Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in November 2017

The death of privacy

rainey

Sometimes, tying together two seemingly disparate events/stories can make a good connection to explain an issue larger than either of them. So it is as I look at the national outpouring of deserved condemnation that followed the musings of multi-millionaires Donald Sterling and Mitt Romney some time ago. Talk about disparate!

But they do share one commonality - aside from one disparaging 47% of the citizens of this nation and the other with his racist vehemence involving an entire race of Americans. Both instances involved men who believed they were speaking only to the people in their private presence while the words of each were surreptitiously recorded and later made public.

Whether the principals of either situation engaged in speech that was morally right or wrong is up to any of us who care to decide. But one thing is sure. Both fell victim to expectations of privacy that were violated - a privacy that is gone from our lives. An individual right we were brought up to expect, but which has now been eradicated by our own technology and the immoral use of that technology by those so devoted.

We’ve long been openly or surreptitiously spied upon by microphones and cameras in public - and some not-so-public - places. Banks, grocery stores, parks, street corners, while we’re driving and - if Eric Snowden’s disclosures are accurate - for years while we’ve engaged in written or spoken conversations with the expectation of absolute privacy. We can be outraged. We can be vehement in our opposition. We can demand an end to such activities. But we’ll lose. The genie is out of the bottle. We have become a world where Big Brothers - and Big Sisters - keep an eye and an ear on all we do.

From a legal standpoint, Sterling may have a case that his First Amendment rights were violated. He uttered his now infamous racist and sexist words in a two-way conversation in California where recording any such conversation is illegal unless approved - in advance - by BOTH parties. Seems obvious he didn’t know of the recording and, thus, at least in California, it appears to have been an illegal act.

Then there’s the part of the story in which someone with knowledge of that recorded conversation leaked it. His then-girl friend - the second party in this instance - denied it was her. A little shakier in the legal department but certainly a moral issue.

Big box stores - grocery and otherwise - often advise you are being recorded “for your own safety.” Pure B.S.. You’re being recorded as a shoplifting tool, a video record of robbery attempts and at the advice of insurance carriers to catch people falsely claiming injury on the property. Your “protection” figures into none of it.

Banks, convenience stores, gas stations, traffic enforcement, parking lots, city parks, toll road, pizza parlors, airports, casinos, cruise ships, theaters, museums, court houses, city halls and other public buildings, bars, merchants of all sizes - all are represented in the official “people spying” industry. Some even use sonic or ultrasonic signals to notify local police of illegal entries or other after-hours interruptions. It matters not how small a community you live in - you are under surveillance.

Cell phones have made amateur “reporters” of all of us. Think of videos or pictures you’ve chuckled about in your emails or social media. Much of the time, what amused you was the subject of the missive was unaware of his/her situation. So, innocently someone passed it to you and - innocently, of course - you saw it, laughed and - innocently again - sent it along.

I’ve seen cameras disguised as buttons. Medicine now uses “live” cameras in pills! Swallow one and the Doc can watch your innards at work. More and more cops are wearing cameras to protect themselves from false charges of brutality or other inappropriate actions. Bail bondsmen, process servers, cab drivers - even postal delivery workers - are following suit.

Awhile back, I decided to count cameras I could see in one day’s travels. The total was eight readily identifiable with another six “could be’s” in cop cars, two stores and on the highway. And I lived in a town of only 1,400 folks. Of course, the whole idea is you shouldn’t be able to spot surveillance cameras in some cases, but you can figure they’re there. In addition to those you’re told about - for your own “protection,” of course.

Privacy - personal privacy - as we’ve known it is gone. Has been for some time. Even in our most unguarded moments, we’re apt to be spied on by someone. It matters not where you live - what you do - where you go. We’ve either gotten so used to it we don’t think about it or - as in the case of those big stores - we’re told of the spying and we accept it.

Used to be old political hands warned newcomers “If you don’t want to see it in the morning headlines, don’t say it.” Not so anymore. They’ve just gotten more defensive. Check out the number of “public” meetings where professional media is turned away. Outsiders only know what went on if someone inside leaks pictures or audio recordings. Which happens often.

