North Carolina Republicans vote to make it easier to get a handgun

With all of the mass shootings going on with regularity and suicides being the number one gun death, I woke up to this headline in my home state. Hannah Schoenbaum of AP News penned the following piece “State Senate votes to override gun bill veto, sends to House.” Per the article:

“North Carolina’s Republican-controlled Senate voted Tuesday to override the Democratic governor’s first veto of the session on legislation to loosen gun restrictions, teeing up the House’s first test of party unity under new operating rules.

The Senate voted 30-19 along party lines to revive a package of gun access measures that would scrap a requirement that handgun buyers obtain a permit from their county sheriff.”

So, if you are keeping score, this veto override, if passed in the Republican led House, would make it easier to get a handgun. This truly boggles the mind. I am truly disillusioned and disappointed that a group of adults which includes parents, grandparents and aunts would pass such a bill in light of our America’s inability to govern guns. And, as noted in the surveys cited in my previous post, Americans, in majority, want better governance not worse.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/state-senate-votes-to-override-gun-bill-veto-sends-to-house/ar-AA19cdM2

Advertisement

The majority of people want better gun governance – yet another redundant plea

Another week, another mass shooting in America. Ho-hum. Children killed, that is unfortunate, but the right to shoot someone supercedes the right to life, even a child’s life, in some folks’ minds. Another day, more suicides by impetuous acts and more homicides by uncivil arguers. Boring. And, of course, we have the inevitable accidental shooting by a curious child and discovered weapon. This does not seem to bother anyone, either.

The following is a repeat of post from three (and also one) years ago. It is a variation of a post I have written countless times. Yet, we do not seem to care. I am glad the president is going after ghost guns, but that is only part of the problem and we passed some watered-down language last year after this post was last made. But more is needed, much more. When the leading US gun death cause is suicide, by far, you would think legislators, especially Republican ones, will stop counting the NRA donations and do something about this obvious problem.

From an article called “Polls find Americans mostly are supportive of stricter laws on guns” by Dawn Baumgartner Vaughn of the Raleigh News and Observer, please note the following cited survey results. Note these results have been fact checked by the paper’s Fact Checking Project.

– Gallup’s poll from August, 2019 noted “61% would support a ban on semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles.”

– The Civitas Institute (a conservative policy group) poll from September, 2019 showed “58% of respondents saying gun laws were not strict enough.” Note of the Civitas poll respondents, “48% either owned a gun or had someone in their home who owned a gun.”

– A Quinnipac University poll from May, 2019 showed “61% of Americans support stricter gun laws. The same poll showed 94% of Americans support required background checks for gun buyers. And, 77% of those polled support ‘requiring individuals to obtain a license before being able to purchase a gun.’”

– In 2017, Politifact Wisconsin “found multiple previous polls citing support for background checks ranging from 84% to 94%.”

The numbers 58% and 61% are meaningful, but let’s focus on the 94% (or even 84% to 94%) of respondents who want required background checks and the 77% who want a license before hand.

These are consequential majorities. Earlier this week, the Houston Chief of Police challenged his two Texas Senators (Ted Cruz and John Cornyn) and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell to act after yet another police officer was killed.

The NRA has spoken. Now, we need to set their ardent, sales focused rhetoric aside and act sensibly. Just the two items highlighted above will help – background checks and pre-buy licensing. No loopholes. Cars require ownership and driving licenses to operate. Yet, they are not designed to kill.

I am long-ago tired of the standard “thoughts and prayers” line offered by legislators followed by “now is not the time to discuss changes.” Since people are dying everyday by suicide and other reasons, waiting for a time with no deaths will not happen. Further, the mass shootings of more than a few victims are happening with alarming frequency.

To be brutally frank, Democrats should push this issue to the nth degree. Although, the Senate and president acted last year, we are not addressing the issues in a holistic and dramatic manner. It matters not who pats themselves on the back – JUST DO SOMETHING that will address the problems. And, these legislators are in my “thoughts and prayers” to actually act like the parents and grandparents we hope they would be.

And, if this were not enough lack of better gun governance is just one of several issues that causes UNICEF to rank the US as 37th on children well-being. By my count, that places 36 countries ahead of us and means we are barely in the top 20% of all countries. That is not exceptionalism. That is beyond poor stewardship.

We need Trump – Really?

I saw a MAGA fan of the former president holding up a sign that said “We need Trump.” My response is “really?” A person voted by over 150 presidential historians as in the bottom five as one of the worst presidents ever? I am sure this poll of historians does not make many far right’ news blips.

