Letter to the Editor: 04.04.19

A Squeaky Wheel

Springs

March 27 2019

Dear David: 

It has been an honor to serve our community as president of the Springs Historical Society and Library. The organization is an important part of the community.

My election came at a very crucial time considering that the leadership had previously not changed in decades. Problems, however, bloomed — everything from lacking a current New York State charter to unfinished tax filings, to lack of hot water in the lavatory, to state requirements for an updated constitution were all matters that needed immediate attention.

In just six months, I have:

1. Primarily researched and coauthored a new constitution, which was approved by the board. It contains the necessary amendments now required by New York State and insurance companies that work with nonprofits. This includes policies on nondiscrimination, sexual harassment, conflict of interest, and so on.

2. Obtained better insurance for the facility and for the first time ever, gotten a policy to indemnify trustees, officers, and volunteers.

3. Obtained new tools. Personally researched, purchased, and directed the installation of a new computer with a contemporary operating system and software, a high-speed printer, the networking of machines (including one on the second floor), put in new working telephones throughout the building, and obtained new fire extinguishers for everyone’s safety.

4. I can also state that my initiative to create a working list of members’ emails and to use electronic means to communicate has been started. 

5. I hope that the board will soon authorize the building of a website that will allow announcements and programs to be easily accessed by members’ from their home. Some of the preliminary work that I’ve done on this will be useful going forward.

6. Described the tools necessary to begin digitizing and archiving documents and photographs, as well as constructed a modest budget to acquire and use them.

Perhaps most important, I avoided giving our historical documents to the East Hampton Library (as some trustees initially advocated). This would have facilitated digitizing archived materials but would have given full possession and ownership of the materials away. If this had been done, our very existence could have been challenged in Albany. 

This is especially important because our organization has never been authorized to operate a library, but only, and specifically, a historical society. There are very different requirements (and agencies that supervise them) for local historical societies versus libraries. Each is governed by different state agencies, and the requirements for qualifications differ significantly. 

Springs has never been officially authorized to operate a library under tax- exempt or New York State charter guidelines.

The 16 years since our New York State charter expired have made us vulnerable (potentially) for huge tax liabilities. The new insurance policies that I negotiated and put in place (for the first time in our history) may provide some protection for trustees who might be deemed liable for monies collected during this period.

There also have been many physical improvements to 1 Parsons Place. All of you will recall that only months before our election, the town condemned the part of the library on the second floor and, because no alternative plan was proffered, discarded over 6,000 books.

I photographed the premises after taking office to document the disrepair and neglect. There were more official safety, fire, and health violations that could be counted on the fingers of both hands. As a picture is often worth a thousand words, I entered one in the Guild Hall members show. I wanted to direct attention to the plight of the facilities. Although criticized by some for doing this, I consider it in the rich tradition of documentary photography and film. Art does not just serve beauty and sometimes it takes a squeaky wheel to get things done.

Here are a few examples of the improvements that I successfully lobbied Town Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc and Councilwoman Kathee Burke-Gonzalez to make: a new banister, guard rails, elimination of exposed electrical wires, working locks on all doors, reconditioning of bathroom fixtures and kitchen sink, repair of steps and loose floor planks, etc. Anyone who comes to the facility today will find it much better organized, cleaner, and much safer than it has been in years. I thank the elected officials who made this possible.

This has been accomplished through hundreds of emails, dozens of meetings, and scores of telephone conversations. I have maintained a compete record of these efforts and responses. I have also established a photographic, as well as a written record.

I want to thank Linda Child for stepping in and doing a great job to re-establish the viability of the library and to run it with the skills of a librarian. Ethel Henn deserves credit for putting our financial records in order and both establishing and proving budget reports and timely attention to all monetary affairs. Also, Henrika Conner, C.P.A., deserves credit for sorting out issues concerning the society’s missing tax filings and submitting the necessary forms and information.

I especially want to thank and commend John Kaufman who has served as our pro bono attorney with distinction. He has consistently been a good partner and has regularly provided expertise, skill, and insight to our challenges. This especially applies to his work formulating the new constitution.

