A little over three years ago, I received a phone call from a person identifying himself as a reader of this column. Longtime readers of this column will remember the “early years” of it being more controversial, somewhat by design but also driven by my own personal demons I have worked to conquer. The reader, Scott Rytlewski, was no stranger to stirring the pot and, in that sense, we were kindred spirits.

Eventually Scott challenged me to “put up or shut up” and instead of sitting in front of a computer screen spouting off about what is wrong with the world, I should get off my butt and do something about it. That “something” was a run for office with Scott as my campaign manager.

Scott and I had a falling out a few months ago, and so I had not talked to him at all during the last election cycle. As the campaign wound down, I thought a lot about all we had been through together the last election and I often wondered how he was doing.

On the night of the election, as I waited to get the results, I remembered the look on his face in 2007 when he found out we had been defeated. Scott was not a person who liked to show his sensitive side, but that evening he could not hide the pain any better than I could.  And in the days after the campaign when the calls stop and the loser feels an emptiness, Scott was the one of the few to call and try and cheer me up and then he vowed we would be back in two years.

Scott suffered from a condition that kept him in a wheelchair, and yet I never heard him complain about it once. He used to joke with me that if I wanted to go to an event that “the cripple always gets the best parking spot.” When Scott, Harold Suhr and I got together for Harold’s short-lived run for assembly, it had the makings of a great reality show. Harold would get Scott going and we all shared many laughs. Even then, when Scott would complain he was not feeling well, we figured he would take a short trip to the hospital for a tune up and be right back as feisty as ever.

On the Thursday after the election, I received a call from Scott’s sister asking to borrow some sound equipment and I asked how Scott was doing, she said he was “not well.” I knew that it was time to go and make peace with Scott and made plans to see him after work on Monday.

On Sunday morning, I opened up my dresser drawer and pulled out a solid blue t-shirt that Scott had given me. It was a double XL and I remember him joking with me when I tried to tell him I wore an XL. I put the shirt on went to the Albion Knights of Columbus to drop off the sound equipment. It was there I heard that Scott had passed away.

I paused for a moment and thought how weird it was to hear of his death in a place he spoke about often, for it was at the K of C building where he attended a famous sports banquet with his father. Scott loved sports and he really loved his family.  In a weird way, I thought he was trying to get a message to his old friend Thom.

I suppose in some strange way it is fitting that I am saying farewell to Scott in the column that brought us together; I only wish it could have been in person. For now, I will cherish the fond memories of our brief time together and smile knowing that Scott is probably busy bowling a game with his father and getting ready to stir up the pot in heaven.

After losing...again! I am back. Look for a ton of entries over the next two weeks.

Thanks to the wonderful voters of Orleans County, I now have a third line, Reform NY, which was established by Gary Kent in 2007. I am honored Gary decided to support my candidacy. In order to get on the line I needed one hundred twenty five signatures from registered voters in the district and we secured one hundred fifty.

This means I will now appear on three lines, Democrat, Working Families and Reform NY. My effort to get the Conservative line was blocked and thus my opponent and his fellow Republicans somehow secured the Conservative and Independence lines, even those running unopposed. 

The process of gathering the signatures was enlightening. Unlike major party petitions, which can only be signed by voters registered to particular party, any registered voter in the district may sign Independent petitions. This meant that many persons who had never been able to sign a petition for county legislature in District 3 now were part of an early and important process in the election.  I had the chance to converse with some great people that otherwise would not have been part of this early process. Some offered prayers, others offered advice and many offered concerns. They all cared deeply about their community.

My next project will be to attempt to get a fair campaign pledge signed by all candidates at the county level. Those of you around last time will remember a nasty trick from the last campaign  when a series of reader ads appeared in the Lake Country Pennysaver the weekend before the election that were filled with false accusations and innuendo. None of them were attributed to a candidate or a party, which was a clear ethical violation. To this day, no one has come forward to claim authorship.

A fair campaign pledge will help stop dirty tricks and provide the voters with an opportunity to have candidates focus on the issues. Whoever wins the election will have a sense of what the voter wants and not get embroiled in a bitter campaign filled with sleaze ball tactics. I am committed to signing the pledge.

