Coronavirus - Why We Might Need a Functional Government

Coronavirus pushed aside my draft columns about Biden-Sanders and the latest local guardianship hearing.

The virus has upended all our lives. As if we felt great but had been diagnosed with an aggressive cancer, everything is the same but different. We are uncertain, sluggish, a bit dazed. The garden is sunny and peaceful, yet everything feels strangely ominous. Each of us contradicting today something we said yesterday. So are most of our leaders. 

 

I don’t know how our social/medical landscape will look in May. I hope the fears and dire predictions are exaggerated. And Coronavirus isn’t Donald Trump’s fault.

But the U.S. response has been slow and underwhelming, more like Italy’s disastrous hesitation than like South Korea’s coherent approach. This incompetence in a crisis might even bring home to folks the dangers of leaving the ship of state unhelmed. 

 

We had a unit to foresee pandemics and jump-start a response. It was probably not adequate. But the Trump Administration abandoned it. Trump’s proposed budget savaged the BioShield account – set up more than ten years ago so the government could fund research on pharmaceutical responses to a pandemic or biological attack. But there’s nothing politically sexy about health preparedness.

For months, experts predicted Covid-19 would reach the U.S. Trump downplayed its significance, and misleadingly minimized the numbers. To oversee our response, he appointed Mike Pence, the failed Indiana politician he’d made Vice-President. A cartoonist should draw Trump standing smugly on a wharf, while a huge wave labeled “coronavirus” looms behind him. 

 

After one recent meeting, Trump Administration figures revealed that finally Trump had focused on the problem, rather uttering disconnected discourses on his popularity or the evil Democrats. However, he refused Republican Senators’ request to let scientist Anthony Fauci direct the government’s response. That same day, Pence contradicted scientists’ advice by bragging that he was still shaking people’s hands. That night, an NBA player who had mocked the “panic” by touching microphones and recording devices after his press conference became the league’s first Covid-19 case. Trump joked that he might be resistant to the virus because his uncle was a super-genius who taught at MIT. Officials running our national response to a pandemic oughtta be smarter than a twentyish ballplayer.

Trump’s non-response to coronavirus symptomizes his approach to government: he attacks lower-level functionaries who’ve served Democratic and Republican Presidents for decades, hollowing out whole agencies; he clamps the Presidential hand over scientists’ mouths; if he can’t make some agency further his political fortunes or burnish his image, he destroys it; and his go-to response to questions is to attack critics and ramble on and on about Trumpian greatness. His nationwide address this week blamed other countries and wrongly claimed there’s little risk for Americans.

This won’t change. For many reasons – anger about globalism, distaste for Hillary, distaste for abortion, fear of having guns confiscated, a sense that things are going downhill for the country or for white men, and concern that dealing with climate-change might curtail corporate profits – we have elected a toddler-in-chief. Whatever the justifications for electing him in 2016, we can’t we afford four more years’ of watching the weeds grow in the doorways of government.

Is it bad taste to mention pandemics and politics right now? Maybe. If we were bailing your rowboat, I wouldn’t waste energy cursing you for not having plugged the leaks; but if you were steering us into an iceberg, I might holler.

                                                                – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 15 March 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website the newspaper's website and on KRWG's website.  The corresponding radio commentary will air during the week on both KRWG and on KTAL-LP, 101.5 FM (www.lccommunityradio.org), and will also be available at on KRWG's site.]

[Added late:
NOTE:This just in: KTAL's "Speak Up, Las Cruces!" (8-10 a.m. Wednesdays, on 101.5 FM (or stream at the Las Cruces Community Radio site above) will focus on our current situation, with discussions with health officials, public officials, a couple of economists, and otherss -- including callers at 526-KTAL (5825), but IN ADDITION I'm almost certain we'll start Monday with a half-hour special update, and do those each Monday - Wednesday - Friday at 9 (although I guess Wednesday's will be a portion of our "Speak Up, Las Cruces!" show, repeating later in the day.  Check our website or Facebook page for details!
Click HERE for a neat graphical explanation (simulation) of how moves like quarantines, social distancing, and having a significant portion of citizens just stay home can affect the curve (how fast we get to 0 cases to millions); and the curve is important because if Las Cruces has 20,000 cases in a month, the health-care system is completely overwhelmed and more people die simply because of the crowding or the lack of doctors or ventilators -- or, as in Italy, they simply don't bother with folks over a certain age!  On the other hand, 20,000 cases over six months could be fatal to far fewer people -- although I'm not sure how the impact on the economy varies with these scenarios.
Watching these simulations, particularly the "social distancing," helps make the important point that staying at home the most you can and washing hands often, etc., may not keep you 100% safe, but by doing it you contribute to flattening the curve, keeping the most people healthy we can, and perhaps helping ensure there's a doctor or hospital bed if/when YOU need one.]