At this point both the Springs Historical Society and the Library are in better shape, with a larger paid membership and more resources than it has had in decades. I hope that some of my suggestions regarding programming and fund-raising will be successfully implemented.

However, I think it best that someone else now lead the group. Therefore, I intend to resign as president effective Friday, March 29, at close of day. I wish everyone on the board of trustees well and hope they will have success furthering our organization’s goals.

I hope the work done will make all members and residents of Springs more contented patrons of our society. This organization is a very valuable part of the community, and I have been fortunate to have been elected by the membership to make contributions to its survival and well-being.

Sincerely,

DONALD SUSSIS

Past president, Springs Historical So- ciety and Community Library



Hug a . . .

East Hampton

April 1, 2019

Dear Dave, 

I’m sure all our readers are already aware, but today, Thursday, April 4, is National Hug a Newsperson Day. Well deserved if you ask me.

RUSSELL BENNETT



Second Class

Montauk

March 26, 2019

Editor:

Recently the East Hampton town board passed legislation related to restructuring the East Hampton parking permits and beach access permits. As most are well aware, the East Hampton town board has been keenly focused on rationalizing the excessive number and process by which beach access permits were issued, and introducing an expiration on those permits. East Hampton beach access permits remain free to East Hampton residents, $375 for nonresidents, and under the new law now expire every five years.

Part of the debate leading up to the passage of this new legislation was how East Hampton should treat owners of co-ops. Unfortunately, rather than introducing some kind of rational and reasonable accommodation for co-op owners — recognizing co-op owners as property taxpayers and holders of proprietary leases — the East Hampton town board chose to dismiss co-op owners outright and treat them as second-class citizens. Their action was discriminatory, misguided, and off the mark.

As a co-op owner in East Hampton, whether your primary residence is in Westchester County, West Islip, New Jersey, or Connecticut, under the new law the only way one could obtain a beach access permit is to register your vehicle at your East Hampton address and have your driver’s license at your East Hampton address. No accommodations were discussed or considered to provide East Hampton co-op owners seeking an avenue to secure a 4x4 beach access permit: proof of ownership, copy of proprietary lease, certification of ownership by the co-op board, proof of insurance, etc.

Rather than embrace a rational and reasonable accommodation, the East Hampton town board took the positon that co-op owners are not property owners, they are shareholders and corporations and do not own real property. Therefore they are not property taxpayers whose names and addresses appear on the tax rolls. In fact, during the debate, one town board member commented, and I am paraphrasing, “We don’t issue beach access permits to out-of-town business owners, why should we issue them to out-of-town co-op owners.”

So if you own a second home in East Hampton (private home or condo) and your driver’s license and vehicle registration are in Alaska, you are eligible for a 4x4 beach access permit. If you own a second home in East Hampton (a co-op) and your driver’s license and vehicle registration are in Islip, you are not eligible for a 4x4 beach access permit. If you rent an apartment in East Hampton and your driver’s license and vehicle registration are in Montauk you are eligible for a 4x4 beach access permit. Seem fair and reasonable to you?

I grew up in Westchester County and have been visiting Montauk since the mid-1970s, vacationing and fishing with my father. I moved to New Jersey in 1995 to raise my family. Approximately ten (10) years ago I took a leap and purchased a Montauk co-op, an investment of approximately $300,000. I made that investment to provide my family a place to enjoy for the rest of our lives, a place to fish for the rest of our lives in the best place in the world. Whether the town board views me as a resident or not, Montauk is my second home. I am not a tourist. I have invested significant time and resources in Montauk.

The current East Hampton property tax bill for this Montauk co-op property is approximately $14,500 per year. As a shareholder, for the past 10 years I have contributed my fair share to those annual property taxes. Four years ago, all the owners agreed to fund and execute a $1.6-million renovation of the property — a significant improvement to the property and significant investment in East Hampton. Finally, as a shareholder, I also hold a proprietary 30-year lease agreement between me as the shareholder and the co-op, granting me exclusive access to my unit.