A public servants duty is to serve the public. The only way a candidate gets a true picture of what the public wants is if they engage in a fair campaign focused on issues. After the last county election, the county government implemented many of the issues I supported-including having more citizens involved in the county government , establishing an ethics commission and exploring alternatives to the county jail project-even though I was defeated. That is a major reason why an issue based campaign is so important. Simply stated, it serves the public’s best interest and not the candidates.

A recent letter to the editor published in this paper questioned why “old downtown” Albion businesses continue to seek grant money. The letter went on to compare grant money to “welfare” or a “handout.” The author stated that business owners should “roll up (their) sleeves and fix” the buildings themselves. I am certain that he is not alone in his opinion that downtown Albion is a lost cause and that grant money is just taxpayer money that is wasted.

I understand why someone feels that way, but based on personal experience I simply do not agree that grant money is a handout. Comparing grant money to welfare is overly simplistic. There is such a thing as corporate welfare, which is when large profitable corporations negotiate tax breaks on the threat of leaving the country to go overseas or like the bank bailout money given to banking institutions that gave out huge bonuses to executives in spite of their poor performance. Few people other than the ones who got nice junkets support that kind of “welfare.”

As far as grant money is concerned, it always has a designated purpose that will address a specific problem. Grant money is an investment that will reap rewards. On an individual level, if a student receives grant money to go to college they will likely pay it back tenfold in the form of taxes because of the ability to earn more income. That does not mean that a person who never goes to college does not pay taxes, there are plenty of examples of people who did not go to college that pay tons of taxes, but the reality is that some people will simply not be able to become productive members of society without a formal education. The choice then is if you want to pay for subsidies for a lifetime or college for a few years.

Other grant money goes to projects that no private entity will fund, such as road and sewer improvements. In upgrading infrastructure, the government adds value to communities and increases the tax base. The alternative is to let neighborhoods deteriorate which usually leads to an influx of uneducated criminals and drug dealers. Again, it is pay to keep up a neighborhood or pay for a jail to house the criminals.

As far as investing in “old downtown Albion” goes, it is a no-brainer. The choices are simple, let the area deteriorate and watch all the building owners be forced to abandon buildings. That sticks the taxpayer with the cost of demolition, which likely will not happen especially if there is a bunch of buildings taken off the tax rolls. Then we have a ghost town, which will attract more drug dealers and squatters, and since it is in the center of town, the ripple effect will destroy the property values of many homes in the village.

Luckily, Albion has a lot of dedicated business and building owners that roll up their sleeves and open their wallets. I respect every one of them and I have no problem with any or all of them receiving money because I know it is a good investment. The fact that businesses are seeking grant money shows a commitment to the area. We must also realize that we will all reap the rewards.

Finally, everyone should realize that in order to get grant money there has to be a clear plan as to how the recipient will use it. I have reviewed and scored over $30 million in grant applications and I can attest to the amount of detail and supporting documentation that is in the larger ones. The Teaching American History grant that Albion Central Schools received was highly competitive, and, although I did not review their application, I did participate in part of the grant program and can attest to the fact that there were many controls in place including auditors and independent evaluators.

 

A few weeks ago when I was helping my mother move out of her apartment in Brighton to her new place in Albion, I lost the charger to my cell phone. It is an “outdated” model so finding a replacement charger turned out to be a bit of a challenge. What wound up happening was that I went without a cell phone for about the last three weeks.

            I am old enough to remember when not everybody had a cell phone, of course that was not all that long ago. For the most part, I have not kept up with the latest models of phone. The bells and whistles do not really mean that much to me and so I am not willing to spend a lot of money to try to keep up with the latest technology. That means that most teenagers have a better phone than I do, including my own.

            I did own a Blackberry for a short time-my mother always called it a “Blueberry”-but it was distracting because I checked it every time it indicated I had a new email message, which tripled the mount of times I looked at my phone. It broke and I did not get another Blackberry.

            I am also not a text message junkie like many of my friends and co-workers. I still do not understand why some people can have entire conversations via text messages when they could just use the phone function and call the person. I have co-workers that text all through lunch and some that text throughout the workday even though it is against company policy. My thumbs are just not built for all that text messaging.

