"An Unhealthy Tax Plan" Letter to trhe editor Tom Denton

An Unhealthy Tax Plan

According to one-time campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, candidate Trump’s go-to meal at McDonald’s was two Big Macs, two Filet-O-Fishes, and a chocolate shake.  With an in- White House chef and maybe a whisper from the Surgeon General, President Trump’s diet might have gotten an upgrade.  But there is no better symbol for a Republican party and its leader whose menu is all about the appetites of now—to hell with the future.

            The GOOP (Grand Old Oligarchy Party) tax bill delivers a sugar high to the superwealthy, whose “consumables”--a new yacht? a Russian dacha?--don’t appear on the shopping lists of the rest of us.  Corporations get a windfall, likely to be channeled into stock buybacks and shareholder dividends.  It’s all paid for by small tax cuts that turn into tax hikes for most Americans in 2027.  And don’t forget its trillion dollar debt financing (our debt) that reputable economists believe, contrary to Republican cheerleaders, will not be paid for with new growth.

            Americans who worry about crumbling roads and water pipes, who fret as they see no action on lowering the cost of higher education, who wonder if Medicare and Medicaid will still be there to support dignified retirement years, who are appalled that the children’s health program (CHIP) remains unfunded because . . . “there isn’t enough money” . . . well, they can park their worries at home, grab their tax cuts, head to McDonald’s, and order the President’s menu.  Add double fries.  And BYOB to spike the shake.  Yee-hah.

Publishing history

New Paltz Times                 12/28

Poughkeepsie Journal          online 12/30, 1/7/2018

"The GOP shell game" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

The GOP Chess Game

            Throughout Donald Trump’s presidency commentators have sometimes offered the checkers vs. chess analogy:    is he somehow playing a long, strategic game while most of us try to keep up, day-to-day, with his abrupt, shifting moves, seemingly timed to capture or divert the news cycle?  After almost eleven months it is clear that Trump is no chess master; he is a bit player.  Rather, with the passage of its tax bill, it is the Republican party that has boldly and unapologetically asserted its master plan.   Its so-called tax reform legislation certainly redistributes wealth from the poor and lower and middle class Americans to corporations and the rich, packaged in a promise of trickle down benefits from top to bottom.  But it is more than that.  Our Republican representatives have seized their long-sought opportunity to “starve the beast,” a goal proudly announced as far back as the 1980s by David Stockman, Reagan’s budget director.   They pledge jet-fueled growth from tax cuts, but their overarching goal is to spawn deficits and reduce the federal government’s ability to fund an array of programs—most specifically, what they label “entitlements.”  Whose entitlements?  Yours.  Your children’s

.

            Watch the plan play out.   Very soon we’ll see cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and other health-related programs, as they will be required by “pay-as-you-go” Congressional rules.  House Speaker Paul Ryan has already announced his plans to attack the challenges of long term spending for Social Security and Medicare.  Responsible governing?  Check to see whose pockets have been picked, whose stuffed, before you answer that question.

Publishing history

Herald Record                       12/7

New Paltz Times                   12/14

"Taxing education" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Taxing Education

Tax bills currently in the House and Senate variously propose the following:

1.  Would impose a 1.4%  excise tax on the interest income of private university endowments subject to guidelines.   Here are some private institutions in New York that would be affected:

• Williams College
• Hamilton College
• Cooper Union
• Columbia University
• Vassar College
• Colgate University

(Chronicle of Higher Education)

2.Would require tuition waivers or reductions currently granted to college & university employees and their families—faculty, staff, maintenance—to be taxed as income.   Many of these waivers have been negotiated in good faith in lieu of salary compensation for the workers.

3.  Would tax tuition waivers for graduate students, who do much of the work in educational institutions.  The money would be deducted from their typically measly stipends, which are far less than annual tuition.

4.  Would eliminate the existing deduction of interest on student loans at certain amounts.  The average student (class of ’16) has over $37,000 in student loan debt. 

5.  Would eliminate the individual deduction for teachers who pay for classroom materials out of their own pockets.

There are additional items in the bills that would harm our nation’s students and institutions of higher learning.  How can one look at this list and not conclude that the Republican party is painting a bullseye on our students, colleges, and universities?  And for what?  To reduce the taxes of corporations and the wealthiest individuals.

Constituents should let their representatives know that we do not want their tax bills to attack the seed corn of our democracy.

Publishing History

Daily Freeman                      11/25

"No ‘hoax’ in threat of climate change" Letter to the editor Ted Millar

Dear Editor:

It appears the walls of reality are beginning to close in on climate change deniers.

