Sensible ways to reduce gun violence

Sensible ways to reduce gun violence

This is from the website of Americans for Responsible Solutions :

Americans for Responsible Solutions is working across the country to build an organization with millions of people committed to finding sensible ways to reduce gun violence and encouraging elected officials to enact responsible firearms policies that protect the Second Amendment. Today, ARS stands more than 500,000 strong.

I suppose I’m one of those half-million or so. I hope more will join and become a united voice for addressing gun violence. The organization is not that old and maybe it will be millions in the near future.

I hope our politicians come to realize that a large number of voters support this organization or some sort of gun laws that protect both the Second Amendment and the potential victims of gun violence. By the way, that last group includes nearly all of us.

Stop by the website. You can sign an online petition, like them on Facebook, make a donation, or just read their perspective. Or maybe several of those things.

Americans for Responsible Solutions encourages a national conversation to address gun violence. The conversation should no longer be dominated by the National Rifle Association (NRA). Let your elected officials know what you think. They want your vote and will listen.

Gridlock illusion WQ

Gridlock illusion WQ

For many years I subscribed to the Wilson Quarterly and enjoyed it when it landed in my mailbox. There were almost always several articles worth reading and shorter articles including Book Reviews that I found interesting. It was a very thought provoking and often gave me a look and differing perspectives on various issues. But they stopped printing and I miss it.

These articles are still published but on the web. Since I still get email from them, this morning, I decided to read an article pointing how our government still works and why the founders designed it the way they did. It was interesting reading since so much of the news around our government lately has been about the gridlock in Washington that led to the recent government shutdown and debt crisis.

The article The Gridlock Illusion by R. Shep Melnick which is subtitled “If Washington seems to get much less done than it once did, it is partly because it is trying to do so much more” is well-worth reading.

The Wilson Quarterly is published by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. They list several subscription options on their website. I’ll be doing a little thinking about which makes makes sense for me.

Fighting for the Press by James Goodale

Fighting for the Press by James Goodale

I read Fighting for the Press: The Inside Story of the Pentagon Papers and Other Battles by James Goodale for several reasons. First there was a radio interview with the author on Radio Times and I listened to the podcast. It I found it very interesting and wanted to buy the book as soon as I could.

Second, I was in college at the time of the Pentagon Papers battles and it was interesting to re-visit this history and learn more about it. And third, this battle over the publication of the Pentagon Papers by the New York Times and other papers during the Vietnam War is very relevant to the freedom of the press disputes today.


James Goodale was the New York Times general counsel at a time when the Pentagon Papers were leaked to the NY Times. The Pentagon Papers was classified Top Secret, although that classification now seems excessive. After internal discussions at the Times, the paper battled Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice for the right to publish and won.

Why was this so important? The Pentagon Papers were a history of our involvement in Vietnam prepared for the government and classified ‘Top Secret’. Thousands of young men were being killed in the Vietnam War and the country was being torn apart with political protests, bombings, etc.

The Pentagon Papers showed that the case the government made for going to war was a pack of lies. These papers were leaked (stolen secrets) and the New York Times wanted to publish and, of course, the Nixon administration wanted to keep the secrets away from the public. It was a great story and is told well in this book.

So this is an insider’s story of what may have been the most important case on First Amendment and freedom of the press. I was expecting the book to be dry and legalistic in parts or even much of the story. I was surprised and pleased and it was not. Although this is a true story, it reads more like a legal thriller and kept me reading.

Most of the book discusses The Pentagon Papers case and other cases related to Richard Nixon’s war on the free press. The last few chapters move us into the present. And there is an extensive set of references. The G.W. Bush and Obama administrations have not been good for ‘freedom of the press‘ issues.

So who would I recommend read this? First, there are journalists and lawyers. Although I must repeat again the book is not at all bogged down by any technical aspects of the law or journalism that would detract from the experience of the general reader. Then anyone with an interest in the time period or freedom of the press issues. I find this last particularly important today since the balance of security, surveillance, privacy, and press freedom is so essential to our society,

Looking at the Amazon page, there are both Kindle and Paperback Editions and the Kindle version is much less than the paperback. I went with the Kindle edition since it was much cheaper and delivery was almost immediate.

bipartisan agreement to avoid default and shutdown

bipartisan agreement to avoid default and shutdown

There has been a bipartisan agreement to avoid default and end the government shutdown. The compromise was reached by Senate leaders.

It is a temporary fix but that is the way of politics lately. Of course, it need to pass in both the Senate and House. Here’s hoping our Senators and Representatives vote as Americans rather than as party members and ideologues.

Partisan problem

Partisan problem

I think that that much of the problem in Washington is due to the excessive power we give to our 2 major political parties. This shutdown and the debt ceiling crisis are just examples of that.

Now there appears to be a compromise that may solve these problems but even if the immediate problems are solved (for now anyway), we still need to fix the partisan problem.

It is nice to know that George Washington thought political parties were a problem too.