As the town board considered the proposed legislation, there was ample opportunity to discuss a compromise to accommodate co-op owners. Whether it was creating a new class of permit holders, imposing a nominal fee for co-op owners, requiring co-op boards to certify unit ownership with their quarterly property tax payments, and/or requiring owners to provide a copy of their proprietary lease. I tried my best, but the fact is the town board wanted nothing to do with it and decided to mistreat co-op owners as second-class citizens. Disappointing and discriminatory, in my opinion.

Finally, having worked inside and outside government for the past 30 years, how a government body treats people, whether you consider them a resident or not, is very telling. To his credit, Supervisor Van Scoyoc was very respectful and responsive throughout this process, as was staff. While we did not agree on everything, he was a gentleman. Unfortunately, the same could not be said for the remainder of the town board. Repeated communications ignored; no responses received from any member of the town board, not even a simple response saying thank you for your input. That speaks volumes to how the majority of the town board views second-home owners, a population its own hamlet study recognizes as vital to the East Hampton economy. Sad but true.

MATT STANTON



Key Players

East Hampton 

April 1, 2019

Dear David,

We all raise our voices to claim how much we love our town and its semirural character, but when you look carefully you will see that greed and avarice have become the key players in our community. Right now, global warming, climate change, or whatever you want to call it, is advancing over the horizon. We are beginning to experience changes in our weather telling us that something drastic is happening. Scientists say we now are living in a temperate rain forest. 

Our soil, which is labeled Bridgehampton loam, and is the richest in New York State, perhaps the country, and maybe the world, should be treasured; instead it is threatened by people with small minds who only have one value, making the most money they can with the land they own. Whether it is a mega- mansion or a gym, the governments in our East End towns, whose role is to care for the needs of the people, are complicit in their schemes, they may deny it, but they are the ones who choose the decision makers, the people who are on the governing boards who have never learned to say no and the towns’ administrative staff.

Just drive below 27 from East Hampton to Southampton, wow, look at the proliferation of the mansion obsession. There is one huge house that the queen is probably coming to live in, as it is truly a palace. Why? Why are people so greedy for room upon room upon room? Don’t know, but we know the builders, the new mafia, have greed and avarice, love this desire on the part of some to exhibit their wealth.  

We must elect political leaders in the next go-round who will put people on the all-important boards who can say resounding “No” to wasteful use of precious land, which should be preserved when the coming changes are predicted to produce hunger and maybe even starvation. Greed and avarice must not destroy what little we have left of our farmland and our special place.

Sincerely,

PHYLLIS ITALIANO



Offshore Wind

Montauk

March 31, 2019

Editor:

Unfortunately, some people in East Hampton perform analysis of issues, like the wind farm project, from a confirmation bias perspective. The results of their evaluation are appraised through the prism of their personal interest. In this case, the imperative pursuit of alternative energy over fossil-fuel energy is being subverted by myopic self-interests, such as political brinkmanship, and nimbyism driven by belief in demagogic propaganda. 

David Gruber and I have now gone back and forth in our respective letters in this publication debating his original enumerated criticisms against the South Fork Wind project and more specifically his disparagements of the handling of such by some town board members.

Given the detailed form and length of those letters, I’m sure it is a debate enjoyed by not too many readers other than he and I. Nevertheless, they surface many important points, which, in my opinion, have revealed Mr. Gruber’s motivation and prism: his political aspirations and not so much the project’s unprejudiced merits. Having said that, I will refrain from making other personal insinuations against Mr. Gruber and stick to the disputed facts.

It is circuitous to refute point-by-point all the particulars already disputed in our respective letters. His arguments and presentations of evidences have been stated and in contradiction to those so have mine. I do want to focus in this letter among other things, what I think is the crux of the matter at this point in time and expound on that — to grant or not to grant the easements for the Beach Lane easements.

Orsted claims that they need the easements because they need assurance that if they go through the lengthy and intensive process of permitting the proposed cable landing and route from Beach Lane, they will indeed be able to implement it. Mr. Gruber asserts that the wise negotiation tactic is to withhold the easements until the permitting process is completed, several months from now. He claims this would give the town more leverage in negotiating the terms of the easement. Indeed it would give the town more leverage, so much so that Orsted would be foolish to put itself in such a precarious position and may instead decide the wiser and only choice is to shift to a cable landing and route from Hither Hills.