The recently released fourth National Climate Assessment report confirms what scientists have been warning us about for decades: Human activity is the primary cause of global warming, and dire consequences like sea level rise of 8 feet by century’s end and more catastrophic weather are guaranteed if we fail to act.


What this means is climate skeptics can no longer retreat behind superficial talking points about climate change being a “hoax.”



I call on Gov. Andrew Cuomo to continue his leadership on offshore wind energy.

I also call on U.S. Rep. John Faso, R-Kinderhook, to protect measures in the federal tax plan favorable to renewable energy that the Trump administration wants to eliminate or limit, namely tax credits for electric vehicles and subsidies for sustainable energy development.


Ted Millar

Publishing history

Daily Freeman 11/22/17

"To the editor" Letter to the editor Susan Denton

To the Editor:

   On Sunday morning in Sutherland Texas,  26 year old Devin Patrick Kelly

killed 26 people as they prayed in church. Responding to the

slaughter, Donald Trump described it as “a mental health problem at the highest level”.

    The president’s misconstruction of "a mental health problem" rings hollow. Domestic violence is so often the predictor of greater violence that it is now a factor in the majority of mass shootings. IT WAS MURDER. Devin Kelley could not have done this without a gun.

   Sadly, heartbreakingly, intimate partner violence is at the root of so much violence. If it were used as a predictor of future behavior, we could make a significant dent in crime statistics. The landscapes are littered with the collateral damage of our failure to do this. Abusers escalate.

    When women are valued less than men, blamed for everything from bad mothering to being the architects of their own rapes, domestic violence is viewed as a lesser crime. The word “domestic” implies a prior relationship in which the victim unwisely brought the crime against herself.  

    Call domestic crimes what they are and charge them exactly as we would if they were committed by strangers. Assault, battery, rape; use the term strangulation instead of choking, menacing instead of harassment.  Be clear.

    States and municipalities will show that they can make a difference in a virulent criminal public health scourge. This is a terrorism we can stop.

Susan Denton

Publishing History

Poughkeepsie Journal 11/15/17

"Letter to the editor" Letter to the editor Misha Harnick

On October 16th, I have attended a debate on the New York State Constitutional Convention (BACK SIDE of November 7th ballot). It was hosted by SUNY New Paltz and the debaters were Gerald Benjamin, director of the The Benjamin Center for Public Policy Initiatives at SUNY New Paltz, and Fred Kowal, statewide president of the United University Professions (UUP).

Both speakers were very well prepared and the format was highly professional. After their presentation, for almost an hour they took questions from the audience. I can sympathize with Prof. Benjamin’s pushing for the Convention. But I am VERY MUCH concerned about the process and the potential results.

ONE -- if we vote “yes” on November 7th, over 200 delegates will have to be selected and voted on in the 2018 election. This would be a year long haul. A friend said that if he knew that only people who care about OTHER people’s interests and not just their own, MAYBE the convention could bring positive results. But it is likely that many state legislators (those NOT up for reelection in 2018) would run, and considering that they do not necessarily have our interests at heart NOW, would unlikely have during the Convention.

TWO -- the delegates’ campaigns would be costly, whether they themselves foot the bill or collect donations from us, the voters.

THREE -- once delegates are selected, WE ALL start paying: each delegate gets a “stipend” of some $80,000 @ year; and the Convention could drag on and on!!

FOUR – if “dark money” pushes for a “YES” vote, and if the backers’ delegates are appointed, we could see slashing of many protections, embedded in the Constitution now. The issues we need to preserve, such as environmental conservation, rights to unionize, dependence on state pensions; and issues that would benefit from improvements, such as some of our voting laws, could be rescinded and curtailed.

FIVE – there is no way to tell whether at the end of the Convention we, the voters, would be presented with individual articles or -- beware! – a total package.

I will vote “NO” on November 7th and encourage you to do likewise.



Misha Harnick
Publishing History: Poughkeepsie Journal 10/31/2017

"CON/CON is just a big political con" Letter to the editor Cynthia Kraman

CON/CON is just a big political con

New Yorkers get to vote this Nov.7 on whether or not to have a Constitutional Convention, or CON/CON as it’s now known. This comes up every 20 years. We’ve said no to it since 1967. There are good reasons to keep saying no and also, to say yes. But for me there’s one big problem: it will cost too much. In fact some people feel it’s the biggest swindle since our Vice President spent a quarter of a million dollars to fake-attend a football game.

Here’s the set-up: delegates get paid. A lot: $80,000. Since many delegates will also be legislators this gives them a 100 percent bonus---$160,000 for doing two part-time jobs. Pretty sweet. And our tax dollars will pay for it. (State legislators are set to soon vote themselves pay hikes, which will fatten their pensions.)