            Being without a cell phone has been a great experience. It reminds me of the days when I could go to the store and be forced to remember what I was sent there to get. My leg still tingles with phantom cell phone vibrations, but I am not constantly checking to see if somebody is calling. I am also able to carry on complete conversations with people instead of stopping somebody mid-sentence to look at my cell and see if I “need” to take a particular phone call.

            Some of my friends complained that they could not get in touch with me and that my voice mail was full. I told them they could call me at home, only to find out that many of my friends do not even know my home phone number. Some were shocked that I could function without a cell phone.

            The time when it really seemed to make a big difference was when I went golfing.  Years ago I used to turn my cell off when I went golfing because I figured that the purpose of golf was to provide a temporary getaway from the daily grind. The last two games of golf I played were by far the most relaxing I had played in a long time and I took notice how my golf companions were still tied to their cell phones.

            Until recently I was convinced that my cell phone was a necessity. I have broken down and ordered a new phone on the internet but in some ways I am going to miss not having a cell, or maybe I just miss the days when nobody had them.

           

A recent program providing $200 per child for school supplies to families on public assistance is drawing criticism from politicians and private citizens. The program was funded by Federal stimulus money that the state only qualified for because of a $35 million donation to the state by philanthropist George Soros. If Soros had not donated his portion of the money then the stimulus money would have gone to another state.

The major criticism of the program revolves around the notion that while the state government strangles the middle class with huge tax increases, the lower class is getting a handout without any strings attached. On the surface that seems like a legitimate argument, unfortunately it is not quite accurate. The $200 is a combination of private and federal funds; the states only responsibility is to distribute the money. Granted, the federal portion is made up of taxpayer dollars, but the only way the state would ever see the money return to our economy was by distributing it in the way they did.

Sadly, there are many irresponsible parents in the world that will spend the money on things other than school supplies. Nonetheless, most of the money will be pumped into the economy in one way or another, which is the programs real intent. It was classified as a program for “school supplies” to make it sound more palatable to the average person and to encourage the responsible recipients of the money to use it for that purpose.

With the present state of our economy, the only people who can afford to blow $200 are the lower class. If the money were put in the hands of the middle class, it would likely go towards bills. That is why these quick fix economic stimulation packages seldom work. Yes, the $200 will go into the local economy and stores like Wal-Mart will see their sales increase temporarily, but that will not translate into the creation of new jobs, which is ultimately the only way the economy will recover.

This is the problem with many of the quick fix programs like “Cash for Clunkers.” On the surface, it sounds like a great idea, but once the money is gone will any long-term jobs have been created? The only hope is that somehow the programs will jumps start our troubled economy.

What none of the programs does address is the real problem, a combination of high taxes and rewards to the scoundrels that nearly bankrupt the nation. People should be just as outraged over bank executives taking bailout money and going on expensive junkets as they are at a few bad parents buying a new game for the Wii rather than some notebooks and school supplies.

Ultimately, the government needs to realize that the money they seem to think needs to be “redistributed” is better off in the hands of the people who will distribute it fairly. That is in the hands of the taxpayer.

In 2006 while I was attending a summer class at SUNY Brockport, I felt a sharp pain in my stomach. After going to the school's medical center, they determined that I needed to get to an emergency room, and I was quickly transported to laceName w:st="on">LakesidelaceName> laceType w:st="on">HospitallaceType>, where I spent the next five days being treated for an intestinal infection. I had very basic health insurance, which left me to foot a sizable portion of the bill. This scenario is not uncommon, I did not plan to be hospitalized but I am still financially responsible for paying the medical costs whether I have insurance or not.

            If I had decided to rob my teacher and the police apprehended me, I would have been taken to jail where I would be eligible for free medical treatment and when I finished my sentence I would owe nothing, regardless of my ability to pay. In short, it costs more to get sick than to commit a crime.

            More and more states are beginning to charge inmates for the time they spend in jail. This is not necessarily because they feel it is the right thing to do, it has much more to do with the fiscal reality governments are facing during the economic downturn. When a government faces the reality that taxpayers are not an infinite source of money whose taxes can be raised on a whim, they need to find alternate sources of revenue.