Freedom to know and government secrecy

Freedom to know and government secrecy

One of the interview shows are our local NPR affiliate (WHYY in Philadelphia) is Radio Times. I am sometimes lucky and catch all or most of a good interview on the radio but I miss most of them on the air.

Most days there are 2 one hour interviews so it is really hard to keep up unless you listen to the radio a lot. So I usually listen to the ones I find most interesting by podcast.


This morning I listened to a podcast of the Radio Times interview with James Goodale on his book Fighting for the Press: The Inside Story of the Pentagon Papers and Other Battles. If you can get the podcast, it is well-worth a listen.

James Goodale was the New York Times general counsel at a time when the Pentagon Papers were leaked to the NY Times. The Pentagon Papers was classified Top Secret, although that classification now seems excessive. After internal discussions at the Times, the paper battled Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice for the right to publish and won.

So this is an insider’s story of what may have been the most important case on First Amendment and freedom of the press. The interview and his book also talk about ‘freedom of the press’ issues arising since then. For much of the interview, he talked about the excessive amount of secrecy in the Obama administration and the unfortunate toll that takes on a free press.

Looking at the Amazon page, it seems there that both Kindle and Paperback Editions and the Kindle version is much less than the paperback.

The reviews on Amazon are great and I find this topic interesting and important so as soon as I finish this I plan to download the Kindle version. Whenever I’ve ordered a Kindle book in the past, it appears within seconds on my Kindle.

Legally dead but really alive

Legally dead but really alive

I just saw an interesting story online. I’m not sure if this is interesting, stupid, bizarre or maybe all three. Or maybe “interesting but stupid” as the saying goes.

Now and then there’s a news story to remind us that few things are as simple as they may seem.

Donald Eugene Miller Jr. remained dead this week, even though he was feeling well enough to stand up in the Hancock County, Ohio, probate court and ask Judge Allan Davis to recognize what sounds pretty obvious: He’s alive.

Read or listen to the whole story on NPR, Judge: ‘You’re Still Deceased As Far As The Law Is Concerned’.

If the court is unable to rule that an obviously living person is still alive because he was declared dead years ago, several very interesting questions arise.

Can he collect Social Security and go on Medicare when he reaches the appropriate age?

Does he now pay Social Security and Medicare tax if he does work? Does he pay other taxes?

Will he be required to have health insurance under the ACA?

Of course if he was dead but is now alive, there are other questions.

Death by government shutdown

Death by government shutdown

When this government shutdown was just a few days old I wrote that Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power.

As you can easily guess my major point was about the excessive power of political parties but Continue reading “Death by government shutdown”

Repeal medical device tax or not

Repeal medical device tax or not

About 2 weeks ago I wrote that Fixing the ACA or Obamacare makes more sense than repeal.

In that piece I mentioned that “I probably would back the repeal of the medical device tax.” but not as part of the current budget fiasco and that we need much more discussion before acting.

For another point of view see Excise Tax on Medical Devices Should Not Be Repealed: Industry Lobbyists Distort Tax’s Impact.

Wilson by A. Scott Berg

Wilson by A. Scott Berg

Woodrow Wilson was a complicated man and he dealt with complicated issue so it seems fairly obvious that this biography must be complicated. In “Wilson”, A. Scott Berg tells this story well. There are some places where the complications and details slow down the reading but I think Berg gets about as close as you can get to a page-turner given the amount of material and complexity of material in some places.


He piqued my interest with an introduction about President Wilson’s journey to Europe to settle the terms of the peace after World War I. I was interested (otherwise I wouldn’t have even attempted the 800+ pages here) but this made me more interested.

Then Berg gives a more or less chronological account of his life giving you a better understanding of this man who would be President. I’ll not go into detail here but I will say Berg tells this well. You can probably find many short summaries of his life online.

Woodrow Wilson graduated from Princeton (Class of 1879) and would return there after practicing law, earning a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University and several faculty positions. He was a respected academic and wrote extensively on government and politics. In 1890 Wilson joined the Princeton faculty and in 1902 became president of Princeton.

In 1910 the political bosses in New Jersey thought he was an electable candidate for Governor and could be easily controlled. He was elected and they were very surprised.

Then with about a year of political experience, he was chosen as the Democratic candidate for President. The bulk of the book describes the next 8 years as president and then his final years. Wilson is often rated among our greatest presidents. Read this book and you’ll learn why.

I enjoyed the book. It is a commitment to read book of this length but it is certainly worth it.

Administrative discretion in the  Pay Our Military Act

Administrative discretion in the Pay Our Military Act

This is the entire text of HR 3210 the Pay Our Military Act as found on the Thomas LOC website. Unfortunately the site seems to time out so you may need to repeat the search.

AN ACT
Making continuing appropriations for military pay in the event of a Government shutdown.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Pay Our Military Act’.