I can think of no defense against this invasion in our lives. Not one that works, anyway. As citizens, we can’t afford to hire security people to daily check our homes and other places of expected personal privacy for recording devices. If the professionals can’t do it, the rest of us don’t stand a chance.

As the old joke goes, “even paranoids can have real enemies.” The unblinking official eyes and unofficial ears most of us are caught by each day may not be enemies. But, no matter whose hands operate them, they’ve changed our lives forever. And not for the better.

R-I-P, privacy.
 

Idaho Briefing – November 20

This is a summary of a few items in the Idaho Weekly Briefing for November 20. Interested in subscribing? Send us a note at stapilus@ridenbaugh.com.

Biggest news of the week probably was the announcement of next year’s retirement by Boise State University President Bob Kustra, though it had been widely expected for a while. That change in presidency will doubtless be a major topic of discussion in the year ahead.

A surge in the number of Idahoans 16 and older working or looking for work in October increased the pool of available workers for employment and pushed the state’s unemployment rate up to 2.9 percent. While October’s one-tenth of a percentage point increase in unemployment was the first increase in eight years, the addition of 4,850 people to the labor force was one of the largest monthly increases on record and helped move the state’s labor force participation rate up to 63.5 percent.

The U.S. Department of the Interior said the Bureau of Land Management has signed a Record of Decision for the Boardman to Hemingway Transmission Line Project. The B2H Project will provide additional electrical capacity between the Pacific Northwest and the Intermountain West regions.

The Idaho Water Resource Board heard this week that about 280,000 acre-feet of water is expected to be recharged into the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer this winter. That’s on top of more than 90,000 acre-feet of recharge since the end of August.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo and Banking Committee members Joe Donnelly (D-Indiana), Heidi Heitkamp (D-North Dakota), Jon Tester (D-Montana) and Mark Warner (D-Virginia), along with other senators, announced an agreement on legislative proposals to improve the financial regulatory framework and promote economic growth.

The Sawtooth National Recreation Area is seeking public comments on the proposal to revise and update the motorized travel system in the Big Wood River watershed northwest of Ketchum

PHOTO The revamped Drop and Impact Pad (DRIP) Outdoor Facility. See article in the health and education section. (Idaho State University)

Here we go again

trahant

Here we go again. The Congress is hell bent on wrecking the Affordable Care Act.

This time the mechanism is the so-called tax reform bill that will be voted in the U.S. Senate. The logic is rich (and, yes, "rich" is absolutely the right word and sentiment) because this tax cut will wreck the individual health insurance market so that the rich will pay less in taxes. But the problem gets at the core of insurance itself. How do you make sure there is a large enough pool to cover high cost patients? The Affordable Care Act did this by requiring everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. Without that provision people who are healthy are free to skip out. But sick people always want coverage. And that creates an imbalance that does not work.

Senate Republicans added the provision because it saves money, some $338 billion according to the Congressional Budget Office. It estimates 13 million people will drop health insurance.

"We’re optimistic that inserting the individual mandate repeal would be helpful,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday.

The Senate bill is now being shaped into its final form. Wait. That's funny. That's what they say. But both the Senate and the House will change these tax bills all the way up until the final vote (unless it's a sure thing, anyway). One of the reasons the bill will evolve is what's called the Byrd Rule. This Senate is using the reconciliation process, like the Affordable Care Act repeal bills, so only 50 votes are required to pass. But that means the bill has limit of $1.5 trillion in new debt over 10 years and cannot add more after that. None of the bills, so far, accomplish that.

So the health care fight is back. And the Senate majority is confident this time they have the votes to pass the legislation.