But that’s not the worst part. Apparently once the convention starts, it’s open ended. It can go on for a year or forever. The longer it lasts, the fatter the paychecks and pensions. We’ll also pay for hotels, travel, parties, meals, halls---millions of dollars to do what can already be done well by legal, democratic instruments already in place.

So, this is not CON/CON, it’s a plain CON. A boondoggle at your expense. Just vote NO! (It's on the back of the ballot that’s where they stuck it.)

Cynthia Kraman
New Paltz

Publishing history

Poughkeepsie Journal, October 27, 2017

"To the Editor" Letter to the editor" Susan Denton

To the Editor

Laura Petit is running for the Ulster County Legislature in District 8/Esopus.   A 35-year resident of Esopus, Laura is well known in her community for her service in a food recovery program for local churches and agencies and for her advocacy for humane treatment of animals.  The list of her other service positions in Esopus includes the library board and the Advisory, Zoning, and Environmental boards.  Service is not just a campaign slogan for her; she walks the talk. 

Laura is familiar to her neighbors in New Paltz as the friendly and efficient coordinator of the New Paltz recycling center.  In that capacity she wrote several grants that were funded in excess of one million dollars.  Other communities should be as fortunate to have an official who can bring outside funding to their projects that promote economic development, infrastructure¸ environmental protection, and the social safety net.  She has initiated an Esopus Repair Café that utilizes the volunteer skills of community members to reduce waste and enhance sustainability. 

            Previously elected to two terms in the legislature, Laura knows how county government can work effectively to improve the lives of people and communities.  She has the knowledge, experience, and skill to be a leader in the legislature, and she has the heart to put people first.  Laura Petit deserves the enthusiastic support of Esopus voters. 

Susan Denton

"To the editor ("Daily Freeman")" Letter to the Editor Andi Weiss Bartczak

To the editor ("Daily Freeman") Andi Weiss Bartczak

On Election Day, we will be deciding whether to start a NYS Constitutional Convention process.  As a progressive, I would love to update our state constitution to improve protection of rights not recognized in our present state constitution.  How about an environmental bill of rights?  How about the right to change party registration up to a month before a primary?  Early voting?  Sure we have too many levels of courts, insufficient home rule.  Why doesn’t New York City have the power to govern itself?     

Unfortunately the way delegates will be chosen pretty much insures that state legislators and their pals would be deciding what kind of a constitution would be offered for our vote in a future election.  Opening the Adirondacks to developers?  No free public schools?  And those delegates get the same salary as our state legislators, over $70,000 per year.

 The alternative is that we improve our constitution piece by piece, starting with electing sufficient progressives.  There are two constitutional amendments on the ballot this November, so we do change the constitution.

  So please vote no on the question of a constitutional convention this November.

Andi Weiss Bartczak

Gardiner, NY

"To the Editor" Letter to the Editor Amy Kletter

To the editor:

This Nov. 7 you can vote for state supreme court judge, Ulster County comptroller, legislators, supervisors, town board members, 2 constitutional amendments and whether we should hold a state constitutional convention. Every 20 years we choose whether to open the constitution for changes. Some say this is an opportunity to examine and update many aspects of state government. I encourage you to vote NO. 

If we vote yes, we would need to elect 219 delegates. It is not  easy to become a delegate-lobbyists, politicians and special interest groups get most of the positions. They have their own agenda which will be to their benefit, and not ours. Our rights are at risk. And, each would get a salary of almost $80,000. (total cost is estimated at  about $300 million) Guess who pays?

We could take our resources to try to get over 100 good delegates elected, but I think the best way forward is to take our energy and money to work on getting people into our state senate and congress who will truly work for us.

Please, stay informed and go to the polls on Nov. 7^th!!

Yours truly,

AmyKletter

Publishing history

New Paltz News

Kingston Freeman

"Faso, Firearms and Funding" Letter to the Editor Diana Staats

Faso, Firearms and Funding

John Faso boasts (on johnfaso.com) that as a congressman he will defend your right to have  guns. He also brags about an “A” rating from the NRA which , naturally, contributed $6,000 towards his congressional campaign. Our 19^th district  Congressman has pledged to:

• ·         Oppose legislation that allows the federal government to prohibit the sales of firearms.
• ·         Oppose a return of the assault weapons ban.
• ·         Oppose restrictions on magazine capacities.
• ·         Oppose a national registry of gun owners.
• ·         Support (and has voted to approve) a concealed carry law. This allows out of state residents to carry a concealed weapon in NY State.

