We have known for a couple of days that the Department of Justice planned to sue North Carolina, as it has sued the state of Texas, over new voting laws. What we didn't have information on is the extent of the suit.
Here is the latest information:
"The suit, set to be filed in Greensboro,
N.C., will ask that the state be barred from enforcing the new voter-ID
law, the source said. However, the case will also go further, demanding
that the entire state of North Carolina be placed under a requirement to
have all changes to voting laws, procedures and polling places
"precleared" by either the Justice Department or a federal court, the
source added."
Good start. Now let's extend the voting rights preclearance requirement to all fifty states.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Economist Mark Thoma On Inequality And The Republican Shutdown Shakedown
In a column in the Fiscal Times, economist Mark Thoma explains the real reason for the current fight over the debt limit. He actually puts it more politely than I do, but the article explains pretty clearly what is at stake.
"We have lost something important as a society," Thoma explains, "as inequality has grown over the last several decades, our sense that we are all in this together. Social insurance is a way of sharing the risks that our economic system imposes upon us. As with other types of insurance, e.g. fire insurance, we all put our money into a common pool and the few of us unlucky enough to experience a “fire” – the loss of a job, health problems that wipe out retirement funds, disability, and so on – use the insurance to avoid financial disaster and rebuild as best we can."
One of the themes that jumps out at me from my reading of actions during World War II: American servicemen completely grasped that we were all in this together - they didn't abandon their fellow soldiers and sailors to the enemy. The order to "abandon ship" didn't mean "abandon your shipmates." It didn't mean "you're on your own." The French say "sauve qui peut," literally "save [oneself] who can" or "every man for himself." That wasn't the way of the American warrior. It is the way these days of wealthy Republicans.
"But growing inequality has allowed one strata of society to be largely free of these risks while the other is very much exposed to them." The two strata Thoma is referring to are the 1% at the top of the ladder and the other 99%. "As that has happened," Thoma goes on, "as one group in society has had fewer and fewer worries about paying for college education, has first-rate health insurance, ample funds for retirement, and little or no chance of losing a home and ending up on the street if a job suddenly disappears in a recession, support among the politically powerful elite for the risk sharing that makes social insurance work has declined."
During World War II, even the wealthy dared not violate rationing, even when they could easily afford black market prices. Nor did they dare evade the draft. It wasn't patriotic.
"Rising inequality and differential exposure to economic risk has caused one group to see themselves as the “makers” in society who provide for the rest and pay most of the bills, and the other group as “takers” who get all the benefits. The upper strata wonders, “Why should we pay for social insurance when we get little or none of the benefits?” and this leads to an attack on these programs."
I didn't miss the Republican message conveyed during last year's election. The theme was "you hard working white folks have to pay taxes to support those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics (all illegal immigrants)." Across the nation, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans and recent immigrants of all varieties got the same message: The Republican Party has become the party of White Supremacists. Indeed, both supporters and opponents of the GOP understand that "politically conservative" is another way of saying "White Supremacist."
"Even worse, this social stratification leads those at the top to begin imposing a virtue and vice story to justify their desire to stop paying the taxes needed to support social insurance programs. Those at the top did it all by themselves." ( in their own imaginations) "They “built that” through their own effort and sacrifice with no help from anyone else." Balderdash!
The American industrial planner who most clearly articulated the antidote to this nonsense was the late W. Edwards Deming. He understood that success was a result of collective rather than individual effort and particularly opposed bonuses. He described giving a manager a bonus for his organization's quarterly success as akin to rewarding the weatherman for a pleasant sunshiny day.
"Those at the bottom, on the other hand," the comfortably wealthy assert, "are essentially burning down their own houses just to collect the fire insurance, i.e. making poor choices and sponging off of social insurance programs. It’s their behavior that’s the problem," according to the Koch Brothers and their ilk, "and taking away the incentive to live off of the rest of society by constraining their ability to collect social insurance is the only way to ensure they get jobs and provide for themselves." And how did the Koch brothers provide for themselves? The old fashioned way. By choosing wealthy parents.
The people who have made poor choices in recent decades are our political leaders who dismantled very effective protections put in place eighty years ago. We are all suffering as a result.
"Of course, this is a false view of how the system operates," Thoma explains. "The wealthy would not have the opportunity to make so much money if it society didn’t provide the infrastructure, educated workforce, legal protections, and other building blocks critical for their success. And we shouldn’t forget that many of the wealthy got where they are through the privilege and advantage that comes from familial wealth rather than their own merit."
I might add that another way the super wealthy got that way is by buying politicians to change the rules by which we all live. To their advantage, of course. They have rigged the system.
"We have lost something important as a society," Thoma explains, "as inequality has grown over the last several decades, our sense that we are all in this together. Social insurance is a way of sharing the risks that our economic system imposes upon us. As with other types of insurance, e.g. fire insurance, we all put our money into a common pool and the few of us unlucky enough to experience a “fire” – the loss of a job, health problems that wipe out retirement funds, disability, and so on – use the insurance to avoid financial disaster and rebuild as best we can."
One of the themes that jumps out at me from my reading of actions during World War II: American servicemen completely grasped that we were all in this together - they didn't abandon their fellow soldiers and sailors to the enemy. The order to "abandon ship" didn't mean "abandon your shipmates." It didn't mean "you're on your own." The French say "sauve qui peut," literally "save [oneself] who can" or "every man for himself." That wasn't the way of the American warrior. It is the way these days of wealthy Republicans.
"But growing inequality has allowed one strata of society to be largely free of these risks while the other is very much exposed to them." The two strata Thoma is referring to are the 1% at the top of the ladder and the other 99%. "As that has happened," Thoma goes on, "as one group in society has had fewer and fewer worries about paying for college education, has first-rate health insurance, ample funds for retirement, and little or no chance of losing a home and ending up on the street if a job suddenly disappears in a recession, support among the politically powerful elite for the risk sharing that makes social insurance work has declined."
