Editorial Roundup: New England

Editorials from around New England:

CONNECTICUT

Time to jettison FISA court?

Republican-American

Dec. 25

The FBI is reeling from the release this month of a report by Michael E. Horowitz, inspector general for the Department of Justice (DOJ). Mr. Horowitz found that the FBI, a DOJ subagency, did a shameful job in obtaining warrants to surveil Carter Page, a one-time aide to the 2016 campaign of now-President Trump. Last week, the court at the center of this case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), “ordered the FBI to explain what it’s doing to ensure applications for wiretaps are legally sound and accurate,” according to a Bloomberg News story the Republican-American carried Dec. 18.

While the FBI’s conduct in this matter was an affront to the rule of law, FISC didn’t cover itself with glory, either.

In 1978, Congress passed, and President Jimmy Carter signed, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Among other things, this law established FISC. “The court entertains applications submitted by the United States government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes,” according to its website. The website also indicates FISC is comprised of 11 U.S. District Court (trial court) judges, who are assigned to FISC by the chief justice of the United States.

During the 2016 campaign, the FBI sought to surveil Mr. Page, who supposedly was a go-between for the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Mr. Horowitz found the FBI’s warrant applications to FISA had “significant inaccuracies and omissions,” and that FBI personnel “failed to meet the basic obligation to ensure the applications were scrupulously accurate.” The FBI relied too much on a dossier compiled by the unreliable Christopher Steele, a former British spy with ties to the campaign of Hillary Clinton, Mr. Trump’s Democratic opponent. These “mistakes” seem indicative of political bias, Mr. Horowitz’s official conclusion notwithstanding.

In a Dec. 20 column about FISC’s order to the FBI, The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley A. Strassel noted FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer has been aware of the FBI’s failures for nearly two years. Ms. Strassel indicated that in February and June of 2018, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., then chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, wrote to Judge Collyer to inform her of the trouble spots. According to Ms. Strassel, the second of these letters noted Congress had “uncovered evidence that DOJ and FBI provided incomplete and potentially incorrect information to the court.” By Ms. Strassel’s account, Judge Collyer was dismissive.

To say the least, Judge Collyer’s attitude is troubling. Ms. Strassel perfectly encapsulated the problem. “The House Intelligence Committee has oversight jurisdiction of FISA. And (Rep.) Nunes didn’t come to the court with mere suspicions; he provided facts, following a thorough investigation. The court at the very least had an obligation to demand answers from the FBI and the Justice Department.”

FISA was adopted in response to “widespread intelligence abuses” in the 1960s and ’70s, according to PBS. As the Page case demonstrates, abuse still is occurring, and the FISA system isn’t stopping it. While FISC has ordered the FBI to chart a new course, the court’s 2018 indifference raises serious doubts about FISA’s future.

Online: https://bit.ly/35ZzH3W

___

MAINE

Maine communities will need state’s help to move ahead on broadband

Portland Press Herald

Dec. 26

Vienna residents voted in October to join five other central Maine towns in the latest coalition seeking to bring high-speed internet to an underserved area of the state.

Internet providers have largely ignored these communities, so they are banding together – in central Maine, Down East and in island communities, among other places – to see what they can do on their own.

They’re doing it in more populated places, too, to make sure they have the access to the affordable, reliable high-speed internet that they need.

Most of them are planning using funding from state grants. But once these towns figure out what they’ve got to do in regard to high-speed internet – so important for residents’ health and way of life, and for businesses’ ability to do business – they’ll need help doing it.

One source of help is the state, which has funded the planning grants through the ConnectME initiative. The program has also funded the next step – infrastructure – but the state needs more money to meet demand in Maine, one of the most rural states and, not coincidentally, one with some of the slowest internet speeds.

The Legislature failed this year to put a bond funding broadband improvements on the November ballot after it was held up by Republicans.

Speaking recently to the Editorial Board, Senate President Troy Jackson, D-Allagash, said he wants get the money for broadband improvements through the forecasted budget surplus to avoid another showdown over a bond proposal. Sen. Erin Herbig, D-Belfast, has a proposal that would target $15 million toward communities unserved and underserved by high-speed internet.

The Legislature earlier this year passed a law that exempts municipalities from certain utility fees related to broadband expansion, significantly lowering the cost of high-speed internet projects.

