A_map_of_New_England,_being_the_first_that_ever_was_here_cut_..._places_(2675732378).jpg
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Chris Powell: At least we plow well; sick vets and discretionary wars

MANCHESTER, Conn. Government in Connecticut does one thing well: snowplowing. While 2 inches of snow can send Washington, D.C., into comic panic and paralysis, Connecticut plays through even a foot or more of snow and can push it out of the way and be back in business in 24 hours.

Still, even in normal winters the snow is a drag here, and now, with heavy snow seeming to come nearly every week, it is more than a drag. It may be reducing economic output by 10 or 20 percent. Many people feel as if they are going to work mainly so they can earn money to pay someone to plow their driveway so they can go to work again.

Of course Connecticut long has managed despite having three terrible months each year. But that is because the state offered advantages offsetting that disadvantage.

On the whole for the last 25 years, since its enactment of an income tax, Connecticut has been losing population relative to the rest of the country, and the other day the Census Bureau reported that the state's population is back in absolute numerical decline as well.

Reflecting recently on state government's continuing budget deficits despite a record tax increase, budget director Ben Barnes said Connecticut has entered "a period of permanent fiscal crisis." His candor could be appreciated but Barnes also was confessing failure -- confessing that state government's policies have not been making Connecticut more prosperous but rather have been impoverishing it.

The excessive snow will make many state residents reconsider their premises for living here. To encourage them to stay put, state government better start reconsidering some of its premises as well.

* * *

Connecticut U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal is making much of his sponsorship of legislation aimed at reducing suicides among returned military veterans. The legislation is mainly a matter of requiring the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to increase mental-health services and hire more psychiatrists, and since the legislation passed the House and the Senate unanimously, its enactment may not have required as much political courage as the press releases about it imply.

Of course war always has been traumatic, and many returning soldiers always have suffered from a self-destructive depression even when they bore no debilitating physical wounds. Today there is a fancy name for it: post-traumatic stress disorder.

But at least with the country's biggest wars -- the Civil War, World War I and World War II -- veterans had the consolation that their work absolutely had to be done, whether it was preserving the nation and ending slavery or defeating totalitarian aggression that threatened the whole world, as well as the consolation that their fellow citizens profoundly appreciated their sacrifice.

It has been much different with the country's discretionary wars of recent decades, from Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, where U.S. soldiers fought for dubious premises, where the national interest was not at risk enough to seem to require drafting the whole population into the war effort, and where the service of the soldiers was not really appreciated when they got home, because by then the wars they fought -- intervening in other countries' civil wars or trying to civilize barbarian cultures -- were not considered to have been worthwhile, the civil wars having burned themselves out on their own and the barbarians having not been civilized.

Yes, there are so many suicides of recently returned veterans, estimated at an appalling 22 every day, that the Veterans Affairs Department should have the resources to help more. But what the Armed Forces deserve most is not to be squandered on stupid and unnecessary wars -- like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan that Senator Blumenthal has supported despite their failure to reach their objectives and despite the impossibility that they ever  could reach their objectives, at least not without the all-consuming effort  that elected officials like the senator did not dare to demand from their constituents.

Chris Powell is managing edit0r of the Journal Inquirer, in Manchester, Conn.

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Robert Whitcomb: The light gets brighter and cars warmer

  A New England winter’s compensations? I’m so fed up with it now that making this list took strenuous self-hypnosis.

First, of course, there’s the beauty and quiet. For brief stretches, all seems sinless, albeit with intimations of a monochromatic death. Of course, you might also hear cursing as people fight over a parking lot’s sole remaining space amidst six-foot-high piles of dirty snow.

To me, the two best winter pleasures are 1) walking at night, with a soft snow falling straight down in big fat flakes and 2) on a bright still morning right after a snowstorm, with almost blinding sunlight. My fondest memories of this season, which too many persist in calling “character-building,’’ are from living in New Hampshire in the mid and late ‘60s. The sun on the snow was an anti-depressant, especially after drab November.

A crucial aspect to enjoying a snowscape is lack of wind. That’s why you should stay away from our coastal cities, damp and exposed to the gales of offshore storms. Head inland.

Walking down a street in Boston or Providence on a winter’s day with a northwest gale is advanced masochism. I’d rather stroll on the same day in, say, Windsor, Vt. (where J.D. Salinger used to regularly eat in a diner), in the Connecticut Valley. Clean, dry and open, but with the worst of the wind blocked by the hills to the west. Very different from the narrow, clogged and frozen-slush streets of Providence and Boston, which weren’t designed for thousands of cars.