During World War II, even the wealthy dared not violate rationing, even when they could easily afford black market prices. Nor did they dare evade the draft. It wasn't patriotic.
"Rising inequality and differential exposure to economic risk has caused one group to see themselves as the “makers” in society who provide for the rest and pay most of the bills, and the other group as “takers” who get all the benefits. The upper strata wonders, “Why should we pay for social insurance when we get little or none of the benefits?” and this leads to an attack on these programs."
I didn't miss the Republican message conveyed during last year's election. The theme was "you hard working white folks have to pay taxes to support those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics (all illegal immigrants)." Across the nation, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans and recent immigrants of all varieties got the same message: The Republican Party has become the party of White Supremacists. Indeed, both supporters and opponents of the GOP understand that "politically conservative" is another way of saying "White Supremacist."
"Even worse, this social stratification leads those at the top to begin imposing a virtue and vice story to justify their desire to stop paying the taxes needed to support social insurance programs. Those at the top did it all by themselves." ( in their own imaginations) "They “built that” through their own effort and sacrifice with no help from anyone else." Balderdash!
The American industrial planner who most clearly articulated the antidote to this nonsense was the late W. Edwards Deming. He understood that success was a result of collective rather than individual effort and particularly opposed bonuses. He described giving a manager a bonus for his organization's quarterly success as akin to rewarding the weatherman for a pleasant sunshiny day.
"Those at the bottom, on the other hand," the comfortably wealthy assert, "are essentially burning down their own houses just to collect the fire insurance, i.e. making poor choices and sponging off of social insurance programs. It’s their behavior that’s the problem," according to the Koch Brothers and their ilk, "and taking away the incentive to live off of the rest of society by constraining their ability to collect social insurance is the only way to ensure they get jobs and provide for themselves." And how did the Koch brothers provide for themselves? The old fashioned way. By choosing wealthy parents.
The people who have made poor choices in recent decades are our political leaders who dismantled very effective protections put in place eighty years ago. We are all suffering as a result.
"Of course, this is a false view of how the system operates," Thoma explains. "The wealthy would not have the opportunity to make so much money if it society didn’t provide the infrastructure, educated workforce, legal protections, and other building blocks critical for their success. And we shouldn’t forget that many of the wealthy got where they are through the privilege and advantage that comes from familial wealth rather than their own merit."
I might add that another way the super wealthy got that way is by buying politicians to change the rules by which we all live. To their advantage, of course. They have rigged the system.
This
political dispute over the debt limit is, plainly and simply, about the
size and role of government. In particular, it’s an attempt by
Republicans to use undue fear about the debt to scale back or eliminate
spending on social insurance programs such as Medicare, Social Security,
Obamacare, food stamps, and unemployment compensation. And it’s no
accident that this attack on social insurance coincides with growing
income inequality. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
This
political dispute over the debt limit is, plainly and simply, about the
size and role of government. In particular, it’s an attempt by
Republicans to use undue fear about the debt to scale back or eliminate
spending on social insurance programs such as Medicare, Social Security,
Obamacare, food stamps, and unemployment compensation. And it’s no
accident that this attack on social insurance coincides with growing
income inequality. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest estimates from
the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a debt problem
until over a decade from now, and when the debt does finally begin
increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health care. So
finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that already seems
to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt problem. - See
more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest estimates from
the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a debt problem
until over a decade from now, and when the debt does finally begin
increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health care. So
finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that already seems
to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt problem. - See
more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
In
fact, the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest
estimates from the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a
debt problem until over a decade from now, and when the debt does
finally begin increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health
care. So finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that
already seems to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt
problem. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
In
fact, the debt is not even an immediate problem. As the latest
estimates from the Congressional Budget Office show, we don’t have a
debt problem until over a decade from now, and when the debt does
finally begin increasing the main cause will be rising costs for health
care. So finding a way to rein in health care costs, something that
already seems to be happening, is the key to solving our future debt
problem. - See more at:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/09/24/Real-Reason-Fight-over-Debt-Limit#sthash.1PJ2MA0P.dpuf
Which Wolf Do You Feed?
There is a story, thought to be of Cherokee origin, quoted in today's New York Times. It goes like this:
A girl is troubled by a recurring dream in which two wolves fight viciously. Seeking an explanation, she goes to her grandfather, highly regarded for his wisdom, who explains that there are two forces within each of us, struggling for supremacy, one embodying peace and the other, war. At this, the girl is even more distressed, and asks her grandfather who wins. His answer: “The one you feed.”
A girl is troubled by a recurring dream in which two wolves fight viciously. Seeking an explanation, she goes to her grandfather, highly regarded for his wisdom, who explains that there are two forces within each of us, struggling for supremacy, one embodying peace and the other, war. At this, the girl is even more distressed, and asks her grandfather who wins. His answer: “The one you feed.”
Saturday, September 28, 2013
The Intentional Destruction Of Public Education
I recommend everyone concerned with public education to read Jonothan Kozol's review in the New York Times of Diane Ravitch's new book:
This Is Only a Test
‘Reign of Error,’ by Diane Ravitch
By JONATHAN KOZOL
Published: September 26, 2013
I also recommend following education issues Diane Ravitvh's blog: http://dianeravitch.net/
She also has a web site at http://dianeravitch.net/
I recently tried to recall when I first heard newspaper commentary about how our schools were failing. I can't pin it down exactly, but my best recollection is that the drumbeat of criticism began about 1970. That was when, across the South, public schools began to integrate as required by the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. [Some may recall the Supreme Court's order that this be accomplished with "all deliberate speed."] I had a few words to say about this back in June.
Across the South, White parents began removing their children from public schools to "home school" them or to enroll them in "Christian" academies.
Now, across the land, wealthy Americans are engaged in a vast struggle to destroy public schools and replace them with corporate, for profit undertakings.
