Given those statistics, it’s a little curious that there were over a dozen bills heading to the legislature to deal with immigration issues. We are not a border state. At most we may have a few thousand undocumented people in our state, which hardly seems to merit such an abundance of proposed law. Some of the legislation has been condensed, so now there are only 7 or 8 bills, which still seems a lot for NH.
Immigration has been seized by the extreme right as the next wedge issue, and they’re using it to scapegoat people with brown skin. There is absolutely no reason to try to turn NH law enforcement personnel into experts on immigration law, and the reading of immigration documents. Immigration is a federal issue. They are the experts. We’ve already seen cops engaging in racial profiling in some southern towns, and I wonder – is this who we really want to be in this state? Targeting undocumented immigrants leads to ethnic profiling of many immigrants, though not all. The only undocumented immigrants I’ve met in recent years are from Canada, and they aren’t prospects for profiling. There are 26 different varieties of immigrant status which are not immediately visible to a cop pulling over a car. Is this the best use of our law enforcement, our courts, and our state resources? The anti-immigrant folk have begun tying their issue to homeland security. Could someone please remind me how many Mexicans flew planes into the World Trade Center?
Once again, we’re going about solving a problem backwards. Instead of targeting the undocumented people who come here to try to have a better life – why aren’t we having a national dialogue about the abject failure of our trade policies and agreements? If NAFTA were working, people wouldn’t be literally dying to come here.
As always, a number of bills relating to health care will be dealt with this year. This past Wednesday, the Commerce Committee had a hearing on HB 1704, the Fair Share Health Act. HB 1704 calls for companies with more than 1500 employees to either spend a percentage of their payroll on employee health care, or pay into a state fund to cover more Granite Staters. Maryland, Rhode Island, and Washington all have similar bills in process. The consensus is that some big companies aren’t offering affordable health care to their employees. Interestingly, NH doesn’t collect the kind of data that would prove or disprove the assertions. There is a bill coming up that would require that data to be collected in the future.
It was an interesting hearing. The conference room was packed with lobbyists for various business associations and insurance companies. Those of us in attendance heard the history of the employer based health care system a couple of times, while business lobbyists were making the case that employers shouldn’t be responsible for providing health care for employees. One rather snide lobbyist tried to suggest that this assumption on the part of employees was really silly. A couple of legislators felt that people have the option of shopping around for an employer who provides good benefits, that indeed that is the responsibility of the worker. I hasten to add that none of those legislators were from the north country, where that kind of shopping isn’t an option for many workers. Representative Howard Dickinson of Conway was present for part of the hearing, and agreed that this might be a way to move forward in solving our state’s health care problems.
The employer based system began during WWII. It was a temporary measure, aimed at preventing the inflation that might have resulted in the tight labor market created by 15 million men joining the military. The system continued to expand after the war. Health care costs were considerably less back then, and during the Eisenhower days, many Americans spent their lives working for just one company. Corporate loyalty to employees was different then – CEO’s weren’t making 430 times more than their lowest paid employee. Pensions and health benefits were part of the package loyal employees received.
Those days are over. Corporate America wants out of pensions, and health care. Proponents of the “ownership society” believe that workers should purchase their own health care. Conservatives love the concept of the Health Savings Account, where workers pay into an account, and manage their own health care spending. This is a wonderful idea for the wealthy – but for folks struggling to pay the rent, not so wonderful. Worker wages haven’t kept pace with CEO wages. If they had, the minimum wage would be $23.50 an hour.
Once again, we are looking at solving a problem the wrong way. I don’t blame business for wanting out of the employer based system. It’s not working, and it’s not fair. When an employee leaves a company they lose their insurance – that’s not right. Representative Stepanek on the Commerce Committee mentioned several times that what data supporters of HB 1704 had might be flawed, because most businesses only ensure full time employees. Folks here in the valley know that all too well. Part time employees aren’t alive only part time – and those who have multiple part time jobs are mysteriously deemed to be not meritorious of insurance? It doesn’t make any sense.
It’s wrong for the business lobbyists to try to claim some sort of amnesia. We do, for now, have an employer based system of health care in this country. We should certainly be deciding whether or not to go forward with that. For now, we have to deal with the system we have. HB 1704 is not a perfect bill, but it is a place to start the broader conversations that we desperately need to be having.