Mr. Gruber’s tactic is not a form of negotiation. It is akin to extortion. After a year and a half of review, Orsted would be forced to either acquiesce to the town’s demands, no matter the unreasonableness of those demands, or begin anew with another location and review process. Does Mr. Gruber want to negotiate a good faith deal or does he simply want to chase the other party away from the table? If East Hampton wants to demonstrate its leadership in supporting offshore wind energy as an alternative to fossil fuel-derived energy, it should be committed to working in a sensible manner to negotiate a good deal for the town, not engaging in brinksmanship that is more likely to result in no deal. The other salient point that needs to be addressed is the fear-inducing lie that once the cable is installed on Beach Lane in Wainscott it will be a wide open portal for additional transmission of offshore power, leading to major development of larger and numerous substations. This is simply not true. I don’t want you to take my word for it or anyone’s word for it. Just read the Article Seven application Orsted made to the New York State Public Service Commission. It clearly defines the project as “up to 15 turbines,” and “a 138kV cable.” Orsted can only build what its permits and real estate rights will allow, which also means the town and trustees have the final word on project size if the cable lands at Beach Lane because they control the project easements.

There is a specific need for power on the East End caused by shortages during peak summer months. The wind farm is a big part of a solution for that problem. If it were more cost effective to transmit additional power from the west out to the South Fork, the Long Island Power Authority would be implementing that plan. It was the base against which LIPA considered the cost of the South Fork Wind Farm. But it’s not cheaper — it’s more expensive. Paying more to upgrade transmission lines that will carry additional fossil-fired power from the west is a loser. Ratepayers get a better deal — and clean power — from the wind project. Worse still would be the implementation of new fossil-fired generators in East Hampton, the other likely alternative absent power from the wind farm project.

The grander community benefit of utilizing offshore wind power for our electrical needs is in danger of being thwarted by the provincial, inflated concerns of residents in one segment of the Town of East Hampton, the unsubstantiated fears of some in the fishing industry, and worst of all by the selfish political aspirations of a few demagogues.

Don’t let those forces win out. Speak out and support those in local government who have had and hopefully will continue to have the courage to act for the greater good of our community.

BENNY SORGIE



Simple Shift

Bayport

March 28, 2019

To the Editor: 

Across Long Island, towns and villages have driven clean energy development and building efficiency standards for new homes. For example, there has been broad adoption of fast track and reduced cost permitting for residential solar projects.

This positive attitude toward residential solar should drive new building codes to mandate that new commercial development include rooftop solar energy generation. New commercial construction should mitigate its impact on the electric grid the same way developers are required to improve roads to mitigate the increase in traffic their new building will create.   Long Island’s contribution to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s goal of a carbon-neutral New York by 2040 can only be achieved if solar power is considered in the mix along with offshore wind as well as battery storage. Producing solar power on rooftops in the built environment right where it is used will eliminate the need to upgrade the electrical distribution system. This simple shift in our local building codes will speed our transition to a renewable energy economy and help keep fossil fuels in the ground where they belong.

ROXI SHARIF



Need York City

New York City  

March 28, 2019

To the Editor:

There’s more Long Island can do to contribute to a renewable energy future than supply offshore wind power. Renewable energy production would be maximized if solar power is considered in the mix.

Long Island towns and villages have the right to make building codes even more energy-efficient than the state requires. To meet Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s doable and necessary goal of a 50 percent renewable electric grid by 2030, towns and villages must mandate that new commercial development include rooftop solar energy generation. New commercial sites are already required to mitigate other public impacts, like improving roads to accommodate increased traffic. Higher demand on the electric grid, which currently would result in higher greenhouse gas pollution, should be addressed by developers with renewable power generation.

Producing solar power on rooftops right where it is used will eliminate the need to upgrade the electric power distribution system, and save natural environments from disruption. This remediation of building codes will speed our transition to a renewable energy economy.