One element in the attack on public schools is "Teach For America." The premise of TFA is that bright, committed college graduates can do what trained, experienced teachers cannot. In short, it is an attack on American public education. This recent article in Atlantic calls that whole enterprise into question.
What's The Health Care Fight All About?
"The Republican Party is bending its entire will, staking its very
soul, fighting to its last breath, in service of a crusade to....
Make sure that the working poor don't have access to affordable health care."
Kevin Drum
Another way to put it:
When the exchange opens, 1,346,603 uninsured and eligible North Carolinians will have access to affordable care.
Up to 95,000 young adults in North Carolina can now stay on their parent's health insurance until they're 26 years old.
People from North Carolina with Medicare saved nearly $209 million on prescription drugs because of the Affordable Care Act.
Up to 4,099,922 non-elderly North Carolinians with pre-existing conditions, including 539,092 children, can no longer be denied coverage.
And this is what Republicans are trying to take away.
By the way, this is the party that claims to be "Christian" and to reflect "family values."
Someone has to explain that to me.
Make sure that the working poor don't have access to affordable health care."
Kevin Drum
Another way to put it:
When the exchange opens, 1,346,603 uninsured and eligible North Carolinians will have access to affordable care.
Up to 95,000 young adults in North Carolina can now stay on their parent's health insurance until they're 26 years old.
People from North Carolina with Medicare saved nearly $209 million on prescription drugs because of the Affordable Care Act.
Up to 4,099,922 non-elderly North Carolinians with pre-existing conditions, including 539,092 children, can no longer be denied coverage.
And this is what Republicans are trying to take away.
By the way, this is the party that claims to be "Christian" and to reflect "family values."
Someone has to explain that to me.
Friday, September 27, 2013
Voter Suppression In New Bern
They are at it again! Today's Sun Journal highlights an e-mail campaign by the Craven County Republican Party to stir up concern over a supposed need to purge the county's voter registration rolls. The article, by reporter Sue Book, makes it clear that the e-mail is contrary to provisions of North Carolina general statutes governing elections. The restrictions of NC election law that the article describes concerning voters presumed to have moved are dictated by federal election law, namely the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Craven County election officials got it right.
It seems worth mentioning that the State Board of Elections, now dominated by its republican members, also got the law right when they overturned county actions in the case of a student who filed to run in the Elizabethtown municipal elections. Neither that county board action or the one in Boone, NC closing a precinct at Appalachian State University, relied on recent changes to state election laws.
Stand by for more of the same.
It seems worth mentioning that the State Board of Elections, now dominated by its republican members, also got the law right when they overturned county actions in the case of a student who filed to run in the Elizabethtown municipal elections. Neither that county board action or the one in Boone, NC closing a precinct at Appalachian State University, relied on recent changes to state election laws.
Stand by for more of the same.
Voter Suppression In NC: More Than Just Voter ID
Professor Dan Carter of the University of South Carolina has written a very illuminating article explaining what has happened in North Carolina in the past two legislative sessions. The article is here.
It is plain from this and other sources that the voter suppression
legislation in North Carolina is part of a national GOP scheme to
suppress voting by African Americans, college students, women, the poor,
and democratic voters in general. Carter explains clearly how this is
done.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Friday, September 20, 2013
Oriental Town Board Whines About Wal-Mart
At a spirited special meeting last night of the Oriental Town Board, a standing-room only crowd voiced overwhelming opposition to the planned Wal-Mart Express to be built just outside Town.
After a dozen citizens spoke, all but one opposing Wal-Mart, the Town Board considered an eight-page resolution drafted over the previous 36 hours by Commissioner Venturi. Commissioner Summers, in the only sensible move of the evening, moved to "table" the resolution until the Board's next meeting. His resolution didn't pass. The Board then recessed for fifteen minutes to read the resolution they had just refused to table.
After the recess, Commissioner Bissette moved to amend the resolution by deleting approximately two pages of the resolution. The amended resolution, essentially a lengthy whine asking Wal-Mart to play nice, was adopted.
If you think my characterization a bit harsh, you can read the resolution here: http://www.townoforiental.com/vertical/sites/%7B8227B748-6F08-4124-B0ED-02789B9A2F82%7D/uploads/Too_-_Wal-Mart_Resolution.pdf
I agree with the commissioners who pointed out the Town has, at best, only limited powers in this case. Why is that? It is the result of decades of dithering and refusal to look aggressively to the future.
Examples:
Six years ago, the Long Range Planning Committee refused to even mention the possibility of expanding the Town by annexation. Such a move would be very much more difficult now;
In the 1990's, the Town sold its sewage treatment plant, rather than seeking state and federal funds to repair and modernize it. Result: the Town lost control over its future;
Six years ago, the Town made a poorly-conceived effort to remove a restriction on Extra Territorial Jurisdiction in Pamlico County. We wasted the support of our representatives in the state house and senate by a very clumsy approach;
And on and on.
We have an important municipal election coming up. Let's put some people in office who want to DO things.
After a dozen citizens spoke, all but one opposing Wal-Mart, the Town Board considered an eight-page resolution drafted over the previous 36 hours by Commissioner Venturi. Commissioner Summers, in the only sensible move of the evening, moved to "table" the resolution until the Board's next meeting. His resolution didn't pass. The Board then recessed for fifteen minutes to read the resolution they had just refused to table.
After the recess, Commissioner Bissette moved to amend the resolution by deleting approximately two pages of the resolution. The amended resolution, essentially a lengthy whine asking Wal-Mart to play nice, was adopted.
If you think my characterization a bit harsh, you can read the resolution here: http://www.townoforiental.com/vertical/sites/%7B8227B748-6F08-4124-B0ED-02789B9A2F82%7D/uploads/Too_-_Wal-Mart_Resolution.pdf
I agree with the commissioners who pointed out the Town has, at best, only limited powers in this case. Why is that? It is the result of decades of dithering and refusal to look aggressively to the future.