[btw, if anyone thinks it's bad taste to discuss the political implications of this crisis, please note that Donald Trump has repeatedly blamed it on Barack Obama.]

[Friday just as I opened my email program to send this column to the Sun-News, I had an email forwarding to me a Washington Post Op-Ed piece by Beth Cameron, the woman who ran the White House National Security Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense -- entitled, not surprisingly, The Federal Government Is Moving too Slowly, due to Lack of Leadership.  Ms. Cameron had run the office when it was established in 2014, after the Ebola epidemic.

[Ms. Cameron "was mystified when the White House dissolved the office, leaving the country less prepared for pandemics like covid-19."  She added:

"The U.S. government’s slow and inadequate response to the new coronavirus underscores the need for organized, accountable leadership to prepare for and respond to pandemic threats. 
"In a health security crisis, speed is essential. When this new coronavirus emerged, there was no clear White House-led structure to oversee our response, and we lost valuable time. . . . The specter of rapid community transmission and exponential growth is real and daunting. The job of a White House pandemics office would have been to get ahead: to accelerate the response, empower experts, anticipate failures, and act quickly and transparently to solve problems. 
". . . Our job was to be the smoke alarm — keeping watch to get ahead of emergencies, sounding a warning at the earliest sign of fire — all with the goal of avoiding a six-alarm blaze.
"My office was also tasked with preparing , . . . for the next health emergency, no matter its origin. In 2014, even before the first cases of Ebola came to light in Guinea, the Obama administration launched the Global Health Security Agenda, which now includes more than 60 countries, to accelerate epidemic preparedness. That effort, bolstered by $1 billion from the U.S. government in an emergency spending bill to fight Ebola, led to major gains in global capability to combat the Ebola outbreak and prepare for the next pandemic, which turned out to be covid-19. We began building, measuring and tracking capacities each country had, such as the strength of their national laboratory systems and their abilities to detect and report disease, stand up emergency operation centers, build an epidemiology workforce and maintain safe and secure practices. We spurred the use of transparent, measurable assessments of progress, and we leveraged our diplomacy with other countries to finance and fill gaps. At the same time, we strengthened international biosurveillance networks to help alert us to future potential pandemics."]

[A frequent correspondent replied by email to my column early this morning with this advice:

Well stated.  Sometimes I suspect we're in a toilet that was flushed several decades ago and now find ourselves in that "final spin" before we're shoved into the sewer pipe of history.

Still, my dad had (as usual) an apt proverb:  You can either play with the toys you have, or whine about the ones you don't have....do whichever is the most fun.  Turns out that it's best to play with what you have and make the best of it.  In my mind, we need to devote our strongest effort to encouraging our local citizenry, including elected officials, to  focus on actually developing an economic system based upon Maslow's hierarchy.  With that economic base we can do what we need locally to take care of most problems.  Schools, healthcare, housing, food, clothing....whatever the necessity can be dealt with locally if we set our minds and hearts to it.  We may be on our last legs as an empire, but we needn't be on our death bed as a community.

Take care.]

Common Sense advice from an expert on coronavirus.

[I am republishing here a communication from a doctor who clearly knows the subject.  Some of it has become common knowledge since I first received it.  One further point, regarding services: I have heard through a nurse we know that the virus can last for 7-9 days on glass or plastic, but only for quite shorter periods on many other surfaces; and, not unexpectedly, chlorine (as in pools) kills the virus immediately.]

Dear Colleagues, as some of you may recall, when I was a professor of pathology at the University of California San Diego, I was one of the first molecular virologists in the world to work on coronaviruses (the 1970s). I was the first to demonstrate the number of genes the virus contained. Since then, I have kept up with the coronavirus field and its multiple clinical transfers into the human population (e.g., SARS, MERS), from different animal sources. The current projections for its expansion in the US are only probable, due to continued insufficient worldwide data, but it is most likely to be widespread in the US by mid to late March and April.

