Editorials from around New England

Editorials from around New England:

CONNECTICUT

The president’s behavior raises serious questions. Do we all have the courage to ask them?

Hartford Courant

Sept. 29

The revelations of the last week - President Donald Trump’s phone call with a foreign power, allegations that the White House tried to cover it up - are very serious, and every American should agree to that. But the divisions over the president’s behavior seem to be widening, and in many ways, that’s just as serious.

The rough transcript of the telephone conversation between Donald Trump and the Ukrainian president, in which Mr. Trump explicitly requested interference in the electoral process, is the smoking gun that was largely absent in the Mueller report. It constitutes clear and incontrovertible evidence of an impeachable offense.

So why is the country so divided about it? Why are Republicans from the Naugatuck Valley to Capitol Hill insisting that it’s a witch hunt, that the president did nothing wrong, that former Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. is the person who should be investigated, that the Democrats are still angry that Hillary lost? And why are Democrats so bewildered that anyone could support the president after all he’s done?

It’s time for Democrats to listen seriously to what Republicans are saying - and for Republicans to reassess their unwavering support of the president.

Consider the case of Mr. Biden’s son, Hunter, who was on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company. President Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, according to the transcript: “The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

It may well be worth looking into Hunter Biden’s position more closely. Even if the investigation has already been closed and the Bidens found to have done nothing wrong, Democrats should be willing to acknowledge that Hunter Biden’s mere presence on the board while his father was vice president looks fishy. Is it worth investigating all over again? It’s worth asking the question, at least.

But at the same time, Republicans and supporters of President Trump have to be able to separate the Hunter Biden question from the issue of Mr. Trump’s conduct. Everyone, Republican and Democrat alike, should be able to agree that American elections should not be open to other countries and that other countries should not be allowed - or invited - to participate, interfere or assist a particular candidate. The integrity of the American political process is sacrosanct.

Democrats should also be able to acknowledge that the question of whether Mr. Trump actually broke campaign finance law in his telephone call with Mr. Zelenskiy by seeking a “thing of value” is not cut and dried. There are reasonable interpretations on both sides. They should be discussed, rationally, without the interference of political passion.

And at the same time, Mr. Trump’s supporters should acknowledge that the question of whether he abused the power of the presidency by dangling military aid as a quid pro quo for political assistance is, also, a question that should be asked and answered.

Ever since Mr. Trump won the election, Republicans have asserted that Democrats are still bitter, still mad that Hillary Clinton lost, and will do anything to oppose him. But that’s not it. This isn’t about winning or losing or Hillary at all. It’s about a president who has shown a propensity for lying from day one and an apparent disregard for the law - behavior that should concern us all.

Those concerns have only grown more serious. Sadly, because of preconceptions about “the other side” that have been fanned by hateful rhetoric, where one stands on the question of Mr. Trump is now an issue of personal identity.

It shouldn’t be that way. This nation should be able to evaluate potentially impeachable behavior as rationally as possible.

In this case, President Trump’s behavior appears to have crossed a clear line, and in the end, soliciting political assistance from a foreign power is illegal. Republicans should be able to acknowledge that much without feeling like their own values are at risk - because they aren’t. Being Republican, or being conservative, does not mean one must bow before Mr. Trump.

Republican or Democrat, every true American believes that no one is above the law. It is a cornerstone of our Democracy. It’s time to stand firm, and united, on that principle.

Online: https://bit.ly/31IY8QV

___

MAINE

A remarkable hug reminds us to choose understanding and forgiveness

Bangor Daily News

Oct. 4

Eighteen-year-old Brandt Jean stunned a courtroom, and the world, with a simple request for a Texas judge on Wednesday. “Can I give her a hug, please?”

It wouldn’t have been an extraordinary request, except that the woman Jean wanted to hug had the day before been convicted of murdering his brother, Botham Jean.

Amber Guyger, who is white and was a Dallas police officer, entered Botham Jean’s apartment last year. Thinking she was in her own apartment, she shot and killed Jean, a 26-year-old black man, who had been sitting on his couch and eating ice cream. She was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

“If you truly are sorry - I know I can speak for myself - I, I forgive you,” Brandt Jean told Guyger during a sentencing hearing. “And I know if you go to God and ask Him, He will forgive you.”

“I love you just like anyone else,” he added. “I’m not going to say I hope you rot and die, just like my brother did. . I personally want the best for you.”

Jean then turned to Judge Tammy Kemp. “I don’t know if this is possible, but can I give her a hug, please,” he asked. “Please?”

The judge said yes, and Jean stepped down from the witness stand and wrapped Guyger in his arms. Both sobbed.