Examples:
Six years ago, the Long Range Planning Committee refused to even mention the possibility of expanding the Town by annexation. Such a move would be very much more difficult now;
In the 1990's, the Town sold its sewage treatment plant, rather than seeking state and federal funds to repair and modernize it. Result: the Town lost control over its future;
Six years ago, the Town made a poorly-conceived effort to remove a restriction on Extra Territorial Jurisdiction in Pamlico County. We wasted the support of our representatives in the state house and senate by a very clumsy approach;
And on and on.
We have an important municipal election coming up. Let's put some people in office who want to DO things.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Pamlico County State Legislators
Last Friday I attended the Town Meeting with Pamlico County's State Legislators at Pamlico Community College's Ned Delamar Center.
First the good news. Both State Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale have become more polished in their presentations since being elected to the state legislature.
I'll get to the bad news in a minute.
I don't know Michel Speciale at all, but I do know Norm Sanderson. He has always been completely courteous in his dealings with me, despite disagreements on policy matters. Now that I have heard the two legislators explain what they view as the significant accomplishments of the General Assembly in the recent session, I have many more policy disagreements.
Most of all, I am disappointed that neither elected official seems to inquire very deeply into the truth of matters affecting their constituents. That is, the voters in their districts.
One example: Michel Speciale's explanation of one provision of the bill making vast changes to election law in North Carolina. The legislature did away with same day registration of voters during one-stop, Speciale explained, "because there was not enough time to review and certify the voter before the election." He did not cite a single case where this had been a problem.
His statement is false in several dimensions:
1. It may not look like it, but votes cast at one-stop sites are actually absentee ballots. They are processed exactly the same way. They are reviewed by the county board of elections weekly during one-stop and either verified, rejected or set aside for further examination. Like any other vote, they don't count officially until the tenth day after the general election in even-numbered years or the seventh day after the general election in odd-numbered years.
2. Every ballot cast at a one-stop site, every provisional ballot and every absentee ballot is retrievable. (That isn't true for ballots cast election day). I don't know of a single case where a county board of elections was unable to determine validity of any such ballot by the time they completed the canvass.
3. Because ballots are retrievable, votes cast at one-stop, including those cast by voters using same-day registration, could be challenged right up to the time the board of elections completes tha canvass of votes cast.
Why does this matter?
a. It makes it possible for voters to correct any errors in their voter registration information even after the registration deadline. Voters often don't review their information until voting begins at one-stop.
b. It provides a safety valve against voter registration scams. In 2012, both in North Carolina and Virginia, "helpful" persons conducted voter registration drives in African American, Hispanic and College neighborhoods. They then tossed all the registration forms for categories they didn't want to vote.
This scam worked in Virginia, where thousands of discarded registration forms were found in dumpsters after registration closed. It was too late for the scammed voters to correct the record and vote.
The scam didn't work as well in North Carolina, where more than half of the voters cast ballots at one-stop sites. Because of same day registration, North Carolina voters were better protected from an insidious form of GOP election fraud.
Our state legislature has now made North Carolina safe for a particular form of targeted election fraud designed to suppress the vote in certain neighborhoods.
I don't know whether the legislators who voted for this change are dishonest or just gullible. I prefer to think they are just gullible.
First the good news. Both State Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale have become more polished in their presentations since being elected to the state legislature.
I'll get to the bad news in a minute.
I don't know Michel Speciale at all, but I do know Norm Sanderson. He has always been completely courteous in his dealings with me, despite disagreements on policy matters. Now that I have heard the two legislators explain what they view as the significant accomplishments of the General Assembly in the recent session, I have many more policy disagreements.
Most of all, I am disappointed that neither elected official seems to inquire very deeply into the truth of matters affecting their constituents. That is, the voters in their districts.
One example: Michel Speciale's explanation of one provision of the bill making vast changes to election law in North Carolina. The legislature did away with same day registration of voters during one-stop, Speciale explained, "because there was not enough time to review and certify the voter before the election." He did not cite a single case where this had been a problem.
His statement is false in several dimensions:
1. It may not look like it, but votes cast at one-stop sites are actually absentee ballots. They are processed exactly the same way. They are reviewed by the county board of elections weekly during one-stop and either verified, rejected or set aside for further examination. Like any other vote, they don't count officially until the tenth day after the general election in even-numbered years or the seventh day after the general election in odd-numbered years.
2. Every ballot cast at a one-stop site, every provisional ballot and every absentee ballot is retrievable. (That isn't true for ballots cast election day). I don't know of a single case where a county board of elections was unable to determine validity of any such ballot by the time they completed the canvass.
3. Because ballots are retrievable, votes cast at one-stop, including those cast by voters using same-day registration, could be challenged right up to the time the board of elections completes tha canvass of votes cast.
Why does this matter?
a. It makes it possible for voters to correct any errors in their voter registration information even after the registration deadline. Voters often don't review their information until voting begins at one-stop.
b. It provides a safety valve against voter registration scams. In 2012, both in North Carolina and Virginia, "helpful" persons conducted voter registration drives in African American, Hispanic and College neighborhoods. They then tossed all the registration forms for categories they didn't want to vote.
This scam worked in Virginia, where thousands of discarded registration forms were found in dumpsters after registration closed. It was too late for the scammed voters to correct the record and vote.
The scam didn't work as well in North Carolina, where more than half of the voters cast ballots at one-stop sites. Because of same day registration, North Carolina voters were better protected from an insidious form of GOP election fraud.
Our state legislature has now made North Carolina safe for a particular form of targeted election fraud designed to suppress the vote in certain neighborhoods.
I don't know whether the legislators who voted for this change are dishonest or just gullible. I prefer to think they are just gullible.
Pamlico County - Two Wal Marts?
There may be news today on the Wal-Mart front.
Would you believe two Wal-Mart stores in Pamlico County?