Here is what I have done and the precautions that I take and will take. These are the same precautions I currently use during our influenza seasons, except for the mask and gloves.:

1) NO HANDSHAKING! Use a fist bump, slight bow, elbow bump, etc.
2) Use ONLY your knuckle to touch light switches. elevator buttons, etc.. Lift the gasoline dispenser with a paper towel or use a disposable glove.
3) Open doors with your closed fist or hip - do not grasp the handle with your hand, unless there is no other way to open the door. Especially important on bathroom and post office/commercial doors.
4) Use disinfectant wipes at the stores when they are available, including wiping the handle and child seat in grocery carts.
5) Wash your hands with soap for 10-20 seconds and/or use a greater than 60% alcohol-based hand sanitizer whenever you return home from ANY activity that involves locations where other people have been.
6) Keep a bottle of sanitizer available at each of your home's entrances. AND in your car for use after getting gas or touching other contaminated objects when you can't immediately wash your hands.
7) If possible, cough or sneeze into a disposable tissue and discard. Use your elbow only if you have to. The clothing on your elbow will contain infectious virus that can be passed on for up to a week or more!
What I have stocked in preparation for the pandemic spread to the US:
1) Latex or nitrile latex disposable gloves for use when going shopping, using the gasoline pump, and all other outside activity when you come in contact with contaminated areas.
Note: This virus is spread in large droplets by coughing and sneezing. This means that the air will not infect you! BUT all the surfaces where these droplets land are infectious for about a week on average - everything that is associated with infected people will be contaminated and potentially infectious. The virus is on surfaces and you will not be infected unless your unprotected face is directly coughed or sneezed upon. This virus only has cell receptors for lung cells (it only infects your lungs) The only way for the virus to infect you is through your nose or mouth via your hands or an infected cough or sneeze onto or into your nose or mouth.
2) Stock up now with disposable surgical masks and use them to prevent you from touching your nose and/or mouth (We touch our nose/mouth 90X/day without knowing it!). This is the only way this virus can infect you - it is lung-specific. The mask will not prevent the virus in a direct sneeze from getting into your nose or mouth - it is only to keep you from touching your nose or mouth.
3) Stock up now with hand sanitizers and latex/nitrile gloves (get the appropriate sizes for your family). The hand sanitizers must be alcohol-based and greater than 60% alcohol to be effective.
4) Stock up now with zinc lozenges. These lozenges have been proven to be effective in blocking coronavirus (and most other viruses) from multiplying in your throat and nasopharynx. Use as directed several times each day when you begin to feel ANY "cold-like" symptoms beginning. It is best to lie down and let the lozenge dissolve in the back of your throat and nasopharynx. Cold-Eeze lozenges is one brand available, but there are other brands available. 

I, as many others do, hope that this pandemic will be reasonably contained, BUT I personally do not think it will be. Humans have never seen this snake-associated virus before and have no internal defense against it. Tremendous worldwide efforts are being made to understand the molecular and clinical virology of this virus. Unbelievable molecular knowledge about the genomics, structure, and virulence of this virus has already been achieved. BUT, there will be NO drugs or vaccines available this year to protect us or limit the infection within us. Only symptomatic support is available. I hope these personal thoughts will be helpful during this potentially catastrophic pandemic. You are welcome to share this email. 

Good luck to all of us!
James Robb, MD FCAP

xx

Thoughts on the Las Cruces City Manager Search

Both Interim Manager Bill Studer and Assistant City Manager David Dollahon survived the cut from ten to five candidates for Las Cruces City Manager.

Some city employees want anybody but these two. Former manager Stuart Ed had a dictatorial management style. He allegedly made some questionable choices, and insisted the City follow them. That’s no fun for employees. Some say Studer and Dollahon facilitated some of Ed’s missteps – and that damaged employee morale would heal best in a wholly fresh environment. 

 

But one employee told me Dollahon deserved the job, because he’d been here thirty years and knew everything, and that although some find him abrasive, “David is fair with the people who work hard.” Dollahon certainly does know city government here. 

 

Should it matter that in 2013, when his city computer picked up a virus, the IT people discovered that for three years Dollahon had spent a lot of time at work reviewing pornographic websites? He made “consistent, repeated, and sustained,” misuse of his city computer, reflecting “flagrant disregard for city policy.” This exposed the computer to the virus; and we weren’t paying him to watch porn. After inspecting his hard drive, LCPD determined that he hadn’t committed criminal activity. Dollahon was allowed “to take unpaid leave” for three days of his choice. (I hadn’t mentioned this situation before; but it seems relevant to his candidacy, though it shouldn’t dominate the discussion. Dollahon politely refused to discuss his candidacy with me.)

People associate Studer with Ed, which wouldn’t help him convince employees his was a truly new regime. People quote him as saying he doesn’t believe humankind is causing climate change. Our City Council, most citizens, and the vast weight of scientific investigation say otherwise. The Southwest is a climate-change hot spot. Studer said Friday, “humans are having an impact, I’m just not sure of the magnitude of that impact.”

Former County Manager (and recently-former Sunland Park City Manager) Julia Brown didn’t make the second cut. She’s smart and professional. I’ve criticized and praised her. The County firing her means nothing. A new commission majority, including two new members allegedly in Sheriff Kiki Vigil’s orbit, fired her; and her legal settlement exceeded $500K. 

