Categories
Living in Society Social Commentary

Public Health Approach to Gun Violence

Polish Carpentry Crew in Chicago

On page A5 of Tuesday’s Cedar Rapids Gazette was the headline “75 shot in Chicago last weekend.”

From 3 p.m. Friday until 6 a.m. Monday 12 people were killed and 63 wounded, mostly on the south and west sides of the city.

It seems like a lot, even for a large city. Shootings in Cedar Rapids are frequent, but not like this. Is the headline a call to do something about gun violence?

Chicago law enforcement attributed the shootings to gangs who shoot into summer crowds at night, according to the news story. The shootings appear to be random, and ongoing. At least 1,700 people have been shot in Chicago this year. It is one tough city.

In the early 1990s I attended a session of arraignment court near the Washington Park neighborhood on the south side. It was an eye opener. Case after case came before the judge: shootings, domestic violence, assault, petty theft, sexual assault — plaintiffs were bandaged and bruised by incidents that provoked the court appearance. The public defender would lose track of his clients and which case was being heard. It was a chaotic meat grinder.

Experiences like these lead me somewhere besides lack of gun control as the core problem regarding social violence. The lightning rod has been the National Rifle Association.

Progressives found a certain amount of glee in the recent story in Rolling Stone titled “The NRA Says It’s in Deep Financial Trouble, May Be ‘Unable to Exist.’” The NRA is the poster child for what’s wrong about gun culture in the United States.

“The National Rifle Association uses its enormous lobbying power to stymie legislative debate and block most constructive gun legislation,” Ralph Scharnau recently wrote. “Thus even very moderate provisions fail to pass or even get out of committee.”

As a society Americans are not good at controlling violence. That includes our elected officials.

Chicago stands as an example the solution to gun violence is not only gun control. I’m not alone in believing that. The World Health Organization proposes violence be treated as a public health problem, outlining four basic approaches:

  1. Uncovering as much basic knowledge as possible about all the aspects of violence through systematically collecting data on the magnitude, scope, characteristics and consequences of violence at local, national and international levels.
  2. Investigating why violence occurs – that is, conducting research to determine the causes and correlates of violence; the factors that increase or decrease the risk for violence; and the factors that might be modifiable through interventions.
  3. Exploring ways to prevent violence, using the information from the above, by designing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating interventions.
  4. Implementing interventions that appear promising, widely disseminating information and determining the cost-effectiveness of programs.

Hasn’t this work been done? Yes it has. WHO produced a list of ten evidence-based strategies for preventing violence.

  1. Increase safe, stable, and nurturing relationships between children and their parents and caretakers;
  2. Reduce availability and misuse of alcohol;
  3. Reduce access to lethal means, such as guns, knives,and pesticides (often used to commit suicide, especially in low-and middle-income countries);
  4. Improve life skills and enhance opportunities for children and youth;
  5. Promote gender equality and empower women;
  6. Change cultural norms that support violence;
  7. Improve criminal justice systems;
  8. Improve social welfare systems;
  9. Reduce social distance between conflicting groups;
  10. Reduce economic inequality and concentrated poverty.

Will a public health approach to preventing gun violence work? I don’t know, but what we are doing now — hammering the NRA and elected officials — isn’t. It’s time to try something else.

~ First posted at Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society Writing

Outside The Comfort Zone

Ben Keiffer (L) and Dr. Christopher Peters chatting at Pints and Politics event, Thursday, Aug. 9, 2018

In an effort to get outside my comfort zone I tried something new. I went to a media event called “Pints and Politics” at the Cedar Ridge Winery and Distillery in Swisher Thursday after my shift at the home, farm and auto supply store.

The Cedar Rapids Gazette hosts Pints and Politics in which their columnists and reporters form a panel and answer audience questions. People drink alcoholic beverages and talk about politics. That is, most people. I drank about two pints of water before the show started and discussed a case with a lawyer I know who was there. I felt uncomfortable among the crowd of people mostly in my cohort of sixty somethings. Many seemed like they had retired with not enough to do. One presumes they read newspapers and listen to the radio. More than 200 people arrived for the forum.

Iowa Public Radio glommed on to Pints and Politics and makes an edition from the raw materials for their weekday program River to River with Ben Keiffer. Keiffer drank a beer and handed out a few Post-It pads with the Iowa Public Radio logo on them. These will be handy for dispatches to my spouse to be left on the refrigerator with information about our ongoing conflict with the spiders assuming control of our house. The Gazette, being a newspaper under duress in an on line world, had no such useful perquisites.

