It is crystal clear there is no love lost between Senator John McCain and Donald Trump. That boiled over this past week.
I think Trump did go over the top with his attack on McCain. McCain is a Viet Nam war “hero” as are all who served in Viet Nam in a war the United States had no business being in. (Where have we heard that lately?) There are thousands who did not come home, hundreds who were prisoners in North Viet Nam, thousands who suffer the consequences of Agent Orange even today, and thousands who continue to battle PTSD. All are heros. They served the United States under political leadership that was worse than flawed. They, as did John McCain, paid the price.
I think the big bone between Trump and McCain is the Presidential campaign of 2008. Trump claims to have donated over one million dollars to the McCain effort. As it turned out, McCain was not up to the task. He was a weak candidate who further weakened his position with the pandering selection of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin as the GOP Vice Presidential candidate. That did it for me. Palin turned out to be about as close to a dunce as one could imagine. Is it any wonder that Senator Barack Hussein Obama won the election by a landslide after first beating Hillary Clinton out for the candidacy?
So, you may not like Trump’s frankness and barbs, but he does speak his mind in ways there can be no misunderstanding. And, guess what, he leads the polls. That should be telling the establishment GOP types something. The public is fed up with Washington insiders and east coast talking heads. Who knows at this point if Trump will be the candidate of choice, but you can be sure he already has made an impact.
Smoking Something: Highways, Immigrants, and Students
Honest to goodness! There are times when I think our politicians are smoking something.
Two articles on the Opinion page of the July 17th issue of the Tribune caught my attention. The first was one in which Senator Toomey (R) from Pennsylvania and Senator Dan Coats (R) from Indiana proposed linking an encouragement of more immigration of “highly skilled” people to the United States with the need to find money to fund highway maintenance. What? They claim attracting foreign students and others “highly skilled” to remain in or come to the United States would produce more job creation and economic growth thereby providing more tax dollars for highway maintenance. They don’t, however, suggest a mechanism of how that would be tracked. Do they propose an eye in the sky to watch these immigrants or tag them somehow, maybe a tattoo or electronic chip, so that all the taxes they pay or taxes from jobs they create get directly into highway funds? So, no doubt, another government agency would be required to keep track of it all. Ridiculous! This proposal is a total flight of fantasy.
The cost of highway maintenance should be paid by the users of the highways. The current mechanism for funding is mostly gasoline and diesel tax on a per gallon basis. And, yes, users are choosing to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles and, thereby, use fewer gallons of fuel. This does not mean, however, they drive fewer miles on roads. The answer, simply, is to increase the tax per gallon up to the point needed to fund highway maintenance. Sure, there will be a lot of gnashing of teeth, but the problem needs to be addressed head on; not through some cockamamie scheme involving immigrants.
Now to the other article which, ironically, seems to tie right in. It was the editorial by the Tribune Board about education and graduation rates. The article pointed out the pathetic preparation of high school graduates for college level studies. The key sentence in the article said, “…. thousands of its (Indiana) high school students are graduating without the basic math, reading and writing skills needed to succeed in college”. This is no surprise and a problem existing for decades. The finger needs to be pointed at the high schools and nowhere else. Students wanting to prepare for college should not graduate from high school unless they demonstrate preparedness. The can should not be kicked down the road for universities to deal with as it now is. The current system is a recipe for the failure it is. And, guess what, if students were prepared, maybe graduation rates would go up and students would succeed in getting into the “highly skilled” category. No need for “highly skilled” immigrants. We would grow our own.
European Union and Immigration
Europe has its problems. There is a flood of illegal immigrants from the Middle East and Africa. The pressure will continue.
The southeastern border of the European Union is generally marked by Greece, Bulgaria, and Romania. Hungary is one nation removed from that border except for a rather short border with Ukraine and another with Serbia. Hungary has announced it will build a fence along its border with Serbia to block illegal entry of migrants. There are already fences on the Franco-Italian border manned now by legions of French police. Greece has tightened its Turkish border and Bulgaria built a fence on its Turkish border. All of this to prevent or slow illegal immigration from the Middle East and Africa.
The countries of the European Union are already heavily burdened by illegal immigrants from Africa and the Middle East. More come daily. They come from war torn areas and because of social, environmental, or economic conditions to seek a better life for themselves and their families…. and from areas with very high birth rates. If the tsunami of people is allowed to continue unabated, Europe will rapidly decline socially and economically. New homes for all would be wonderful, but that is not realistic.
