Sunday School 1/29/23

In this week's Sunday School, I've got recaps of a few discussions on the Tyre Nichols case and on policing more generally. 

We'll start with Dana Bash and her panel in the State of the Union classroom: Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), author/CNN pundit Bakari Sellers, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), and CNN's Scott Jennings.

Lee said people talk about public safety, but "where we stop short every single time is talking about, how do we invest in communities that have been underinvested," and mentioned education and jobs as the kind of investments needed.

We have data. We know what makes communities safe. But, every single time, we defer, we kind of go back right to, well, 'policing in and of itself is public safety.' Public safety doesn't begin or end with policing.

She said the conversation needs to move a lot more quickly than it is right now, and that 

We need to start "looking deeply into our culture, looking deeply within ourselves and figuring out why we make policy decisions that we know have adverse impact on these communities, that we know are setting communities up for failure." 

Jennings had many more questions than answers after seeing the videos. He said, "we have an epidemic of hard hearts in this country." Among his questions?

how these officers were hired. And what were the standards? Where do they come from? What was the testing? And what kind of people are we putting with such power in our communities that they feel like they could drag you out of a car and beat you to death? I mean, these -- this is not protecting and serving. This is not law and order. 

Sellers said even if police reform legislation had passed and everything had been implemented, it wouldn't be enough.

(W)e still... have to have a conversation about culture because what we saw and the conversation that we have to have is about the nuance around systems in this country. And systemic racism is a word that people don't want to hear... we're so anti-intellectual that they clench up when they hear it, but it's a conversation that we have to have.

Police have been given more training, resources, and equipment- which didn't prevent this from happening. He said we need to have a real conversation, 

whether it's a 'hard heart' conversation, or a 'cultural conversation', or a... 'black folk don't get the benefit of their humanity' conversation, this is where we have to have this difficult conversation. 

Sellers draws a "direct line" from this incident to things like the lack of safe drinking water in black communities, poor and unsafe schools, and healthcare disparities for blacks, saying, "That is systemic racism across institutions."

Kinzinger acknowledges that we need to have "real conversations" but hates the term. You start the discussion on how to fix things, he said,

And then what happens is the online kind of profit machine kicks up. And, on the right, it's all the sudden, like, we have to back the blue and not talk about any reforms. And sometimes, on the left, it ends up being basically -- you saw it to the extreme, defund the police. And then you end up hating each other, not talking about it, not solving problems. This is a moment where I think, if we can actually be like, OK, look, neither side is going to get exactly what they want in policing or in reform, but we can make a huge difference, sort of like the Justice for George Floyd Act, we can make a difference. But everybody's got to get away from just default(ing) to their corners.

Yes, We Can Do Something (Part 1)

As I mentioned in the Introduction, some friends and I have had running conversations about mass shootings and gun safety legislation since the Sandy Hook tragedy. Honestly, that's way too long for us to be working on this.

Before we dive into our recommendations, there's some ground to cover, including these overarching principles:

We need to change how we talk about the goal. It is not to prevent mass shootings from happening; the goal is to make it harder for someone to commit mass carnage, and to reduce the number of deaths should such an event occur. 

And, gun safety legislation must stand alone, with no unrelated amendments or attachments. Any attempts to attach anything that is not directly related to gun safety shall be considered a bribe.. 

That second one may seem extreme, but one of the problems we have is that literally anything can be attached to a bill, no matter how far removed from the topic at hand. The only way to make sure that doesn't happen is to be absurdly strict.  

For these discussions, the term 'guns' excludes air guns, nail guns, starter pistols, bubble guns, staple guns, Nerf guns, water pistols, etc., and includes handguns, rifles, sidearms, firearms, so-called 'assault weapons,' semi-automatic weapons, 'military-style' weapons', 'weapons of war' and other terms of disgust or endearment. We all know what we're talking about here, and pretending otherwise is merely a deflection. 

What else? These changes would impact all gun sales, not just sales of the type of weapon used in mass shootings, and would standardize processes at the federal level.  States could opt to add additional regs if desired.  I'm aware some progress may have been made in some areas in the years since we first started these conversations. And finally, we tried to take an 'all of the above' approach, to this, addressing key themes from both sides of the argument, in the interest of allowing everyone a victory or two. 

So: here are some recommendations related to legal purchases of guns:

• Raise the legal age for purchasing guns. If it's not safe for kids to purchase alcohol until they are 21, they should not be allowed to purchase a gun until they're 21. If that means the age for voting and being drafted, should the need arise, must be raised to 21, so be it. 