SEC. 2. CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General- There are hereby appropriated for fiscal year 2014, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for any period during which interim or full-year appropriations for fiscal year 2014 are not in effect–
(1) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to members of the Armed Forces (as defined in section 101(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code), including reserve components thereof, who perform active service during such period;
(2) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to the civilian personnel of the Department of Defense (and the Department of Homeland Security in the case of the Coast Guard) whom the Secretary concerned determines are providing support to members of the Armed Forces described in paragraph (1); and
(3) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to contractors of the Department of Defense (and the Department of Homeland Security in the case of the Coast Guard) whom the Secretary concerned determines are providing support to members of the Armed Forces described in paragraph (1).

(b) Secretary Concerned Defined- In this section, the term `Secretary concerned’ means–
(1) the Secretary of Defense with respect to matters concerning the Department of Defense; and
(2) the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to matters concerning the Coast Guard.

SEC. 3. TERMINATION.
Appropriations and funds made available and authority granted pursuant to this Act shall be available until whichever of the following first occurs: (1) the enactment into law of an appropriation (including a continuing appropriation) for any purpose for which amounts are made available in section 2; (2) the enactment into law of the applicable regular or continuing appropriations resolution or other Act without any appropriation for such purpose; or (3) January 1, 2015.

Passed the House of Representatives September 29 (legislative day September 28), 2013.

The relevant portion to the argument as to whether death benefits are covered is Section 2, part (a)sub 1. This is rendered in bold above for easy reference. The key here, I believe, are the words “pay and allowances“.

Pay and allowances” are described on the Military Pay page of the Defense Department. Pay includes Basic Pay as well as extra pay for various type of duties. Allowances are provided for specific needs. For example, food or housing allowances are provided as needed. A separate benefits page describes various benefits such as the death gratuity to survivors and survivor benefits.

I think there certainly can be a case made that Congress thought they were providing this benefit but the way I read the law, this appears to be inadvertently omitted and unlikely to be up to the discretion of the Secretary of Defense. (Some claim the administration has discretion here but I don’t see it.)

Although the government failed the families of soldiers who died for the United States, it is good to know that a private foundation has stepped in to help until the United Staes government gets its act together. (Read the story on CNN.

Shutdown  Emergency Declarations In Utah

Shutdown Emergency Declarations In Utah

Declining tourism spending because of the government shutdown has resulted in 4 counties in Utah to declare states of emergency.

Perhaps the governor and county commissioners could contact their members of Congress and suggest they find a way around the Congressional leadership’s refusal to allow votes and suggest that voters of Utah might remember those who keep the government closed.

So called leaders lead us into Shutdown

So called leaders lead us into Shutdown

The intransigence of the leaders of Congress brought us into a government shutdown and now prevents us from re-opening the government.

The House tries to open things piecemeal but that in unsuccessful. In most cases, the leader of the Senate won’t let his Senate vote on these proposals.

Even when there is some success, there are are unintentional omissions. Yes, pass a bill to pay the soldiers. Oops, they forgot to include death benefits. Pass another bill and hope Harry Reed will consider it and hope we don’t leave out anything that turns out to be important.

The government does lots of things and in most cases we don’t know what will be important in the near future. So we have essential personnel man agencies that lose much of their strength in a shutdown. And then watch the CDC have to make a skeleton staff a little less skeletal to deal with a disease outbreak.

Why not just open it all? Well, the leader of the House won’t let his members vote on that.

John Boehner, are you listening ?

Government Shutdown and congressional leadership

Government Shutdown and congressional leadership

As we go into the 8th date of Government shutdown 2013 and have an even more serious issue in the national debt ceiling to deal with in about a week, I thought I would start by quoting myself. Last week I wrote that I thought giving the major parties excessive power is one of the root causes of the current stand-off on funding the government in Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power.

The leader of the dominant party in each part of Congress sets the agenda in his part of Congress and the 2 parts of Congress are controlled by different political parties now. Therefore each part of Congress does not always get to vote on what the other part has passed. …

Should each part of Congress have a nonpartisan officer who sets the agenda, perhaps with a set of rules and oversight of some sort. Both the Senate and the House already have some nonpartisan officers but should we consider adding one who sets the agenda for votes? Or maybe we could keep the existing leadership structure but limit the discretion of the leader?

Another option is suggested by No Labels. In their plan to address this issue is that a bipartisan majority would be able to override the leadership refusal to bring a bill to the floor for a vote.

They have also other ideas to make Congress function better. Have a look and if you agree, please sign their petition and consider supporting the organization in some other way.

Prevent Medicare Fraud

Prevent Medicare Fraud

In discussing healthcare, the subject of Medicare fraud often comes up. The big thing that is often talked about is the billions of taxpayer dollars wasted because of fraudulent over-payments. There is another type of Medicare fraud where Medicare beneficiaries are targeted and the cost can be very personal.

I read an article from AARP today about a bill to reduce both types of fraud. Of course, it is near impossible to totally prevent attempts at fraud and Medicare is a very big target. So why not tighten things up a bit and make things a bit tougher for those committing the fraud and those who help wittingly or unwittingly.

The article is Pass the PRIME Act and it is from the AARP Bulletin. Read it over and see what you think. Seems reasonable to me.