I attended the event Thursday and listened to the edited version on the radio Friday.

The panelists were Todd Dorman and Adam Sullivan, both columnists for the Gazette, and Joyce Russell, statehouse reporter for Iowa Public Radio. The two people I know best, Lynda Waddington and James Q. Lynch of the Gazette, while in adverts for the event, were both absent. I follow the work of the panelists. While Russell is a journalist, I’m not sure what one calls columnists. The word “pundit” was used several times during the event and the appellation will serve.

The event was rigged from the git-go to serve existing media narratives. Audience members submitted written questions to the panel and many more than could be asked were collected. This made the question editing process the driver in how the panel proceeded. The topics Keiffer chose were what’s already in the news: the Iowa Supreme Court hearing oral arguments on the state’s voter suppression law that day; President Trump’s recent visit to Peosta; and others. The radio version should be posted soon here. 2020 presidential candidate John Delaney announced completion of visits to all 99 Iowa Counties. Dorman suggested as a reward that his likeness be carved in butter and displayed at the Iowa State Fair.

I’m not sure what I expected and maybe that’s the point of trying something new. I did not know many attendees, and most of those I did were conservatives. Democratic Rep. Amy Nielsen was there. Cedar Ridge Winery and Distillery is in her district. Republican congressional candidate Dr. Christopher Peters was present working the crowd. Once Peters found out Rep. Rod Blum declined an opportunity to appear on River to River he made clear to Keiffer he had no reservations about appearing on the program. There was a table full of Libertarians, about proportional in number to the percentage of the general population. The rest of the audience leaned Democratic.

Adam Sullivan stood out on the panel simply because he talked so much. He served as a useful foil for more Democratic audience members to express their belief in status quo politics driven by media narratives. Russell is a professional, as are they all. The three of them all tried to get along. In the background I might have heard a “both sides” or two, but maybe that is confirmation bias whispering in my ear.

The most significant media narrative related to how elections are decided. I posted this on twitter Friday while listening to the radio.

Panelists agreed with Dorman we are in an election where issues not that important. “Persuasion stuff is kind of dead,” he said. Rile up the base on both sides. Get who you can of whoever is left. I’m not sure that’s the case, although here’s an example of media that believe it.

I want to emphasize 1. I’ve heard this before during recent election cycles, and 2. based on my experience this cycle, I don’t believe for one minute this is how the 2018 midterms are rolling out. Repeating this narrative is not as important as the fact people believe it. Based on reports I get from the field, the narrative is bankrupt and the panelists didn’t seem to be aware. That disconnect is important.

While attendees passed a pleasant two hours, I was decidedly unsettled by the experience. As I drove east along 120th Street in my 21 year old vehicle, the sun was moving toward the horizon. I turned north at the Ely Blacktop to get an ice cream at Dan and Debbie’s Creamery before heading south and home. What unsettled me was not the media personalities, or the people in Swisher. It was knowledge of the amount of work to overcome the tainted media narratives which were promulgated.

I get it that news writers need a hook and consumers of news need to understand it. A lot of fish were caught during Pints and Politics but the pool wasn’t very deep. I’m thankful for a new experience, but I doubt I’ll be returning to a media event like this.

Categories
Living in Society

After Dave Loebsack

Congressman Dave Loebsack in the Solon Beef Days parade

You don’t need to be a political insider to understand Dave Loebsack’s days in the U.S. House of Representatives are getting numbered.

Loebsack seems likely to dispatch with power his second time opponent, Chris Peters from Coralville, this year. He could continue to run for Congress for several more terms. I think he should continue to run and would be willing to chip in to buy a wheelchair to get him to the floor to vote should he become infirm as he ages. It’s not about me.

What about when Dave decides to put away his running shoes? He reaches the Social Security Administration’s “full retirement age” later this year.

Will he start a third career? Will he run for the U.S. Senate? Will he continue to serve in the U.S. House? Will he kick back with his retirement packages from Cornell College and the House and take it easy? Any of those is possible and only Dave knows. I don’t care to speculate about his plans.

The risk Second District voters face when Dave moves on is an open seat becomes more vulnerable to a Republican takeover. Dave created a trove of institutional political knowledge about the district since first being elected in 2006. Presumably he will be willing and able to help a potential successor learn what he’s learned. As we saw in 2014, Tom Harkin’s departure from the U.S. Senate did not go well for Democrats. Harkin knew the political landscape of the state as well as anyone and that didn’t help Democrats win his seat.

