December 5, 2017
Dec 05 02:48 Who needs constituents? Dec 05 10:41 Exceptionally stupid journalism Dec 05 11:47 Feinstein's foolishness Dec 05 14:20 Who believes them anymore?
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Who needs constituents?
Who needs constituents when you've got special interests that want special favors? First, Monday night's city council meeting was mild by recent meetings. The big item on the menu was a discussion of this resolution presented by Council President Carol Lewis:
WHEREAS, tobacco use is the foremost preventable cause of premature death in the United States, responsible for approximately 480,000 deaths a year and 208 million premature deaths in the U.S. over the past 50 years since the first Surgeon General's report on smoking in 1964;The City Council received a copy of the resolution late last week, which is an improvement over the dissemination of Jeff Goerger's resolution of Oct. 23. At the Nov. 6 meeting, the City Council passed an ordinance that would've prevented St. Cloud businesses from selling cigarettes to people under the age of 21. Fortunately, Mayor Kleis vetoed the ordinance.
WHEREAS, the annual economic impact of smoking in the U.S. is approximately $300 billion in health care and lost worker productivity costs;
WHEREAS, national data show that 95 percent of adult smokers begin smoking before they turn 21, and that adolescence is a critical period when many smokers move from experimental smoking to regular, daily use;
WHEREAS, the developing brains of adolescents are particularly susceptible to the addictive properties of nicotine, and tobacco industry documents show that those who start smoking by the age of 18 are almost twice as likely to become lifetime smokers as those who start after they turn 21;
WHEREAS, electronic smoking device use among minors has recently tripled, and use of electronic smoking devices is associated with and may encourage the use of conventional tobacco products;
WHEREAS, 90% of all individuals who purchase tobacco products for minors are between the ages of 18 and 20;
WHEREAS, a 2015 Institute of Medicine report concludes that raising the minimum legal sales age for tobacco products nationwide will reduce tobacco initiation, particularly among adolescents aged 15 to 17 (by 25%), and that it will improve health across the lifespan and save lives; and that raising the minimum legal sales age for tobacco products to 21 nationwide would, over time, lead to a 12 percent decrease in smoking prevalence;
WHEREAS, the Institute of Medicine also predicts that raising the minimum legal sales age for tobacco products to 21 nationwide would result in 223,000 fewer premature deaths, 50,000 fewer deaths from lung cancer, and 4.2 million fewer years of life lost for those born between 2000 and 2019, and that it would result in near immediate reductions in preterm birth, low birth weight, and sudden infant death syndrome;
WHEREAS, more than 250 communities have enacted laws mandating a minimum legal sales age for tobacco products to 21,13 including Edina and Bloomington, MN.
WHEREAS, three-quarters of U.S. adults favor raising the MLSA for tobacco products to 21, including seven in ten smokers;
WHEREAS, the retail impact of ordinances mandating a minimum legal sales age of 21 for tobacco products is minimal, with an estimated decrease of only 0.24-0.48%;
WHEREAS, raising the legal drinking age to 21 led to reduced alcohol use and dependence among youth, and dramatically decreased drunk driving fatalities;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Saint Cloud City Council highly recommends that State of Minnesota raise the minimum legal sales age for tobacco products to 21.
This time, Ms. Lewis and Messrs. Laraway, Libert and Masters were prepared to vote for the above resolution. Fortunately, Councilman Johnson injected a little sanity into the discussion by saying that the people of St. Cloud haven't seen the resolution, adding that he didn't feel comfortable voting on anything without first consulting with his constituents. (Apparently, their constituents weren't a consideration. They had the votes and that's all that mattered to these 'public servants'.
Posted Tuesday, December 5, 2017 2:48 AM
Comment 1 by Margaret at 05-Dec-17 08:45 AM
Thank you Gary, for respecting your readers enough to post this Special Interest symbolism to the State.
Now, if only the St Cloud city council respected their constituents as much as you do your readers, maybe we'd get a look at their 'plans' before a vote. So much for being public 'servants.'
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Dec-17 10:02 AM
You're welcome, Margaret. I specialize in trying to do the right thing for the right reasons. Councilman Johnson is special in that way, too.
Comment 2 by Dave Steckling at 05-Dec-17 09:42 AM
Will someone please take Carol Lewis aside for several hours an school her in the ways of parliamentary procedures. Better yet, offer her a few days of instruction.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Dec-17 10:05 AM
That assumes she gives a shit about those procedures. I don't make that assumption.
Exceptionally stupid journalism
This column , written by Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, is a perfect example of liberal stupidity. First, he said "We know that President Trump and his campaign either colluded with the Russian effort to undermine U.S. democracy or tried mightily to do so." That's why I don't trust conventional wisdom. What proof exists that that's true? It doesn't make sense even from a hypothetical standpoint.
Next, Robinson wrote "We know that Trump has apparently obstructed justice to try to halt investigation into what happened." Apparently? That's the equivalent of saying 'I think that's what he did but it's purely opinion.' It's apparent that Robinson doesn't have proof. He's just a 'wishful thinking columnist'. He wishes President Trump hadn't defeated Mrs. Clinton. Therefore, he'll write sloppy columns that divide the nation rather than write responsibly in the hopes of uniting the nation.