Then there’s late-winter “spring skiing’’. In the sun the air finally seems warm, the corn snow bouncy and soft and the air fragrant with wood smoke from the chimney of the base lodge. After a day on the slopes, a rich languor falls over you.

Another New England winter asset is liquid. The snowpack helps ensure that our region will have plenty of water to get through the year. New Englanders underestimate just what a valuable resource this, and how lacking it is in most of the Sunbelt. Of course, we could do much more with it, especially with hydro-electric power.

Winter also forces innovation. That may be why the Northeast continues to be America’s richest region. Consider the subway systems of Boston and New York. The Great Blizzard of 1888, which paralyzed the Northeast for weeks, helped lead Boston to create America’s first subway system, followed soon by New York. The MBTA mess from the recent blizzards should not obscure that having such a public-transit system has been a huge boon to the New England economy.

Cold winters also reduce the incidence of many diseases. Microbes prefer warmer climates. The healthier states are the colder ones, although we associate cold winters with the flu and colds.

Anyway, about now you notice that car interiors are warming up faster in the stronger sun, you hear the morning music of birds you haven’t heard for months and see that the buds on the trees are swelling as the light lengthens.

Signs of future life and warmth just as you’re getting violent. Still, all in all, this year I’d rather be in Florida about now. Actually, North Carolina would do.

Late winter reminds me of what we used to say on my cross-country running team in high school: “It feels so good when you stop.’’

xxx

In other weather news, we have Wei-Hock Soon, of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, another poster boy for the economics of “expert opinion.’’ See http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Mr. Soon preaches that our burning ever-increasing amounts of fossil fuel isn’t the main culprit in global warming. Most scientists disagree with him. But then most scientists haven’t received, as he has, $1.2 million in fossil-fuel industry funds in the last decade without disclosing it in most of his scientific papers. In the same way certain “public-policy think tanks’’ are well compensated to promote positions that support certain industries.

The Times reported that, in correspondence with his corporate funders, he called many of his papers and testimony to Congress “deliverables.’’ A deal is a deal!

Robert Whitcomb (rwhitcomb51@gmail.com), is overseer of this site and a bi-weekly contributor to The Providence Journal, where for more than two decades he had been editorial-page editor,. He's also a former financial editor of the International Herald Tribune, a former Wall Street Journal editor, a Fellow of the Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy,  and a partner at  Cambridge Management Group (cmg625.com), a national healthcare-sector consultancy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

West still in Fantasyland over Putin?

  Has the West really comes to grips with the implications of the Russian police state's invasion and dismemberment of a major democracy -- Ukraine?

And would the Western press apply a little skepticism, please, to "polls'' showing an alleged 84 percent approval rating for Vladimir Putin? His regime controls ever more of  the media in his country, and uses propaganda  for domestic consumption with the skill of a  Stalin and a Hitler.

The fact is that we don't really know how popular Putin is. We do know, however, that he is feared. People who oppose him can  end up dead in "accidents.''

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

38 Studios Memorial Stadium

bakerdownthedrain "Down the Drain (sublimated metal with float backing), copyright BOBBY BAKER PHOTOGRAPHY

The plan to put up a stadium for the Red Sox farm team now known as the Pawtucket Red Sox on redevelopment land in the middle of Providence makes n0 economic sense, except perhaps  for a few insiders.

For a few mostly minimum-wage jobs  from April to October, land that could be used for enterprises that could employ hundreds of well paid people in such fields as bio-tech and even light assembly would be taken out of use. This project is a plaything and ego trip for a  few rich politically connected operators who want to wrap themselves tighter in the macho world of baseball and send much of the bill to taxpayers with much less money than them.

Readers can research just how macro-economically over-rated are stadium projects for rich professional sports teams, even for the Major League teams, let alone Minor League teams such as the soon-to-be-late-lamented PawSox.

Another thing to remember is the remarkable ability 0f businesses to abandon their followers without warning. The entity that would like to call itself the "Rhode Island Red Sox'' could decide to close up shop and move to greener pastures, or just close up shop, period. That would then leave an empty stadium taking up space that could have been taken up by offices, labs or even a small factory where at least some people could continue to work. What would we do with an empty stadium in such a place?

After the strategic use of tax credits, the local (or Floridians six months a year plus a day) could have this stadium built at no cost to themselves, and then rake in some moolah until they bail out.

 

-- Robert Whitcomb

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

David Warsh: 'The Putin Show' is scarier than you think

   

The confrontation with Russia is becoming more alarming. Kathrin Hille, reporting from Moscow for the Financial Times, describes how cellphone operators are offering free ringtones of patriotic war songs, intended to evoke the defense of Moscow in 1941.