 

Although I like and respect Brown, I understand the Council’s doubts. Managers must please an ever-shifting set of elected officials who are rarely experts. Officials’ instincts don’t always serve the city’s needs. “Independence” is an admirable character trait that councilors might not love in a city manager. It’s tough to steer the right course among competing interests, or between instructions and good sense, tactfully. 

 

I do think the Council may have missed a potential star in Len Sossaman. None of us are particularly looking for a gray-bearded white guy from the Southeast; but in going beyond the resumes and news stories and talking to some folks, I was impressed. I think he speaks frankly to his bosses, but with minimal abrasiveness, and tends to inspire employees, rather than shout “my way or the highway.” The quality of admiration and respect I heard in some voices moved me. I’ll bet you a beer he makes someone a hell of a city manager.

Also under consideration are Los Lunas Village Administrator Greg Martin and two promising younger people who’ve not yet been a city or county manager: Verónica Soto (San Antonio) and Kenneth Young (Loudoun County, Virginia). I don’t yet know enough about the three to offer an opinion.

                                                  – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 8 March 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's website KRWG's website.  A spoken version will air during the week on both KRWG and KTAL, 101.5 FM (www.lccommunityradio.org).  That spoken version will also be on KRWG's website -- but not until later or tomorrow, because of the press of other work this weekend.]

[Sorry, I'm moving kind of slowly this morning.  It's been a very full week, and we spent hours last night enjoying the songs of our new friend John T. Davis, "the Belfast cowboy," a filmmaker and musician who visited this week, along with poet Kathleen McCracken, whom we heard read a week or so earlier.  John played  at Vintage Wines in Mesilla, along with Russ Bradburd and David   .   Those who weren't there (which is almost everyone) missed a very enjoyable evening.]

[Should briefly mention an upcoming event.  This Wednesday, 11 March, at 5:50 p.m. on the third floor of Zuhl Library on the NMSU campus, 

Title is "Will Local News Survive? -- a Discussion of Journalism's Future" -- which is obviously timely as newspapers disappear like some endangered species, Internet sites (some full of ideological or partisan screeds masquerading as factual news stories or fair commentary) rush in to fill the void, and our own local daily newspaper downsizes almost daily?  This is a real and important problem.

Excellent panel includes Walt Rubel, Algernon D'Ammassa, Susan Dunlap of New Mexico Political Report, and Kathleen Sloan, who publishes the on-line newspaper the Sierra County

Kathleen Sloan

Sun.  Who's better-positioned than Ms. Sloan to discuss what to do when your community newspaper disappears -- or when it's controlled by someone who also has a lot of control over the city government?  She can also talk about why she does what she does and how challenging it can be!  Walt, of course, has been a journalist here for a very long time, much of that time with the Las Cruces Sun-News (and does two shows on KTAL-LP, 101.5 FM); and Algernon reports for the Sun-News now. Because Walt's a panelist, I'll be moderating the event this year.]

Amazed yet again by Donald Trump, I asked some Trump-capped acquaintances at the Farmers’ Market what they thought.

U.S. Intelligence says Putin is again trying to tip our electoral scales in Russia’s favor. That’s a security issue, whatever your politics. Trump scoffed, then sacked his own appointed acting head of intelligence for reporting to Congress as he’s required to do. Trump then installed a shill with no intelligence qualifications. 

You’d sure think a patriot, of any party, would be concerned. Yet many erstwhile patriots seem blissfully unconcerned about Trump’s damage to the State Department and U.S. intelligence.

First guy I asked said frankly, “I’m so into what Trump’s doing that I can’t even think about that. He’s the greatest President we’ve had in a very long time.” I thanked him as he ran off.

Second said Trump was doing wonderful things, and questioned my facts as to the new intelligence chief’s complete lack of qualifications. He had to run, but agreed we could talk again later. We will.

A friend asked why I’d even tried to talk to the Trump fans. Quoting Ezra Klein’s interesting new book, Why We’re Polarized, he pointed out that I’d never convince them because their (and possibly our) political thoughts are so inextricably bound up with our feelings about who we are that emotions won’t let the mind analyze facts dispassionately. 

(He also asked whether the first guy’s response hurt my feelings or irritated me. No. That gentleman was frank. He also spared both of us a lame effort at communicating, which was not going to be feasible this time around.)

Without questioning the logic of all that, I’m just not in a position to be that . . . exclusive. I live in southern New Mexico, where we have (to outsiders’ surprise) a great variety of viewpoints and lively discussions about those views. I write a Sunday column and co-host a two-hour radio show on which we talk with folks. More, I live in a community; and in a community, folks kind of need each other sometimes.