Like many other lawmakers, Mr. Faso recently sent out a condolence message of “thoughts and prayers” to the victims and families of the Las Vegas shooting. Unfortunately thoughts and prayers were not enough to  prevent the massacre in Las Vegas. Stronger gun control laws however might have made a difference. A ban on bump stock devices   and a limit on the number of firearms licensed to an individual  (the Las Vegas shooter has 23 legally registered guns, including an AK-47 type rifle  in his hotel room) might have lessened the carnage in Las Vegas.

After the Las Vegas shooting the Republicans in Congress quickly removed ,temporarily, a bill (ironically named the Hearing Protection Act) to make it easier to buy a gun silencer and to lessen the restrictions on armor piercing bullets. This is the second time this bill has been delayed due to a mass shooting. The first time was in June- after members of Congress were targeted during baseball practice for a charity game.   Mr. Faso has not publicly stated his views on this bill but since his NRA financing and NRA “A” rating will be jeopardized if he votes against this- my bet is that he will be an avid supporter. If these facts  concern you, make your views known by calling Mr Faso’s office: (  202-225-5614 or 845-514-2322)  .                 

-          Diana Staats, Highland   
       
       Publishing history

e      New Paltz News 10-19-17 

"To the editor" Letter to the Editor Susan Denton

To the Editor:

  Don’t cruise through the election on November 7th thinking it isn’t very important, saving yourself for a bigger impact in 2018.  Know this: whether to have a New York State Constitutional Convention is a decision we will all materially live with for  the next 20 years. I am against it. I hope I can persuade you that we must vote “NO”.

   The Constitutional Convention would be an” Open Agenda”. That means the delegates could go through the whole constitution and change any pesky elements it pleases, like collective bargaining rights or previously agreed to union pensions. Lest you think I am a recipient of such things, I am not, always having worked in the profoundly non-profit sector.

  If a Constitutional Convention is convened what will it cost and who will pay for it? You will. Lower estimates put it at approximately $300 million. Delegates will be selected from all over the state and receive a stipend of $80,000 a year for their trouble.  It is expected to take at least three years.  There is, as far as I can tell, there’s no estimate of the cost of having a staff, or travel or paper clips, yet.  

   We already have a process in place by which we can change any of the elements that need changing in the NYS constitution. It is called the NYS Legislature, through the amendment process. Not perfect but, they would have a harder time taking your pension. So don’t skip this election;wouldn’t be prudent.

Sincerely,

Susan Denton

Publishing history

New Paltz News

"Trump Incapable of Magnanimity" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Trump Incapable of Magnanimity

Recent commentary has noted Donald Trump’s all-too obvious lack of empathy—the capacity to imagine, understand, and share the feelings of others.  A much-cited example was his behavior during his visit to Puerto Rico, devastated by Hurricane Maria, where he most theatrically connected with beleaguered Puerto Ricans by throwing rolls of paper towels into a crowd.

But the focus on empathy obscures the more important flaw in Trump’s character.  More damaging to Trump’s conduct of his presidency is the void where his magnanimity should reside:  “loftiness of spirit enabling one to bear trouble calmly, to disdain meanness and pettiness, and to display a noble generosity”  (Merriam-Webster).  Americans are accustomed to their presidents rising above the criticisms, even insults, inevitably directed toward them.  The stronger ones would even join in the fun when satire was directed at them:  witness recent Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama laughing at the gibes during the annual correspondents’ dinner.  In a more solemn time, Abraham Lincoln, variously portrayed as a drunk, baboon, or vampire, urged Americans at the end of the Civil War to forgive those who had been enemies, to reunite, and rebuild the nation.

Where Trump could rise above or at least ignore perceived slights, he instead attacks.  When San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz begged for help for her constituents, criticizing the lagging relief efforts in Puerto Rico, Trump returned a string of insults via tweet.  He was incapable of keeping the focus on people in dire need.

We expect our presidents to be better than our worst selves.  Most Americans instinctively know that when a man, particularly one with great power, cannot be magnanimous, underneath lies a small, cramped spirit, deeply insecure at the core.  The nation is badly served and threatened by such a leader.

Tom Denton

Publishing history

Poughkeepsie Journal       10/18  online, 10/26 

NP Times       11/2

Voter Registration Deadline: October 13th Letter to the Editor Jane Schanberg

After decades as a take-no-sides journalist I’m coming out — politically. I call it my DIY Change plan. I’m tired of merely liking political posts on Facebook or yelling at the TV when neo-Nazis marched in Charlottesville. After many years in neutral, I’ve taken sides and rolled up my sleeves to create do-it-myself change right here in New Paltz. 

First, I updated my voter registration so I’d be eligible to vote in local elections. Then I took time to inform myself about village and town issues I consider to be important — like the cost of off-campus housing due to rising taxes, landlord issues, the town’s water problem and economic development controversy. We’re good on the environment and green spaces — no worries there.