"The government-led drive, named Hurray for Victory!, comes as Moscow enters the homestretch in an impassioned and increasingly shrill campaign to commemorate the end of the Second World War.''

Meanwhile, The New York Times, as part of the rollout of its redesigned magazine, commissioned Soviet-born Russian novelist Gary Shteyngart to hole up for seven days at the Four Seasons Hotel on 57th Street in Manhattan with the main Russian television networks on three screens. In “‘Out of My Mouth Comes Unimpeachable Manly Truth:’ What I learned from watching a week of Russian TV ‘” Shteyngart concludes,

''When you watch the Putin Show, you live in a superpower. You are a rebel in Ukraine bravely leveling the once-state-of-the-art Donetsk airport with Russian-supplied weaponry. You are a Russian-speaking grandmother standing by her destroyed home in Lugansk shouting at the fascist Nazis, much as her mother probably did when the Germans invaded more than 70 years ago. You are a priest sprinkling blessings on a photogenic convoy of Russian humanitarian aid headed for the front line. To suffer and to survive: This must be the meaning of being Russian. It was in the past and will be forever. This is the fantasy being served up each night on Channel 1, on Rossiya 1, on NTV.''

And The Wall Street Journal has an essay by Andrew S. Weiss, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment, an aide in various capacities in the administrations of Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Weiss writes,

''[T]he Ukraine showdown is even scarier than you think: Mr. Putin is making it up as he goes along….  Almost single-handedly, [he] seems to be dragging much of the West into a New Cold War.  He’s winging it, and when things get difficult, he tends to double down.''

Weiss describes an “extreme personalization of power” following Putin’s return as president, in 2012. As the Ukraine crisis intensified in late 2013 and 2014, Putin narrowed his circle of advisers and placed them on a war-footing, valuing loyalty over worldliness.

Blindsided when events in Kiev spun out of control last February and Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled to Moscow, Weiss says, Putin had only himself to blame for having backed a leader who simply panicked when the going got tough.”  So, on the “spur-of-the-moment,” Putin annexed Crimea.

''Why on earth would Moscow want to take over a money pit like Crimea at a time of slowing economic growth and plunging oil prices?  On the fly, Kremlin propagandists came up with a mantra that they invoke to this day: the new authorities who replaced Mr. Yanukovych in Kiev were illegitimate because they had staged a coup d’état with Western backing,''

Putin followed his invasion – “the most audacious land-grab since World War II” – with a “sham popular referendum” and formal annexation. Then came more “damn-the-consequences, trial-and-error improvisation” to sow unrest in  southeastern Ukraine: seizures of government buildings by Russian-speaking separatists, led by Russian “facilitators.” And after the situation escalated to outright war, Putin sought a ceasefire, obtained it on advantageous terms, and then violated it with an unexpected surge of fighting around Donetsk and Lugansk.

''Mr. Putin’s highly personalized, profoundly erratic approach to government tmay be even more dangerous than most Western governments are comfortable admitting.  How can the Ukrainians or dogged western leaders such as {German Chancellor Angela} Merkel possibly search for a diplomatic solution if they are dealing with a leader who is making it all up on the fly?  … Kiev doesn’t know what Mr. Putin wants; even Mr. Putin doesn’t know what he wants.''

Notice anything funny about this narrative? Putin is always the impulsive actor, never the one who is acted upon.  He is never reacting to anything that NATO or the Americans do.

There is nothing here about NATO expansion. Nothing about the brief 2008 war with Georgia. Nothing about the continuing controversy about who fired the shots on Kiev’s  Maidan Square, nothing about the phone call by U.S.  Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, taped by the Russians at the height of the crisis; nothing about the Russian naval base at Sevastopol on the Black Sea.  Nothing about the sanctions imposed on the Russians since the crisis began. Nothing about the Ukrainian army offensives in the southeast. Nothing about the Ukrainian vote to join NATO that may have triggered the January offensive. Nothing to note that all this is happening on Russia’s doorstep.  Is it any wonder Putin is “doubling down”?

The scariest thing of all is that it may be Putin who has been telling the fundamental truth all along:  NATO expansion in Georgia Ukraine is unacceptable to him and Russia is willing to go to war to rule it out. He’s been improvising, all right, but often in response to probes – Ukrainian, European, U.S.  For a fuller argument along these lines, see Gordon Hahn’s illuminating commentary on ''The American Education of Vladimir Putin, ''by Clifford Gaddy and Fiona Hill, which appears in The Atlantic for February.