We also don't know what else special counsel Robert Mueller might have discovered, especially about the Trump family's international financial dealings. Or what Mueller might be learning from Trump's former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty Friday to lying to the FBI and is cooperating with investigators. Or how far Trump, who is increasingly frantic, might yet go to squash the Mueller probe.
I believe that President Trump won't do anything to "squash the Mueller probe." I believe that because, thus far, the Mueller probe is fueled mostly by journalists doing a ton of huffing and puffing. Thus far, the Mueller investigation has been more witch hunt than investigation.
I'm no fan of conspiracy theories, which usually fall apart under scrutiny; and I'm not interested in carrying water for the Democratic Party, which should have been able to beat Trump, who was manifestly unqualified and unfit, no matter what the Russians did.
That's BS. Robinson is nothing if not being one of the DNC's chief water carriers. It's difficult to call the content of his columns anything other than carrying Hillary Clinton's water. This is what Robinson peddles on a daily basis:
[Video no longer available]
Posted Tuesday, December 5, 2017 10:41 AM
No comments.
Feinstein's foolishness
Dianne Feinstein's op-ed is part wishful thinking, part propaganda. She opened by saying "Tax reform shouldn't add one penny to our deficit or to the tax bills of middle-class Americans. I thought that belief was shared by everyone in the Senate. It appears I was wrong."
First, it's incredibly dishonest for Sen. Feinstein to say that she thought everyone shared the belief that tax reform wouldn't "add a penny to our deficit." Why doesn't Sen. Feinstein just admit that virtually everything that Washington, DC does adds to our deficits?
Next, Sen. Feinstein wrote "Behind closed doors, Republicans drafted a bill that raises taxes on millions in the middle class and adds at least $1 trillion to our deficit. The bill also renews the GOP attack on the Affordable Care Act, a move that will drive up health insurance premiums in the individual market by 10% each year and will likely result in 13 million more Americans without coverage." Actually, removing the individual mandate doesn't drive up health insurance premiums. It just eliminates the tax for not buying government-required health insurance policies. What's likely to happen is that people will be free to buy the health insurance policy of their choice.
As for raising taxes on "millions in the middle class", Sen. Feinstein is just lying. The only people who are getting an increase are high-income people who itemize in high-tax states. This is typical Democrat fear-mongering.
This is an outright lie that's been demolished:
Unfortunately, they're not alone. Half of American households will see a tax increase. Meanwhile, billionaires and millionaires will pay less. That's appalling.
Sen. Feinstein knows that half "of American households" won't "see a tax increase." That's what happens when you don't have a legitimate argument against a policy. Politicians resort to lying. That's sad. This is especially rich:
Since the national income tax was created in 1913, Americans have been able to prevent double taxation by deducting state and local taxes they have already paid.
Sen. Feinstein doesn't have a problem with double taxation of estates but she's opposed to not being able to deduct state and local taxes. That's what happens when you play identity politics.
The fight, however, is not over. Senate and House Republicans must now reconcile the differences in their two tax bills (the House version is as disastrous for most Americans as the Senate bill). I urge all Californians to join me in doing everything we can to defeat this legislation. Write, call or email your representatives. Tell them to reject the Republican tax plan and work on bipartisan tax reform that puts the middle class first.
Sorry, Sen. Feinstein. The fight is all but officially over. It's true that Republicans have to reconcile the two bills but that's virtually a done deal. President Trump will sign this bill long before Christmas. In a week or 2, we'll see a repeat of this:
[Video no longer available]
Posted Tuesday, December 5, 2017 11:47 AM
No comments.
Who believes them anymore?
When the ISD 742 promised to "repurpose" the Tech High School and turn it into the School District's office, people didn't imagine that the District would betray them . That's what they did, though. Now, the District wants to transfer that property to the City of St. Cloud.
Matt Demczyk's article states that "St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis says he and St. Cloud Schools Superintendent Willie Jett have come up with a proposal to have the district transfer the school and grounds to the city once the district vacates the property to move into the new Tech High School."
Demczyk continues by quoting Mayor Kleis as saying "We are proposing to both the school board and city council that District 742, when it vacates Tech in 2019, that all of that property is conveyed to the city, so the city can plan in conjunction with the neighborhood the redevelopment of that site. And we've gone through this process many times where we will set, with the neighborhood and community, a process envisioning the best possible use."
Let's be clear about something. I don't trust Willie Jett at all and I don't trust Dave Kleis that much, either. I agree that the City has more tools to use and that they've gone through this process before. This is prime real estate. It should be zoned commercial so we can start getting property tax revenue from it. Since the City Council has to vote on the Jett-Kleis negotiations, they have the right to put stipulations on how the property can be used.
There's little question that the planning board won't want restrictions put on it. That's tough. Since the property belongs to the people, the people should have a say in the matter. If the property isn't put back on the property tax rolls and if the property doesn't meet with the people's approval, the Jett-Kleis initiative should be rejected.
Kleis says the city doesn't want to hurt the character of the neighborhood, and will work with community members as plans are drawn up to renovate the historic part of the building. The Mayor is hoping city council and the school board sign off on the proposal in the next month or so.
If the people get what they want, we'll sign off on the initiative. If we don't get what we want, the City and the District will have its hands full. It's time the District, the Mayor and the Council got a taste of trust but verify.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Tuesday, December 5, 2017 2:20 PM
No comments.