And I was one of the 829 residents who showed up to vote in the Democratic primary on September 12 — although more than 5,200 registered citizens were eligible.

Local politicians lauded the primary turnout as large (The Oracle, Sept. 14) and perhaps by past standards it was. 

Yet this primary drew a mere 15 to 18 percent of eligible voters and only 150 or so SUNY New Paltz students among the thousands on campus. I view that turnout as tragically low — particularly among the student population. When participation in the community and on campus is so slight, too few people end up making laws and decisions that impact all our lives. It seems many people would complain about how things are rather than vote for how things could be. 

Many activist groups in the area are working hard to increase voter registration and participation. Since SUNY New Paltz contributes significantly to the towns’ population, students becoming active citizens who vote — instead of passive citizens who demur — would go a long way towards helping to improve the future of our community and our country.

To that end, here’s an important fact about New York State: registration to vote in the Nov. 7 election has a cut-off date — Oct. 13 — just a few weeks away. If you’ve moved since you last registered it’s essential to update your address with the Ulster County Board of Elections. (You may recall first-daughter Ivanka Trump’s embarrassment when she could not vote for her own dad in the 2016 New York primary because didn’t know about the voter registration cut off date).

The New York State Board of Elections has a website: https://www.elections.ny.gov. Their voting deadlines page explains how and where to register to vote. It gives the deadlines and qualifications. It also provides a download for the mail-in form both in English and Spanish.

Voting is the first step each of us can take towards the meaningful change we need. That starts Nov. 7 at the local and county level and includes four propositions on the ballot that require some reading. One, the proposed New York State Constitutional Convention, is especially controversial.

Next year we elect a Congressman to represent our district NY 19 in the House of Representatives in Washington, D.C. That’s another huge choice, as many know, because it impacts the future of health care, immigration, voting rights, minority rights, climate and the environment.

I live across the street and two doors down from campus. You guys are my neighbors. I know everyone is busy with classes. But I hope you’ll accept this neighborly reminder to register by Oct. 13 (if you haven’t already) and remember to set aside 20 minutes to vote on Tuesday, Nov. 7. In less than half an hour, coming out for DIY Change can make an impact on campus and beyond.

Publishing history

New Paltz Oracle    10/4/2017

WHY We Should Be Registered with a Declared Party Affiliation Letter to the Editor Misha Harnick

Many people (me included) don’t think it is important to have a party affiliation, and we don’t really think much about the primary elections.   But having declared party affiliation and voting in the primaries IS important.   That’s why I submitted a new registration form, with a declared party.  True, this did not allow me to vote in the primaries last month, but after the November 7th national election, my enrollment will be changed, and I will be able to vote in the primaries in 2018 and ever after.

During the campaigns, we (hopefully) get to know enough about  our  party candidates, to help us decide which one we want to vote for in the primary election.    And we expect that person to be positioned against the opposing party’s candidate.    

When a weaker candidate loses the primary election, but had some good ideas and platforms, those may be adopted by the party's chosen presidential (or congressional) candidate.   Especially if we, voters, paid enough attention and force the chosen candidate to adopt and improve on the good ideas.

Some states have eliminated their presidential primary elections due various reasons.  New York State still holds primary elections and we all should do our best to participate in them.   New York State has “closed” primaries, allowing ONLY voters registered with the particular party to vote.

So, don’t hesitate and register , OR re-register, PRIOR TO the OCTOBER 13th deadline and  -- be sure to check a party affiliation on the form!  The form is easy to obtain: www.voteulster.com.   

Misha Harnick

New Paltz, NY

Publishing history
Poughkeepsie Journal online, Oct. 3, 2017
New Paltz Times, Oct. 5, 2017
Times Herald-Record online, Oct. 6, 2017
Kingston Daily Freeman, Oct. 6, 2017

"John Faso's Philosophical Conundrum" Letter to the Editor Tom Denton

With the collapse of the Graham/Cassidy bill, Congressman John Faso just dodged a bullet. He has long railed against the State of New York’s transfer of Medicaid obligations to localities, calling it Nelson Rockefeller’s “51-year-old mistake.”  In July the House AHCA bill passed with a special amendment (tailored to Faso’s request) that denied federal funds to New York if it didn’t rescind its requirement of a county share for Medicaid.

The National Association of Medicaid Directors, declaring its members “strong proponents of state innovation in the drive towards health care system transformation,” nevertheless asserted the following:  “the per-capita caps and the envisioned block grant [of the proposed Graham/Cassidy legislation] would constitute the largest intergovernmental transfer of financial risk from the federal government to the states in our country’s history.”  It concluded by urging Congress to “revisit comprehensive Medicaid reform” with more “careful consideration.”