And seeing just how important high-speed internet is to attracting and retaining residents and businesses, communities are well on their way toward figuring out how to establish reliable, fast service.

Last year, projects in Sanford, Old Town-Orono and Down East were selected for a nationwide pilot project to evaluate the costs and benefits of placing high-speed smart fiber on utility poles.

When 2nd District U.S. Rep. Jared Golden, a member of the House Task Force on Rural Broadband, toured central Maine in June, he heard about the importance of projects in Oakland and China. He said he is working on a bill that would help businesses in rural areas connect to existing broadband networks they don’t yet have access to.

Federal help would be appropriate, and appreciated. But Maine, where roughly 200,000 residents don’t have access to adequate internet service, including at least 20,000 who have no access at all, needs to help itself too.

Maine communities are fighting so hard for the tools they need for a prosperous future. The Legislature should not go home next session without finding a way to help them.

Online: https://bit.ly/2QpeKsA

____

MASSACHUSETTS

Back Baker’s climate plan

The Boston Globe

Dec. 26

Until the spell of climate denial breaks in the White House and the Senate, state and city governments offer America’s best hope to curb global warming. Fortunately, some states have Republican leaders who actually want to tackle the climate crisis, like Governor Charlie Baker.

The governor’s team just hashed out an innovative regional plan with the leaders of 12 Eastern seaboard states, plus the District of Columbia, to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks.

Now comes the hard part: convincing member states to actually enact it. It’s a tough sell in rural northern New England, where New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu has already ruled out participation. But the more states that join, the more effective the plan will be. Winning buy-in from state legislatures would also help.

The goal of the program is to reduce vehicle emissions, which now account for the largest share of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions. To the driver, it would work just like a gas tax, raising the price of gasoline up to 17 cents per gallon in the first year. It may seem expensive at first glance, but not compared with the continuing costs of climate change.

The proceeds, up to $5.6 billion annually for the region, would be used to provide low-carbon transportation options that vary state to state, such as public transit or electric vehicles. The Baker administration has said it intends to use a big chunk of the Commonwealth’s share, expected to be around $500 million annually, to fund the MBTA. The goal is to decrease the amount of gasoline and diesel burned in transportation, leading to reductions in transportation emissions of up to 25 percent by 2032.

The plan advanced last week, when the 13 jurisdictions released their latest draft and invited public comment. If all goes well, most of the states will begin seeking approval in 2020.

In most of those states, turning the plan into law will involve going to their respective state legislatures for approval. Even if clearing that hurdle is technically not required in Massachusetts, the long-term prospects of the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) would be brighter if the Legislature formally enshrines it into law.

Although the public is increasingly demanding action on climate change, it remains politically risky to advocate for a measure that sounds like a new gas tax. It’s therefore smart that Baker got business groups to back TCI. But a legislative vote would deprive critics of the most powerful argument against the plan - that it amounts to taxation without representation. That was a potent line in 2014, when voters rejected a plan to link the gas tax to inflation. Even though the Legislature clearly had the authority- just as Baker may well have the authority to adopt TCI now - the electorate bristled at the move. Massachusetts does not need another referendum reversal.

It’s worth noting the TCI by itself isn’t sufficient to address Massachusetts’ transportation woes. The House of Representatives has been eyeing a potential hike to the regular gas tax, which is also urgently needed. The revenue would start flowing sooner and would be easier to borrow against. Bill Straus, the chair of the House transportation committee, suggests that the climate initiative might also be vulnerable to a constitutional challenge, but the Baker administration believes its plan is legally sound.

For another reason to prefer a legislative vote, just look to the federal level: The Obama administration, frustrated by congressional inaction, enacted climate and environmental policy via executive orders. The Trump administration has since reversed many of them. The issues are different for states, but it’s also true that what one governor can implement via executive authority, the next might be able to undo. That New Hampshire participated in the planning for TCI and then Sununu backed out shows that’s not a hypothetical risk.

One can’t help but see Sununu’s claim that New Hampshire gas taxes would subsidize improvements to other states’ infrastructure as nonsense. New Hampshire could use TCI money for local improvements, such as boosting existing efforts to build charging stations for electric cars, or it could use the funds to help keep fuel affordable for people with lower incomes. If surrounding states proceed with TCI, the chair of New Hampshire’s Senate Transportation Committee points out, the pollution fees may well hit regional fuel distributors that also serve New Hampshire. Their costs could then get passed onto Granite State drivers anyway. The prudent move would be to stay in TCI and get its benefits.