One of the key ideas is to increase the size of the standard deduction so that fewer taxpayers will have to itemize. But to pay for that the simplicity the Senate bill is getting rid of some popular deductions, including the ability to deduct state and local taxes from your federal tax return. The bill also gets rid of deductions for dependents. The math works out so that families with fewer than three children will pay about the same. But if your family size is larger, then you will pay more. This is Indian Country. The average American family has 3.2 children, but in Indian Country it's 4.2 children per family

This is where it gets weird. The Senate bill does increase a tax credit, from $1,000 now to $1,650 per child. But, and this is huge, the additional $650 credit is only available to those who owe federal income taxes. It's not refundable. This is important to people who are not rich because so many pay more in payroll taxes (Social Security, Medicare, etc.) than in income taxes.

Add it all up and the Senate bill would increase taxes on 13.8 million moderate income households. But, hey, at least the rich get a break, right?

The House of Representatives could vote on its version of tax reform this week. The House bill is similar but takes a different tack on mortgages and the deduction of state and local taxes. The House would also eliminate the ability of families to deduct medical expenses. (Think about that when matched with the Senate's plan to mess up health insurance.)

And the House bill really goes after university graduate students. Many graduate students earn a small stipend for working on campus, doing research or teaching, and get a break on tuition. The stipend is already taxed. But the House would tax the tuition waiver, thousands of dollars. The average cost of graduate school is $30,000 a year at a public university and $40,000 at a private school. The Washington Post explains the problem this way: "Say you’re a married graduate student at Princeton. Your spouse has a full-time job and makes $50,000 a year; you have two school-age children. You’re filing a joint tax return. For sake of simplicity, you have no other deductions beyond the standard. According to H&R Block’s tax calculator, you would owe about $5,000 under the current law. Under the proposed Republican plan, you would owe about $15,000."

The House bill also eliminates the deduction for interest on student loans and it eliminates tax credits for higher education.

This is terrible public policy. The digital age demands more education, not less, and the tax code should be in alignment. The House bill does the opposite. It will make higher education more expensive and less likely for too many people.

And just to make sure that higher education gets the message about what the country values, the House bill also would tax the larger university endowments, such as Harvard, Princeton, and even smaller colleges that have reserves of more than $250,000 per student.

But both the House and Senate do have one group in mind when writing this new tax code, business. The total "tax cuts" in the bill add up to $1.4 trillion over the next decade and of that amount, $1 trillion goes to businesses and corporations. It does this by reducing the corporate tax bracket from to 20 percent.

The other side of this tax debate is that it will reduce the amount of revenue that goes into the federal treasury. That means that soon after one of these measures passes, Congress will be required to look again at cutting spending.

Already the Congressional Budget Office estimates the tax bill will require $136 billion cuts from Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs. “Without enacting subsequent legislation to either offset that deficit increase, waive the recordation of the bill’s impact on the scorecard, or otherwise mitigate or eliminate the requirements of the [pay-go] law, OMB would be required to issue a sequestration order within 15 days of the end of the session of Congress to reduce spending in fiscal year 2018 by the resultant total of $136 billion,” CBO said Tuesday.

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities pegs these coming budget cuts at $5.8 trillion. "These include $1.8 trillion in cuts in Medicaid, Medicare, and other health care entitlement programs and $800 billion in cuts below the already austere sequestration levels in 'non-defense discretionary' programs, the budget area that includes education and training, transportation, scientific and medical research, protection of the food and water supply, child care, low-income housing assistance, services for frail elderly people, and much more," the center reports.

So we are just at the beginning of the debate. The conservative dream is to sharply cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy -- and then to shrink government. The House and Senate tax bills do just that.
 

Notes . . .

notes

Wise move by Oregon's state Senate Republicans with their choice of Jackie Winters as the new minority leader. It'll be tough to replace Ted Ferrioli, who's held the job for a very long time, but Winters - second most veteran Oregon legislator - can do it. Put aside the minority and female elements: She's a knowledgeable, skilled and a working-across-the-aisle kind of lawmaker, the kind we don't see enough of. Although Oregon still has a surprising number of them left.