Some Senate Republicans claim that in the future they will continue to push ACA repeal and replacement with the Graham/Cassidy concept of block grants to states.  If this GOP policy goal persists and the House initiates new legislation around state block grants, Rep. Faso will have to explain to his constituents whether what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.  Will he profess outrage about unfunded mandates and New York State’s Medicaid requirements for counties but find it acceptable for Uncle Sam to dump Medicaid in the lap of the 50 states with massively reduced funding?  Remember his vote on the AHCA bill and stay tuned.

Publishing history

Kingston Freeman      10/1

"Faso’s Philosophical Conundrum" Letter to the editor Tom denton

Faso’s Philosophical Conundrum

With the collapse of the Graham/Cassidy bill, Congressman John Faso just dodged a bullet. He has long railed against the State of New York’s transfer of Medicaid obligations to localities, calling it Nelson Rockefeller’s “51-year-old mistake.”  In July the House AHCA bill passed with a special amendment (tailored to Faso’s request) that denied federal funds to New York if it didn’t rescind its requirement of a county share for Medicaid.

The National Association of Medicaid Directors, declaring its members “strong proponents of state innovation in the drive towards health care system transformation,” nevertheless asserted the following:  “the per-capita caps and the envisioned block grant [of the proposed Graham/Cassidy legislation] would constitute the largest intergovernmental transfer of financial risk from the federal government to the states in our country’s history.”  It concluded by urging Congress to “revisit comprehensive Medicaid reform” with more “careful consideration.”

Some Senate Republicans claim that in the future they will continue to push ACA repeal and replacement with the Graham/Cassidy concept of block grants to states.  If this GOP policy goal persists and the House initiates new legislation around state block grants, Rep. Faso will have to explain to his constituents whether what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.  Will he profess outrage about New York State’s Medicaid requirements for counties but find it acceptable for Uncle Sam to dump Medicaid in the lap of the 50 states with massively reduced funding?  Remember his vote on the AHCA bill and stay tuned.

Tom Denton

Publishing history 

Daily Freeman                10/1

New Paltz Times              10/19

"Congressman Faso's dark money" Letter to the Editor Tom Denton

Congressman Faso’s Dark Money

On August 31 I attended the Esopus Town Hall meeting with Congressman John Faso (19^th district).  He fielded many questions, but one of his responses was jarring.  One individual noted Faso’s earlier expressed desire for civility in our national dialogue and described her great concern about the hateful messages purveyed on Breitbart News, the prominent platform for alt-right extremists..  She then asked if he would no longer accept campaign money from the billionaire Robert Mercer, who generously funds Breitbart.  To loud groans, he replied that he personally has never read Breitbart.  He followed by saying that he had never heard Mercer say anything racist or discriminatory.  More groans.  He refused to disassociate himself from Mercer.

            Congressman Faso’s dodge drew on the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” defense.  It will not wash.  There are few politically engaged Americans who are unaware of Breitbart’s content, whether they’ve read it “personally” or not.  Most probably haven’t read Mein Kampf personally either, but they know what it spewed.  Steve Bannon came to Trump’s administration  from Breitbart, and he returned to it the day he was bounced from the White House.  We can be confident that “civility” is not a value Bannon has ever cherished.

            Congressman Faso can’t credibly deplore the hatred marching in Charlottesville while he accepts campaign money from those who fund the most uncivil voices in America.  He might want to find the time to read Breitbart. 

Publishing History

Poughkeepsie Journal             9/6 online

New Paltz Times                    9/7

Times Herald-Record             9/11

"The Pivot" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

The Pivot

            Those who voted reluctantly for Donald Trump but wanted to “give him a chance” expressed confidence that, once in office, he would “pivot”:  he would govern within the bounds of historical precedence and the norms of presidential behavior.  Although he pledged to be disruptive, we would see productive change; the American story would forge ahead.

            Seven months into his presidency, we see a backward pivot perhaps not anticipated by his supporters.  Two recent events—Trump’s responses to the Charlottesville conflagration and his pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio—inescapably reinforce a pattern evident since his inauguration but now shifted to new extremes.  The president will inflame divisive passions in the American citizenry to advance his political strategies.  With his latest actions he has set a match to conflicts about race and deepened doubts that he honors the rule of law.  Did his reluctant supporters anticipate that, once elected, he would continue to appease his extremist far right supporters for the sake of holding his base?  That he would flout customary judicial procedures to send signals to those who approved of Arpaio’s flagrant abuses of the law?