• Require registration of all guns on a federal gun license, regardless of the gun type, and regardless of how bought, sold, or otherwise transferred to a different owner. Everyone who owns a gun must have a license to do so. 

• Mandatory education and training must be provided before every gun purchase or transfer is completed. The training must be specific to the gun, and include all aspects of gun ownership (carrying, transporting, using, and storing the gun and ammunition, etc.). The training must also include reports of gun owners hurting themselves or others, such as when kids and parents accidentally kill children, and accidental shootings in the leg, in the head, in the head, in the testicles, in the testicles, in the testicles, in the penis, in the foot, taking a selfie, defending a Muslim-free gun store, trying out his new holster, in the girlfriend, in the girlfriend, in the girlfriend, etc. It must also include video impact statements from survivors and from families of victims of mass shootings. Proof of successful completion of the training must be documented as part of the sale or transfer transaction. 

• Require mandatory videotaping of all gun sales and require a 'green light' result on a background check, rather than just the absence of a 'red light.' These ideas are good ones, and came from Walmart, after the mass shooting at their El Paso store left 23 people dead. 

• Require yearly renewal of the federal gun license, to include proficiency testing for all guns on the license. Testing should also include an assessment of a person's decision-making ability, such as when to fire vs. when to de-escalate. This training is critical to support the 'good guy with a gun' argument.

• Enhance the federal background check process, to include a check of criminal records, mental health records, and social media posts to identify potentially risky gun owners, and to give them a chance to respond to the findings. The background check must be applied to all gun sales and transfers.

• Implement mandatory reporting into the federal background check system. (a) All law enforcement organizations and security companies must provide timely reporting on all incidents involving all types of guns. (b) All branches of the United States Military must provide timely reporting of relevant data, including all discharge statuses. (c) All social media companies, 'discussion boards,' gaming platforms, etc. must proactively monitor for and report threats of violence, or actual violence, to a designated agency. (d) Requirements will be developed to ensure sufficient but only minimally necessary data is reported. (e) Additionally, all medical facilities and practitioners must provide timely reporting of anonymized data on gunshot victims to the CDC to allow for research, policy development, educational, and legislative purposes. (f) Failure to comply with the reporting requirements will result in an escalated financial and/or criminal penalty process.

• Eliminate state background check systems upon implementation of the enhanced federal system. Historical data from the separate state systems must be incorporated into the federal system before they are shut down.

• Implement a minimum 10-day waiting period on all gun purchases and transfers. One year after implementation of the new background check system, an assessment of the average time to complete a background check will be reviewed, and adjustments to the 10-day waiting period may be considered at that time.

• Attach a federal excise tax to the purchases of guns as we do cigarettes, fuel, airline tickets and alcohol. Taxes collected will be placed in a dedicated fund, used solely in support of gun safety efforts. The fund will be audited annually to ensure the tax is being collected, allocated, and distributed as intended. 

These recommendations pertain to ammunition sales and purchases.

• Require mandatory reporting on large ammunition sales, like the reporting in place today for deposits under federal banking regulations. The definition of 'large' sales will be data-based, and determined by federal regulators. 

• Attach a federal excise tax to ammunition, as outlined above.

• Limit the sale of high-capacity magazines. The definition of 'high-capacity' will be data-based, and determined by federal regulators. 

Coming up, I'll look at things we can do to ensure bad guys with guns are dealt with appropriately; red flag laws; mental health, and more.

Meanwhile Back in Albany (v40)

Nathaniel Brooks/NY Times

How'd you do with Days One and Two of my Sonofa Gov's State of the State? And are you ready for more? 

Day Three focused on the greening of New York, what Gov. Andrew Cuomo called a "new economic engine that is future-oriented, that is essential to our survival, and that has the potential to benefit generations to come." But, he said,

As is true in so many major issues of our time, the challenge is to close the societal and governmental gap between aspirations and accomplishment, between rhetoric and reality, between saying and doing. Offering hope of a tomorrow that never comes is one of the main causes of our social unrest and distrust in government. We are just not making enough actual progress. Why? Because change is hard.

Have no fear, though: "As the world economy resets, and as change is a necessity, there is an opportunity to raise our efforts to the next level - and New York should seize this moment." And, we can seize the rhetorical moment, too: Cuomo noted that "candles cannot power the future." We're going to stick a fork in fossil fuels, or something, via a four-pronged approach: 

• identifying and building enough green projects to generate the clean energy needed to "reliably support" all our needs; 
• ending our reliance on other countries, by building our own green tech and equipment, and developing "a steady flow of projects to start up and sustain those new businesses;"  
• building up our transmission capacity to connect the dots between where energy is generated, and where it's consumed; and
• elevating our training and education programs, and building out our R&D capacity.