LAURIE JOAN ARON



Renewable Energy

Springs

March 25, 2019

Dear David,

In a very strange letter to the March 14 Star, Paul Fiondella opens with an excellent exposition of the long-range devastating effects the world will suffer (human extinction, for example) if we continue with business as usual dumping carbon into the atmosphere. Then he suddenly pivots to unfounded false accusations against town board members, Peter Van Scoyoc and Sylvia Overby, for not doing anything to reduce energy demand. In fact, the board has in place a portfolio of programs to reduce demand, and I urge residents to check out http://energizeeh.org for information on how to reduce your carbon footprint and save money on your energy bill.

Just for the record, Mr. Van Scoyoc, a leader by example, has taken advantage of these programs for his own home. Whereas previously he was relying on fossil power, now his solar-powered house is putting excess clean energy into the grid, which helps us all. I wonder if Mr. Fiondella has taken similar steps.

At the same time that our elected board is pushing the envelope toward renewable energy, the fossil fuel industry is not resting. Joe Balash, of Trump’s Interior Department, has told fossil fuel executives that the Atlantic Coast will be included in the administration’s plan to expand federal leasing to nearly the entire outer continental shelf. Many local, vocal opponents of the clean power from Deepwater Wind are strangely silent about the threat to our marine environment from oil and gas drilling. It makes one wonder if this opposition is not just another example of fossil fuel-abetted defense of oil company profits. Is there an invisible hand in this fight?

Conservation must be a significant part of the transition to clean power, but we can’t conserve our way to zero. We need robust alternative power. The longer we dither, the more resources will be squandered drilling for oil, which serves only to grease our slide to oblivion.

DON MATHESON



Already Many

Springs

April 1st, 2019

Dear David,

On the Letters page last week, a concerned citizen wrote that the local, state, and federal governments should slow down and further study the use of windmills for renewable energy along the eastern shoreline of the United States. He agreed with the current president’s offer to create a commission of private, independent scientists to study impacts. Note: There are already many completed studies.

The letter goes on to admire a professor from Princeton, William Happer, who was appointed to chair this group. Because so many scientists and academics have studied wind energy as a source of power over open water, I was interested as to what scientists Mr. Trump respected enough to present yet another study, as he is not a “science-oriented” president. His administration has already moved toward extending large oil drilling rigs off our East Coast along the same path as the leases for the windmills.

With the push of a button on the internet, I looked up the chairman of Mr. Trump’s new commission, William Happer. He has quite a résumé. Vice President Al Gore fired him from a commission on global warming in the early ’90s because of his extreme views. Dr. Happer has no formal training in climate science and is a staunch denier of climate change and the science supporting it. 

His premise is, “The world must abandon this suicidal global warming crusade.” The local letter writer feels we are moving, “to solve a problem that is not a problem.” Instead of moving ahead with the windmills, we should wait until the president’s commission report, funded by the Koch and Mercer families — large contributors to the president with oil interests.

I am stating these facts so that discerning readers may judge for themselves if we should move ahead with the proven effectiveness of having our town using renewable wind energy or wait for the president’s study. Incidentally, the wind off Montauk is one of the most consistent on earth. Look it up.

Sincerely, 

DEBRA FOSTER



Need to Relax

Amagansett

March 26, 2019

Dear David,

I find it comical Trump and company are declaring some kind of vast victory over the minute summary of the Mueller report that the Trump attorney general, William Barr, has submitted. Democrats, Republicans, and independents yearning for Donald Trump, this blight on our democracy, to be exposed, need to relax. We are only in the top of the fourth inning.

All we know is Mueller failed to establish collusion. I believe it occurred, but that doesn’t mean the special counsel could definitively establish it. That’s far from a declaration of innocence. It’s an acknowledgement that guilt couldn’t be proved, yet nor could his innocence be confirmed. How many crooks like John Gotti escaped conviction when they were guilty? As to the charge of obstruction of justice, all we know is Mueller failed to exonerate Team Trump.

Let’s get the report out, then our heavy hitters — the House investigative committees and the Southern District of New York — come to the plate. We’ve seen indictments and guilty pleas from the Don’s top associates, cabinet members resigning amidst scandals, others fleeing or being fired, his university and charitable foundations exposed as frauds, setting a bar so low (an inch above a dirty puddle) that they are thrilled that his crew has failed to be exonerated for obstruction of justice. Break out the champagne.

