He had much in common with me - a middle aged man who wanted to do as much as he could for his children; a social man who enjoyed chatting with all types of people; a former high school football player who missed that excitement and camaraderie; a man blessed with a supportive family but who nonetheless had bouts of feeling unworthy. He even shared a first name - Timothy (or "Tim" to his friends and "Timmy" to his older family members).
The man in question was the late Tim Finch who died in the middle of the afternoon in the middle of historic Boston on July 4th of this year after being beaten up in plain view of hundreds of tourists and local revelers who ignored the homeless man's plight. See http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1106864&format=&page=2&listingType=loc#articleFull
I knew Mr. Finch personally, having been appointed about six years ago to represent him in a custody case involving his infant son. It was an easy case - Mr. Finch recognized that he needed to "clean up his act" in order to have a significant role in his son's life and that he was not in a position to have custody of him. He eventually acceded custody to his sister Karetta. He then set his mind to trying to defeat his alcoholism and get his life on track by working steadily and getting an apartment.
Mr. Finch was a kind and decent man. He endeavored to receive treatment several times for his alcoholism at the local VA hospital, but those stays were always too limited and he could not overcome this disease. For me, Mr. Finch put a "human face" on the homeless and gave meaning to the cliche "there but for the grace of God, . . . "
Mr. Finch is also emblematic of the problem of homelessness in America. To me, the extensive homelessness in our cities marks an inhumane societal failure. It's a blatant sign that we've flunked one of Hubert Humphrey's eloquent moral tests - the treatment of "those who are in the shadows of life . . ."
What can be done about homelessness? Is it so complex and intractable an issue that we should just continue to avert our eyes and say it's just some necessary byproduct of our free society and capitalist economy?
I think not. What I'd propose is increase private and government resources for treatment. Most homeless people suffer from substance abuse, mental illness or both. WE NEED MORE OF FACILITIES TO TREAT ALCOHOLISM, OTHER SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL ILLNESS - FACILITIES WHERE THOSE AFFLICTED COULD STAY FOR AS LONG AS IT TOOK TO ADDRESS THEIR ISSUES. Is it just me or did it seem like prior to the movement to assimilate people with these issues into society and de-institutionalize them, there were few if any homeless. Granted that some of those institutions were deplorable, but is the current state of thousands of homeless around the U.S.A. any better? Wouldn't such institutions now offer more humane treatment given the advances that have occurred in medicine, psychiatry and perceptions of basic human rights? Perhaps with such long-term care facilities more readily available, a good man like Tim Finch would not have had his life ended in the violent and ignominious way it was.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Doing away with the Electoral College system
Former Massachusetts Governor and Democratic Presidential Candidate Michael Dukakis is now lobbying to do away with the Electoral College system of electing the U.S. President and switching it with a straight tally of the popular vote. Will the Electoral College system soon give way to a simple counting of popular votes? Should the Electoral College system be replaced?
Sorry Mr. Dukakis, I don't see that happening. Indeed, I'm having a difficult time understanding your argument about how " a national popular vote would help a smaller state like Massachusetts have a bigger impact on presidential politics." Wouldn't a national popular vote have the opposite effect since it would encourage candidates to campaign only in the most populous states like California, New York, Texas, Illinois, Ohio and Florida, and ignore smaller states like New Hampshire and Iowa?
Sorry Mr. Dukakis, I don't see that happening. Indeed, I'm having a difficult time understanding your argument about how " a national popular vote would help a smaller state like Massachusetts have a bigger impact on presidential politics." Wouldn't a national popular vote have the opposite effect since it would encourage candidates to campaign only in the most populous states like California, New York, Texas, Illinois, Ohio and Florida, and ignore smaller states like New Hampshire and Iowa?
What should the U.S. do about Zimbabwe?
Are the sanctions to be imposed by the G-8 nations on Robert Mugabe and his inner circle a sufficient response by the U.S. to the situation in Zimbabwe? Should the U.S. and it's allies do more to attempt to oust Mugabe and end the suffering of his opponents?
Clearly, the recent "election" in Zimbabwe was a sham, the continued rule of Mugabe is illegitimate and the country's economy is on the brink of total collapse. The U.S. and Britain were correct to make Zimbabwe a major issue at the G-8 conference in Toyako. They are also right to keep pushing sanctions (and appropriate relief) at the U.N. level. But suppose the U.N. decides not to get involved? I believe that with their relative wealth, both the U.S. and Britain, along with other G-8 nations, would then have a moral responsibility to provide assistance to affiliates of opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), not only in the form of humanitarian aid but also strategic aid.
Clearly, the recent "election" in Zimbabwe was a sham, the continued rule of Mugabe is illegitimate and the country's economy is on the brink of total collapse. The U.S. and Britain were correct to make Zimbabwe a major issue at the G-8 conference in Toyako. They are also right to keep pushing sanctions (and appropriate relief) at the U.N. level. But suppose the U.N. decides not to get involved? I believe that with their relative wealth, both the U.S. and Britain, along with other G-8 nations, would then have a moral responsibility to provide assistance to affiliates of opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), not only in the form of humanitarian aid but also strategic aid.
President Bush's attendance at the Beijing Olympics
Should President Bush attend the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics, as planned? Or by doing so, is that seen as some kind of implicit endorsement of China's reprehensible policies toward Tibet, Darfur and Burma?
I say, keep the diplomatic channels open. Not only the Chinese government, but more importantly the vast majority of Chinese people are taking great pride in their role as host of the 2008 Summer Olympics. If President Bush were to renege on his commitment to attend the opening ceremonies it would be construed not only as a diplomatic affront, but also as a personal insult to the Chinese. No doubt that would lead to further charges of the U.S. meddling in another sovereign nation's affairs and being hypocritical. Perhaps Bush and his diplomatic team have already used his commitment to attend as a chit in negotiating the recent North Korean dismantling of nuclear facilities.