Loebsack’s first election to the House was a reaction to the incumbency of Jim Leach, and a repudiation of President George W. Bush. When Bush was reelected in 2004, Democratic voters were activated for change. Leach, partly through his participation as House Banking Committee chair during the Whitewater investigation of the Clintons, caught shrapnel from the wave election that was 2006. Those of us making political telephone calls at the time heard voters ready for a change. There were enough of them to tip the scales to a Loebsack win. Those dynamics don’t exist today.

Loebsack has been able to survive the Republican resurgence during the last four cycles. That doesn’t mean a potential successor will get elected. Voters don’t change that much but political dynamics get reset in an open race. I expect the first election once Dave announces retirement will be a barn burner.

Who could replace Dave Loebsack? A few names have been suggested, but it’s been scuttlebutt, gossip and wishful thinking thus far. It makes sense for a potential candidate to have deep grassroots political experience as Loebsack did, or significant service in the Iowa legislature. However, the electorate seems to be moving out of the age of reason into darker territory. Presently, that’s not a question on the minds of many Democrats I know. We just feel Dave will always be available, regardless of reality, reason and logic.

Loebsack reaches full retirement age on Dec. 23. He may not be ready to retire from the House, and many Democrats, including the author, would like to see him seek another term in 2020. However, the day is coming and preparation to find a successor should begin if it hasn’t already. What is that process? I don’t know. If it’s an open race, anyone could run, and several probably will.

For now, the work is to reelect Dave Loebsack in 2018 and give him some help in the other Iowa Congressional Districts. That’s what many of us will be doing over the next three months with an eye toward the future.

~ First posted at Blog for Iowa

Categories
Environment

On the Comeback Trail – Asbestos

Earthrise by Bill Anders, Dec. 24, 1968

The Environmental Protection Agency is not what it once was as the Trump administration finishes year two.

In addition to public renunciation of the words “climate change,” combined with promotion of fossil fuels which contribute to global warming, Trump’s minions are eating away at the foundation of protections the agency created since President Nixon formed it on Dec. 2, 1970. Like a swarm of termites, they follow an agenda crafted by conservative think tanks to deregulate what is perceived as infringement on the liberties of corporations to practice unfettered capitalism.

A national environmental movement influenced Nixon’s decision to create the EPA, and only a similar movement will stop the current administration from dismantling it. Thus far, nothing has proved egregious enough to precipitate a movement like the one that rose in the 1960s. Will the last straw be reintroducing asbestos into our consumer society?

You’ve got to be kidding me. Asbestos?

Asbestos may be coming back to your neighborhood, according to Aileen Kwun who posted an article about it on Fast Company July 31.

“Asbestos, a dangerous carcinogen outlawed in more than 55 countries, could make a comeback in the United States, under Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency,” Kwun wrote. “The EPA has even made it easier for companies to introduce new uses of asbestos-containing products in America — many of which could end up in common products in your home, as well as the materials used to build it.”

“Trump has been outward in his views on the asbestos industry,” she said. “His 1997 book Art of the Comeback explicitly stated that asbestos bans are a conspiracy ‘led by the mob, because it was often mob-related companies that would do the asbestos removal.’”

On June 1, the EPA enacted a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) allowing the manufacture of new asbestos-containing products to be petitioned and approved by the federal government on a case-by-case basis, according to Kwun.

Ask a public health official and they will say EPA should continue to regulate asbestos as they have.

Asbestos? Making a comeback? Good grief! Read Kwun’s entire article here.

George Carlin famously said, “Environmentalists don’t give a shit about the planet, they don’t care about the planet… You know what they’re interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They’re worried that some day in the future they might be personally inconvenienced.”

There is little about the modern environmental movement and its reaction to changes at the EPA to prove Carlin wrong. In the meanwhile, termites continue to consume the regulatory foundation for a safe environment built up over decades.

~ First posted on Blog for Iowa

Categories
Kitchen Garden

Bowl of Summer – Cucumber Salad

Cucumber Salad

Cucumber salad is not even a recipe.

Peel them, slice and put them in a bowl. Add thinly sliced onions, extra virgin olive oil and your favorite vinegar, then salt and pepper to taste.

Mix gently then serve. It’s summer in a bowl.