Years back when she ran for a U.S. House seat, I watched her at a forum with her primary competitor, who went on to win that race. Asked about legislation and legislative activities, Winters replied with precise and detailed, maybe a little wonkish, answers. His opponent tossed out the red meat, which in a conventional sense meant he "won" the debate. But she's the one who got my respect that evening.

Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic put it well in a November 16 description of his magazine (it was in a subscription pitch mail) and where and how it positions itself these days. Part of it: "We’re on the side of E pluribus unum. We’re on the side of the Constitution. We’re on the side of dignity in office. We’re opposed to corruption. Most important, in our self-conception we’re a magazine of the Enlightenment. What I mean by that is that we endorse and believe in the Enlightenment principle that there is such a thing as observable, empirical reality, and that our job is to report on that reality and interpret it. Therefore, the whole fake-news, post-truth moment that we’re allegedly in—we’re the enemy of that." A lot of people probably could go along with, and join in, that.
 

The Idaho presidents

stapiluslogo1

A few years ago when I put together a list of the 100 most influential Idahoans, Boise State University President Robert Kustra ranked at number eight. Some people thought that was a little high; but others might have edged him higher yet.

University of Idaho President Chuck Staben and Idaho State University President Arthur Vailas made the list too, and some other higher ed leaders (like Tony Fernandez at Lewis-Clark State College) were contenders.

Why are they such critical figures in the state, and so influential? That has partly to do with them as individuals (especially in Kustra’s case) but more the impact of these institutions, not just involving the thousands of people they employ and who are students there, but the sweeping outreach they have across the state. The University of Idaho, for example, has programs and activities all over Idaho, not just in Moscow (or Boise). The others are far-flung too, and so are the state’s community colleges. The leader of one of these organizations can create major ripple effects, of one sort or another, all over the state.

That’s worth some reflection now, with the news that BSU’s Kustra has announced his retirement next summer, after 15 years in charge.

He has been a big factor in Idaho. Part of the reason is Boise State as such, since it is an urban university in a rapidly-growing area, with a fast-expanding student base.

But some of it is personal. He has deep political skills and experience (he is a former lieutenant governor of Illinois) and a strong sense of public relations and community visibility, together with ambition for his institution: It has grown explosively, and the Kustra years will be remembered too as glory years for Bronco football. The growth of BSU in recent years surely is attributable to some degree to Kustra. The specifics surrounding a university president can matter.

So it matters that this is a time of transition in that regard. Kustra is not the only one on the move.

ISU’s Vailas said in August that he will retire next year (within a few days, it turns out, of Kustra’s departure). The UI’s Staben, the newcomer of the three with his arrival in 2014, caused a stir a few weeks ago when word came that he was a finalist for president of the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. (It didn’t pan out.) The stir was all the louder because Stabem had said when he arrived at Moscow that he hoped to spend 10 to 15 years there, and appeared to view it as his last career stop. (UI had five presidents in the 10 years before Staben’s hiring.)

And at LCSC, Fernandez is retiring next year too, on the same day as Vailas.

Idaho’s higher education may be going through some changes in the next few years. (Remember, it’ll soon be dealing with a new governor as well.)

I’ve argued for some years that the extensive recruitment process and the levels of compensation for university presidents both are overdone. (More institutions could probably gain more of the stability they look for, and all the competence they need, by promoting from within.)

But that doesn’t mean a change in university presidents doesn’t matter. Someone like Kustra, to name just one, can show easily how significant the choice can be.

Note: A reader notes that in addition to the Idaho higher education presidents noted here, "Marv Henberg retired earlier this year from the presidency at the College of Idaho as well. He taught at the University of Idaho before coming to Linfield and advancing up the ranks to dean of faculty."
 

Projecting in South Korea

richardson

When President Trump delivered his remarks in South Korea, I was struck by how many times he accused North Korea's Kim Jong Un of traits and conduct that characterize his own administration and its enablers. Psychologists call this projection – the attribution of qualities to others that apply to, but one denies in, oneself.