Meanwhile, a friend, who knows the territory well, writes,

''I think it was Napoleon who said your adversary gets a vote in all battles. Putin is a complex, dangerous, possibly paranoid man. We in the West act in ways consciously or unconsciously that can affect his actions. Could he still be winging it? At times, he could.  I agree with Weiss that Yanukovich surprised, possibly astounded, Putin when he caved. I also think the oil price collapse and ruble meltdown caught him completely unaware. His finance people were not prepared and he fired them. Same for many of his agricultural  folks. Was that winging it or just having to react to tough times? We in the US did not have to fire Bernanke to right the ship in 2009.  There seems to be a purge mentality in Putin that comes from “Soviet man.”

Whoever started it, Putin is now thoroughly buttoned-up in a defensive posture. What’s more dangerous than a Russian bear?  A wounded Russian bear.

.

David Warsh, a long-time economic historian and business columnist, is proprietor of economicprincipals.com.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Jim Hightower: Vt. Janitor leaves millions for hospital, library

When you get fed up with all the greed and narcissism that seems to rule our country, a good way to restore your faith in humankind is to reflect on the generosity of people like Ron Read — a philanthropist from Dummerston, Vt.

Read was no splashy, self-celebrating, David Koch-Michael Dell-Richard DeVos type. He’s not the kind of guy whose “altruism” depends on how prominently his name gets displayed on the facilities he endows.

In fact, no one in Dummerston had a clue that Ronald James Read was a man of wealth, much less a benefactor, until he died at age 92.

Known around town as Ron, he was a quiet, hard-working, and well-liked fellow who spent 25 years as a gas- station employee, then 17 more as a janitor at the local JCPenney store.

He drove a second-hand cars,  gathered downed limbs for firewood, held his well-worn coat together with safety pins, and hated seeing anything go to waste.

Some knew that Read enjoyed collecting stamps, and that he often checked out books from the local library. It was only after his death, however, that the town learned about another little hobby he enjoyed: picking stocks and making small investments.

Turns out, he was very, very good at it.

This February, local folks were astonished and delighted to learn that their modest neighbor had bequeathed $1.2 million to their library — the largest gift in its 129 years, doubling its endowment. He also gave $4.8 million to Brattleboro Memorial Hospital, the  region's major hospital, the largest bequest it ever received.

He didn’t even wait around for a public thank you, much less demand that he get tax writeoffs and have his name engraved on the library façade. Ron Read was an exemplary philanthropist — a genuine altruist who invested in the future of the common good.

Jim Hightower is a radio commentator, writer and public speaker. He wrote this for otherwords.org.

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Get ready for oil/gas drilling off the Northeast?

 

By JOYCE ROWLEY/ecoRI News contributor

From EcoRi News

When the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) released its notice of intent to scope an environmental review for Atlantic Ocean oil and gas leases in January, it left little room for public comment at meetings. Using an open house-style meeting, BOEM’s Web site states the meetings “will not include a designated session for formal oral testimony.”

But by the third meeting, held Feb. 17 in Wilmington, N.C., 400 people had signed up to speak and 150 protesters convened at the meeting site, opposed to opening up any part of the Atlantic Ocean to the potential impacts of a BP Deepwater Horizon disaster.

The scoping sessions stem from BOEM’s 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Draft Proposed Program (DPP), released last month. Five-year plans are prepared under the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act.

However, this DPP calls for opening up sectors off the Mid-Atlantic  states and off the Southeast  to oil and gas drilling for the first time since 1983, triggering a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Atlantic Ocean OCS leases expired in the mid-1990s, after exploratory wells came up empty. Forty-three exploratory wells were sunk off the Northeast, one off the Mid-Atlantic  states and seven off the Southeast.

BOEM contends those studies are outdated, and against strenuous objections from environmentalists, commercial and recreational fishing industries, state and federal legislators, and tens of thousands of individuals, BOEM approved a PEIS for geotechnical and geophysical (G&G) studies in the Atlantic last summer. BOEM is now working with coastal states and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to secure permits, including incidental “takes” of marine mammals and endangered species of turtles. Eight G&G contractors haveapplications pending for the work.

Back in the mix Two years after congressional restrictions expired in 2008, the Atlantic OCS planning areas were put into the 2012-2017 plan. A PEIS published in early April 2010 included only the Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning areas. But just as Northeast coastal communities breathed a sigh of relief, BP’s Deepwater Horizon exploratory oil rig exploded, creating the nation’s worst environmental disaster in its history.