I'm not sure even one makes sense in a county of 13,000, but two?
Would you believe two Wal-Mart stores in Pamlico County?
I'm not sure even one makes sense in a county of 13,000, but two?
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Doolittle Raiders Have Last Public Reunion
Every year since 1942, on April 18, the anniversary of the Doolittle raid on Japan by 16 B-25 bombers taking off from the pitching flight deck of USS Hornet, the survivors of the 80 aviators from the raid hold a reunion. They toast those who passed on during the previous year. Among the mementoes possessed by the surviving raiders is a bottle of fine cognac bottled in 1896, the year of General Doolittle's birth. The plan is for the last survivors to open the bottle and toast their departed comrades.
At their annual reunion this year, the four remaining survivors, all in their nineties, decided that this year's reunion was the last public reunion they will hold. Later this year, they will hold a private ceremony at which the 1896 bottle will be opened. Here is the story.
I have written about the Doolittle raid before: here and here and here and here and here. It was one of the most remarkable military operations in history and had an effect far beyond the slight damage it caused to Tokyo. It was, in fact, a game-changer for the entire Pacific war.
The eighty volunteers who pulled it off were no more remarkable than many others in our armed forces at the time of Pearl Harbor, but only trained B-25 crew members had the chance to volunteer.
They did a remarkable thing, but standing behind them were thousands of sailors, engineers, technicians and military planners who made the plan, modified the aircraft, trained the crews to take off from an aircraft carrier, land in China and get back to the US.
The aircrews got the glory, but all these men were in it together. Teamwork. And it was done with airplanes, ships, soldiers and sailors who were already in the service at the time of Pearl Harbor.
At their annual reunion this year, the four remaining survivors, all in their nineties, decided that this year's reunion was the last public reunion they will hold. Later this year, they will hold a private ceremony at which the 1896 bottle will be opened. Here is the story.
I have written about the Doolittle raid before: here and here and here and here and here. It was one of the most remarkable military operations in history and had an effect far beyond the slight damage it caused to Tokyo. It was, in fact, a game-changer for the entire Pacific war.
The eighty volunteers who pulled it off were no more remarkable than many others in our armed forces at the time of Pearl Harbor, but only trained B-25 crew members had the chance to volunteer.
They did a remarkable thing, but standing behind them were thousands of sailors, engineers, technicians and military planners who made the plan, modified the aircraft, trained the crews to take off from an aircraft carrier, land in China and get back to the US.
The aircrews got the glory, but all these men were in it together. Teamwork. And it was done with airplanes, ships, soldiers and sailors who were already in the service at the time of Pearl Harbor.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Seventy Years Ago: September 11, 1943: USS Savannah
September 11, 1943, USS Savannah (CL-42), a prewar Brooklyn class light cruiser, was hit by a German bomb while supporting our landing at Salerno. The bomb, which was dropped from high altitude, turned out to be a radio-controlled bomb, which hit the top of turret three and caused extensive damage, destroying part of the keel and killing most of the sailors in the forward part of the ship.
Here is a personal account of the event by one of the sailors aboard. Savannah's effective gunfire in support of US troops ashore figures in the movie, "Big Red One."
The photos below show the ship after the bomb hit.
The bomb killed 197 out of Savannah's 868-man crew.
Here is a personal account of the event by one of the sailors aboard. Savannah's effective gunfire in support of US troops ashore figures in the movie, "Big Red One."
The photos below show the ship after the bomb hit.
The bomb killed 197 out of Savannah's 868-man crew.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Syria And Chemical Weapons - Light At End Of Tunnel?
Today's news seems somewhat hopeful.
It isn't clear how it came about, but it sounds like Secretary of State Kerry may have proposed a settlement believing Syria would refuse - and now both Syria and Russia are jumping through hoops as fast as they can to accept it.
The proposal that Syria turn over its chemical weapons to international control is a good one. It was made even better when Russia suggested the weapons be destroyed under international supervision.
Doing this would resolve a potential dilemma: should there be a strike against Syria's chemical weapons depots? On the one hand, that would be the most justifiable target. On the other hand, attacking the chemical weapons would likely release some very nasty stuff into the Syrian countryside - possibly causing innocent deaths.
President Theodore Roosevelt is often quoted as advising that we "speak softly and carry a big stick."
George W. Bush's neocons seemed to think that meant "shout loudly and hit people over the head with the stick."
Sometimes diplomacy can accomplish wonders, but it is hard work best accomplished behind the scenes.
I hope that's what's going on here.
It isn't clear how it came about, but it sounds like Secretary of State Kerry may have proposed a settlement believing Syria would refuse - and now both Syria and Russia are jumping through hoops as fast as they can to accept it.
The proposal that Syria turn over its chemical weapons to international control is a good one. It was made even better when Russia suggested the weapons be destroyed under international supervision.
Doing this would resolve a potential dilemma: should there be a strike against Syria's chemical weapons depots? On the one hand, that would be the most justifiable target. On the other hand, attacking the chemical weapons would likely release some very nasty stuff into the Syrian countryside - possibly causing innocent deaths.
President Theodore Roosevelt is often quoted as advising that we "speak softly and carry a big stick."
George W. Bush's neocons seemed to think that meant "shout loudly and hit people over the head with the stick."
Sometimes diplomacy can accomplish wonders, but it is hard work best accomplished behind the scenes.
I hope that's what's going on here.
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Unemployment Rate Down - Not Necessarily Good News
I have thought for many years that the "unemployment rate" was not a very useful statistic. It doesn't tell us much about the real world of jobs in this country, and when looked at alone, can convey the absolutely wrong impression.
Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post gives a good explanation why last Friday's employment report, showing reduced unemployment, is not good news. As usual, the devil is in the details.
In a nutshell, the unemployment rate is down because of the large number of jobless people who have given up looking.