“Let's face it, in America today we don't have a health care system, we have a sick care system.” Tom Harkin
NH is a small, but growing state. We have 1.3 million residents, according to our last census. Approximately four percent of our population is comprised of people of color. The 2000 census figures show our state to be 96 percent white. Given those statistics, it’s a little curious that there were over a dozen bills heading to the legislature to deal with immigration issues. We are not a border state. At most we may have a few thousand undocumented people in our state, which hardly seems to merit such an abundance of proposed law. Some of the legislation has been condensed, so now there are only 7 or 8 bills, which still seems a lot for NH.
Immigration has been seized by the extreme right as the next wedge issue, and they’re using it to scapegoat people with brown skin. There is absolutely no reason to try to turn NH law enforcement personnel into experts on immigration law, and the reading of immigration documents. Immigration is a federal issue. They are the experts. We’ve already seen cops engaging in racial profiling in some southern towns, and I wonder – is this who we really want to be in this state? Targeting undocumented immigrants leads to ethnic profiling of many immigrants, though not all. The only undocumented immigrants I’ve met in recent years are from Canada, and they aren’t prospects for profiling. There are 26 different varieties of immigrant status which are not immediately visible to a cop pulling over a car. Is this the best use of our law enforcement, our courts, and our state resources? The anti-immigrant folk have begun tying their issue to homeland security. Could someone please remind me how many Mexicans flew planes into the World Trade Center?
Once again, we’re going about solving a problem backwards. Instead of targeting the undocumented people who come here to try to have a better life – why aren’t we having a national dialogue about the abject failure of our trade policies and agreements? If NAFTA were working, people wouldn’t be literally dying to come here.
As always, a number of bills relating to health care will be dealt with this year. This past Wednesday, the Commerce Committee had a hearing on HB 1704, the Fair Share Health Act. HB 1704 calls for companies with more than 1500 employees to either spend a percentage of their payroll on employee health care, or pay into a state fund to cover more Granite Staters. Maryland, Rhode Island, and Washington all have similar bills in process. The consensus is that some big companies aren’t offering affordable health care to their employees. Interestingly, NH doesn’t collect the kind of data that would prove or disprove the assertions. There is a bill coming up that would require that data to be collected in the future.
It was an interesting hearing. The conference room was packed with lobbyists for various business associations and insurance companies. Those of us in attendance heard the history of the employer based health care system a couple of times, while business lobbyists were making the case that employers shouldn’t be responsible for providing health care for employees. One rather snide lobbyist tried to suggest that this assumption on the part of employees was really silly. A couple of legislators felt that people have the option of shopping around for an employer who provides good benefits, that indeed that is the responsibility of the worker. I hasten to add that none of those legislators were from the north country, where that kind of shopping isn’t an option for many workers. Representative Howard Dickinson of Conway was present for part of the hearing, and agreed that this might be a way to move forward in solving our state’s health care problems.
The employer based system began during WWII. It was a temporary measure, aimed at preventing the inflation that might have resulted in the tight labor market created by 15 million men joining the military. The system continued to expand after the war. Health care costs were considerably less back then, and during the Eisenhower days, many Americans spent their lives working for just one company. Corporate loyalty to employees was different then – CEO’s weren’t making 430 times more than their lowest paid employee. Pensions and health benefits were part of the package loyal employees received.
Those days are over. Corporate America wants out of pensions, and health care. Proponents of the “ownership society” believe that workers should purchase their own health care. Conservatives love the concept of the Health Savings Account, where workers pay into an account, and manage their own health care spending. This is a wonderful idea for the wealthy – but for folks struggling to pay the rent, not so wonderful. Worker wages haven’t kept pace with CEO wages. If they had, the minimum wage would be $23.50 an hour.
Once again, we are looking at solving a problem the wrong way. I don’t blame business for wanting out of the employer based system. It’s not working, and it’s not fair. When an employee leaves a company they lose their insurance – that’s not right. Representative Stepanek on the Commerce Committee mentioned several times that what data supporters of HB 1704 had might be flawed, because most businesses only ensure full time employees. Folks here in the valley know that all too well. Part time employees aren’t alive only part time – and those who have multiple part time jobs are mysteriously deemed to be not meritorious of insurance? It doesn’t make any sense.
It’s wrong for the business lobbyists to try to claim some sort of amnesia. We do, for now, have an employer based system of health care in this country. We should certainly be deciding whether or not to go forward with that. For now, we have to deal with the system we have. HB 1704 is not a perfect bill, but it is a place to start the broader conversations that we desperately need to be having.