            The concept of charging inmates for their stay is hardly a new one, but in laceName w:st="on">New YorklaceName> laceType w:st="on">StatelaceType> the debate over whether to charge inmates for their time behind bars has been renewed because of recent legislation introduced by New York State Assemblyman James Tedisco, a Republican from Schenectady. Tedisco's bill is called the "Madoff Bill" in honor of professional swindler Bernard Madoff, who after bilking billions of dollars investor's money, is now a guest of the taxpayers.

            The "Madoff Bill" will not apply to Madoff if it ever becomes law, but maybe it will help recoup some of the taxpayer's dollars that are being wasted on inmates. The bill targets wealthy inmates and charges them based on their ability to pay.

            Opponents of charging inmates for prison time say that the money will be difficult to collect. I suppose hospital bills, back taxes, utility bills and student loans are just as difficult to collect, but nobody seems to be proposing that people stop attempting to get people to pay them.

            In that respect I think the only problem with the Tedisco bill is that it does not go far enough. It is not cruel or unusual to charge someone for services rendered. I also think the sliding scale should apply to fines, if a millionaire pays $1,000 fine for a DWI is that even a form of punishment? Hit a middle class person with $1,000 fine and they are going to feel the pain and it may serve as deterrent and save lives in the process.

            Sadly, I think the Tedisco bill is just another bill proposed to capitalize on the frustration of taxpayers. Nonetheless, the concept of charging inmates is not something that should just get caught up in an endless debate and never acted upon.

My wife and I have very different television viewing habits. She likes to watch the Food Network and HGTV, while I like to watch the History Channel and truTv. If I am out for the evening, I usually miss getting control of the tube and thus am stuck either pretending I like watching giant cakes being built or people looking at houses I can never afford.

There are a few of her favorite shows I have learned to tolerate, like Iron Chef America. I love watching two chefs taking a gigantic table of Sablefish or Barramundi and transforming it into a meal fit for a judge. I also don’t mind Diners Drive-in’s and Dives, since I have spent a great deal of my life eating greasy food in greasy restaurants, and I have the gut to prove it.

 One day I came home and Tracy was watching Jon and Kate plus 8. I have to admit; I sat down and watched it with her for a while out of curiosity. I was never particularly fond of the show, I think the only reason I did not leave the room was that I was hoping that something exciting would happen. It was better than the show about the fishing boats, but not by much.

I also had to watch it to build up some History Channel hours, meaning that I could say to her, “We watched Jon and Kate plus 8 last night so tonight I should be able to watch Forensic Files.” It took weeks of Jon and Kate plus 8 watching to build up enough hours to watch a three hour documentary on the Watergate burglary.

A few months back Jon and Kate filed for divorce, and I thought all of my dreams had come true. I watched the episode where they announced their divorce thinking that all of my pain and suffering was over and I could go back to Bobby Flay and Rachael Ray. To my horror Jon and Kate plus 8 was not cancelled!

The new show should be entitled Kate plus 8 with guest appearances by Jon. Maybe they will both bring in their new mates and it can be Jon and Kate plus 10, it would be even better if they both remarry to spouses with eight of their own children, then maybe we could call it Jon and Jill, Kate and Jack plus 8 times 3. It would be as if the Brady Bunch combined with Survivor. They could even vote kids off the show and form alliances. CBS, Nick at Night and TLC could take turns broadcasting the show.

The real question is how long this show can last without the main characters being together. Even though there is a lot of money to be made, somebody is going to call it quits because of either a jealous girlfriend or a lawyer. As long as it is on the air, I will be watching it, because unlike Kate and Jon, I have learned that some things aren't worth fighting over.

Opponents of healthcare reform fear that if the government takes control of healthcare that the nation will go into massive debt and the quality of care will suffer. That is a valid argument because the government is already heavily invested in the healthcare industry and the nation is racking up huge debts while the costs continue upward. Inasmuch as it would be easy to blame all the "rich" doctors and nurses out there, the fact is that they are not the ones getting rich.         The real problem is with the administrative overhead and giant insurance companies draining the economy. Where do they get the bulk of their money? It is from the taxpayers who are funding Medicare and Medicaid programs or from increased costs of private insurance that is provided to government workers. Since there is little or no competition, the prices keep rising.