            Think back to October, 2016 when Trump raged daily that the election was “rigged” by nebulous forces supporting “crooked Hillary.”  He left no doubt that were he to lose, he would trash the constitutional system upon which our country’s government is based.  Trump issued then his warning that the only values he held sacred were those worshipped in the temple of Trump.  Were you listening?

Publishing history

Albany Times Union             9/4

"Arms and these particular men" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Arms and These Particular Men

            Wait a minute!  Second Amendment enthusiasts, is this what you had in mind?  Does the march in Charlottesville by neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and white supremacists represent the ultimate expression of our right to bear arms?

            Was anyone else a bit taken aback by the sight of American Youth for Hitler armed with helmets, shields, and semiautomatics, parading in torch light, shouting “Jews will never replace us” and “Blood and Soil”?  Or is it just me?

            Excuse me, where does it say in the Second Amendment that we have the right to bear arms for purposes of intimidation and threat?  Or am I mistaken, and those guns were on display simply to show pride in America’s military heritage?

            My right to free speech does not permit me to shout Fire! in a crowded theater, just for the fun of watching terrified people scramble.  Does the legislated right to carry arms openly allow hate groups to file down our streets in military formation, groups that preach hostility and have a history of violence ? To use our public parks to sermonize as their centurions with AK-47s stare down protesters or passersby?

            If we view the Second Amendment as absolute and as expansive as its fiercest supporters advocate, and if we suspend our ability to make judgments about limits to rights that threaten public safety, Charlottesville will not be the last or the worst act of domestic terrorism committed under the banner of American greatness.

Publishing History

Daily Freeman                      8/28

NP Times                               8/31

Shawangunk Journal           8/31

"Tough Trump" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Tough, Trump

In the past two weeks we’ve seen the “tough” Donald Trump bluster through speeches to two predominantly male audiences: one, thousands of teenage boy scouts at their jamboree; another, to Long Island police officers.  In the first event, his purposes seemed to be to titillate a group, which needs no encouragement, with his suggestions of wild parties on rich men’s yachts, and—bizarrely--to celebrate with him his revenge on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, the media, and others who’ve defied him.  In the second event, he clearly exhorted cops not to “be nice” in handling suspects, as in protecting their heads while loading them in police cars. 

 The visuals for both occasions were stark: backdrops of seas of uniformed males, some pre-pubescent, others mature.  Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, the Texan of Stetson and cowboy boots fame, offered to posterity a You Tube study in sycophancy, standing behind Trump, laughing at his jokes, clapping, seeming slightly disjointed with Trump’s sex innuendoes to the boys.

            So the American public was offered two views of our leader’s brand of masculine strength, the engine behind his promises of endless “winning.”

            No thanks.  On any day I’ll take the toughness shown by two senators, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who firmly resisted enormous pressure from the administration and their Republican colleagues to vote in favor of the GOP repeal and replace bills for Obamacare.  Standing on their principles, honoring their promises to constituents, they showed Americans what authentic courage and strength truly is.  Two women, defying Trump’s fury.  Wow.

Publishing History

NP Times, Poughkeepsie Journal, other Gannett             8/10

Times Herald-Record                                                           8/11

"Net Neutrality" Letter to the editor Amy Kletter

Net Neutrality

The FCC (federal communications commission) is considering removal of protection of the internet as a public utility. Often called net neutrality (referred to as restoring internet freedom by the FCC), the internet is currently protected byTitle II. If the FCC eliminates this protection, the new rules would favor big corporations over free access. Besides higher costs for us, it will be harder or impossible for independent voices to be heard, for mobilization of grassroots movements. This would seriously impact our access to an open internet and ourfreedom of speech!

If this is as troublesome to you as it is to me, please make a comment to the FCC before September 1 of this year. Comments can be very simple. The main point is that you want the FCC to maintain Title II protection of the internet. Send your comment to the FCC via internet by using fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express,choose express comment (proceedings number 17-108) and fill out the form.

       Let your Congress people know how you feel. Encourage others to comment.You can get more information now on sites like Save the Internet, but if this protection is removed, that freedom may no longer be available.

Amy Kletter

U-Act (Ulster Activists)

Publishing history 

New Paltz Times     8/3/2017

"The Republicans' Petard" Tom Denton Letter to the editor

The Republicans’ Petard

            An etymological review of the familiar phrase, “hoisted with his own petard,” yields some rich contemporary applications.  A petard was a somewhat crude, sixteenth century, gunpowder-fed artillery device used to blow a hole in a castle gate during battle.  Sadly, it often blew up those who ignited it, hence, the expression that generally has come to mean “to suffer harm from a plan by which you had intended to harm someone else” (Cambridge Dictionary).   Linguists note the similarity of “petard” with the French “péter”—to fart.