“Let's face it, in America today we don't have a health care system, we have a sick care system.” Tom Harkin
Friday, December 30, 2005
It All Comes Down to Money
Governor Lynch has been making headlines, recently. In a December 20 USA Survey Poll of nationwide gubernatorial approval ratings, Governor Lynch came in fifth place, with a 69 percent approval rating. Jodi Rell of CT was in first place with 77 percent approval, and in last place was Bob Taft of Ohio, with 17 percent approval. California’s Gropenator was in 46th place, with a 34 percent approval rating. Presidential hopeful Mark Warner of Virginia was in 7th place, with a 66 percent approval rating. Mitt Romney of MA (another presidential hopeful) was ranked in 32nd place, with a 49 percent approval. I approach polls with a healthy dose of skepticism, but it was interesting, and even a little surprising to see how popular Governor Lynch is. He’s certainly in good shape to begin his bid for re-election next year. No word yet on the likely GOP candidate. Will the GOP pit their best candidate, Bruce Keogh against the popular Lynch? We’ll find out in 2006.
Lynch has recently proposed a plan to lower the high school drop out rate, by raising the age that children must remain in school from 16 to 18. The compulsory attendance age of 16 was set in 1903. Lynch says that in 1903 teens could leave school and get good paying jobs in factories or on farms, which is no longer the case. Lynch and other supportive legislators point out the need for students to have more education on today’s high tech world. This issue is being examined around the nation, with some educators and politicians claiming that it’s too easy for students to drop out.
We can all applaud the Governor’s concern for the education of our youth, and wanting to decrease NH’s 3.8% drop out rate. It worries me that NH may attempt to solve a problem by focusing on the end result. Can we solve a problem by focusing on the end of it? What about the beginning and the middle? We talk a good game here about the importance of education, but the reality is a little different. NH ranks 49th in the nation in state funding of post-secondary education. UNH is the fourth most expensive state university in the country.
Everything in NH comes down to money. To keep kids in school, will require an honest appraisal of how we do education, and making some changes. This may require money. Some kids aren’t going to comply. Will we be willing to pay for additional truant officers? Are we willing to pay for tutors, counselors, or whatever is needed to help troubled kids through the educational system? Are we willing to fund after school programs to keep kids safe until their parents get home from work? We all know the answer – and it’s a resounding NO. If we were willing, we’d be doing it already. As long as we continue to fund education through the statewide property tax, children and education will continue to be the enemy.
Governor Lynch accepted a draft last week of the NH 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness. The report was prepared by the Governor’s Interagency Council on Homelessness. A one day survey last January identified 3, 278 people as homeless, on that particular day, and 978 of them were children. The average age of a homeless person in the US is nine. The report estimates that 20,000 people are homeless in NH at some point during the year. Once again, we can all applaud the Governor’s willingness to tackle this problem. Homelessness is all too often dismissed as not being a serious issue in NH. Nearly a thousand homeless children are very serious, especially with homelessness on the rise. Those numbers will only increase until we make a serious commitment to doing something about it.
Once again, everything in NH comes down to money. There’s a real shortage of affordable housing in this state. Towns don’t want apartment buildings or rental properties, because if kids move in, the town must pay for their education. Wages haven’t kept pace with housing costs. It’s a nasty circle, and there doesn’t seem to be any way out of it. As long as NH insists on the regressive system of taxation we currently enjoy, there is no real end to any of this. The housing problems are serious enough to make prospective businesses think twice about locating in NH. Where will their work force live? The ownership society is something much touted by the current administration, but with the cost of a home averaging out at somewhere around $300,000 the American Dream is dead in the water for a large segment of the population.
It’s great that Governor Lynch is getting the dialogue going about education and housing in our state. Sadly, conversation is likely to be as far as we go. Our legislature is filled with dinosaurs. For many of them, time stopped in 1950. These are not people who are suited (in many cases) to deal with the issues of today. Again, it all comes down to money. For $100 a year, we’re getting what we pay for. NH isn’t willing to change. Until we are, nothing will.