For instance, he bellowed, "The regime fears the truth above all else . . . ." This is from the man who sent CIA Director Mike Pompeio to meet with a debunked conspiracy theorist and who lies with impunity at every turn. Lest you think I exaggerate, as of Oct. 9, 2017, fact checkers at the Washington Post had tallied more than 1,300 Trump lies and misleading claims – just since the inauguration – or about 5 a day.

Then Trump shouted: "In place of a vibrant society, the people . . . are bombarded by state propaganda practically every waking hour of the day." Again, this is from the man who daily sends out the shameless Sarah Huckabee Sanders to spin her web of deceit and duplicity before the White House press corps. He calls out credible reporters by name as “totally dishonest,” “disgusting,” “corrupt,” and “scum," and the media collectively – other than his fawning sycophants at Fox News – as “the enemy of the American people.”

Next, he claimed that North Korea is little more than a "cult" at whose center "is a deranged belief in the leader’s destiny to rule as parent protector." Remember Trump's brag at the Republican National Convention: "Only I can fix it!" And his recent assertion, "I am the only one that matters." And, of course, there's his chilling and pathetic boast "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters." All this sounds pretty cultish to me.

Then Trump complained that the North Korean regime has broken international commitments. We need look no further than Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the Trans Pacific Partnership to see that he models the same behavior. And, of course, he has threatened to walk away from NAFTA, if our partners in this hemisphere don't accede to his demands. For a time, it looked like he might even walk away from NATO.

Finally – and perhaps most telling – he slammed the regime for seeking conflict abroad to distract from "total failure that they suffer at home." Yup, we can check that box too. In fact, that's exactly what he was doing in his speech in South Korea.

They say it takes one to know one. I couldn't help but think, as I listened to Trump's list of grievances against Kim Jong Un, that - in so very many respects - he was describing himself as well.
 

Notes . . .

notes

Wednesday night, Fox host Sean Hannity backed off his demand that Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore demonstrate his innocence of harassment charges - which he failed to do, instead seeing the accusations nearly double scope this week - or else he call on him to drop out of the race ... after Moore sent him a note pleading to back off. Thereby demonstrating what kind of characters both of them are.

Maybe even better, though, was Moore's tweeted challenge to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell: "Dear Mitch McConnell, Bring. It. On." To which another tweeter noted that "Bring It On" is the name of a movie about high school cheerleaders: "Great movie. Lots of high schoolers. If you're into that sort of thing." This isn't going to get prettier. Was this, again, a campaign for the United States Senate that we're talking about?

The startling, even stunning, comments swirling around Moore are breathtaking. But I was maybe most struck by a post from J. Pepper Bryars of Yellowhammer, a fiercely conservative Alabama-based blog which until today has backed Moore. But as of now, no longer, as the evidence has piled up and Moore retorts have been far short of convincing:

There are more voters just like me, however, diehard conservatives who have cheered the judge for years, who have supported his actions and defended him against the media and the establishment wings within both parties.

But who now, when faced with these overwhelming and credible allegations, and the judge’s implausible and evasive answers, cannot support him any longer.

I will not … cannot, in fact … vote for Roy Moore.

Period.

This causes me anguish beyond measure because I know what the immediate consequences may be – an extreme pro-choice Democrat being elected to the United States Senate who could hold the deciding vote to confirm the next one or two justices.

But the conservative movement isn’t about individuals. It’s about ideas.

 

A fitting tribute

carlson

Governor C. L. “Butch” Otter and Representative Mike Simpson, R-2nd, are staunch, conservative Republicans. Former Governor Cecil D. Andrus was a self-described “lunch bucket” Democrat. The three men, though, had an ability to put the interests of the state ahead of partisanship and work together when necessary.

They held each other in genuine respect and though they could disagree they were rarely disagreeable while dissenting. They had a long history of knowing and working with each other. Andrus couldn’t help liking Butch who worked well with Cece during the 14 years Butch was Lieutenant Governor; and, Mike, whom Cece nicknamed “Driller” because he had a dentistry degree, was also a person of his word.