In the United States, we are fortunate to have the natural barrier of thousands of miles of ocean to the east and to the west that do not prevent but do slow the flow of illegal immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere. Still many get through. Our primary problem is the border with Mexico where thousands continue to enter the United States illegally daily. Most illegal aliens that cross our southern border are from Central and South America, but others have made their way from the Eastern Hemisphere to Mexico to gain entry to the United States.
Nobody wants to talk about population numbers. The United States must adopt policies that stabilize human numbers within this country. Absent immigration, the United States and virtually all developed countries, including those in the European Union, would have stable populations. Not so the countries with continuing high birth rates. They have reached max capacity economically, socially, and with available natural resources…. yet continue to grow population numbers. There is no place to go but out. As said, the pressure on developed countries will continue and grow. It remains to be seen whether they will say NO MORE or participate in the race to the bottom.
And We Wonder — DDT and Monsanto
[In part from “The Week” of July 3, 1015]
DDT was banned in the United States in 1972, but new research suggests this once ubiquitous insecticide is still causing cancer. Women born in the 1960s to mothers exposed to high levels of DDT while pregnant are nearly four times more likely to develop breast cancer, reports National Geographic. Scientists measured levels of DDT in blood samples taken from mothers of 118 women diagnosed with breast cancer by age 52, and compared them with samples taken from 354 women whose daughters did not get breast cancer. Women exposed to higher DDT levels in the womb were not only more likely to get breast cancer but they were also more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive and deadly forms of the disease……. Shanna Swan, an environmental health scientist at Mount Sinai Hospital said the finding were very troubling. “DDT could be responsible for raising the risk of breast cancer for a whole generation of women”.
And we still wonder if we should trust Monsanto, one of the primary producers of DDT from decades ago. This is the same company that has given us Dioxin, PCBs, 2/4/D, Agent Orange and more. It is the same company that has given us Roundup (glyphosate) that now has been declared a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization. It is the same company that has given us genetically engineered crops that can live through massive application of pesticide; pesticide whose residues follow the crop to the dinner table.
It does not take a genius to conclude that biocides — chemicals that cause death to organisms — are dangerous and harmful. We are poisoning ourselves and the planet. And who knows the ultimate damage to be done by genetically engineered crops and animals. We play with fire.
Aiding and Abetting
The rhetoric is heating up over the illegal immigrant issue. Donald Trump has seen to that. Good for him. Other political candidates in both the Democrat and Republican parties really don’t want to touch the issue with a ten foot pole. Oh, yes, a lot of talk on the fringes but no action for literally decades. But, clearly, the American public wants action, not talk.
Now we have front and center the case in San Francisco of an illegal alien many times over, Francisco Sanchez, killing a woman while she was walking with her father on a pier there that was popular for tourists. I don’t think anyone knows why yet. Sanchez claims innocence. He was supposed not to be in the United States.
Then we learn that San Francisco is a “sanctuary city”, meaning they welcome illegal aliens. They, along with something like 300 cities across the country, offer welcome to all illegal aliens. Just to remind you, illegal aliens are breaking federal law with Sanchez doing it multiple times.
So, what are these cities doing? They are aiding and abetting individuals who are in violation of federal law. Anyone guilty of aiding and abetting is often found to be guilty of the same crime as the perpetrator. If this is the case, the mayors of all of these cities should be arrested and put in prison along with any who actively support sanctuary by their inaction. For example, this would include the Police Chief of San Francisco, a person sworn to uphold the law.
I am just guessing, but I am thinking sanctuary cities might rethink their positions pretty quickly if the mayors were hauled off in handcuffs in a paddy wagon for trial and jail time in a federal prison.
Donald Trump may not be the most diplomatic in his rhetoric, but he has struck a note with the majority of the American public. They are sick and tired of inaction on illegal aliens. They want the border sealed up tightly with total control of who is permitted to cross. That is not to say people with legitimate reason would be stopped. They would simply have to convince border authorities of that legitimacy. Pretty simple.
Weather
Don’t know about you, but I am thinking June and now into July has gotten mixed up with November. We are all tired of gray skies and rain, but there is more to come. Farmers in Indiana are in disaster mode. Fields are flooded or so soggy they cannot be worked. Any equipment on the soil will only compact it severely. Around here; the loss includes corn and soy beans mostly but farmers with tomatoes and pumpkins and other crops have suffered as much.