“The past is a guidepost, not a hitching post.” L. Thomas Holdcroft
Lynch has recently proposed a plan to lower the high school drop out rate, by raising the age that children must remain in school from 16 to 18. The compulsory attendance age of 16 was set in 1903. Lynch says that in 1903 teens could leave school and get good paying jobs in factories or on farms, which is no longer the case. Lynch and other supportive legislators point out the need for students to have more education on today’s high tech world. This issue is being examined around the nation, with some educators and politicians claiming that it’s too easy for students to drop out.
We can all applaud the Governor’s concern for the education of our youth, and wanting to decrease NH’s 3.8% drop out rate. It worries me that NH may attempt to solve a problem by focusing on the end result. Can we solve a problem by focusing on the end of it? What about the beginning and the middle? We talk a good game here about the importance of education, but the reality is a little different. NH ranks 49th in the nation in state funding of post-secondary education. UNH is the fourth most expensive state university in the country.
Everything in NH comes down to money. To keep kids in school, will require an honest appraisal of how we do education, and making some changes. This may require money. Some kids aren’t going to comply. Will we be willing to pay for additional truant officers? Are we willing to pay for tutors, counselors, or whatever is needed to help troubled kids through the educational system? Are we willing to fund after school programs to keep kids safe until their parents get home from work? We all know the answer – and it’s a resounding NO. If we were willing, we’d be doing it already. As long as we continue to fund education through the statewide property tax, children and education will continue to be the enemy.
Governor Lynch accepted a draft last week of the NH 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness. The report was prepared by the Governor’s Interagency Council on Homelessness. A one day survey last January identified 3, 278 people as homeless, on that particular day, and 978 of them were children. The average age of a homeless person in the US is nine. The report estimates that 20,000 people are homeless in NH at some point during the year. Once again, we can all applaud the Governor’s willingness to tackle this problem. Homelessness is all too often dismissed as not being a serious issue in NH. Nearly a thousand homeless children are very serious, especially with homelessness on the rise. Those numbers will only increase until we make a serious commitment to doing something about it.
Once again, everything in NH comes down to money. There’s a real shortage of affordable housing in this state. Towns don’t want apartment buildings or rental properties, because if kids move in, the town must pay for their education. Wages haven’t kept pace with housing costs. It’s a nasty circle, and there doesn’t seem to be any way out of it. As long as NH insists on the regressive system of taxation we currently enjoy, there is no real end to any of this. The housing problems are serious enough to make prospective businesses think twice about locating in NH. Where will their work force live? The ownership society is something much touted by the current administration, but with the cost of a home averaging out at somewhere around $300,000 the American Dream is dead in the water for a large segment of the population.
It’s great that Governor Lynch is getting the dialogue going about education and housing in our state. Sadly, conversation is likely to be as far as we go. Our legislature is filled with dinosaurs. For many of them, time stopped in 1950. These are not people who are suited (in many cases) to deal with the issues of today. Again, it all comes down to money. For $100 a year, we’re getting what we pay for. NH isn’t willing to change. Until we are, nothing will.
“The past is a guidepost, not a hitching post.” L. Thomas Holdcroft
Friday, December 16, 2005
Distraction
During this holiday season, the Falwellian Christians are engaging in some loud public distraction. Jerry Falwell is encouraging his flock to boycott businesses that greet customers with “happy holidays” as opposed to “Merry Christmas.” He is collecting money for a legal defense fund, the better to sue anyone who “tries to inhibit the liberties of our children and our families from worshipping and honoring the Lord, as we in
In my traveling around the state, I haven’t noticed any lack of Christmas going on. I hear plenty of Christmas carols on the radio, folks are shopping, folks are sending Christmas cards, and folks are even saying Merry Christmas to one another. Falwell and O’Reilly’s phony distraction crusade would be hilarious, if it weren’t so dangerous. The religious right has been trying to convince us of their persecution for years now. Whenever they are reminded that they share this country with people of other religions, they start sniveling about what victims they are. No one is persecuting them for practicing their religion. I haven’t seen or read about Christian churches being forcibly closed down by “libruls” or government agents. It’s smoke and mirrors, designed to keep the faithful busy, while Falwell, and the high mucky-mucks are busy building empires, raking in cash, and acquiring power.