The rationale for such a low rating, per one of the historians who so voted, is on top of his policy decisions and making America’s standing in the world fall, his poor handling of the COVID pandemic and his role in the seditious insurrection against a branch of government pull him down. It is not a surprise that his sycophants are trying to re-write history on these two issues.

But, these two issues do not stand alone. Here are a few other things to chew on:

• His one focus his first year was to take away people’s healthcare which would have harmed his constituents as well as other Americans. Thank goodness his efforts failed as a Republican led Congress could not come up with a suitable replacement or follow a better process to get there.
• He decided to set aside a regulation that would require investment advisors to be fiduciaries, meaning they would be responsive to the needs of their customers first and foremost. In other words, this populist president sided with the investment sellers not the buyers. (Sidebar – investors should insist their advisors be fiduciaries).
• He decided to place tariffs on goods and services from China and our allies, which caused rebuttal tariffs on US goods. History has shown tariffs are not very successful at their stated goals and the consumers are the ones who are punished (he consistently lied about the impact on consumers, as well). He also upset both supply and sales chains, causing buyers and sellers to take action.
• He took credit for turning the economy around, but he inherited an economy that was in its 91st consecutive month of GDP growth, with 2 + million per annum job growth for six straight years, and a more than doubled stock market from his predecessor. It did continue on his watch, was made better by a sugar rush of a tax cut before waning  and then going into recession with the pandemic.
• He passed a tax cut that primarily benefitted the wealthy and corporations providing some breaks for lower paid workers but punishing the middle class with caps on state and local tax deductions. This not only increased the debt by about $2 trillion per the CBO, but it only gave us a brief increase in the economy for a brief time (like a sugar rush).
• He pulled the US out of the Paris Climate Change Accord making us a significant outlier in the fight against global warming. Note, this change was made a day after Exxon shareholders voted to require management to advise them on what they are doing to fight climate change.
• He elevated the exposure of far right, white nationalist groups allowing them to come out in the open. One of the worst things he said after Charlottesville is there are good people on both sides normalizing oppressive behavior.

Note five of the above examples of this populist president are harmful to the broader population, including those folks who are so enamored with him. This is keeping with what I have said for many years as a former Republican, that most Republicans are voting against their economic interests have no idea they are.

I will say I do agree that he made other NATO countries start coming to the table with the agreed upon funding. Yet, his manner in so doing is off-putting as it is in so many things. But, there is not much I support that this president put in motion. Yet, when you throw his actions leading up to, during and following the insurrection, coupled with his poor handling of the pandemic, his ranking in the bottom five is well-earned.

So, do we need Trump? Certainly not in the White House.

Hidden Figures – a reprise of a story about heroes who overcame

With February being Black History Month and March being Women’s History Month, there are few better stories than one that honors both as noted below. Here is a reprise of a post I wrote six years ago.

My family had the opportunity to see the movie “Hidden Figures” recently. It may be one of the finest movies I have seen in the past few years. From the online movie summary, it is about the “incredible untold story of Katherine G. Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson – brilliant African-American women working at NASA, who served as the brains behind one of the greatest operations in history: the launch of astronaut John Glenn into orbit….The visionary trio crossed all gender and race lines to inspire generations to dream big.”

The movie stars Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer, and Janelle Monáe, with a key role for Kevin Costner. These three mathematicians helped plot a course into space, so that our astronauts could return safely. And, when computers were destined to replace them, one taught other African-American women in the computing department how to program in Fortran to save their jobs and supply capable talent to the NASA space effort, since so few folks knew Fortran.

We must value diversity for its own sake, but also from economic and development standpoints. If we limit where ideas can come from, we limit ideas. It gets no simpler than that math equation. As Johnson notes, math does not care what color you are. The other key point is the math to launch, orbit and return safely was breaking new ground, so innovative thinking was key. Johnson offered that kind of innovation, which married some old school math to solve the new problems.

Throughout history, ideas have come from those who understand and are in proximity to the problem. A gay man named Alan Turing saved over a million lives in World War II and shortened the war by two years per General Dwight Eisenhower by solving the Nazi Enigma communication code. Yet, he had to hide his homosexuality and was later imprisoned for it when discovered. This WWII hero died in jail. The 2014 movie “The Imitation Game” is about Turing’s efforts.

A black man named Vivien Thomas helped solve the Blue Baby death problem by restoring the full flow of blood from the heart through groundbreaking open heart surgery on a baby. Yet, like the NASA mathematicians, he had to battle racism which would not allow him in the operating room, at first. His story is told in the 2004 movie, “Something the Lord Made.”