So, yeah, I’ll keep listening, and keep engaging – courteously and openly – with folks who disagree with me. I don’t have the luxury of talking only with political allies. Nor would I want to. As a writer and citizen, I enjoy our diversity. I’m also well aware of my own fallibility.

Do I know the secret to helping folks who appreciate Donald Trump recognize how he endangers us? No. But I’m more likely to figure it out by trying than by ducking that problem. 

I hear, even from folks who believe as I do, some lies and honestly-believed myths. Some sources of working-class anger at the U.S. Government seem righteous. That even respected authorities on “my side” can be wrong teaches two lessons: to check our own facts carefully, constantly questioning our own beliefs; and to listen more carefully to people we disagree with. (It’s helpful to assume that those folks are not evil, but merely misinformed or duped.) As E.J. Dionne reminds us, theologian Reinhold Niebuhr advised us “to seek the truth in our opponent’s error, and the error in our own truth.”

Yeah, as Trump keeps doing things for the corporations and the wealthiest Americans, while painting himself as a regular guy, I sometimes imagine that people will see through him after awhile. Even ardent fans. But I’m not holding my breath.

                                                         - 30 - 

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 1 March 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website, and a spoken version will air during the week both on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM, Las Cruces Community Radio.]

Sam Bradley, County Commission candidate

How will voters regard county commission candidate Sam Bradley, who left a high-powered academic post after a university committee’s report accused him of consistent misconduct? 

 

Bradley seeks the Democratic nomination for District 4. Republicans here have sometimes used vicious and misleading ads against progressive candidates. Won’t they have fun with a host of news stories about alleged sex, lies, and drunkenness?

Bradley says, "I have never been accused of sexual harassment or anything like that.” The January 2013 Texas Tech University report said, “Graduate Student 2 . . . said she was in a vulnerable place which Sam Bradley knew about and took advantage of. She felt she had to respond to him because she was in his class. He told her that he wanted to have a physical, sexual relationship with her, that he was going to leave his wife, and that he wanted to marry her. . . . that he sent her sexually suggestive emails about her body and what he wanted to do with her. . . . He had kissed her in his office once. This had been going on for several months. GS-2 said it made her sick, and she wanted it to stop.” 

 

Bradley denies misconduct, and says GS-2 initiated the sex-related communications.

The report concluded Bradley “engaged in inappropriate relationships” that violated policy, and “engaged in generally unprofessional behavior on numerous occasions that was embarrassing to Texas Tech.” Investigators interviewed at least 20 witnesses and reviewed many documents. 

 

Bradley says the witnesses weren’t under oath, and that some hated him. That seems likely. His then-wife shared with GS-2’s husband some of the inappropriate communications, and he went ballistic. Witnesses also said Bradley was inappropriately close with a male student (“B”), and that when B broke up with his girlfriend, Bradley started seeing her. One source told me B was on “a vendetta” against Bradley. (Bradley denies going out with B’s ex.)

Bradley says that he forced Texas Tech to pay him good money to leave – and that he didn’t yet know about the written report, which he calls “a very good hit job.” He says if he’d known, he’d have refused TTU’s offer and fought. But that won’t stop opposition leaflets from quoting freely from it.

“[A]lmost every individual interviewed had concerns about other unprofessional behavior [by] Bradley. . . . [T]here were numerous references to his getting drunk with students, getting drunk at conferences and requiring students to drive him . . . and look after him when he was drunk.” “Every faculty member interviewed [said] said “Bradley’s relationships with students, even if not necessarily a conflict of interest, were much too familiar and unprofessional.”

It’s too bad. Bradley is a sharp and able progressive who speaks well. (There’s a notable dissonance between his advocacy of “me-too” accusers generally and the allegations regarding his conduct.) 

 

I’m less concerned about the report about than about how it’s used, how the voters view it and how Bradley handles it. If he files on March 10^th, then wins the Democratic primary, maybe he can survive the General Election. 

 

When I asked him about this stuff on radio, I got bluster and legal arguments, with no visible contrition or concern for how his conduct affected students he mentored. That was disappointing. On the telephone, Friday, he was more thoughtful. He denies misconduct, but says he should have immediately rejected GS-2’s personal communications.

The election could be interesting.

                                                     -30-

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 23 February 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's site.  A spoken version will air during the week on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM, Las Cruces Community Radio, and is also available on KRWG's website.]