And what is there to do? Nothing. Weather experts report now that the Midwest is on average showing an increase of over two degrees. This seems little, but it is enough to disturb the water cycle. The result, they say, is to expect more rain with increasing winds and more water in shorter periods of time. They say crops will be affected everywhere and some crops will no longer be possible in areas in which they once grew. They say places like Iowa and Kansas may have to return land to grazing rather than attempt to grow corn, soy beans, and wheat.
Who is to blame. We have met the enemy and he is us. The consequences of our burning of fossil fuels and creating chemicals that cause the atmosphere to capture more heat will be felt long after those of us now living leave. It is our children and grandchildren who will pay the greatest price. The will not be calling us the “Greatest Generation“. They will wonder why we did nothing.
Connect With Nature
[From Connect Column Archives]
Most of us are so involved in our daily lives that we do not notice the ground is shifting under our very feet. We hear or read one news story after another that tells of problems with the environment, but as long as the problems are not right in our face, we really pay little mind. We are comfortable at home in Midtown, Indiana, USA. The only time we perk up is when something like a very toxic piece of real estate crops up in our own backyard, like the old Continental Steel Superfund site. Otherwise, what do we really care? The problems with the environment we hear about seem far away and about things we cannot do anything about anyhow.
We need to care. We must care. We must do everything is our power to learn what is happening, make up our minds about what should be done; then change our own ways and put the pressure on our government officials to act constructively. Not facing up to the tough decisions about what human beings have and are continuing to do to the environment has very serious consequences for our children and children’s children. There remains no doubt about this. The facts are clear. The questions now are about how bad things are going to get, not whether they will get bad. Scientists are warning us, but they cannot act alone. If we do not have our listening ears on, we will not hear the messages they bring until it is too late to escape the negative and probably permanent consequences of inaction. Sounds serious. It is.
I was once the publisher of the Kokomo Tribune. I spent 20 years involved in the management of that newspaper. When it sold, I returned to Purdue to pursue biological research. This was several years after I read a book, ‘Silent Spring’, by Rachel Carson. The message in her book changed many people as it drew attention to the abusive use of pesticides, toxic poisons, in the 1950’s. Rachel Carson rang a bell and change occurred. Others are ringing new bells that are just as loud or louder.
At Purdue, I earned three graduate degrees: a master of science in conservation of natural resources, a master of science in aquatic toxicology and fish biology, and a doctor’s degree in genetics; these on top of an earlier bachelor of science degree in industrial management. I do not tell you this to brag. Rather, I want you to know that when I write about biology, the environment, and public policy; I write from a solid science foundation. I know what ‘good’ science is and what ‘bad’ science is, unlike many in political office presently.
Future columns will deal with a wide range of subjects from the debate over global warming to the use of antibiotics in the animals we eat. They will deal with air and water pollution, agriculture, population, medicine, genetics, genetically modified animals and plants, energy, how much fish is caught in the oceans, our love for automobiles, AIDS, land use, and many other subjects. All will have a direct or indirect connection with biology. One finds that everything is connected to everything else anyhow. If anything is changed in an ecosystem — a scientific word for a place on the earth that has many different plants and animals that relate in some way or another to each other — it affects everything else. Sometimes a change can cause the collapse of the whole place.
My goal is to cause thinking. I will not hesitate to take on those in public life that are, in my opinion, headed in the wrong direction or no direction at all. And I will say why. It is too late to tip toe through the tulips about these things. It is time to learn what the problems are, make up minds about what should be done, and then act. Many decisions to be made will be tough ones. If made wisely, they will result in present sacrifice for the benefit of future generations. If we choose not to act or act too little too late on key decisions, many scientists believe we may jeopardize the existence of human life on the planet Earth. Hard to believe, isn’t it? Let’s see what you conclude a few months from now.
If you ever want to contact me, make comment including telling me you believe I am full of hot air, ask a question about what I have written, or suggest topics for future columns; please write to me in care of the Kokomo Tribune or email kent@visionengineers.com. I cannot promise a personal response always, but I will carefully consider what you have to say.
My files for this column are called ‘Connect’. We have become increasingly disconnected from nature since the dawn of the industrial revolution a couple of hundred years ago. A conscious re-connection with the natural world is the only way back.
Until next time……tell a tree or a bird or a flower that you really do care.