Jesus said we should treat each other like we want to be treated. It is the right thing to do, but it is also the wise thing to do. Please remember this quote from an economist who advised Presidents Reagan and Clinton, “Innovation is portable.” And, where it occurs is where the jobs start. So, we need to let innovative ideas flourish regardless of their source.

Ice on Fire – a second reprise

Note, the following post was written four years ago and reposted two years ago, but still serves as a reminder of the progress we have made and need to make to address our climate change problem. Since I mentioned this documentary in a comment on my last post, I thought I would repeat it here.

I encourage people to watch the excellent HBO documentary called “Ice on Fire” on concerns over climate change and remedial actions underway that should and can be leveraged. The documentary is produced and narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio, but the most impactful voices are the scientists, inventors and trendsetters who are seeing dividends from their actions and investments.

To sum up, we have two major problems facing us – too much carbon in the air along with a growing concern over methane as it is released from beneath melting ice caps and frozen tundra, on top of the venting from natural gas sites. The title comes from researchers lighting methane leaks on fire as it is released from melting ice covered waters. The scientists note with data that it is quite clear man is causing the hastened uptick in temperatures as we leave our carbon fingerprints in the atmosphere.

These are major concerns, but we are not sitting still. Significant efforts are underway. They can be categorized as putting less carbon in the air and capturing more carbon from the air. To avoid a novel, I will touch on some of the ideas, but please do deeper dives and watch the documentary airing now.

Stop putting carbon in the air

We must hasten the move to renewable energy. The costs are more on par and less, in some cases, than fossil fuel energy production. Wind and solar energy are growing at accelerated rates. One CEO noted, the technology is here to make this happen even more than it already is. Here in the US, California gets 25% of its electricity from solar and Texas gets 16% of its electricity from wind energy.

Yet, a very promising start-up off Scotland is tapping tidal energy. There is a company producing electricity today with an offshore platform with two turbines turned by the tides to generate electricity. I have written before about this group as they use existing technologies to harness the sea. Their success is gaining notoriety around the world, as it appears to be replicable.

Two other ideas also help with both recapture and restricting release. The first is reusing depleting biowaste (such as dying trees, plants and compost) in the soils to grow crops and future trees and foliage. The biowaste holds water better, maintains top soil and is straight out of nature’s guidebook.

The other is growing more kelp offshore as it captures carbon like sequoia trees and can also be used as a food source for livestock. Feeding cattle kelp is not a new approach. Feeding cattle is important as it greatly reduces the gases released by animals and preserves more carbon capturing grassland.

Capture more carbon from the air

The documentary spells out several natural ways to capture carbon and a few technological ways. On the former, here are a few ideas:

Maintain forests, especially those with large sequoias, which are huge carbon eaters. There are several places that are nurturing huge forests, but they note we need more of these efforts. We need to be mindful to replace what we cut, but keep some protected forests off limits to cutting.

Another example is to replenish mangroves that offer buffers to oceans. In addition to offering protection against storms, they also are natural born carbon eaters.

Another effort is to grow more urban farms. These farms are usually more organic, but in addition to absorbing carbon in urban areas, they perpetuate a farm to table concept that reduces transportation fumes. Reducing auto fumes is a huge concern of cities around the globe.

The next idea is more compex, but it requires the growing of more shells in the ocean. The dusts off the shells creates “ocean snow” that settles to the bottom and absorbs carbon. The idea is to spread a very small amount of iron in the ocean to cause more shells to grow.

The more technological solutions are designed to pull carbon out of the air. There are two approaches – one is to extract carbon and store it safely underground. The other is to pull it out and reuse it through artificial photosynthesis. Both of these options need more description than I am giving them. I prefer the more natural ways, but all of the above, is a necessary strategy at this late hour.

The scientists have concerns, but they do offer hope. The uncertainty of the ice-covered methane release gives them pause. They did note the methane release from accidental leaks from fossil fuel is visible from space and reduceable with some effort.

Another concern is the well-funded activity behind climate change deniers. A Wyoming rancher scientist standing in front of a visible, leaky methane cap said it plainly – they know this stuffs hurts kids more than adults. If someone came into my home to hurt my kids, it would be over my dead body. So, why is it OK to allow this?

Another scientist was less colorful, but equally plainspoken. He said fossil fuel executives perpetuating climate change denial should be tried in The Hague for crimes against humanity. Yet, as the costs have declined, the profit of creating carbon is becoming less palatable than the profit of reducing carbon in the air. People need to know these market forces exist today and not stand for future unhealthy energy creation.