[My initial, abortive effort at writing this column I'd have titled "A Tale of Two Sinners," because getting plunged into the sordid details of the TTU Report, and talking to Mr. Bradly about it, kept reminding me of recent conversations with a friend who was involved in sort of a sex scandal, and kind of dropped from sight.  That friend has picked up the pieces of his life.  His wife, particularly deserves great credit. But he has learned from what happened, knows himself a little better because of it, and can express remorse.  Mr. Bradley is mostly at pains to attack the reliability of the report, or argue details here and there, or establish that he's in general a good guy with a strong character.  I hope he is.  
Bradley attacks the veracity of the report.  I wasn't there.  He certainly had some admirers and supporters.  But it's hard to read that report and not feel that he did things he ought to regret. (As have all of us, to varying degrees!)  For example, although the administrators at TTU (who'd apparently regarded him as a star, with one saying he'd initially accepted Bradley's explanations) seem to have concluded that with GS-2 (whom everyone agreed was a troubled, "fragile" young woman), Bradley denies he initiated anything and says he regrets responding to her instead of telling her "I don't think you meant to send this to me."  Reading her statements on it, it's clear that she participated, from some mix of feeling flattered and knowing he was a big professor in the department, and that she regrets the harm that she and Bradley did to her fiance, then husband.  And feels ashamed.  Bradley sounds as if he's in denial.  Bottom line, even accepting his version of events, it's hard to imagine that most folks wouldn't feel some contrition for the way his conduct affected GS-2 and her fiance/husband; and, yeah, he was a man in authority.  My instinct, certainly, is that he hasn't come to terms with that inside.]

Because many who voted for Donald Trump love our country and the ideals of freedom that made thirteen colonies revolt, I can’t help but try to articulate the danger Donald Trump poses to what we all love.

He sounded great on radio recently, smoothly mocking Democrats by complimenting them on creating the impeachment case “from nothing.” You’d never realize that the non-partisan General Accounting Office investigation had concluded that Trump’s Ukraine fiasco broke the law. Trump spoke persuasively of his “perfect” conversation with the Ukrainian President – although his own people immediately tried to hide the phone call’s summary to protect him. The call was part of a months-long effort to force Ukraine to announce a baseless “investigation” of Trump’s then-major political opponent. 

I admit I’ve never liked Trump. But even if a president stood for policies I liked, and values I embraced, I hope I’d reject him or her wholeheartedly if s/he were endangering our judiciary, our Separation of Powers, our Bill of Rights protections, and so much of our government, including the State Department and FBI. 

Trump says only lily-livered Democrats criticize him. But John Bolton, his hand-picked National Security Advisor, ridiculed the Ukraine episode as “that drug deal,” refused to participate, and says Trump is lying about it. General John Kelley, who provided adult supervision to the inexperienced Trump, says he believes Bolton.

The impeachment witnesses were respected, long-time diplomats (including highly-decorated war veteran Vindaman), plus Trump’s own Ambassador Sondland. Sondland contributed big bucks to get Trump into the White House.

U.S. Senator Mitt Romney was a Republican presidential candidate. And is deeply religious. He broke ranks and voted to impeach, on one count, explaining that Trump’s deeply repugnant conduct forced him to.

This week Trump sacked several witnesses, and threatened more. For testifying under oath before Congress. Probably truthfully, since contemporaneous documents supported their testimony and lying could have meant prison. Meanwhile Trump improperly denied investigators access to witnesses and documents.

Trump not only sacked folks for telling the truth, but interfered with the sentencing of his pal Roger Stone. Federal prosecutors recommended 7-9 years, Trump screamed, and the Department of Justice slunk back into court to suggest lighter sentences – as the four prosecutors resigned from the case. Even Nixon recognized that such conduct was completely wrong.

Trump does things U.S. leaders have never done. Things Putin, Stalin, Hitler, and Franco were infamous for. Things that directly contradict our rights as U.S. citizens.

We have freedom of speech. Our courts are independent of the Executive Branch. Most states prohibit sacking someone for whistle-blowing or trial testimony. Absent national security issues or disloyalty, we WANT people to speak out candidly, and testify truthfully. Dictators or corrupt city bosses interfere to get a crooked crony off, or misuse the law to punish people who criticize them. That ain’t the U.S. as our founders conceived it. John Peter Zenger must be barfing in his grave.

Attorney-General William Barr, once a principled conservative lawyer, has licked Trump’s boots throughout. Trump congratulated Barr for recommending a lighter sentence for Stone. Friday Barr announced that Trump’s improper and bullying tweets are making it impossible for Barr to do his job. 

I share the skepticism about established politicians. Much is wrong with our system. I too have wanted to throw a monkey wrench into the federal machinery. But now we all need to face the fact that Trump is a dangerous con man.

                                                            – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 16 February 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's site.  A spoken version will air during the week on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM, Las Cruces Community Radio, and is also available on KRWG's website.]

[A friend who gently chides me for such things points out that to some degree Trump is not a departure from previous presidents but a somewhat grotesque exaggeration of faults many of them had in common.  He writes:

Your point is well taken:  Our current president is remarkably bold in his contempt for the rest of us.  Yet, he is just a brazen example of our history. . . . Trump is a total insult to honesty, decency and compassion.  He's only the latest in a long line of similar souls.  His predecessors just had better manners."