So those who see this fraud of a human being for what he is, take heart. This is the man who had the gall to claim he was the victim of a Joe McCarthy witch hunt when his mentor and lawyer was Roy Cohn, McCarthy’s lawyer. Undoubtedly, when he is exposed he will announce he is the victim of a Deep State conspiracy engineered by the ghosts of Hubert Humphrey and Adlai Stevenson — for those who luxuriate in his lies, those so willfully blind, why not? But take heart you out there who yearn for this malevolence that has been foisted on the republic to be excised. The game is much afoot and the best is yet to come.

On a side note, I recommend as must reading “Red Notice” by Bill Browder. He was a hedge-fund manager who invested in Russia in the late ’90s till Vladimir Putin turned on him, tortured and murdered his attorney Sergei Magnitsky, and went after Browder. Browder, with the help of both sides of the aisle, got American heroes like John McCain to pass the Magnitsky Act, which punishes those responsible for his attorney and friend’s murder. Putin responded by restricting the ability of Americans to adopt Russian kids. The book is riveting and insightful.

Putin went after Browder, sending Natalia Veselnitskaya to Washington, D.C., to discredit him. She failed. She was the same gal at the Trump Tower meeting that Little Don and Jared Kushner attended. When Trump, his son, and Hope Hicks lied to the American people about the real purpose of the Trump Tower meeting, the excuse was that they were there to discuss Russian adoptions, not dirt on Hillary Clinton. Anyone still believing that lie with money please respond, I have several bridges in Brooklyn available for purchase. She was indicted for obstruction of justice by our government this year. Read the book. You’ll better understand our enemy. Our president remains oblivious, or worse.

Browder is writing a sequel that will be out next year about the Russian assault on our freedom. He is another who has to fear for his life. Trump, and his buddy Putin, will not find it happy reading.

Wait. The truth will out.

Regards,

PETER HONERKAMP



Tone-Deaf G.O.P.

Springs

March 31, 2019

Dear David:

Remember when Ivanka Trump promised to make paid parental leave one of her priorities? The Trumps’ G.O.P. has just unveiled yet another scheme that would yet again victimize Americans. This time he has his sights on those who want children.

The G.O.P. euphemistically calls this scheme the Cradle Plan. Rather than providing traditional paid parental leave, whereby parents are paid by their employers for post-birth leave, the Cradle Plan cradles no one. Instead, parents are given the choice of returning to work post-birth or raiding their Social Security account to pay for any parental leave they choose to take. And it gets worse. 

Parents would be allowed to dip into their Social Security savings for up to three months of parental leave. The catch? In return for being allowed to deplete their retirement resources, parents would have their retirement delayed by twice the amount used for the “paid” leave. So if a parent chose to take three months of post-birth leave, her retirement would be delayed by six months of delay to her Social Security entitlements for each child.

America is the only industrialized nation that does not mandate a form of paid leave for growing families. The reason is self-evident: the benefits of parental post-birth subsidies not only improve the child’s health, which one would think would be a bipartisan interest, but helps workplaces remain competitive through the retention of female workers (if benefits are extended only to the mother; retention of all workers is enhanced if the benefits extend to paternal leave as well).

Young American families and their parents need to make their voices heard to end the victimization of them by the tone-deaf G.O.P. There already are drumbeats for the 2020 election and it is high time that those G.O.P. legislators who choose to forgo real paid parental leave should lose their jobs.

Sincerely,

BRUCE COLBATH



Great Unknown

East Hampton

March 30, 2019

To the Editor:

As a citizen I realize that the past is gone but that our future rests in the hands of 545 people elected to Congress. We have a very large hill ahead to climb, but being unable to function and make decisions will not make that hill any smaller. It is here and now that matters! One or 545 cannot produce a positive outcome if they have a negative mind; standstill is a pollution. Pollution produces fear. Action is and past fear is courage who exactly can we say possesses that quality of courage in Congress today?

Life can answer in three ways. It says yes and gives you what you want. It says no and gives you something better. It says wait and gives you the best. It is up to the 545 of you who were voted into office. You must pick one and get something done. Ability is what you are capable of doing, motivation determines what you do, and attitude determines how well you do it. 