            As it stands right now, around 50% of all money spent on healthcare comes from the government. Much of the money goes to private for-profit corporations. If the trend continues and no significant reform is enacted, then some people forecast that the government would be paying up to 70% of all the healthcare costs in the United States.

            There are other major factors contributing to this trend, including employees that elect not to take health insurance from their employer. This is not always an act of malice, sometimes they simply cannot afford it. In many cases small to medium sized employers are not in the position to pay a large chunk of the insurance and remain profitable. This is becoming a huge problem and a major contributing factor to the amount of people that are not insured.

            The reason that premiums are so high is that in the United States up to 30% of all healthcare costs goes to administration and profits as opposed to the medicines and the care. There is no reason for the benefactors of the system to change it because there is tons of money to be made, and there are corporations making tons of it at taxpayer expense.

            To those of us fortunate enough to have employer subsidized health insurance, it means that there is less money for pay raises and in some cases increased premiums cut into or eliminate pay increases. Many employees have no choice in health insurance providers, and mergers have created regional monopolies. This has led to an astronomical 428% increase in profits from 2000 to 2007 at the ten largest insurance companies.

            Of course, there is nothing wrong with making a profit, but health insurance premiums drive up the costs of all goods and services and are a major factor in government expenditures, which adds insult to injury. That means taxpayers subsidize private insurers on top of paying for Medicaid and Medicare programs, and let us not forget the government provides healthcare to prisoners as well. Isn't it comforting to know that serial killers have better health care coverage than 45 million hard working Americans?

            Nothing I have presented in this column is new, nor is the realization that the system is messed up. Inasmuch as I am hopeful that the government's newest attempt to fix the system will work to some degree, I fear that it will be easier to find Osama Bin-Laden or Jimmy Hoffa than it will be to pass meaningful legislation that won't make the problem worse.

             

Monday July 20, 2009 marked the fortieth anniversary of the “small step for man.” It felt like it was a good day to be a social studies teacher, even if it was summer school, a time when students tend to be less excited about learning about anything. I had prepared a full day of lessons on the moon landing, and was feeling pretty good about how equipped I was to teach about it when a colleague came up to me and asked, “what was the big deal about the moon landing, I mean what do you tell the kids.?”

 That simple question is very tough to answer. We all know the quote, “small step, giant leap,” but can anyone who did not witness the moon landing on television the day it happened really appreciate the degree of accomplishment of the significance of the event. I was a day shy of three years old when it happened, so I do not remember a thing about it.

 The other problem is that unless you are over 45 or so you have no event that bears a comparison. I know from reading books and watching old footage of the moon landing that the nation was unified by something positive instead of a national tragedy. In an era full of national tragedies, like political assassinations and the war in Vietnam, the moon landing represented everything good about the United States and as Armstrong aptly said it, for mankind. 

 September 11, 2001 was my generations Pearl Harbor, but my generation and younger has no moon landing. We have no lofty national goal to strive for, nothing that truly brings the entire nation together, and that is a shame because if history tells us anything, it tells us that we can accomplish anything that we set our mind to.

 In 1969, the nation needed a unifying event, because the nation was filled with turmoil and protests. The moon landing provided only a brief respite, because the height of the Vietnam War and the protest movement came later. That is not an easy sell to kids today, they cannot truly comprehend how much trouble the nation was in anymore than I can. My only advantage is that I have spent years studying the era, which gives me an insight into it, but not having lived through it means I will never fully understand the times.

 What I do know is that John F. Kennedy said in 1961 that we would put a man on the moon by the end of the century, and we did. In a history book the eight years is just a few short paragraphs, and the concept of man landing on the moon is accepted, not magical.

 Nevertheless, it was magical and amazing and I wish I remembered it.  In many ways, I am jealous of the generation that was able to witness such an amazing event when it was still amazing. I can only imagine what it would be like to see the entire nation gathered around television sets and setting aside their differences watching years of hard work pay off. I wish I knew what it was like when the nation as a whole had pride in an accomplishment that rose above politics and didn’t involve conventional warfare.
 What made the moon landing a giant leap for mankind, was that it proved when the nation worked together we could accomplish anything. Just as Lincoln professed that a “nation divided against itself cannot stand,” the moon landing proved that we were still united as a country.