            The biblical "they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind" and the recent “what goes around comes around” also remind us that the Republicans’ current agonies over stalled attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act are thoroughly earned.  Having exploited the political utility of Obamacare opposition for seven years, the GOP now finds that power has blown up in its face.

We all have suffered, though, from the noxious fumes of their legislative assault. 

Publishing history 

NP Times     7/27

"Oh, the Places We'll Go" Tom Denton Letter to the Editor

Oh, the Places We’ll Go

As reports suggest that Senate Republicans are reaching agreement on stopping Medicaid expansion (we must depend on “reports” since Mitch McConnell is holding no public hearings
on the AHCA bill), commentary has focused on how the cuts will devastate younger, poorer Americans. All true, but generally unmentioned is the fact that two thirds of Medicaid spending goes to older and disabled Americans, largely to those who must spend down much of their assets before Medicaid will cover their nursing home costs. In total, the AHCA would hammer the most vulnerable among us as it shifts huge tax cuts to the wealthy.
But let’s shift our focus from the moral atrocities of Trumpcare to the most crass considerations. After all, the “greed is good” creed of the 90s is getting new life after November, 2016. One in three Americans, currently, will need nursing home care. That means, Trumpcare supporters, that you or someone in your family might well turn to Medicaid eventually. If it’s your mother, you will watch as she depletes her savings before Medicaid intervenes, if it does. What will be left of your inheritance pot under new guidelines? Worse, will you also be forced to spend from your own accounts to give her decent care? If the one in the bed is you, you can spend your last days worrying about how your very existence is diminishing your children’s prospects for a good life.
Bottom line: your bottom line could be smashed by Trumpcare. Oh, the places we’ll go to sacrifice for the greater good of the wealthy.

Publishing history

Southern Dut. News   6/28 

Kingston Freeman   6/27 

NP Times  6/29 

"Bring Back the Public Option" Tom Denton Letter to the editor

Bring Back the Public Option 

     In the debate about Republicans' proposed health care bills, we've been hearing a lot about death--death panels (again!), death spirals, the death of conscience.  The bills themselves are in the throes of dying; the death rattle might begin with Congress' return from recess.  We shall see.  If the misbegotten legislation is interred, even Mitch McConnell now suggests the focus will be on stabilizing ACA exchanges and including Democrats in the planning.  With death comes re-birth, so we can begin to think again about universal health care coverage for Americans, which both parties advocate, at least rhetorically (Republicans--access, Democrats--actual care)

. 

     Republicans, holding power, will continue to resist fiercely the perceived expansion of federal control of health care.  But the moment might be ripe to introduce into ACA exchanges a public option, a mechanism once favored by many Democrats.  Self-proclaimed champions of competition and choice, Republicans might now acknowledge the benefit of a government insurance "company" that can leverage its size to put price pressures on for-profit insurers and negotiate favorably with pharmaceuticals, hospitals, and doctors. 

     Independent and even some Republican voters, many of whom have developed a sudden appreciation of the ACA, might welcome this version of a kindly, supportive Uncle Sam rather than the snarling uncle in the basement foisted on us by the current legislation. 

Albany TU  7/15 

"Tax Cuts for the Rich the AHCA" Tom Denton Letter to the Editor

Tax Cuts for the Rich in the AHCA

Both the Senate and House versions of the AHCA purport to offer lower cost and better insurance coverage to all Americans, a claim belied by CBO scoring of the bills. Careful examination makes clear their true twofold purpose. Republicans’ proposals are the apotheosis of their decades-long campaign for “entitlement reform,” with Medicaid as the target. Provisions in the bill over the next decade will result in reduced Medicaid spending of nearly one trillion dollars. Their spin on AHCA focuses on supposed improvements in cost, coverage, and choice. Don’t be fooled: Trumpcare is about rolling back the health care safety net to a level that better suits Republican priorities.
The leviathan in the room, which is decidedly not part of the spin, is the enormous tax cut for the wealthy built into the bills . . . over $800 billion. “Entitlement reform,” in the form of AHCA, means a massive transfer of wealth from those with limited means—average Americans—to the wealthy.
Perhaps the health care bills could be respected at least as honest efforts to advance Republicans’ philosophical claims: entitlement programs must be modified in order to save them—respected IF the bills focused only on that goal. But the addition of the giant tax cut exposes Trumpcare for what it really is: a cynical and subversive scheme that uses the fig leaf of
health care policy to raid the federal treasury and shower the gold on rich Americans. Ask: why, instead, are Republicans not using that +$800 billion to strengthen the affordability of insurance and expand coverage to anxious Americans?

Publishing History

PJ June 29