Environment & Politics
[From Connect Column Archives]
How did it happen? How did concerns about the environment and, more particularly, what to do about them, get so tied up in politics? I know as sure as I sit here writing this column that as soon as I take a stand on one environmental or science issue or another, I will be labeled by some as a ‘tree hugger’, a ‘green freak’, an ultra-liberal Democrat, or names I cannot print. I will be accused of being anti-business, anti-development, anti-American, or all sorts of other ‘anti’s’.
We must get past this kind of thinking. It is not productive. It is too important for us to look clearly at the issues involved to be stopped by the politics of labeling. We cannot go blind just because an issue may challenge one’s own views and values.
We have entered the millennium of the environment whether we like it or not. We can go kicking and screaming or we can go with an attitude of wanting to be involved in solutions. The way to solutions is not through screaming at one another about being conservative or liberal or of being one kind of religious person or not. The way to solutions is being willing to examine the facts and then not going into denial.
Things can get real muddied up though. Right now, we cannot agree on what the environmental problems are, where they came from, or how significant they may be. Some folks have almost literally buried their heads in the sand. They say there aren’t any major environmental problems on the planet or that things we see are just part of natural cycles. They say there are already too many rules and regulations about what people and companies can and cannot do. They oppose almost anything that restricts the rights of choice whether it be of an individual or of a business or industry. With industries in particular, most do not favor anything that would conceivably increase the current cost of operating. Fortunately, there are others who have the wisdom to look at a larger view. We do not have to look any farther than our own community to learn important lessons. The Continental Steel Corporation is an excellent example of what can go wrong. To clean up that industrial site has already cost millions of dollars. More will be required. Even then, the ground upon which it was located will be off limits for the foreseeable future for many uses. Why is this?
When in business, Continental Steel Corporation provided jobs for over a thousand people. It provided a good income for people to pay for housing, feed their families, and make a descent living. But what it did not do was to include all of the costs to the environment and to the people in the community in its cost of doing business or in the price of the products it sold. As a result, others have had to pay millions to try to fix what was left behind.
There were other hidden costs not recognized and paid for at the time or even now. What about the costs in terms of the health of former workers or property values near the plant site? What about the costs of water pollution and air pollution left behind? There are and will continue to be monitoring sites for the ground water in the area for the indefinite future to test for toxic chemicals still in the ground.
The former stockholders of Continental Steel Corporation walked away with millions in profits from dollars not spent in dealing with important environmental, societal, and health issues while the company operated. They transferred these ‘costs’ of doing business to others who, if given a choice, would not have wanted to pay for them.
How do you suppose anyone in this community who dared point these things out several decades ago would have been viewed? I can tell you. I was there. Company leadership complained vocally any time they were required to install equipment to reduce harmful air emissions. They buried barrels upon barrels of toxic wastes in their own backyard. They released thousands of gallons of pollutants into the Wildcat Creek. Out of sight, out of mind was the philosophy. We just will not deal with it.
The irony is the leadership of that company and of many companies today would, individually, say one of the ‘All-American’ values he or she holds dear is that of personal responsibility. You fix what you have broken. This presents a real dilemma. The only way, then, to not have to fix something is to deny that a problem exists in the first place, to minimize the problem, or to evade the problem with an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ mentality.
How many other companies are doing the very same thing across the country or the globe right now that Continental Steel Corporation did then? Is this really why one hears so much wailing and gnashing of teeth from one industry leader or another or from those in public office that are aligned with them? Is this why many industries are in denial about environmental matters generally? Is it all about costs and profits? Is this all about short term thinking and not wanting to take responsibility for the lives of anyone else? Is it really about narrow mindedness and lack of concern? You decide.
Jackson Morrow Park Thoroughfare: NO
[From Connect Column Archives]
Thoroughfare The Webster Street through Jackson Morrow Park controversy coupled with talk about a road to connect the Webster extension through Jackson Morrow Park to private commercial property under development and the questions about wetlands raise all sorts of issues. These include private verses public rights, recreation resource planning, preservation of wetlands, and what ‘growth’ is in the best interest of all of Kokomo’s citizens.
I will leave the wetland discussion for a later day. Let it suffice to say for now that wetlands are important, no matter how small an area they involve.