If Falwell and his ilk were at all what they claim to be, they’d be busily joining forces with Jim Wallis, and other religious leaders who, in this holiday season, are busy fighting the real war – the war on the American poor and middle class. This week, over 100 prayer vigils were held across the country, calling on Congress to soften their hearts, and not pass a budget that cuts programs like school lunch programs, food stamps, foster care, and low interest student loans. The Council of Churches is mobilizing clergy around the country to call attention to the fact that a budget is a moral document. No one will die if a store clerk says “happy holidays.” Children may very well die, without foster care funding, and without school lunches. The “war on Christmas” is a farce. The war being waged on the poor in this country is painfully real.
NH is not immune from distraction. The NH commission to study same sex marriage has proven to be another farce. It’s quite clear that the commission went forward with their findings fully in place before a single word of testimony was ever heard. Senator Jack Barnes called for amending the NH constitution, before the commission took even a minute to review their findings. He’s written to every town in the state, urging the selectmen to put two non-binding warrants on the ballot in March. One asking if voters favor same sex marriage (like
This is a nasty bit of politicking. What Barnes and his ilk hope to accomplish is whipping the GOP faithful into an anti-gay political frenzy during the 2006 elections, as a form of distraction. There are a lot of issues that should be discussed during the state elections, and certainly it’s in the best interest of the ruling party to keep them as quiet as possible. Political ethics, property tax, education, housing, development, and health care are important issues in our state – and an honest discussion about them won’t be flattering to the majority party.
NH voters are suspicious of constitutional amendments, as Jack Barnes may discover. Coos County Democrat reporter Edith Tucker summed up the feelings of many in the north country on “NH Outlook” when she said that folks in the north were more interested in whether people are good neighbors or not, and didn’t care much about sexual orientation. It is sorry, indeed, that the right is using this as an attempt to pit neighbor against neighbor, and keep the focus off legislative ethics or our unjust system of taxation.
The sky hasn’t fallen, since
“
Friday, December 02, 2005
No Joy for CCT Workers
Joy isn’t the word that folks who worked for Car Component Technologies (CCT) of
CCT’s parent company is American Remanufacturers Inc., based in
The state has responded very quickly to this situation. The Department of Employment Security (DES) waived the waiting period for unemployment checks. They opened the
To protect the interests of former CCT employees, at the behest of Governor Lynch, NH is intervening in the bankruptcy proceedings. Attorney General Kelly Ayotte and Labor Commissioner George Copadis filed an objection in the
Some of the CCT employees had gone to work there after the closing of the Jac-Pac plant in
I trust most readers will see the irony in the re-training money offered up by the federal Trade Act, since it is trade policies which caused the whole situation. As NH moves further into a service economy, I can’t help but wonder what kind of jobs these folks can be trained for. Some companies have come forward to offer former CCT employees jobs; Stonyfield Yogurt, Freudenburg- NOK, and Wal-Mart among them. There is some irony there – since Wal-Mart is stocked primarily with items made in
Manufacturing jobs are disappearing fast, in the
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes
Friday, November 18, 2005
Values Based Behavior
We’ve been conditioned for a very long time to believe that what is good for corporate America America
Our health care system is collapsing, too. Over 48 million Americans have no health insurance, and that number is on the rise. The number of uninsured children is increasing, too. The number of Americans living in poverty is also on the rise, despite the much touted economic recovery. Most people have lousy health insurance, and are scared to death that they’ll get sick. The Medicare prescription drug plan is going into effect, a wonderful program that will help insurance and drug companies add to their profit margins, while adding an extra monthly “user fee” to folks living on fixed incomes, many of whom are already making some difficult choices between food, rent, and medication.
The solutions being proposed to these situations are things like privatizing Social Security, cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, low income student loans, and school lunch programs. We hear a lot of talk from our friends in
This past weekend, in
The consensus among the movie viewers in
Wal-Mart benefits so much from will hurt their image, and force them to change their behavior. The next time you hear DHHS Commissioner John Stephen complaining about Medicaid costs, be aware that in addition to Wal-Mart, some Dunkin Donuts, and Shaws employees are receiving Medicaid benefits in NH. Employees of the US Postal Service and the NH state government are, too.