Jared Bernstein reports that the reduced unemployment rate is "due to a decline in the share of the population in the labor force, which ticked down two-tenths of a percent, to 63.2%, its lowest level since the summer of 1978, according to MarketWatch.com."
Dylan Matthews' article includes a very illuminating graph:
As the graph shows, the only age group for which the labor participation rate is up is the age group that should already be retired. But many can't afford to retire, so hold on to their jobs as long as they can.
So much for the golden years.
Jared Bernstein has some more thoughts worth considering. He draws particular attention to the fact that since June of 2009, when the present "recovery" began, there has been a significant decline in public sector employment, unlike the recoveries beginning in 1991 and 2001. Without that loss of jobs in the public sector, our overall unemployment rate would be less than 7%. Still not great by historical standards, but better than now.
Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post gives a good explanation why last Friday's employment report, showing reduced unemployment, is not good news. As usual, the devil is in the details.
In a nutshell, the unemployment rate is down because of the large number of jobless people who have given up looking.
Jared Bernstein reports that the reduced unemployment rate is "due to a decline in the share of the population in the labor force, which ticked down two-tenths of a percent, to 63.2%, its lowest level since the summer of 1978, according to MarketWatch.com."
Dylan Matthews' article includes a very illuminating graph:
As the graph shows, the only age group for which the labor participation rate is up is the age group that should already be retired. But many can't afford to retire, so hold on to their jobs as long as they can.
So much for the golden years.
Jared Bernstein has some more thoughts worth considering. He draws particular attention to the fact that since June of 2009, when the present "recovery" began, there has been a significant decline in public sector employment, unlike the recoveries beginning in 1991 and 2001. Without that loss of jobs in the public sector, our overall unemployment rate would be less than 7%. Still not great by historical standards, but better than now.
Friday, September 6, 2013
Town Of Oriental: Let's Have More Studies
Attending Town Board meetings in Oriental can be very frustrating. No one wants to actually take action.
Over the past several weeks, there has been an outcry against the plan announced by Walmart to put a Walmart express just outside the town limits.
The issue wasn't on the agenda for last Tuesday's Town Board meeting. That didn't keep a hall full of people from speaking out during public comment period, but the board maintained its customary silence toward the public.
Not entirely. One commissioner outlined a number of practical problems he saw as affecting the Town and explained what he is looking into - that was Larry Summers, whose points were met with studied indifference by the rest of the Board.
We have had months of agitation over the issue of controlling or regulating boats in the Anchorage. Quite apart from the issue of whether this is a real problem, the Board has seemed uninterested in taking action.
Except for Larry Summers. Larry talked to our state representative and was told he would be willing to sponsor a local bill modeled on one for Carolina Beach, that would grant the Town authority over adjacent waters out to 200 yards. Larry made a motion to go forward with that proposal. To actually act on the matter.
His motion did not receive a second.
Larry tried again to discuss the matter at yesterday afternoon's meeting of the Harbor Committee, explaining that the actual bill would be drafted by the legislative staff in Raleigh. Commissioner Venturi countered that we should refer it first to the Town Attorney (whose expertise in state legislative matters has been hitherto concealed) and who opined that we should first know what we want to DO with the authority before we ask for it. Presumably that would require some more surveys and a new ad-hoc committee.
Speaking of ad-hoc committees, the ad-hoc advisory committee on the water system has met and actually done something. Jim Barton, who has taken charge reported Tuesday night on the accomplishments to date, developing manuals and directives that the Town is required to have, but doesn't. He also pointed out that any ad hoc committee ceases to exist after the election.
The Town continues to speak of a "water board," which apparently never existed - at least there is no ordinance establishing one. On two recent occasions, Larry Summers attempted to introduce an ordinance and received no second.
Over the past several weeks, there has been an outcry against the plan announced by Walmart to put a Walmart express just outside the town limits.
The issue wasn't on the agenda for last Tuesday's Town Board meeting. That didn't keep a hall full of people from speaking out during public comment period, but the board maintained its customary silence toward the public.
Not entirely. One commissioner outlined a number of practical problems he saw as affecting the Town and explained what he is looking into - that was Larry Summers, whose points were met with studied indifference by the rest of the Board.
We have had months of agitation over the issue of controlling or regulating boats in the Anchorage. Quite apart from the issue of whether this is a real problem, the Board has seemed uninterested in taking action.
Except for Larry Summers. Larry talked to our state representative and was told he would be willing to sponsor a local bill modeled on one for Carolina Beach, that would grant the Town authority over adjacent waters out to 200 yards. Larry made a motion to go forward with that proposal. To actually act on the matter.
His motion did not receive a second.
Larry tried again to discuss the matter at yesterday afternoon's meeting of the Harbor Committee, explaining that the actual bill would be drafted by the legislative staff in Raleigh. Commissioner Venturi countered that we should refer it first to the Town Attorney (whose expertise in state legislative matters has been hitherto concealed) and who opined that we should first know what we want to DO with the authority before we ask for it. Presumably that would require some more surveys and a new ad-hoc committee.
Speaking of ad-hoc committees, the ad-hoc advisory committee on the water system has met and actually done something. Jim Barton, who has taken charge reported Tuesday night on the accomplishments to date, developing manuals and directives that the Town is required to have, but doesn't. He also pointed out that any ad hoc committee ceases to exist after the election.
The Town continues to speak of a "water board," which apparently never existed - at least there is no ordinance establishing one. On two recent occasions, Larry Summers attempted to introduce an ordinance and received no second.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Names And Their Complications In Elections
My mother, born in Texas in 1916, never had a birth certificate. She had a driver's license, issued in Oklahoma in 1932, but didn't need a birth certificate to get it. Her name was misread by the typist who filled out my birth certificate. My parents were divorced and she remarried a young soldier in 1940. He recorded the marriage with the military but reversed the order of her first and middle names.
When I entered school in 1943, I used my stepfather's name, but I wasn't adopted until 1946. The school didn't care. Their job was education.