Certainly I didn't mean to say no president ever did more modest versions of what Trump does, or that none took some very wrong actions but were smart enough to avoid the prying eyes of journalists or reformers.  But my point is, that we mostly [with sad exceptions around the Palmer Raids, the 1932 Bonus Army, the post-WWII Red Scare, and the reaction to the civil rights / antiwar movement in my own time] have tried to respect our civil liberties and Bill of Rights.  Nixon was a smart lawyer who knew the rules, and though he secretly broke some, he would not have openly done what Trump does. My friend -- or Trump's friends -- might argue that there's something healthy and welcome about the very openness of Trump's lawbreaking.  He did try to hide the Ukraine extortion, but mostly he doesn't limit himself to quietly whispering to Barr that Roger Stone is a pal who was helping Trump's cause, he bleats like a stuck pig on Twitter and berates his enemies and those of his friends who let laws and civil liberties stand in the way of attacking those enemies.  That's not an unreasonable argument.  Yet when blatant intimidation of witnesses, manipulation of justice, and abuse of legal processes to punish those who speak out become accepted norms, I think maybe we lose something, even if the dictatorial process is less hypocritical.]

Thoughts on New Mexico's Emergency Firearms Protection Order Act

New Mexico’s proposed Emergency Firearm Protection Act, raises some tough questions and some easy ones.

Easy is whether or not the 2^nd Amendment prohibits it. Nope. From 1789-2008, the U.S. Supreme Court read that amendment as not protecting individual (non-militia-related) gun ownership. When the Supreme Court (wrongly, I’d say, but it’s done) created an individual right, striking down an extremely strict prohibition on guns in Washington, D.C., the Court made clear that the right was not unrestricted. The Court stated that restrictions based on mental health or felonies, or on the types of weapons involved, would still stand. 

 

Does the 4^th Amendment prohibit it? Tougher call. Do the procedures allowing at least a temporary state taking of property comport with due process requirements made applicable to states by the 14^th Amendment? The ACLU opposed Rhode Island’s 2018 measure, until the legislature tightened the standard for granting a petition, created penalties for providing false evidence of a threat, allowed only law enforcement to file petitions, required concrete evidence, and granted the right to legal counsel in hearings.

 

Tougher still are several value judgments that balance the rights of frightened family members against the rights of a gun owner they believe is dangerous to self or others.

As introduced, EFPA allowed “family” to petition the court to remove guns, and defined “family” to include ex-wives, former in-laws, and persons the gun-owner has had a child or an intimate relationship with. Opponents said that definition invited frivolous, even perjurious accusations. Proponents pointed to the laws against perjury. Opponents countered by asking how often perjury laws really get enforced in such situations. 

 

An amendment watered down the senate bill so that only police officers could petition – as in Rhode Island. But male-dominated law-enforcement agencies have too often shortchanged women who complained that their male companions were dangerous. Further, what should a battered spouse or ex-spouse, reasonably fearing for her or his life, do in rural New Mexico, given that sheriffs around the state have said they’ll refuse to enforce the law? We could add a provision allowing battered spouses to sue sheriffs to make them do their jobs; but who in that position is likely to sue? 

 

Ironically, by refusing to apply state law, the sheriffs (who misread constitutional law) may force the Legislature to strengthen EFPA in ways that gun enthusiasts (quite reasonably) don’t like!

As written, the bill allows an initial order to issue ex parte, with no advance notice to the respondent. Then the court sets a hearing within 15 days, and the respondent (but not the petitioner) could ask for a postponement. I’d say the respondent should also be able to move for an expedited hearing. If s/he wants the gun(s) back, and has a good case that there’s no unusual danger, s/he should be allowed to make that case and recover the property, sooner rather than later. 

 

So how do we protect against real threats without trampling the rights of responsible and mentally sound gun owners?

I wish each side listened more to the other. We can and should prevent some tragedies by enacting some form of this bill; but due process is essential to democracy. 

 

I hope gun owners, those who know guns best, will participate in refining the bill, not just shout, “I love my gun!” – and that proponents of the law won’t assume everyone who raises a civil liberties question is an NRA member. 
            --  30 -- 

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 9 February 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's website.  A spoken version will air during the week on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM (www.lccommunityradio.org) and will be available also on KRWG's website.]

[I started this column before the Senate amended and passed the bill.  I haven't read the full revised version yet.  Here's an Albuquerque Journal editorial of today's date.]