In December 2010, the Atlantic planning areas were excluded from the final program plan. Six months later, governors in several Southern states formed the Outer Continental Shelf Governors Coalition, to expand areas for offshore energy development and regional revenue sharing. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the former chairman of the Democratic National Party, also joined the coalition in asking for oil and gas drilling in the Mid-Atlantic.

Environmental groups, such as the North Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club and the South Carolina Conservation League, had been protesting against use of the Atlantic OCS for three years. But U.S. Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell has said that it was Governors Coalition’s lobbying for opening the Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic that convinced her to include these areas in the 2017-2022 DPP.

At the Feb. 20 Governors Association Conference in Washington, D.C., the Outer Continental Shelf Governors Coalition discussed putting legislation through Congress for federal-state sharing of royalties, bonus bids and rents from Atlantic offshore oil and gas development.

In opposition Virginia Congressmen Gerald Connolly, Bobby Scott and Donald Beyer have written Jewell asking her to exclude the Mid-Atlantic from consideration.

“Drilling on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (AOCS) is a source of considerable debate in the Commonwealth. It threatens local economies, ecosystems, natural resources, and poses significant national security concerns,” the congressmen wrote.

The letter went on to say that the action puts at risk 91,000 tourism, recreation and fisheries jobs that represent $5 billion of Virginia’s GDP for “a few days’ worth of national oil and gas supply.”

This month’s public protests are a small segment of a much larger public outcry. Federal and state leaders, environmental NGOs and some 285,000 individuals have written in opposition. Senators Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Ed Markey, D-Mass., co-signed a letter in opposition with five other senators.

Rep. David Price, D-N.C.,  wrote a letter co-signed by 36 other members of Congress, which read in part:

“We believe that the circumstances that informed the exclusion of Atlantic planning areas under the existing Five-Year Program remain unchanged. Additionally, significant federal, state, and local resources have been expended in an effort to improve the health of Atlantic fisheries, protect endangered and threatened species that rely on the Atlantic Ocean and coast, and ensure the continued economic vitality of coastal areas through recreation and tourism. We believe that allowing oil and gas development in the Atlantic would be inconsistent with and contrary to these ongoing efforts.”

Upon release of the 2017-2022 DPP last month, Markey, with senators Cory Booker, D-N.J., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., held a press conference seeking administrative withdrawal of the Atlantic planning areas.

Areas can be excluded one of three ways: by presidential administrative withdrawal, as has happened with the North Aleutian planning area in Alaska; by a congressional moratoria, which protected the East Coast from consideration until 2008 and now protects the Eastern Gulf of Mexico; or by the secretary of the interior.

Markey has noted that the existing 2012-2017 DPP utilizes 75 percent of all U.S. oil and gas reserves currently available, yet less than a quarter of all leases are actively developed. Addition of the Atlantic Ocean planning areas proposed would only increase accessible reserves by 5 percent, according to Markey.

Citing a recent Oceana economic analysis comparing offshore drilling and wind energy, Markey said:

“Offshore oil spills don’t respect state boundaries. A spill off the coast of North Carolina could affect Massachusetts. We saw what happened after the BP spill. My state’s fishing and tourism industry can’t afford that kind of tragedy.”

Noting there has never been a tragic wind-energy spill, Markey went on to say that Congress has yet to enact key drilling safety reforms, such as raising the liability cap for an offshore spill and increasing the civil penalties that can be levied against oil companies that violate the law.

Currently, the liability limit is set at $73 million for damages caused by an offshore oil spill.

The latest cost estimate for the BP spill is $46 billion in clean-up efforts and damages. In 2012, BP pled guilty to 11 felony charges in the deaths of 11 workers killed in the explosion and paid $4 billion. Last September, BP appealed a federal court ruling that 4.2 million barrels were spilled, claiming a much lower 2.5 million barrels flowed from its damaged well. The court may award damages of up to $4,300 per barrel under the federal Clean Water Act.

The most recent incident data available for the Gulf of Mexico indicates there have been 22 loss-of-well-control incidents, 461 fires/explosions, 989 injuries and 11 fatalities between 2011-2014. There were three major spills in 2011 and eight in 2012.

Public comment The last two Atlantic region meetings on the environmental scoping document are scheduled to be held March 9 in Annapolis, Md., and March 11 in Charleston, S.C.

There are two separate documents in progress — the 2017-2022 DPP and the scoping for the PEIS. Comments submitted to one will not be automatically included with the other. Comments will be accepted until March 30.

For the 2017-2022 DPP, submit online or in writing to Ms. Kelly Hammerle, Five-Year Program Manager, BOEM (HM–3120), 381 Elden St., Herndon, VA 20170.