What about recreation resource planning? I took a drive to take another look at Jackson Morrow Park. About three-fourths of the park is open, meadow-like, land with a few planted trees here and there. The remaining one-quarter bounded by Center Road and Park Road is wooded. There are a couple of picnic shelters in the open area along with a parking lot and the Kirkendall Interpretive (or Nature) Center nearer the southwestern areas. There are as yet no ball diamonds, basketball courts, soccer fields, tennis courts, designated trails except in the woods, play equipment for children, botanical gardens or specifically designated natural areas, or other amenities one commonly finds in urban public parks. All of these features are possible and many are already planned for the future if the Park Board has the budget and inclination to move in these directions, provided the character of existing park grounds is not substantially altered.
Then there is the proposed Webster Street extension. This is interesting. It appears this extension would lop off about the eastern one-quarter of the park. If this extension is supposed to relieve traffic from Alto Road as suggested, one must assume there would be many automobiles moving north and south through the park daily. Somehow, I have great difficulty understanding how through traffic would enhance use of the park for recreation. Maybe the park could use additional interior access by road, but this could be provided by a meandering road, say from Webster or Center Road to Park Road, containing some serious speed bumps for speed control, as opposed to a road designed to move traffic quickly and efficiently through an area. I know which type of through road, if there has to be one, I would want if my family or small children were using the park for play. And, maybe there need be no through road at all.
As to the proposal for road access from the west side of a commercial development plot through the park to join with the proposed Webster Street extension, I hope the city will not give it another thought. An additional connection to a Webster extension would only compound an already bad situation. There is presently a conflict of goals: moving traffic rapidly through a recreation area verses enhancing recreational grounds for people in Kokomo. Why add more to the mix by granting private commercial property access, which can only increase through traffic, through Jackson Morrow park? Urban recreation land is already difficult to come by. Why compromise it at all?
Given the fact the private commercial developer involved, Dick Scoggins, has been successful in real estate development for many, many years in Kokomo; one must assume he already considered and planned for proper access to his commercial property long before now. His original plan most certainly would not have made the only good option for proper access to his property being through a city park on a road that does not exist to another road that does not exist through the same city park. That would not have been good business planning.
There are clearly conflicting interests involved in this entire matter. At one pole are the folks who want the park to be left as it presently is. At the other pole are those who desire the expansion of roads through Jackson Morrow park, believing the proposed roads would enhance the park. My guess is that a middle ground is going to be most difficult, if not impossible, to come by.
Outdoor recreation raises the spirit. Public lands for recreation are vital for the health of a community. To compromise the value of existing recreational resources both for now and the future does not make good sense.
Not constructing a thoroughfare through Jackson Morrow park, thereby preserving it solely for recreational development, is the decision that is in the best interest for the longest time of the most folks in our community. It is the decision, too, that does the most to honor the wishes of the Kirkendall family who did so much to bring the Jackson Morrow park into being in the first place.
Bush and Cheney Energy Secrets
[From Connect Column Archives]
The General Accounting Office, which is a non-partisan investigative arm of the Congress of the United States, has repeatedly asked President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney for more details about the meetings convened by the administration which resulted in the formulation of the Bush-Cheney national energy policy. Cheney has formally refused to comply with these requests claiming certain details are none of the GAO’s business. The GAO office inquiry was prompted by a request from two House Democrats.
There is a problem here. It is understandable that Bush and Cheney would resist attempts by Democrats to make political hay from information provided to the GAO. This type of maneuvering is the same old monotonous story of politics as usual. If this is the motive behind the request from the Democrats: shame on them.
However, even if it is the motive, that does not excuse the position taken by the Bush-Cheney administration. It is not OK to withhold information about how what may turn out to be one of the most important policies in the history of this country was formulated. It is not OK to hold in secret the names and backgrounds of meeting participants or of other contacts and discussions that took place. It is not OK for the public not to be able to decide for themselves whether the people involved were acting in the best interest of the nation or in the best interest of themselves and the companies they represent.
Holding information in secret always raises suspicion. As a general principle in this country, the citizens have a right to know all that is going on in government unless there is some very, very good immediate national security reason to do otherwise. These energy policy formulation meetings and contacts clearly do not fall into that category. The nation’s business is best carried on in a glass house, not behind closed doors.
The Bush administration promised openness, frankness, and bi-partisan compromise in its campaign promises. It is time for the administration to clearly lay out for the public who participated in what meetings and when as it made the decisions about the energy future of this nation. If it does not, we urge the GAO to exercise what ever powers it may have to require the administration to do so. The decisions about our energy future are much too important for it to be otherwise.