[Make no mistake: I do favor the bill, as well-refined as possible with all rights and interests in mind.  I feel sorry for folks who see every effort to protect against gun violence as part of a plot to confiscate everyone's weapons.  Other gun enthusiasts point out that improvements in diagnosing and treating mental illnesses are important.  I thoroughly agree -- and agree that we need the long-unopened Triage Center here; but that should NOT be an excuse for complete inaction with regard to gun safety and appropriate legislation.  It's like telling me I shouldn't repair my car's steering because I also have a flat tire -- or, more, like trying to help an old friend who's drunkenness and cocaine addiction have cost him job, family, and health -- and he's an ex-athlete who's now obese, lonely, and depressed.  He could benefit from getting back in the gym, from talking with a shrink, from finding some job, and from finding new friends and a lover.  Would you tell him, say, not to bother with the gym because the job and lover are more important, when going to the gym could improve his energy level, his appearance, and his self-image -- and his prospects, and might even bring him into contact with potential new friends or a lover?   Life is complex, and sometimes a problem we probably can't truly solve can be treated by a combination of steps, none the total answer but all of them contributing.]
[So long as they're constitutional, too, some provisions in the bill as to which people disagree can always be tried, then amended or deleted as experience teaches us.]

 

Why We'll Celebrate Giovanni Day

Sunday we visited La Cueva, where Giovanni Maria Agostini (“el Ermitario”) lived 150 years ago.

Giovanni apparently was born to Italian nobles, studied for the priesthood, did not take vows, and spent many years walking through Europe and the Americas. He arrived in New Mexico at 62, after walking with the wagon train of Eugenio Romero (related to J. Paul Taylor, soon to be 100) and lived on a hill (now called Hermit’s Peak) northwest of Las Vegas. 

 

He came to Mesilla to consult lawyer Albert Fountain, then took up residence in La Cueva, up near Dripping Springs. The Barela family (forebears of Mesilla’s current mayor) warned him it was dangerous. He promised to light a fire each Friday evening to let them know he was all right. On Friday, 17 April, 1869, there was no fire. Antonio Garcia, who used to transport sick people to La Cueva so Giovanni could heal them with local herbs, led a group to investigate, and found Giovanni dead, with a knife in his back. His murder, like Fountain’s, went unsolved.

My ears luxuriated in the silence of the hermit’s cave, a healing silence in which, for the first few minutes, the din we take for granted in our daily lives reverberated in my head, expanding to fill the silent cave, then dissipating. As the silence took possession of me, I contemplated Giovanni and wished that each year we would celebrate 17 April.

“As a day of silence? A day of meditation?” my wife asked. Sure. A day of quiet. A day for reflecting on the vastness and beauty of our earth; on the many diverse paths that formed us and brought us here. On God or chance or karma. On whatever led that huge rock to settle exactly there, as many of us seem to have settled in Doña Ana County, New Mexico. 
 

A day to appreciate Giovanni’s contemplative nature, piety, healing, and love of our natural world. 

 

A day to honor the wondrous beauty that surrounds us here, however we choose to do so. A day to share that wonder, without carping that this one doesn’t believe everything I believe, or that that one supports political figures anathema to me. A day when we don’t divide ourselves by concerns that our neighbor doesn’t share our religious or spiritual beliefs, ethnicity, skin color, or sexual identity. A day to share our gratitude for what we have, without arguing about Who or what has given it to us.

Even if I believe you are poisoning our Earth and killing off species, and you believe I am killing nascent lives that will turn into children if all goes well – if whosever house was on fire, would we not form a bucket line? If our boat were sinking, would we not all shut up and bail? Well, our boat is sinking in a cesspool of selfishness, greed, lies, and ideological fervor. Let’s bail.

I suspect that’s what Giovanni would want us to do, so let’s pause each April 17^th to celebrate Giovanni, who loved our mountains, lived and healed where we walk, and is embedded in local history. He preached Catholic sermons, but belongs to all of us.

We have plenty of passionate rallies and marches are about protesting each other. Let’s share Giovanni Day, celebrating our mountains and land and culture and silences. Together. Who knows, we might learn to like each other.

                                                          – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 2 February 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's website.  A spoken version will air Wednesday and Saturdya on KRWG and Thursday afternoon on KTAL, 101.5 FM Las Cruces Community Radio, and is available on the KRWG website.]

[I plan at least to go up to La Cueva as early as I can on 17 April, which I think is on a Friday.  Spend a little longer up there.  Maybe beforehand remind a few others it's Giovanni Day.  Or el dia del ermitario.  Imagine having the patience to spend so long in the cave, mostly alone.  Few of us these days can bear being alone even for a few hours!  Aside from the spiritual dimension, I suspect one MUST develop a little self-knowledge and some amount of inner peace by doing so.]