When the garden produces them, we eat a lot of cucumber salads. This year I mastered the art of cucumber growing with a couple of simple things. First, I mulched as soon as I planted the seedlings. Then, I made sure deer had no access to the plants. I also put up cages and a fence for the vines to grow upward. The result has been abundant.

Other than in pickles, cucumbers don’t preserve well. They must be enjoyed in the moment, and sometimes that’s as good as it gets.

Categories
Kitchen Garden Living in Society

Why Don’t Iowa Farmers Export More to Europe?

Sundog Farm

During a brief appearance at Northeast Iowa Community College in Peosta on July 26, President Trump claimed a trade breakthrough with European allies.

“We just opened up Europe for you,” he said.

Not so fast!

On Saturday, European Union Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, who met with Trump, said trade talks almost collapsed over U.S. agricultural demands.

Agricultural trade will remain off the table in any trade talks between the U.S. and EU, Juncker said, according to Deutsche Welle. A European commitment to buy more U.S. soybeans is driven by market conditions.

Europe is the second largest importer of soybeans after China and prices are low because of the U.S. trade war with China. In other words, after market conditions driven by the president beat the price of soybeans down, Europe sees a bargain. It is hard to fathom how Trump sees Europe “opened up” under these conditions. Granted Iowa farmers planted more acres in soybeans this year, but the president’s statement can only be seen as political posturing in advance of the 2018 midterm elections and everyone should know it.

There is a more significant problem with “opening up” Europe for agricultural trade — the issue of genetically modified organisms.

There are very few genetically modified crops grown in Europe compared to the U.S., according to a July 27 New York Times article. The reason is in 2001, the EU issued a directive about GMOs. From the early stages of research to the marketplace, these products would have to pass a series of tests for environmental risks and human safety. The consequence of the directive in Europe is few farmers produce GMO crops.

In the U.S., neither the USDA nor the National Academy of Sciences is concerned that GMO crops have any impact on consumers different from non-GMO crops, despite a slate of regulations. Driven by science, farmers embrace GMO crops because of their acceptance in the U.S. marketplace combined with the attributes of genetically modified seeds. Regardless of science, increasing the amount of GMO crops exported to Europe seems unlikely given the fact many European countries have banned GMOs.

Shorter version of Trump’s statement, “Farmers, here’s a bone.”

It’s hard to see how help for Iowa farmers will materialize from current discussions with Europe. The irony of increased soybean sales to Europe after Trump’s trade war beat down prices as something positive seems lost on his true believers. They may swallow this hook, line and sinker, but other sentient beings should not. It is another deception from a president with an unending supply of deceit.

~ First posted on Blog for Iowa

Categories
Sustainability

Helsinki and New START

B-61 Nuclear Bombs

I don’t know one person, acquaintance or public figure who thought the July 16 meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Helsinki went well.

The only people who found a ray of hope in the awkward encounter are those in the arms control community who pointed out some positives, not the least of which is an easing of tensions between the two nuclear powers evidenced in the meeting.

“It looks like Trump and Putin may have agreed in Helsinki to resume strategic stability talks.” Daryl Kimball, director of the Arms Control Association, posted on twitter. “One key issue: New START, which can be extended without complex negotiation, without further approval by Senate or Duma, and without Trump making unwise concessions.”

Such a move makes sense and would be an easy win for Trump. It may not be well received among Trump’s base supporters because, after all, the Obama administration negotiated New START. The 44th president called in his markers to get the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty. Some of us felt he gave away too much with a complex offering of perquisites to Republican hawks led by Jon Kyl. Not the least of these was an expensive, unneeded modernization of the U.S. nuclear complex. The Trump crowd won’t like it, regardless of the efficacy of an extension, because of the association with President Barack Obama.

Republicans have expressed disappointment with Trump’s foreign policy, such as it exists. They may (publicly or privately) attempt to reign in the president. At some point the U.S. wants to address perceived Russian violations of the INF treaty negotiated between Presidents Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, signed in 1987. Russia has threatened to withdraw from the INF treaty for many years, according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

As we look forward with trepidation to the next meeting between the two heads of state, the arms control community will be working to advance the causes of nuclear disarmament and abolition. It is something they do regardless which party has majorities in the Congress or who is president.

~ First posted on Blog for Iowa

Categories
Kitchen Garden

Making Applesauce

Applesauce Made With Viking and Dolgo Crab apples

I asked our chief apple officer the following question:

“If I wanted to win a blue ribbon for making applesauce at the state fair which apples, available now, would I use?”

His answer was straightforward.