The old saying “if we keep on doing what we always done, we’ll keep on getting what we always got” has never been truer. We’ve all been hurt by the high cost of gasoline, and we’re all approaching the winter with trepidation about the cost of heating our homes. Our elected officials are responding to this crisis by slipping a provision to drill in ANWR into the budget. Studies by the Dept. of Energy show that drilling in ANWR will reduce the cost of a gallon of gas by about one penny in 20 years. Clearly that’s not the solution to our energy gluttony. Conservation would go a long way – increasing the CAFÉ standards for US vehicles to 40 mpg would reduce our oil consumption by 6 million barrels of oil every day. Our national fuel economy is actually worse today than it was 20 years ago, yet we hear nothing of conservation. Instead, we have US automakers continuing to churn out SUVs and giant trucks as though we had an endless supply of oil. The foreign oil market will become increasingly tight as we compete with the growing energy needs of
I was sorry to see that the town of
“Corporation, n., An ingenious device for obtaining profit without individual responsibility.” Ambrose Bierce
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Water
The ancient Greek lyric poet Pindar wrote, “The noblest of the elements is water.” Water is essential to human life for nourishment and sanitation. We humans have taken water for granted, and contaminated many water supplies – and we are beginning to learn what that will cost us. The water wars will be even uglier than the oil wars.
A new coalition, the NH Water Table, sponsored a conference called “Protecting New Hampshire’s Water” last month in
The world is running out of fresh water. There are already countries in water crisis, including 22 African countries, and two-thirds of northern
The large groundwater withdrawals for water bottling sales are exacerbating the problem.
Bottled water sales have skyrocketed in the last decade. Bottled water is being marketed as being superior to tap water, even though what’s in that bottle may be tap water sold to consumers as “fresh from a mountain spring” at a thousand times the cost of tap water. The bottled water industry is almost entirely unregulated, unlike municipal water supplies, where the water quality is monitored constantly. The idea is to create a suspicion of publicly owned water suppliers, and encourage the belief that bottled water is better and safer. A generation of kids is growing up with the belief that water is something you buy in a plastic bottle at the store. The bottled water companies are making obscene profits and creating obscene amounts of garbage. Every day over 30 million plastic water bottles are discarded. Only 1 in 10 makes it to recycling, the rest go into the landfill – where the chemicals in the plastic break down and contaminate the groundwater.....and the cycle continues.
The Poland Spring water bottling operation in Fryeburg has been a controversial topic now for some time. Fryeburg recently enacted a temporary ban on issuing permits for large scale groundwater extractions. It’s a smart move – given that most towns haven’t factored water extraction into their planning processes or town ordinances. That 6 month moratorium will give the town a chance to study the subject, and reflect seriously on water and the future. The towns on the NH side of the border should be watching this issue, and planning in their own communities.
Poland Spring is owned by the Nestle Corporation, a company with a long, disgusting record of violating human rights around the world. Nestle earns over $4 billion a year selling baby formula. They aggressively market their bottle feeding formulas as superior to breast milk in third world countries. Often they give out free samples to new mothers in the hospital. The mothers leave the hospital, with their own milk dried up, and are now forced to buy the formula and mix it with water, and in many cases that water supply is contaminated. A recent independent audit of Nestlé’s conduct in
Castle Springs Bottled Water Company was a small, locally owned operation in Moultonborough. Two years ago, it was purchased by Crystal Geyser Roxanne, a
Something else for towns and states to consider is that trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA provide foreign countries the opportunity to sue if we create “barriers to trade.” In other words, if a town attempts to pull out of a water deal with a CAFTA country, they can sue for the loss of their profits. Our NH Congressional delegation all voted for CAFTA, by the way. Welcome to the wonderful world of globalization.
Water – we need to act now to protect it. The
“We never know the worth of water till the well is dry.” Thomas Fuller
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Smoking Crack
NH politics are like smoking crack – addictive. Once upon a time I didn’t pay attention; I found national politics more interesting and relevant. Many folks only pay attention to elections every four years, and I was one of them. Those days are long gone; during the last decade I picked up the pipe, and became fully hooked on the interesting and sometimes bizarre world of NH politics.
Bizarro world cropped up recently, with our Congressional delegation urging Executive Councilman Ray Burton to resign. I’ve been to dozens of Congressman Bradley’s town hall meetings in the last six months. He’s been asked plenty of questions that he gladly passed back to state officials, as being out of his jurisdiction. I find the federal delegation’s sudden involvement in state affairs interesting. It’s also heavy handed, bullying, and obnoxious. Why is the federal delegation getting involved in trying to force the resignation of a member of their own political party? Could it be that on a state level, so much bad behavior has been ignored, that our state elected officials don’t have much credibility?