If asked, Otter and Simpson would tell you that they missed “the Boss.” Both delivered moving heartfelt eulogies on Andrus at services in late August.

While they would not put the others’ bumper stickers on their car, one has to search long and hard to find any record on the campaign trail where they actively worked against one another.

They gave the perfunctory endorsement of their party’s nominee but that was it.

About the only exception for Cece was when Betty Richardson ran against Butch in one of his congressional re-elections. Cece knew Betty’s family were long-time supporters and Betty was also so loyalty may have trumped friendship. Otherwise, there was an unspoken rule between all three of them.

October 24th marked the two month date of Cece’s passing. Like many folks, both Governor Otter and Congressman Simpson are having a hard time believing and adjusting to Andrus’ passing. Cece was such an integral part of the life of Idaho as well as our lives, and not to be able to pick up the phone and talk to him is just hard to believe.

In the two months since Cece passed away there have been a number of suggestions regarding designating an appropriate memorial. None can top the announcement Congressman Simpson made on the two-month anniversary of the governor’s passing: Simpson announced he had introduced a bill, H.R. 4134, which would rename the Boulder/White Clouds Wilderness as the Cecil Andrus White Clouds Wilderness. It was immediately referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

In a way it parallels what Republican Senator Jim McClure engineered just before Senator Frank Church died in 1984. McClure introduced and ramrodded through the Congress a bill that renamed Idaho’s Central Idaho Wilderness the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness.

Most folks just call it “the Frank.”

Such bills temporarily suspend requirements of the Geographic Names Act which among other things says there has to be a five year wait after one has passed away before others could go about naming or renaming geographical features.

Congress can do just about anything it wants to do, however, and when someone introduces a special bill and the sponsor happens to be a “Cardinal,” as is Simpson by his chairmanship of the Interior and EPA appropriations subcommittee, another member has to think long and hard before crossing that Cardinal. Thus, odds are high that Simpson’s bill will succeed. Simpson was always a good nose counter and would not introduce a bill unless he knew he had the votes to get it passed.

Undoubtedly, there will be hearings in Idaho and in D.C. for people to express their opinions, but Andrus was phenominally popular and chances are there will be little opposition. Major interest groups such as the Idaho Conservation League and the Idaho Recreation Council are expected to be supportive.

There are several other worthy ideas being batted around Boise and Lewiston, from naming a street after Andrus to naming a city park, to naming a rare plant in the Boise foothills, to naming the Idaho Fish and Game Building. None tops Simpson’s legislation though all the ideas are good and have merit.

There is one crucial vote that supporters hope will weigh in and be supportive of this fine idea. That is Governor Otter, who may not tip his hand until a hearing is held. The governor knows the White Clouds has a special place in the hearts of many Idahoans because the White Clouds’ most majestic mountain, Castle Peak is, as Cece liked to say, the mountain that made a governor.

Butch may not jump on Simpson’s wagon immediately, but by the end of the day he’ll be sitting on the buckboard bench with Mike whipping those horses along for passage.

Notes . . .

notes

This one reminded me of some of the charts Glenn Beck used to construction on his chalk boards, except that this one by Representative Louie Gohmert is much wilder. It blows right past comprehension deep into la-la land. And never mind that what it purports to describe isn't even part of our present, or future: It is about the Obama Administration, which went away most of a year ago. But then, if talking about the present people in power in Washington is too painful, well, that might be understandable . . .

Just how jammed up is Idaho politics? When a congressional seat actually does open, it seems the whole world wants in, at least the whole Republican world. Nampa Republican Representative Christy Perry said that she wants to run for the 1st congressional district seat being vacated by Raul Labrador, and that means she will join former Lieutenant Governor David Leroy, legislator Russ Fulcher, Meridian; state Representative Luke Malek, Coeur d’Alene, Nick Henderson, Post Falls and Michael Snyder, Bonners Ferry - and that's just the Republicans. And we have four months or so yet to the filing deadline . . .