“Use Viking because it’s one of the best for sauce. Plus no one else at the fair would have that variety.”

I took home six each Viking and Dolgo Crab apples after work. This morning I made applesauce with them.

The Dolgo Crab apples were for flavoring, but may not have been needed.The pink sauce produced was tart and delicious… and that’s no apple joke.

Now that the experiment produced a successful result, it’s time to go big with a lot more apples.

It’s part of living in the seasons of local food.

Categories
Sustainability

Rise of Nuclear Power was a Bad Idea

In a broader perspective, the rise of nuclear power was a bad idea. It always required substantial government subsidies, and there is no solution for handling spent fuel rods and radioactive equipment. If there is a disaster like Fukushima Daiichi was in 2011, there is no recovery from it years later.

On Friday major news outlets reported Duane Arnold Energy Center near Palo will cease electricity production in late 2020. Duane Arnold, owned by NextEra Energy Resources, is Iowa’s only nuclear power generating station.

Alliant Energy, the utility’s only remaining customer, entered an agreement with NextEra to cease operations five years earlier than planned.

The declining cost of other forms of energy led to the decision, according to NextEra spokesperson Peter Robbins in a Radio Iowa article.

“You are just seeing continued pressure on all sources of energy — from renewables and from natural gas — and we are certainly seeing that in the market place in Iowa,” Robbins said.

NextEra plans to invest in existing and new renewables generation across Iowa before the end of 2020, according to the article. Alliant Energy said it will save customers nearly $300 million in the next 21 years by switching away from the use of the nuclear power.

Duane Arnold’s fate reflects the general decline in nuclear power in the United States. While some, like retired scientist James Hansen and former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, point to nuclear power as a potential way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in electricity generation, it is just too expensive. Georgia Power remains the only company in the United States attempting to build new nuclear reactors. The construction at the Alvin W. Vogtle generating station near Augusta, Georgia has been plagued by delays and cost overruns endemic to the industry. The two plants may never be completed.

On June 1, President Trump directed Energy Secretary Rick Perry to take immediate steps to keep both coal and nuclear power plants running as a matter of national security. If the U.S. exits the nuclear power generation business there could be repercussions in ceding technological advancements to China and Russia. It could weaken existing nonproliferation standards if the U.S. discontinued its work as a supplier in the global nuclear marketplace. The flagship U.S. company for nuclear power technology is Westinghouse which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy March 29, 2017. Trump’s initiative isn’t going to help Duane Arnold stay operating as the marketplace is doing its work — there are no customers.

Duane Arnold employs about 540 employees, and because of the nature of nuclear power generation, about 300 will find continued employment during the lengthy decommissioning process. The federal government owns the spent fuel rods and there is no current, viable plan for off-site disposal. Storage time required for spent nuclear fuel rods is measured in multiple millennia. The plant’s license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had been extended until 2024.

The only successful application of nuclear has been in nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers where the question “what do you do with a nuclear submarine/aircraft carrier once its nuclear plant reaches the end of life?” has no good answers.

Renewable energy is Iowa’s future, it is the world’s future. Friday’s announcement was expected, as cost dictates how consumers source electricity. Nuclear power has never been cost-competitive. There will be disruption in workers’ lives and that’s unfortunate. However, the end had to come, and now that the announcement is made people can begin making plans.

~ First posted at Blog for Iowa

Categories
Environment Living in Society

Logic, Reason, Decency and Asbestos

Woman Writing Letter

Almost no one I know outside of politics is talking about the Nov. 6 election. That seems typical… and okay.

Most of us try to be organized. At least we pretend to be. We seek to live lives of logic, reason and decency. We’ll organize to figure out for whom to vote later, maybe around Thanksgiving.

Not so fast! It will be too late on Thanksgiving.

Here’s a head scratcher for logic fans from the Environmental Protection Agency. In our relentless pursuit to Make America Great Again, the administration wants to bring back asbestos. Yes that asbestos, the known carcinogen banned in 55 countries. It may soon be available again in consumer products near you.

Our president has a theory about asbestos regulation. In his 1997 book, Art of the Comeback, he explicitly said asbestos bans are a conspiracy “led by the mob, because it was often mob-related companies that would do the asbestos removal.” What kind of theory is that? It is a conspiracy theory.

Ask a public health professional or physician what they think about deregulating asbestos. While you’re at it, make your plan to vote on Nov. 6.

The logical choice would be to vote Democratic.

~ Published Aug. 9, 2018 in the Solon Economist