To comment on the scope of the PEIS, submit online or mail in an envelope labeled ‘‘Scoping Comments for the 2017–2022 Proposed Oil and Gas Leasing Program Programmatic EIS’’ to Mr. Geoffrey L. Wikel, Acting Chief, Division of Environmental Assessment, Office of Environmental Program (HM 3107), Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 381 Elden St., Herndon, VA 20170–4817.

Portions of this article used reporting by the Wilmington (N.C.) Star and The Myrtle Beach (S.C.) Sun News.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

James P. Freeman: The style of George F. Will

   

“The most durable thing in writing is style, and style is the

most valuable investment a writer can make with his time.”

                                          --Raymond Chandler

 

For those who follow closely or casually the commentator and columnist George Will, most are probably left with the impression of his erudite conservative views on the written page and his be-spectacled, bow-tied, urbane appearances on cable television. For some, however, it is Will’s unique style and sensibility that elevates him above his peers. That combination arguably makes him the most influential writer in America.

“A columnist for only a year,” noted James J. Kilpatrick in his 1984 book, The Writer’s Art, when Will wrote in 1975 “a splendid piece” on Patty Hearst. “Her arrest, he informed us, ‘provided a coda to a decade of political infantilism, the exegesis of which could be comprehended as a manifestation of bourgeois Weltanschauung.’ With that out of his system, George went on to win a Pulitzer Prize for commentary and to become a polished and literate essayist…”

That year he also described the rock band Led Zeppelin, as it descended into the nation’s capital, as “one of society’s vigorously vibrating ganglions.” His early work was cast in original, descriptively smoldering tones, a kind of literary Stradivari -- pitch perfect with rich resonance.

He began writing regularly in the early 1970s as Washington Editor for National Review, under the watchful eye of its founder, William F. Buckley Jr.; under the storm clouds of Watergate Will became an early outspoken critic of the Nixon administration. On Jan. 1, 1974 he became a syndicated columnist for The Washington Post; 40 years later the column appears in more than 450 newspapers. In 1976 he started a bi-weekly essay on the back page of Newsweek magazine which ran for over  30  years.

After 25 years, and a rich sediment of source material from which to study, in 1999, writing for the Ashbrook Center. at Ashland University, Steven Hayward noted Will’s “prose style combine three elements.” One, “there is the sheer clarity and aphoristic quality of his prose.” His “one sentence distillations of a larger body of thought can be found in reading every column.” Two, “Will is a superb narrative story-teller, a rarity among opinion journalists.” Three, he writes with a “dry understated, wit, also rare among opinion journalists whose prose seldom deviates from the monotone seriousness of the overly earnest.”

Conceivably, then, Hayward read this 1977 gem:

Unfortunately, my favorite delight (chocolate-coated vanilla ice cream flecked with nuts) bears the unutterable name “Hot Fudge Nutty Buddy,” an example of the plague of cuteness in commerce. There are some things a gentleman simply will not do, and one is announce in public a desire for a ‘Nutty buddy.’ So I usually settle for a plain vanilla cone.

That year he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary. The Commentary Writing Jury Report concluded that, “Will combines a scholarly approach to commentary with wry humor. His writing style is clear and to the point. His arguments and analysis are forceful and easy to understand…”

Fortune Magazine described his collection of columns in 1982’s The Pursuit of Virtue and Other Tory Notions, as “a marvel of style, personality, character, learning and intelligence.” And Commentary Magazine noted “a stylistic signature so immediately recognizeable.”

A genome sequencing of Will’s compositions reveals certain attributes: two word alliterations; one sentence words puncture and punctuate longer sentences; and, despite the ice cream quotation above, rarely will he employ the use of the first-person pronoun “I.” A droll deprecation acts as an effective counter balances to weighty matters and may in fact enhance arguments presented in his work. It is also lyrical -- a certain poetry to the prose within the boundaries a standard 750 word column.

Recall a recent column about Cuba as it offers a simple example. “The permanent embargo was imposed in 1962 in the hope of achieving, among other things, regime change. Well.”

Last spring, Will was interviewed by radio personality Steve Richards for his program Speaking of Writers. He was asked something he rarely is asked about: his writing process and routine. Will explained, “I absolutely love to write” and described the activity as a “physical, tactile pleasure;” the feeling of thoughts becoming words. “A lot of reading and research goes into” writing 100 columns a year, he allows.

Will used to write “the old–fashioned way,” in long hand with a fountain pen. That all changed in February 1994, when, after a taping of the Sunday TV Program  The Week,  he broke his right arm. Ever since, he has written on a computer but he has not brought himself – yet – to twitter and tweeting. The focus always remains on content over transmission.