When I married, my wife took my adopted name but always went by her middle name rather than her first name. That was never a problem, through my thirty year naval career. She eventually started going by her middle name as her first name and her maiden name as her middle name. That worked just fine for a very long time. Then government bureaucrats started getting all hinckey about names and decided to start using driver's licenses as the equivalent of an internal passport ("carte d'identite) like other national governments issue.
My sister (first name Elizabeth) got caught up in the naming hysteria when the IRS complained that her pay checks, W-2's, etc. were made out to "Betty."
Every one of these perfectly innocent circumstances can lead to problems under the "real identity" laws.
Now Department of Motor Vehicles insist that every document give exactly the same version of the name. I might point out that this has absolutely no connection with whether the holder of a driver's license can safely operate a motor vehicle.
This is a frequent problem for women. Here is a recent article in the New York Times summarizing the problems for a woman who kept her unmarried name for professional purposes and uses her married name for private and family purposes.
This set of issues has now been brought into the artificial hysteria of voter ID. Republicans, who want to destroy the credibility of elections (when the "wrong" people win) levy charges of major discrepancies in voter registration - it must be fraud. These charges are usually based on computer matching programs, and on close (and expensive) investigation by boards of election, it turns out there is no fraud at all.
North Carolina Governor Pat McRory recently asserted that we need all these changes to voting procedures to "close loopholes that allow a voter to vote two or three times." There are no such loopholes.
In 2008 in North Carolina, more citizens cast votes than ever before - more than four million. North Carolina has an extensive set of safeguards and has its own computer matching system to uncover double voting. In 2008, the State Board of Elections uncovered 18 cases of double voting. On investigation, only one was found to be intentional and that case was prosecuted.
In a more recent case, a voter cast his ballot at one of his county's one-stop sites. Subsequently he realized he had not completed the reverse side of the ballot. So on election day, he went to his normal precinct and cast a ballot only on the reverse side. He was caught and prosecuted.
Since passage of the National Voter Registration Act in 1993, registration records in all states have vastly improved. North Carolina's records are among the nation's best.
Don't be hoodwinked. There is no election day voter fraud in North Carolina.
I'll have more to say later.
When I entered school in 1943, I used my stepfather's name, but I wasn't adopted until 1946. The school didn't care. Their job was education.
When I married, my wife took my adopted name but always went by her middle name rather than her first name. That was never a problem, through my thirty year naval career. She eventually started going by her middle name as her first name and her maiden name as her middle name. That worked just fine for a very long time. Then government bureaucrats started getting all hinckey about names and decided to start using driver's licenses as the equivalent of an internal passport ("carte d'identite) like other national governments issue.
My sister (first name Elizabeth) got caught up in the naming hysteria when the IRS complained that her pay checks, W-2's, etc. were made out to "Betty."
Every one of these perfectly innocent circumstances can lead to problems under the "real identity" laws.
Now Department of Motor Vehicles insist that every document give exactly the same version of the name. I might point out that this has absolutely no connection with whether the holder of a driver's license can safely operate a motor vehicle.
This is a frequent problem for women. Here is a recent article in the New York Times summarizing the problems for a woman who kept her unmarried name for professional purposes and uses her married name for private and family purposes.
This set of issues has now been brought into the artificial hysteria of voter ID. Republicans, who want to destroy the credibility of elections (when the "wrong" people win) levy charges of major discrepancies in voter registration - it must be fraud. These charges are usually based on computer matching programs, and on close (and expensive) investigation by boards of election, it turns out there is no fraud at all.
North Carolina Governor Pat McRory recently asserted that we need all these changes to voting procedures to "close loopholes that allow a voter to vote two or three times." There are no such loopholes.
In 2008 in North Carolina, more citizens cast votes than ever before - more than four million. North Carolina has an extensive set of safeguards and has its own computer matching system to uncover double voting. In 2008, the State Board of Elections uncovered 18 cases of double voting. On investigation, only one was found to be intentional and that case was prosecuted.
In a more recent case, a voter cast his ballot at one of his county's one-stop sites. Subsequently he realized he had not completed the reverse side of the ballot. So on election day, he went to his normal precinct and cast a ballot only on the reverse side. He was caught and prosecuted.
Since passage of the National Voter Registration Act in 1993, registration records in all states have vastly improved. North Carolina's records are among the nation's best.
Don't be hoodwinked. There is no election day voter fraud in North Carolina.
I'll have more to say later.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Syria, Ypres And Chemical Warfare
April 22, 1915, 5:00 pm northeast of Ypres in Belgium:
German troops had hauled nearly 6,000 cylinders of chlorine gas weighing 90 pounds each to the front lines and uncapped the cylinders by hand. Some German troops died from the gas, but some 6,000 French and colonial troops perished within ten minutes of the attack. The rest fled along a four mile front, leaving the way open for Germans to advance. They did so gingerly, because the Germans themselves lacked effective protection against the gas and German officers had not assigned enough reserves to the line to exploit a breakthrough.
Near midnight, Canadian troops formed up and attacked the Germans, driving them back and halting the German advance.
This was the first effective use of gas in warfare. Three months earlier on the Russian front, Germany had used gas-filled artillery shells, but it was so cold the poisonous gas froze and did not vaporize.
For the remainder of World War I, both sides continued to develop new and deadlier gases, new methods of delivery and better defense methods.
The US chemical warfare program began just prior to American entry into the war in 1917. The program was directed out of offices and laboratories at American University in Washington, DC. Just a few years ago, gas warfare shells were found buried in a residential neighborhood near American University.
In 1948, when my family lived in a rural area east of Oklahoma City, our next door neighbor was a man who had been gassed in Europe during World War I. Thirty years later, he was still suffering the effects of that attack.
Outside Ypres, large tracts of former agricultural land remain unusable because of the effects of persistent chemical warfare agents.