Finally, if you cannot convince a climate change denier that we have a problem, ask them a simple question – if costs were not an issue, would you rather your children and grandchildren breathe methane from vented natural gas or drink coal ash polluted water or have carbon and methane neutral solar, wind or tidal energy? Guess what – costs are not much of an issue anymore and, in an increasing number of cases, less for renewables.

Channeling my inner Stephen King

Amid all the contrived and exaggerated banter by one of the US ‘ political parties about fairly pedestrian topics, I am sure a story out of Australia was missed about the Antarctic ice melting at an even faster pace. This is not good for our planet, especially the billions that live in our coastal cities.

Citing the lead character Johnny from Stephen King’s book “The Dead Zone” might help get people’s attention. After an accident, Johnny could see a hazy future when he touched someone which could be altered if people acted differently when told of his prediction. An arrogant father chose to ignore Johnny as he told the father his son and other kids would drown at a hockey practice on a frozen lake that afternoon. Johnny hit the table with his cane and said you know who I am, don’t you? You investigated me before letting me tutor your son. The ICE is going to break! The son chose not to practice and survived, but four kids died when the father went on with the practice in spite of the warning.

So, let me channel my inner Stephen King and loudly say to people who would rather talk about wokeness, how evil LGBTQ+ are and book banning instead of real problems and dangers, “the ice is going to break!” It is ironic that four of the leaders of this movement to focus on contrived issues live in Florida, which is surrounded on three sides by ocean. In fact, two climate scientists on different continents have said Miami is the most at risk city in the world given its population, sea level proximity, and porous limestone protecting its aquifer. Yet, that apparently is unimportant.

And, just to emphasize the point, the number of sunny day floodings from ocean water coming up through the street drains have increased in the city of Miami Beach. Maybe people should ask Messers. DeSantis, Rubio, Scott and Trump what they plan to do about that. We may need to “wake them up” first.

Poor man’s sandwich

With my wife’s permission to tell on her, I caught her eating what she calls a “poor man’s sandwich” yesterday. Are you ready for this? White bread, surrounding layers of ketchup and mayonnaise. I will let that sink in. If she threw in pickle relish, she would have a Thousand Island sandwich.

You see my wife grew up in houseful of eight, counting her Aunt Mary. They got by on my father-in-law’s modest salary as a service representative and a large garden. So, food budgets were made to last. For example, my wife and her little brother got the drumsticks off the chicken and only one piece of meat at meals. So, she got by on things like the poor man’s sandwich.

She was also known to eat mayonnaise sandwiches. Maybe that is why she grew up so thin. Her two older brothers and sister got more of the food than the youngest two. It should be noted her aunt lived to be age 99 eating mostly a diet of biscuits as her main entree. So, homemade biscuits are truly manna from heaven and do not cost too much. And, after her teeth burned up in a fire, she would gum those biscuits to submission.

Now that my wife and I are empty nesters again, we don’t have as large a food budget or appetites. We split entrees from restaurants, we will eat a baked sweet potato or Idaho potato for dinner, we will eat lots of salads and leftovers and eat brinner (breakfast for dinner). Last night, we had quiche as we had too many eggs remaining in the refrigerator. And, since we watch our carbs, one of our favorite sandwiches does not include bread – take a knife, a jar of peanut butter and a banana and you are all set.

What are some of your poor man’s food choices from your past or today? How do you spread that food budget?

Friday – good day for Chinese food

The folklore used to be to eat fish on Fridays. I don’t know if it began as a Catholic thing, but I do know even public elementary schools served fish as an entree.

To us Chinese food is the menu of choice on Friday, most often takeout food at night. Yet, we have started a new trend to go to lunch at our favorite Chinese restaurant on Friday and swap boxed leftovers at night. That will be the plan for today.

As we have aged, our appetites are smaller, so we end up sharing a lot of food. Splitting entrees and sinful indulgences like French Fries (or chips for our English friends) helps us manage our weight and budget. Cooking for two is harder than it seems, so we need to work on that more as our youngest son moved back out after his COVID retreat.

Chinese food lends itself to sharing, usually lasting two meals for two people. My wife will eat leftovers once, but twice is a bridge too far. So, ideally if we can finish up the leftovers sooner, the better it will be. Otherwise, I will be eating leftovers for days, which I often do.

Back to that fish thing. My wife grew up Catholic, but is more of a lukewarm fan of fish. She prefers fish that is not “too fishy” tasting, so mild fish is the secret. But, leftovers of fish are a no-no to her.

So, Chinese food it is on Friday. Note, we do not do this every Friday, but twice a month is not a stretch. Have a great weekend. Enjoy your food of choice. And, eat your leftovers.