No matter how hard you try you cannot adjust the wind, but you sure as hell can adjust the sails. Don’t be afraid of being different, be afraid of being like everyone else. It’s not always holding on that makes us strong. Sometimes it’s letting go and talking to each other. A bend in the road is not the end unless you fail to make the turn. Fear of the unknown is actually a great creative partner. You can only describe life as the great unknown. The best view comes after the hardest climb. There is great power in letting go and there is great freedom in moving on. All politicians should study themselves carefully and you may discover that your own emotions are your biggest handicap of accurate thinking. Remember the most important thing in any communication is hearing what is said. He who loses faith loses all.

THOMAS BYRNE



Safety Net Programs

Rochester

March 27, 2019

To the Editor:

I believe that I speak for many Dem-ocrats when I tell you that I don’t like some of the direction that the national Democratic Party is taking. I would like the party to be more like it was in the 1960s, when it focused primarily on the bread-and-butter and kitchen-table issues that affect about 90 percent of Americans except for the wealthiest 10 percent. I want the party to stand for enhancing the social safety-net programs such as Social Security as well as advocating for other social programs, including a Canadian-style national health insurance program. I believe that the party focuses too much on fighting against President Trump and the Republicans on the “identity-politics” and “cultural-war” issues.

While these issues are important, I worry a lot more, for example, about people who have lived good and responsible lives but who can’t afford to pay for and take their prescription medications that they need to be in decent health and often need just to stay alive.

I would also like to see the party have the courage and bravery to advocate for the passage of a national wealth tax of 15 percent on all individuals with a net wealth of $10 million and higher so that we will be able to pay for this new social spending, as well as to advocate for eliminating the $100 billion/year that is spent on corporate welfare and business subsidies, which will also help us to pay for this so that we will be fiscally responsible and not increase the national debt as well as the federal budget deficit.

Sincerely,

STEWART B. EPSTEIN



Totally Responsible

East Hampton

April 1, 2019

Editor:

The issue of immigration is a long-standing, unresolved problem that concerns the lives of millions of people and the health and well-being of the country, and yet it is never discussed in real fact-based conversation. David Frum’s article in this month’s Atlantic tries to do just that and does a really good job. Frum puts out a fact-based analysis of our immigration situation and asks most of the pertinent questions around the issue. On the other side, the president threatened to close the border with Mexico, cut off aid to Central American countries, and continue with the wall — all designed to exacerbate the problem rather than trying to resolve it. If resolution is the intent?

The problem we are dealing with is twofold. First is the nation’s need for immigrants who fit into our economic and social systems and provide enormous benefits to the country. Second is the mass migration of millions of people seeking asylum from wars, economic collapse, poverty, etc. These are two distinctly different problems, which we somehow mush together into a single issue. They require different approaches and plans that will produce the desired outcomes. Underlying these questions is the primary question of what can the country reasonably do in dealing with these two problems? How many people can we accommodate and what resources are we prepared to invest to make this possible? The political and emotional level does little but render us stupid. Unfortunately, everything coming from the government has a quasi-fascist underpinning and provides nothing more than short-term emotional relief. Understanding that the government has no real desire to resolve these problems makes any resolution from the top down impossible. Given our economic and political power in the world, we are in a position to deal with the second problem without the emotional distress that accommodating large masses of people engenders. 

We are totally responsible, 150 percent, for the chaos and violence in Central America. If we accepted this responsibility we could substantially modify the economic and social conditions in these countries by investing in their economic, educational, and social systems. (The cost of integrating immigrants into our country is 10 times more than helping them to stay where they are.) Create a Marshall Plan for Central America (sorry, Elliott) with the purpose of raising the quality of life and inducing people to stay home instead of risking their lives coming to the U.S. 

Responsibility is a bizarre concept in our democracy. We created the chaos in the Middle East but we don’t want the migrants whose lives we destroyed. We may not be able to fix the messes we have made around the world, but we can recognize our roles in their fabrication. 