In the absence of federal leadership, reckoning with climate change on the regional level is smart and cost-effective. The Massachusetts Legislature and the leaders of other New England states ought to line up in support of TCI, and follow Governor Baker’s lead to make the plan stick.

Online: https://bit.ly/2EUMJ6M

___

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Space Force funding should have been nixed The Nashua Telegraph

Dec. 21

All too often, bad ideas never really go away in Washington. Congress merely reduces taxpayer funding for them, without insisting they be abandoned. That may be the fate of President Donald Trump’s “Space Force.”

Trump envisions the force as an entirely separate, new branch of the military, added to the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines.

He is correct that our national security requires a strong military capability beyond the atmosphere. Making it impossible for a potential enemy to control space is imperative.

But the president’s idea of a new branch of the military is not the way to go. If anything, it could hamper U.S. capability in space.

A perennial problem at the Pentagon is controlling inter-service rivalry. No one can say how many billions of dollars have been spent to ensure that one branch of the military receives funding, and often equipment, its generals and admirals demand merely to keep up with what other branches are receiving.

Coordinating missions that involve more than one branch – which almost all do, these days – is another challenge. Creation of a separate space force would aggravate such concerns.

A more rational approach is to have the Air Force handle space missions. That is a natural extension of its current mandate to control the skies.

It appears most members of the U.S. House of Representatives agree. A spending bill approved this week by the House reflects that.

Trump had requested $72 million to begin establishing his Space Force. But the bill includes “only” $40 million for that.

Why not just thank the president for his concern with security in space – but say no thanks to his request for funding? The $40 million and, probably, even more during future years of Trump’s presidency, will be frittered away without making any real gain – like so many other government programs no one wants, but that not enough lawmakers have the political will to scrap.

Online: https://bit.ly/2Qm0rVy

___

RHODE ISLAND

A sound ruling by Supreme Court

Providence Journal

Dec. 23

The public can be grateful to the majority of the Rhode Island Supreme Court for paying heed to the actual wording of laws passed by the state’s General Assembly.

Last week, the court ruled 4 to 1 that state law does not, in fact, contain the kooky and costly presumption that all cancers that afflict firefighters are caused by their jobs. The outlier, Justice Francis Flaherty, ruled that the Assembly did indeed intend that.

While firefighters deserve the public’s support for any injuries clearly caused on the job, such a presumption would be exceedingly unfair to the taxpayers. Disability pensions in the state system equal almost 67% of pay, tax free, and are part of the crushing pension burden confronted by many of the state’s cities and towns.

The majority of the justices found that the legislature did not wish all cancers suffered by firefighters to be attributable to the job. The Assembly “intended that an occupational cancer be proven before a firefighter is entitled to receive occupational cancer disability benefits,” the majority contended. It would not have “extended such broad benefits to all firefighters without expressly providing for such in clear and unambiguous language.”

The Assembly specifically stated, in its legislation, that an occupational cancer would have to be “due to injury from exposure to smoke, fumes, or carcinogenic, poisonous, toxic, or chemical substances while in the performance of active duty in the fire department.”

Justice William Robinson, in a concurring opinion, explained: “The plain blunt fact is that the General Assembly never used the word ‘presumption’ (let alone ‘conclusive presumption’) in this particular statute. The General Assembly could have mandated that there be a conclusive presumption with respect to the cause of cancer in firefighters, but there is simply no clear language in the statute indicating that the General Assembly did so.”

The case centered on Kevin Lang, a heavy smoker who developed colon cancer. A Cranston firefighter for 18 years, he was diagnosed in 2012.

In 2015, the state’s Retirement Board correctly denied him a disability pension, on the grounds that it could not be proved that his cancer was work-related.

Mr. Lang appealed the decision to the appellate division of the state Workers Compensation Court, arguing that state law mandated that all cancers suffered by a firefighter are presumed to be job-related. While he presented doctors who said he was permanently disabled, none could state definitively that his cancer was caused by his job.

Even so, the appellate court ruled state law did make a presumption that all cancer was attributable to the job. The Retirement Board appealed that ruling to the state Supreme Court.

While the case was winding through the courts, Mr. Lang died, in 2017. But his estate carried on the fight.

The Supreme Court is right to scrupulously read the wording of laws passed by the General Assembly, and not to substitute its own values or wishes for those who are elected by the people to make the laws.