The best advice ever given to him was uttered by Mark Twain, who advised to do three things: “Write, write, write.” As for dispensing advice for writers, Will instructs: “Find models to emulate,” and it is important one “gets a sense to have a style.” It confirms what William Zinsser, author of On Writing Well, said: “Writing is learned by imitation; we all need models.”

And Will’s models? “This columnist has had two, columnist Murray Kempton and novelist P.G. Wodehouse.”

For me, such an honor  belongs to two writers as well: George Will and U2’s Bono. A strange alloy, perhaps, unique and, at times, seemingly incompatible. But as Will reminds us, “style reflects sensibility.”

James P. Freeman is a Cape Cod-based writer

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Karen Gross: Truth, transparency, trust and the nearby gorilla

 gorilla

In the space of a few weeks in February, we lost the well-regarded journalists Bob Simon, David Carr and Ned Colt, while NBC’s Brian Williams was dethroned amid scandal. In all these cases, the words “truth” and “trust” and less commonly “transparency” have taken center stage. Quality media professionals succeed because they are truthful, and there is transparency in verifying that truth; together, this breeds trust. Trust is the one value central to anyone involved with reporting news.

The words “truth,” “transparency” and “trust” recently have taken on renewed importance in higher education. The reporting and handling of sexual assaults, athletic cheating scandals, Muslim student deaths, the intrusion into the admissions process by college/university presidents forcing acceptance of new students who are politically connected, and fraternity hazing among other inappropriate activities have run headlong into efforts to determine the truth, demonstrate institutional transparency and establish and maintain trust among the wide range of stakeholders.

One example: The “facts” that appeared in a Rolling Stone article related to an alleged rape at a fraternity at the University of Virginia were later retracted. Before this occurred, actions were taken by the university against that fraternity. When the implicated fraternity challenged the factual assertions, a different version of the “facts” emerged, then challenged by the rape victim and some of her friends. The university changed its stand. Then and not without controversy, sorority women on the UVA campus were directed by their national organization not go to frat parties because of safety risks.

The problem with the three “t” words is their complexity—within and outside higher education. Determining “truth” is not easy. Consider the Rashomon effect; different people witnessing an event perceive and describe that event differently. This may be because of faulty memory or unconscious personal bias or unspoken leanings toward a desired outcome and other reasons. Usually, witnesses do not self-perceive as liars. Evidence of challenges of fact-finding abounds in the handling of disciplinary matters on campuses across the nation, raising the need for independent investigators in Title IX cases.

Another distortion of truth can come from “not seeing” all that is there. In the oft-seen film clip showing the students throwing a basketball to each other, a gorilla crosses the room. Because the viewers have been asked to focus on and count the number of throws, many never see the gorilla in the room. Really.

Our capacity to “see” and “share” the truth also depends on what “truth” we are addressing. The truth of some facts—like the world is round—are easy to establish. Other perceived facts like “there is a God” are surely debatable. In classrooms early on, students often seek to identify “the” answer only to learn there is no answer, a frustrating reality for many students.

Transparency, a term that is oft used to refer to the need for government openness, is equally complex. When information reflects badly on a college or university, there is often an effort to bury that truth, lest parents or new students learn of it. But with the Internet, failure to disclose is fraught with risk, as the negative information will be found, worsening the absence of transparency. It is vastly better that institutions, rather than outsiders, control their own bad news.

There are times when telling the truth will produce serious adverse consequences. In the movie The Imitation Game, even with its adaptations of history, there is proof positive of the devastating consequences of “truths” contained in the decoded messages, knowledge that forced individuals to make choices to protect the larger good. On a campus, too, disclosing information like the identity of a victim of rape can have serious consequences, particularly if the rapist is a popular figure on campus.

Establishing trust, animated by both truth and transparency, is hard. It takes time and we test its limits. We know a child’s development is impaired if a parent cannot be trusted. But losing trust is easier. One or two false steps can erode trust, and rebuilding it is not always possible—despite a myriad of past positive decisions. In a relationship, for example, trust undermined by infidelity can sometimes be overcome depending on the individuals, the circumstances and the gravity of the offenses.

Education leaders and campuses must build trust. College presidents know that if they lose the trust of their boards, their faculty, government officials and sometimes their students, their jobs are at risk. Of late, too many presidents have lost their positions because the trust others held in them was eroded beyond repair. No one is suggesting that university and college presidents be flawless. But, they must ferret out—and often quickly—what is fact and what is fiction. They must spend the time to think through the words they use to describe volatile situations. Above all else, they need to own the truth, whether it is good or bad.