Central America is repairable, fixable. We could easily give it a shot? Marshall Planning Central America might resolve the border mania that has divided the country. The huge advantage of the plan is that it still leaves our other immigration issue and doesn’t deprive our political class of an important tool for manipulating and deranging the population. We could do it in secret and watch the numbers at the borders diminish without fanfare. Imagine the ecstasy of taking credit for solving this problem that our politicians would experience. It could be monumentally orgasmic and addictive, and motivate them to solve other problems like our collapsing infrastructure, etc. 

NEIL HAUSIG 



Sandy Hook

Plainview

March 31, 2019

Dear David:

I blame our Congress for Jeremy Richman’s death. If Congress had enacted any lifesaving, common-sense gun control laws after his daughter Avielle was one of 20 6 and 7-year-olds murdered at Sandy Hook, or even after Las Vegas, Parkland, or any other mass shooting, he probably would not have killed himself. 

All 535-plus members of Congress over the past six-plus years have his and Avielle’s blood on their hands. Still, I can’t help wondering if the Sandy Hook murder weapon — instead of killing 20 of those 6 and 7-year-olds — had killed 20 of Congress’s 60 and 70-year-olds, maybe the surviving 515 members might have taken some action.

RICHARD SIEGELMAN



America First 

New York City 

March 26, 2019

To David: 

Let’s get started. A synopsis of the current administration’s accomplishments. U.S.A. Economy. Stock Market. Employment, women, minorities. Wages. Consumer confidence. Purchasing power. All racing to unclimbed, unconcerned peaks.

Taxes. Unemployment decreasing. Decimating the vast restrictive, suffocating manufacturing regulations. Invigorating the related industries. Ditto farming. Overhauling, renegotiating, and rectifying current treaties, emphasizing America First. On the verge of deposing a bloody socialist dictator, and returning a country back to its people. Israeli-Palestinian conflict; echoes of undisclosed ongoing, intensive efforts, and negotiations. Curtains for ISIS, a promise fulfilled. Reversed Obama’s stagnation attitude toward the military. Significantly increased defense budgets. Increased, accelerated, bolstered the modernization of all military weaponry, Army, Navy, and Air Force. Saved our renowned war horse, the M-1 Abrams Army’s main battle tank from extinction. 

Emphasizing the obvious, that the defense-industrial base is essential to our economic national security. Established the Space Force, “Force 6,” a strategic step toward guaranteeing American space superiority. Not reluctant to sack, substitute appointed executives, commanders in pivoted positions for the sake of bettering improving function. It took Abraham Lincoln three years to promote Ulysses Grant to lead all the Union troops. 

Introduced, and passed a prize-winning law, the First Step Act, reforming the federal criminal justice system, overdue. Global Warming set in realistic, down-to-earth (no pun intended), defusing the apprehension, hysterical mythologies. Finally addressing head-on the exuding, threatening infectious breach at our southern border, spotlighting the ridicule, derision of the existing immigration laws. “You have broken our laws, violated our border, you are here illegally. Sign this, and return back here for trial, at this date, five months from today! Next!” An assured enticement, inducement for many more caravans. 

Unquestionably bolstered real estate values in the Hamptons. Please pardon, am sure I missed quite a few more, sorry. Keep it up, Mr. President, six more years to go, the best is yet to come. Juxtapose, Explicate. Democrats entering the 116 Congressional session with zero alternatives agenda, facing pressing, crucial, ongoing national security, economic and global issues. Instead unleashing a tirade of accusations, gibberish on “collusion.” 

“Delusions: Obstruction-Suction,” Pfizer-Mizer,” “Hotel- Schmotel,” mundane, inconsequential, trivial, irrelevant matters, practically precipitating tribal warfare, two years to now. Launching multiple inquisitional hearings, investigations, employing demeaning, embarrassing methods, portraying vast ignorance, insulting honorable, dedicated, patriotic public servants, and military personnel. Squandering essential legislative time, vast sums of $$$$$$$ — mine and yours. 

Finally, this prodigality was confirmed, certified, and delivered to the White House on Saturday, March 23. The adjudication, verdict, clear and simple, one-word “dude,” reverting to good old New York slang, an aggravated pimple, or an infected hair on an elephant’s ass. Mind you, an elephant, not a donkey. 

EDWARD A. WAGSCHAL