He announced a $26B public/private partnership to develop around 100 renewable projects across the state. 68 projects (52 solar, 13 on-shore wind, and three off-shore wind) are already underway, and he announced 24 more during his presentation. Cuomo expects 11,000 jobs in "upstate NY alone." (Upstate is defined here, in case you aren't sure exactly where to find it.) 

Among the new projects? Two new wind farms, invisible from the shore, off Long Island; turning a Capital-district brownfield into a state-of-the-art wind turbine tower facility, and adding a fifth offshore wind turbine hub to serve the entire east coast.

More big news? He announced a competitive bidding process for a new green transmission grid, starting with three projects all leading to NYC. Other projects across the state are designed to "break open congestion" and will start this year. And, we're going to have state-of-the-art battery storage capability, with construction already underway on a new facility in Franklin County

On the last tine of the fork, there's a new $20M Offshore Wind Training Institute, as well as training for heat pumps and geothermal heating technology, which will help us replace existing systems in some 130,000 buildings. All projects have must meet MWBE goals, and pay prevailing wage, so that workers and business owners of color are not left out.

He said the whole green program will create 12,400 megawatts of green power, enough for six million homes; directly create 50,000 jobs; and generate $29 billion in private investment. 

The message? "Go big, or go home," and he's got no intention of us sitting on the sidelines as others move forward. 

Grains of Salt (v30): SOTC, Part 2

The other day, I took a look at new Syracuse Mayor Ben Walsh's State of the City address.

In my first post on the SOTC, I focused on Walsh's plans to leverage collaboration, the careful planning of his Transition Team, performance metrics and accountability, and the work of the I-team to help us innovate our way out of our financial difficulties and into a more successful fiscal position.

Let's pick it up again, starting with the I-81 project.

We will also make 2018 an important year for progress on the I-81 Viaduct project. Syracuse and all of Central New York must seize the opportunity now to drive inclusive growth in the city and the region. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to transform our community. And thus far, we have failed to grab it. We can't afford to wait any longer. 

The facts are out there, Walsh tells us, and he's right. There's a ton of data on the NY DOT website, including the options still under consideration and those dismissed. We've been at this for years now, and we have to move forward at some point. Walsh supports the community grid plan, not a huger viaduct, and not Syracuse's version of The Big Dig. Why?

...commutes will actually be made easier by a street system that stops funneling our entire inbound and outbound daily migration to a major choke point - Harrison and Adams Streets.

...I have had elected officials from outside the City tell me that they understand exactly why I support the community grid, even while they advocate for a different solution. And, to be fair, I understand their position as well.

He's heard and understands concerns in Dewitt about increased traffic, noise and pollution with I-481 being made the new I-81. He's heard and understands concerns from north of the city, in Salina, about loss of tax revenue from hotels and other businesses that have grown up around the current path of the interstate. West suburbs worry about increased truck traffic, as people get off the highway earlier and take back roads to get to points west, disrupting or even destroying the small-village look and feel. And he's heard from our friends at Destiny USA about losing traffic and visibility if the I-81 name is moved to a different location, even if the physical highway will still remain.

And, he's got answers, Walsh does. The concerns are legitimate but solvable; he understands that threats to economic viability should be taken seriously; he gets that main streets are a cornerstone of both commerce and quality of life. Most importantly he's open to collaborative problem-solving.

We should not feel the need to argue over how the current pie is carved up. This city is prepared to work together to make a bigger pie for all. Together we can do transformative things for our city while simultaneously investing in and strengthening the economies of our suburban communities and improving our region's overall quality of life. 

As a community, we have already begun to rise, but handled properly, the I-81 project can be rocket fuel to our ascent. New revenue for our city... Inclusive job growth... A healthier economy and better neighborhoods... All are there. The I-81 opportunity is a clarion call for action and in 2018 the City is ready to answer. 

Specifically on the tunnel, a project which has received significant backing from local State Senator John DeFrancisco, who just announced his candidacy for Governor, Walsh pulls no punches.

Instead of contemplating spending several billion dollars more than is necessary on a tunnel to serve only 30,000 cars per day, what if we invested even a fraction of those dollars and the full power of our collective energy and creativity in undertaking meaningful economic development initiatives in areas outside of the city?

And there was this comment, which was directly related to the I-81 project, but really extends beyond that into Walsh's overarching approach to governing.

Instead of pitting our communities against each other, what if we stood together, unified, with a plan that creates wins for all of our communities? I believe the decision before us can and should be a source of deeper collaboration and a way to reconnect the economic interests of our City and our suburbs. 