It is important that such a ruling was handed down in a case that could have proved immensely costly, and grossly unfair, to Rhode Island taxpayers.

Online: https://bit.ly/2ZAGG0Q

___

VERMONT

Progress ahead

Rutland Herald

Dec. 25

As 2020 comes in on little cat feet - as poet Carl Sandburg said of fog - Vermonters have something to feel good about. We have made progress, and will make further progress, on two issues of importance to our environment.

Act 148, the state’s “Universal Recycling & Composting Law,” was passed by the Legislature in 2012, and imposed a graduated waste-management regime, not just on our institutions and business but on citizens as well, which will reach its fruition on July 1. Vermonters will be required to take responsibility not only for our cardboard, cans, bottles and plastic, as we’ve been doing, but for our food scraps, too.

The goal is to keep them out of the Coventry, Vermont, landfill (owned and operated by Rutland-based Casella Waste Systems Inc.). It’s the only landfill in the state accepting new deposits, but it can’t be called Vermont’s only “active” landfill, because most of the shuttered ones are “active” in the sense that decomposition continues for decades below the surface, generating methane, the potent greenhouse gas.

Also, July 1 will mark the introduction of S.113, signed into law by Gov. Phil Scott last June. It has been hailed as the most comprehensive set of restrictions on food-related single-use plastic products (primarily supermarket bags, plastic drinking straws and polystyrene containers) in the U.S. Truthfully, that’s a sad distinction because there is so much plastic and micro-plastic in our environment, with enormous amounts added each day, that more severe steps must be taken. For now, though, we’ll celebrate the approach of S.113.

Act 148 was created to drastically reduce the amount of organic waste that’s sent up to Coventry. As Michele Morris, of the Chittenden Solid Waste District (CSWD), reports in Green Energy Times, we sent more than 80,000 tons of food and food scraps to the landfill in 2018; such materials account annually for 25% to 30%, by weight, of all the refuse taken in.

Moist organics like discarded food are also the materials that get the gaseous ball rolling (or roiling) within the depths of the landfill, because they decompose more readily than most of the other content. That’s the process that produces methane.

Large-quantity food-scrap producers such as restaurants and hospitals were required to begin diverting their food waste in 2014 if they generated an average of more than 2 tons per week and were located within 20 miles of a certified processor (such as a composting or anaerobic digesting facility). In 2015, that requirement was broadened to include establishments that generated an average of 1 ton a week. In 2016, it was reduced to half a ton a week, and that annual pattern has continued. Six months from now - on July 1, 2020 - the law will apply to household food scraps, with (quoting the Department of Environmental Conservation) “no exemption for distance”

The DEC’s website provides suggestions to help people comply with the law. One is to shop smarter, to reduce food waste and your grocery bill. Other ideas include backyard composting for organic matter that includes yard debris, sawdust, woodchips and leaves, along with food scraps, to create compost usable for gardens and plantings.

Importantly, the DEC makes this distinction: “(I)t’s OK to throw meat, bones and grease in the trash - those items don’t break down quickly in small-scale compost systems.” (In central Vermont, the Additional Recycling Collection Center in Barre accepts such scraps.)

There’s great promise in Act 148. The DEC explains that “if we can capture just 50% of the recyclables now going to the landfill … we could eliminate upwards of 85,000 metric tons of (carbon dioxide) per year, the equivalent of taking 17,708 cars off the road.”

Yet it’s also important to note that Vermont has an advantage with its landfill not enjoyed by most other states. It’s a source of renewable electricity. Washington Electric Cooperative, which serves 10,600 member-households, schools, businesses and institutions in parts of Washington, Orange, Lamoille and Caledonia counties, owns generating facilities adjacent to the landfill that are fueled by captured methane. The power then travels over 11 miles of transmission lines to a VELCO substation, and is loaded onto the statewide electric grid.

On average, the co-op produces the equivalent of 53% of its members’ electricity in this way, supplying some 8,000 homes and buildings. In other locations, such as Baltimore, trash-to-energy incinerators produce unwanted gases, making them less than ideal as renewable-energy sources. Washington Electric’s partnership with Casella has no such drawback.

So, welcome, 2020. Vermont will use the year ahead to reduce its cumulative strain upon the environment, and that will be a good thing.

Online: https://bit.ly/2SuPyn2