Playing both ends against the middle – a reprise from 2014

I wrote the following post about nine years ago, so long ago I reference a post written by an old friend named Hugh who has passed on. I hope the link still works. The thrust of this piece is funders are not stupid, so they fund both sides, one more than the other, just to hedge their bets.

This has always been a problem, but with the vast sums of money that it takes for a US politician to get elected, large industry groups end up supporting both sides and play the ends against the middle. When you tack on the monied lobbyist influence and reasonable, even-handed legislation does not stand a chance. The end result is we are closer to oligarchy in this country approaching the days of the Robber Barons, which Teddy Roosevelt adamantly fought. Roosevelt was against corporate funding whatsoever, but now with recent court decisions, companies are given freedoms to control elections and elected officials.

If you look at the largest and most influential industry in America, the fossil fuel industry, it is easy to see why we still debate over man’s influence over climate change and that fracking should be viewed as perfectly safe because the pretty and earnest spokeswoman tells it is so on the excellently crafted commercial. I have said this before, but they are not my words – the fossil fuel industry pretty much owns the Republican Party in the United States. Oh, I am sure we could argue degrees of influence, but there should be little debate that the fossil fuel industry can get the attention of the GOP.

The sad part of the equation is they also fund Democrats, as well. While they would prefer the Republicans to win, because of the canned legislation ready to be enacted for their betterment through organizations like ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, if the Democrats win, they have that base covered. Coupling that with a heavy lobbying effort and these legislators don’t stand a chance. While the President has espoused moving the ball forward on addressing climate change and has done some good things, we have been fracking like there is no tomorrow, which is an intended pun.

In fact, with Republicans in Congress bashing the EPA efforts, someone high up in the Administration has on more than one occasion asked the EPA to cool their jets. This is one reason EPA Director Lisa Jackson resigned in December 2012 shortly after a report on fracking water poisoning in Pennsylvania was released that was watered down in the headlines. Since no one reads anything any more, people went with the headlines which were less forthcoming about the problematic results. I guess she was hoping someone would have her back in this hard fight. I am likely over-simplifying the reasons, but she was a frustrated camper when she left.

I could have easily picked on another industry group, such as the NRA. There is a reason that goes beyond Republican obstinance that works against getting some legitimate and wanted legislation done. But, the key takeaway is funders can play both ends against the middle in a fight no one knows is going on outside of government halls. In the case of the fossil fuel industry with connections and money, they are a formidable power to reckon with. So, this more than anything is why the EPA is a target. They stand in the way of the industry making decisions where the environmental impact is not highlighted as much as it needs to be. Other environmental groups have had to become more active to lend their voice to the understaffed and under supported EPA. If you hear “we should do away with the EPA” at a cocktail party, you should ask the person, “do you really mean that?”

So, the heavy lifting is going to fall on us citizens. We have to be better informed. We have to ask more questions about why people are advocating something that does not feel right. We cannot rely on party politics to dictate what we do. We need to get our information from reputable and multiple sources. There are too many so-called news sources and pundits that are giving out misinformation and disinformation, or at best spin-doctored news. If you are watching a news source that mentions Benghazi more than half a dozen times, you are not watching a reputable news source.

Let’s keep these folks honest. We have our work cut out for us.

Also, please check out my friend Hugh Curtler’s post on “Corporate Persons” from this morning. http://hughcurtler.wordpress.com/2014/05/29/corporate-persons/

Tuesday troubles

I read where Turkey has experienced another earthquake on top of the tragic one several days ago. It shows how fragile life is and how the planet is indiscriminate on who is impacted by its rumblings.

With such tragedy, it makes me more perturbed by weak-minded tyrants and elected officials who feel the need to invade other countries. Putin has shown how fragile his ego is by not realizing he has harmed his own country by trying to take over land from another.

But, before the US gets too high and mighty, we should not forget we invaded Iraq under false pretenses. This was determined to be the case by a British commission that found British PM Tony Blair and US President George W. Bush at fault for deceiving the British people about invading Iraq.

To be frank, we are focusing on the wrong things. The two most significant long term concerns by the members of the World Economic Forum are the global water crisis and impact of climate change. The latter makes the former independent concern even more troubling hastening evaporation and threatening fresh water aquifers with rising sea levels. But, climate change also is cooking the chemicals left in the earth like a crockpot making them worse per ecologist and biologist Sandra Steingraber.

So, we need to tell so-called leaders to stand down and quit being so narrow-minded with their war games. Always remember the line from the movie “Troy.” “War is old men talking and young men dying.” That sums it up nicely. We have more important things to deal with.