He's got a lot of things in mind to help capitalize on the opportunities presented by the I-81 project, including assisting women and minority businesses in obtaining the necessary certification to allow them to grow now through participation on government projects, allowing them to be prepared to work on the community grid (or whatever solution we end up with).

He's partnering with folks from San Francisco in establishing the Syracuse Build program, modeled after City Build, the construction workforce training program they implemented. Other partners include the Syracuse Industrial Development Agency (Walsh was the Executive Director of SIDA under Mayor Stephanie Miner's administration), trade unions, community organizations, and the state departments of Labor and Transportation to move this innovative program forward.  And, he sees it extending beyond just construction training into other potential growth areas.

Walsh is also looking ahead to building new neighborhoods in the areas freed up by the anticipated removal of the viaduct. There's a massive review of the city's zoning ordinances, which started in 2015 when Walsh was still working for City Hall, and he's committed to getting it done this year. As he noted, the last time it happened, his grandfather was our mayor. And the Syracuse Housing Agency, with many properties in the impacted area, is also going to be ready, by engaging the community now to plan what to do then.

What seems clear from this section of the SOTC? Sitting around waiting for something to happen is not the way our new mayor plans on working, and it's not the way he sees us being successful.

I'll close with one more quote from his remarks.

In case you haven't noticed, I reject the idea that people of good will and open mind cannot find common ground.

Grains of Salt (v6): Dues Not Deals

Regular readers know that I'm not a huge fan of giving away tax dollars to corporations or organizations that don't need them. Or maybe, I should say, to those who shouldn't need them.

And so, naturally, I'm intrigued by an article I saw in Sunday's paper about MACNY, the Manufacturer's Association of Central N, and a couple of state senators, David Valesky and Jeffrey Klein, both members of the Independent Democratic Conference. The pols have proposed that MACNY "administer a centralized apprenticeship program for local factories."

You see, our manufacturing employees are getting old - average age is 56, according to MACNY's President, Randy Wolken. They're probably tired, too, I'd guess - most manufacturing jobs are not as easy as say, my desk job - and it makes sense that we need to have replacements at the ready as these folks start to age out of the workforce.

Wolken also noted that

With the $500,000, if it's added to the state budget, MACNY could run a central apprenticeship program that would reduce costs and administrative red tape for all local manufacturers. Much of the state money would pay for administrative costs involved in running the program. 

MACNY's website shows they have more than 330 member firms. Not all of them are manufacturers, but there are a lot of notable regional companies, many with global reputations, such as Welch Allyn, SRC, Lockheed Martin, Corning Inc, Tessy Plastics, and Par Technology among them. And, certainly, there are lots of smaller companies and likely some start ups who have signed on for the benefits of membership, which include networking, governmental affairs, shared purchasing services, and yes, training opportunities and consulting services.

MACNY's reach extends far outside the Central New York Area. This is important, I think, when we talk about coughing up $500,000 to help train employees. They are not a little trade group for Syracuse and Onondaga County - they're a trade group for everyone, from Rochester to Albany, from Watertown to Binghamton and Elmira. Do they really need half a million in taxpayer dollars to organize a training program, particularly when much of the money, by their own admission, is for administrative costs??

Our economy is such that, in many places, we don't build things anymore: we pour things. That's right: instead of opening companies that make things, we open coffee shops, places which tend to pay less than a good manufacturing job would pay. I mean, there are over 40 Dunkin' Donuts alone within 10 miles of me. We have a fairly new one, completely drive through, built in the shadows of the I-81 interchange with 690 East.

This one may very well come down whenever we decide what we're going to do with the interstate, which makes me question whether the group that built the tiny little DD has designs on a government payout of their own down the road. But I digress.

Folks say that part of the reason we have high unemployment and that we don't build things anymore is that factories cannot find skilled people to hire, and so jobs - good paying jobs, ones that might pay as much as tomorrow's minimum wage - go unfilled. If the jobs could be filled, we're told, we could grow our economy, and we could stabilize our population base, and we could support all of those coffee chains that dot the landscape, and make it possible for small businesses and start ups to grow, and, well, you get the picture.

But again -- does an organization with MACNY's membership and reach really need half a million in taxpayer dollars, no matter how pure their motives and how valuable the services that would be offered if the money was there?

Throw in one more point mentioned in the press coverage of this initiative, and my thinking becomes more clear:

The two (senators) were surrounded by officials from local labor unions and the MACNY who support the concept...

Use your dues, folks- not taxpayer dollars - to support your members and their training needs.