Since that time, on only a few occasions have nations used lethal chemical warfare agents: Italy in Ethiopia in 1935, Japan in China, Saddam Hussein against Kurds and against Iran. Most uses have been against insurgents or unprotected civilians (like the alleged Syrian attack), though even that is rare.
The non-use of chemical warfare in Europe during World War II is something of a puzzle. One possibility is that the agents are effective only under very specific weather conditions. It is difficult to find such conditions at the right time, especially with a dynamic battlefield. Then there is this:
Stanley P. Lovell, Deputy Director for Research and Development of the Office of Strategic Services, submitted the queston "Why was nerve gas not used in Normandy?" to be asked of Hermann Goering during his interrogation. Goering answered that the reason gas was not used had to do with horses. The Wehrmacht was dependent upon horse-drawn transport to move supplies to their combat units, and had never been able to devise a gas mask horses could tolerate; the versions they developed would not pass enough pure air to allow the horses to pull a cart. Thus, gas was of no use to the German Army under most conditions.
The green cloud that rolled down the shallow incline from the German lines was chlorine gas. Chlorine is heavier than air, and it pours like water, seeking lower ground - like protective trenches and fox holes.Dusk was falling when from the German trenches in front of the French line rose that strange green cloud of death. The light north-easterly breeze wafted it toward them, and in a moment death had them by the throat. One cannot blame them that they broke and fled. In the gathering dark of that awful night they fought with the terror, running blindly in the gas-cloud, and dropping with breasts heaving in agony and the slow poison of suffocation mantling their dark faces. Hundreds of them fell and died; others lay helpless, froth upon their agonized lips and their racked bodies powerfully sick, with tearing nausea at short intervals. They too would die later – a slow and lingering death of agony unspeakable. The whole air was tainted with the acrid smell of chlorine that caught at the back of men's throats and filled their mouths with its metallic taste.—Captain Hugh Pollard, The Memoirs of a VC (1932)
German troops had hauled nearly 6,000 cylinders of chlorine gas weighing 90 pounds each to the front lines and uncapped the cylinders by hand. Some German troops died from the gas, but some 6,000 French and colonial troops perished within ten minutes of the attack. The rest fled along a four mile front, leaving the way open for Germans to advance. They did so gingerly, because the Germans themselves lacked effective protection against the gas and German officers had not assigned enough reserves to the line to exploit a breakthrough.
Near midnight, Canadian troops formed up and attacked the Germans, driving them back and halting the German advance.
This was the first effective use of gas in warfare. Three months earlier on the Russian front, Germany had used gas-filled artillery shells, but it was so cold the poisonous gas froze and did not vaporize.
For the remainder of World War I, both sides continued to develop new and deadlier gases, new methods of delivery and better defense methods.
The US chemical warfare program began just prior to American entry into the war in 1917. The program was directed out of offices and laboratories at American University in Washington, DC. Just a few years ago, gas warfare shells were found buried in a residential neighborhood near American University.
In 1948, when my family lived in a rural area east of Oklahoma City, our next door neighbor was a man who had been gassed in Europe during World War I. Thirty years later, he was still suffering the effects of that attack.
Outside Ypres, large tracts of former agricultural land remain unusable because of the effects of persistent chemical warfare agents.
Since that time, on only a few occasions have nations used lethal chemical warfare agents: Italy in Ethiopia in 1935, Japan in China, Saddam Hussein against Kurds and against Iran. Most uses have been against insurgents or unprotected civilians (like the alleged Syrian attack), though even that is rare.
The non-use of chemical warfare in Europe during World War II is something of a puzzle. One possibility is that the agents are effective only under very specific weather conditions. It is difficult to find such conditions at the right time, especially with a dynamic battlefield. Then there is this:
Stanley P. Lovell, Deputy Director for Research and Development of the Office of Strategic Services, submitted the queston "Why was nerve gas not used in Normandy?" to be asked of Hermann Goering during his interrogation. Goering answered that the reason gas was not used had to do with horses. The Wehrmacht was dependent upon horse-drawn transport to move supplies to their combat units, and had never been able to devise a gas mask horses could tolerate; the versions they developed would not pass enough pure air to allow the horses to pull a cart. Thus, gas was of no use to the German Army under most conditions.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
What About Syria?
The subject of Syria keeps coming up at The Bean. "What do I think?"
I shy away from the subject. The truth is, I know a lot about warfare (it's my profession), but I don't know much about Syria.
I also know a lot about diplomacy, international law and strategic planning. But what I know of these subjects leads me to be cautious. Especially when the action under review is to become involved in someone else's civil war. Danger!
I also don't think much of the idea that we can just bomb a country into submission without some form of "boots on the ground." Or at least the threat of "boots on the ground." * And be sceptical of "regime change" as a goal. We're still suffering the aftereffects of our ill-considered "successful" operation of sixty years ago, where we caused the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, the democratically elected, progressive prime minister of Iran.
We saved Iranian oil for British Petroleum, but at what cost?
Worth thinking about.
*The only case that comes to mind of a successful military campaign won almost entirely by bombing is that of Kosovo in 1999.
I shy away from the subject. The truth is, I know a lot about warfare (it's my profession), but I don't know much about Syria.
I also know a lot about diplomacy, international law and strategic planning. But what I know of these subjects leads me to be cautious. Especially when the action under review is to become involved in someone else's civil war. Danger!
I also don't think much of the idea that we can just bomb a country into submission without some form of "boots on the ground." Or at least the threat of "boots on the ground." * And be sceptical of "regime change" as a goal. We're still suffering the aftereffects of our ill-considered "successful" operation of sixty years ago, where we caused the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, the democratically elected, progressive prime minister of Iran.
We saved Iranian oil for British Petroleum, but at what cost?
Worth thinking about.
*The only case that comes to mind of a successful military campaign won almost entirely by bombing is that of Kosovo in 1999.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