I say, keep the diplomatic channels open. Not only the Chinese government, but more importantly the vast majority of Chinese people are taking great pride in their role as host of the 2008 Summer Olympics. If President Bush were to renege on his commitment to attend the opening ceremonies it would be construed not only as a diplomatic affront, but also as a personal insult to the Chinese. No doubt that would lead to further charges of the U.S. meddling in another sovereign nation's affairs and being hypocritical. Perhaps Bush and his diplomatic team have already used his commitment to attend as a chit in negotiating the recent North Korean dismantling of nuclear facilities.
Friday, June 27, 2008
George W. Bush and the North Koreans
Should President George W. Bush be given any credit for the recent move of the North Koreans to start dismantling their nuclear facilities?
To me, the answer is clearly "yes," although I don't foresee that happening, at least not until the waning days of his Presidency after the November election.
To me, the answer is clearly "yes," although I don't foresee that happening, at least not until the waning days of his Presidency after the November election.
Guns and Logic
Was the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court logical in ignoring the prefatory language about "a well-regulated militia" in it's recently released opinion about the 2nd amendment?
Probably not. Remember, the U.S. Supreme Court has blundered before ( Dred Scott v. Sanford and Plessy v. Ferguson come to mind). Nevertheless, it's probably better to err on the side of individual freedom when it's a question of government power vs. individual freedom. Now we'll await what "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership will be permitted, and whether those restrictions may vary from community to community.
Probably not. Remember, the U.S. Supreme Court has blundered before ( Dred Scott v. Sanford and Plessy v. Ferguson come to mind). Nevertheless, it's probably better to err on the side of individual freedom when it's a question of government power vs. individual freedom. Now we'll await what "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership will be permitted, and whether those restrictions may vary from community to community.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Education Reform in Massachusetts - building new schools
The City of Newton Massachusetts is taking ample flak over the $197.5 million price tag for the new high school it's in the process of building. Given that seemingly exorbitant amount, Newton is an easy target. But is Newton being unfairly attacked?
Consider the story in the Boston Globe's ''Globe West" section this past Sunday June 22nd by Rachana Rathi. The new Newton North High School will house nearly 20% more students than Wellesley's $159 million new high school and nearly 72% more than Norwood's $100 million one. The new Newton North also includes features that are not part of the Wellesley or Norwood project such as a pool, theater and vocational education facilities. THESE ARE NOT LUXURY AMENITIES HOWEVER, BUT INSTEAD ARE SIMPLY REPLACING FACILITIES ALREADY PART OF THE EXISTING, DILAPIDATED HIGH SCHOOL IN NEWTON! And looking at the cost per square foot of the three projects, they seem to be fairly close.
Nonetheless, the media and even some public officials like Massachusetts Treasurer Tim Cahill have been calling the Newton North project "extravagant" with a "deluxe design" and comparable to a "Taj Mahal." Cahill has even gone so far to imply that municipalities building new high schools school should focus solely on "core academic" space and not include space for the arts, physical education and community events .
Indeed, Cahill's quotes in this past Sunday's Globe article make him sound like a dictatorial socialist. Cahill rejects the notion of the state giving each community a certain capped amount and then letting that community decide for itself if it wants to spend its own additional money on other features. As he puts it: "just because you have the money doesn't mean you should be allowed to do it. One community should not be able to provide better opportunities for kids versus another community just because they have the money."
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has set aside $2.5 billion in a school building fund, but Tim Cahill as state treasurer has substantial control over disbursements from that fund. This gives rise to a few questions. Mr. Cahill, is it your intent not to provide any state funds for projects unless they meet some bare bones, cookie cutter design approved by you? How does that reflect educational innovation and the different needs and goals of the diverse communities in the Commonwealth? How is that democratic? Have you no sense of the "town meeting" heritage of Massachusetts?
Consider the story in the Boston Globe's ''Globe West" section this past Sunday June 22nd by Rachana Rathi. The new Newton North High School will house nearly 20% more students than Wellesley's $159 million new high school and nearly 72% more than Norwood's $100 million one. The new Newton North also includes features that are not part of the Wellesley or Norwood project such as a pool, theater and vocational education facilities. THESE ARE NOT LUXURY AMENITIES HOWEVER, BUT INSTEAD ARE SIMPLY REPLACING FACILITIES ALREADY PART OF THE EXISTING, DILAPIDATED HIGH SCHOOL IN NEWTON! And looking at the cost per square foot of the three projects, they seem to be fairly close.
Nonetheless, the media and even some public officials like Massachusetts Treasurer Tim Cahill have been calling the Newton North project "extravagant" with a "deluxe design" and comparable to a "Taj Mahal." Cahill has even gone so far to imply that municipalities building new high schools school should focus solely on "core academic" space and not include space for the arts, physical education and community events .
Indeed, Cahill's quotes in this past Sunday's Globe article make him sound like a dictatorial socialist. Cahill rejects the notion of the state giving each community a certain capped amount and then letting that community decide for itself if it wants to spend its own additional money on other features. As he puts it: "just because you have the money doesn't mean you should be allowed to do it. One community should not be able to provide better opportunities for kids versus another community just because they have the money."
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has set aside $2.5 billion in a school building fund, but Tim Cahill as state treasurer has substantial control over disbursements from that fund. This gives rise to a few questions. Mr. Cahill, is it your intent not to provide any state funds for projects unless they meet some bare bones, cookie cutter design approved by you? How does that reflect educational innovation and the different needs and goals of the diverse communities in the Commonwealth? How is that democratic? Have you no sense of the "town meeting" heritage of Massachusetts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