In education circles, we often talk about truth-seeking. The word appears in college insignias. Consider Veritas. We use the phrase: And the truth shall set you free. But, perhaps genuine “trust” (which rests on truth and transparency) better embodies what we need to develop on campuses today. Some students have trusted their sexual partners only to then experience harassment and assault. Students have trusted that they and their colleagues can truly imbibe ad infinitum, only to later realize the deadly impact of alcohol poisoning and drunk driving. We trust that the academic community will protect us from killings and discrimination, a trust that is eroded by events like the shooting of Muslim students.

Judging from current events, trust on our campuses is eroding, including in our leaders and within the student population. Without trust, the connectivity so central to the creation of community and the capacity to learn and take risks diminishes. We need to spend more time rebuilding and valuing trust, not just divining and sharing truth.

Maybe the lessons from the three trustworthy media giants who died contrasted with the Shakespearean fall of now less than trustworthy Brian Williams will help education leaders and their communities refocus on the value of trust in its many dimensions. That, in a world of bad news, would be good.

Karen Gross is former president of Southern Vermont College and former senior policy adviser to the U.S. Department of Education. This originated in the Web site of the New England Board of Higher Education (nebhe.org).

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Tim Faulkner: Blame global warming for all this snow

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

Last year was the hottest year on record for the planet, but it wasn’t the hottest in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. For Rhode Island, the average temperature in 2014 was 51 degrees, the 43rd highest on record. Massachusetts had an average temperature of 47.7 degrees, 87th warmest since 1895.

New England joined much of the eastern  United States as one of the few moderate temperature zones in 2014. The cooler temperatures occurred during all four seasons. Meanwhile, Alaska, Arizona California and Nevada had record warm years.

According to NASA climate expert James Hansen, there is no specific explanation for the regional anomaly. He did note that warming is happening faster at higher altitudes, and decade-by-decade comparisons continue to show rising temperatures for the nation and planet.

Hansen and other scientists have noted that the cooler eastern temperatures and warmer western ones occurred during a lower-temperature year for tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures and a subsequent lower El Niño effect. If the El Niño effect rises slightly this year, it’s expected to push global temperatures higher.

“For global average temperature, the previous record warm year before 2012 was 1998, which ended with a very strong El Niño,” said Michael Rawlins, assistant professor of geosciences and manager of the Climate System Research Center at the University of Massachusetts  at Amherst. “The fact that last year surpassed 1998, despite the absence of an El Niño, is important to note. Should an El Niño emerge this winter, 2015 may end up even warmer.”

According to scientists with the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the planet has warmed 1.4 degrees since record keeping began in 1880. Most of the warming has occurred during the past three decades.

Because of this warming, more moisture is contained in the atmosphere, according to climatologists. This added moisture intensifies weather events, including snowstorms. Through Feb. 15, Boston had received 90 inches of snow — 87 inches in January and February. The average winter snowfall for Boston is 44 inches.

On Jan. 27, Worcester,  had its single snowiest day, with 32 inches. Providence compiled 51 inches of snow between Jan. 1 and Feb. 15. The average snowfall during that period is 17.5 inches. The Jan. 27 blizzard dumped 19 inches of snow across Rhode Island, the third-heaviest storm since the Blizzard of 1978, which dumped 28.5 inches.

In 2014, precipitation was somewhat higher than average across New England. Massachusetts received 49.8 inches of precipitation, which is 102 percent of the normal level.

As the five-year anniversary of the March floods of 2010 approaches, it’s worth noting that the five wettest years in Rhode Island are 1983, 1972, 1979, 2005, and 2008; 1983 was the wettest year with 67.5 inches of precipitation.

The top five warmest summers in Rhode Island were 2010, 1983, 2005, 1944 and 1943; 2010 was the warmest with an average temperature of 74 degrees.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Dead-looking but still alive

tree From "Artists Perspectives on Trees,'' now at Blue Wave Art Gallery, in Amesbury, Mass. It seems impossible at this time of brutal cold, but the buds on some trees have swollen a bit lately as the light has brightened.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Where are the disaster funds for battered Boston?

  E.J. Graff,  telling the world about  Boston's slow-motion catastrophe from blizzard after blizzard and weeks of deep freeze, asks:

"Where are the federal disaster funds, the presidential visit, Anderson Cooper interviewing victims, volunteers flying in, goods and services donated after hurricanes and tornadoes? The pictures may be pretty. But we need help, now. ''

Read More