In April 2005, Representative Chris Doyle of
Do not; (I repeat – DO NOT) take this as a defense of Ray Burton’s extremely bad judgment in hiring and retaining Mark Seidensticker. Ray’s done a fairly decent job in the north country. He’s been very good on health care issues, and I’ve actually heard him admit that NH has a revenue problem. He’s not a barking lunatic right winger, which may be part of the reason his own party is trying to eat him. I’ve disagreed strongly with him on some issues. He’s a Republican, and it’s no secret that I’d be happy to see fewer of them in office in our state. It is very interesting that a bunch of politicians who could care less about the north country unless they want our votes, are suddenly all concerned about ethics and impropriety. They’ve certainly turned their back on plenty of criminal behavior and gross ethical violations. The rallying cry around
Bills held over from last year will be coming back to haunt us in 2006. One such bill is HB16, a bill that would urge our Congressional delegation to support plans to privatize Social Security. It’s been retained in the State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee. Now that we’re facing at least $200 billion in costs to rebuild
The NH Commission studying same sex marriage voted this week to recommend an amendment to our state constitution, defining marriage as only between one man and one woman. Senator Jack Barnes made the motion to recommend to the legislature that they pass this amendment on to voters next November. Senator Barnes admitted that the amendment is not likely to clear the Senate, and would not have much of a chance in the House – but he wanted each legislator to have a chance to take a public stand prior to the 2006 elections.
This is so blatant – and so vile – using a civil rights issue to whip bigots into the voting booth is a shameful tactic. Shame on Senator Barnes and those who voted in favor of this nasty piece of business: Representative Paul Brassard, Commission Chair Rep.Tony Soltani, Commission Vice-Chair Scott Earnshaw, Jack Fredyma, and Commission Clerk Rep. Maureen Mooney. To contact the commission with your comments, send emails to the clerk at: votemooney@aol.com .
“The job of a citizen is to keep his mouth open.” Gunter Grass
Friday, September 23, 2005
Just Say No to HB 39
The legislature will also be contending with everything that was held over in committee from last session. One such bill is HB39, “An Act relative to sex education in public schools.” This bill is aimed at turning comprehensive sex education into an abstinence only program. NH has one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates in the country. Last year DHHS received a big chunk of cash from the federal government for having such a low teen pregnancy rate. What we’ve been doing has obviously been working rather well – so it’s ironic (and moronic) that the response to success is to attempt to institute the sort of programs that are failing teens around the country.
There’s plenty of evidence that abstinence only programs aren’t working. Study after study shows that teens were more sexually active after going through abstinence only programs.
A report issued by Rep. Henry Waxman of
HB39 stipulates that “Pupils shall be provided with statistics based on the latest medical information citing the failure and success rates of condoms in preventing HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.” If this information is coming from one of the aforementioned programs, it’s very likely to be false, and may actually result in kids engaging in unprotected sex – which will in turn result in actually increasing the teen pregnancy rate.
No one ever worries about kids getting too much exposure to math. Teaching algebra doesn’t result in the fear that kids will want to stay after school and figure out pi equations on the blackboard, or go into nerdy math careers. Despite all evidence to the contrary – the fear continues to be perpetuated that educating kids about their bodies, sexuality, and responsibility will result in unrestrained sexual activity, and orgies all over town. Teaching fear and repression has never worked. There was at least one pregnant girl in my little pre-Roe vs. Wade high school. There were even pregnant girls in the idyllic 1950’s. They just got shipped off to relatives for the duration – while discreet adoptions were arranged, or they had illegal abortions.
What the abstinence only proponents refuse to acknowledge, is that abstinence is, in fact, taught in comprehensive sex ed programs. We would all like to see kids wait until they’re older, and more responsible to begin having sexual relationships. Not everyone will heed that advice, as history shows us. Isn’t it better for those kids to at least have some preparation beyond “just say no?” We don’t just put a kid in a car, give ‘em the keys and say – go ahead and drive. We give them an education to prepare them for the reality of what happens behind the wheel. Shouldn’t we do the same with sex education?
NH has been successful in reducing the teen pregnancy rate – so to change what is working, to what is proven not to work is a concept I find utterly mystifying. HB39 is sponsored by Rep.Russell Albert of
Abstinence only programs are politically and religiously motivated. They aren’t based in reality – they don’t care about teens, and above all – they don’t work! Do we really want to ruin young lives with this socio-political experiment? Please contact your state reps and urge them to just vote no on HB39.
“Life in
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)