We are not so naive to suggest that we can all be as forgiving and understanding as Jean. We suspect that a significant number of internet denizens who watched the video and gushed about how uplifting it was were, minutes later, back at their keyboards mocking “their opponents.” Yet, we should take a lesson from his extraordinary action, which has been shared by media around the world.

There is much more that unites us in our shared human experience than divides us. We are all human, no matter our race and ethnicity, our religion, our sexual orientation or party affiliation.

We live in a time when building walls - metaphorical and real - is a too common response to our misperceptions, our misunderstandings and our fears. Denigrating and fighting against those who cast a ballot for a different candidate, who came from a different country, or who worship a different god (or none at all) is wearing us down.

Jean reminds us that we have a different choice - we can choose forgiveness and understanding, despite what feels like a chasm between us.

We are all striving for a better life for ourselves and our family. For some, the path is straight and easy. For many, there are hardships that require assistance and understanding. Some make horrific mistakes. But, as Brandt Jean so eloquently voiced, we should all want what is best for one another - even if we have different ideas of what that means.

When we condemn one another for how we look, how much money we make, what we value, where we come from, how we drive, who we love, where we shop and many other small differences, we throw up unnecessary roadblocks to our wellbeing as a nation, and a planet.

There was another popular video on social media this week. It showed an out-of-control catering cart circling perilously close to an airplane parked at a gate at O’Hare airport in Chicago, spilling its cargo and scattering airport workers. Many joked that the chaos symbolized the current state of American affairs.

But there is a deeper question raised by the video. Who are we? Are we the circle of people mostly standing by, wondering what to do? Or are we the person who acts, using a ramp truck to stop the runaway cart, ending the chaos and danger?

Online: https://bit.ly/31NHGip

___

MASSACHUSETTS

At long last, Senate pushes education funding forward

The Republican of Springfield

Oct. 4

No education funding package was going to satisfy everyone. The Massachusetts Senate version that passed by unanimous vote didn’t do that.

But at long last, the Senate moved forward with a bill designed to launch the state into a new era of equal education opportunity. Now it goes to the House, where different philosophies on this package have existed, but the Senate’s 39-0 vote makes a powerful case for acceptance.

The Student Opportunity Act will require an increase of $1.5 billion annually by the time it is fully implemented. That’s a lot of money. But as a rule, most taxpayers accept spending on public education if they have the confidence that increased funding will actually produce better schools.

Senators believe there will not be a need for new taxes or revenue streams, meaning existing resources can absorb it. Frankly, that remains to be seen over the seven-year phase-in period for implementation. But if it happens, the bill could prove to be worth the cost and then some.

Debate over priorities, time frame and cost have been going on since 2015, when Massachusetts was deemed inadequate in serving needs that were not so prominent in 1993, the last time an educational overhaul took place. The fiscal 2018 and 2019 years in particular ended with disappointment and no resolution.

The Senate version is being supported by teacher unions and education advocates, and hopefully not just out of relief that results are finally being delivered. The culminating debate did leave some ideas on the table.

No amendments were adopted regarding charter schools and reimbursements. Northampton senator Jo Comerford was disappointed that even greater special education increases were not included.

One amendment that was adopted will require local school committees to approve plans to address achievement gaps with input from parents, including parents of special education students and English language learners. It would set “measurable targets” for reducing achievement gaps.

Massachusetts sits at an education crossroads. There are many admirable qualities in our schools, some as a carryover result of the 1993 legislation and others through the diligence of local administrators, teachers and an increasingly active parent base.

Will 21st Century needs be adequately addressed? Will kids from lower income areas, and not just those in more affluent districts, get a fair chance?

The Senate version says yes. Now it’s up to the House to see if this long-awaited reform can continue moving forward.

Online: https://bit.ly/30Nvih0

___

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Time to add ’Lost 74’ to Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall

Foster’s Daily Democrat

Oct. 4

It can happen and it should happen.

Last week, Seacoast Sunday shared the story of the “Lost 74,” a group of Navy personnel killed during the Vietnam War when their destroyer was accidentally sliced in half by an Australian aircraft carrier. Seventy-four men were killed in service to their country during a war.

Among those lost were 21-year-old Gary Joseph Vigue, a 1965 Dover High School graduate who left behind a wife and a 5-month-old son.

However, because the accident occurred outside the designated combat zone of the time, the men who make up the “Lost 74” don’t qualify for inclusion on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall in Washington, D.C. That is wrong and must be corrected as soon as possible as the fatal accident occurred June 3, 1969.

Excluding those who made the ultimate sacrifice because of an arbitrary line is out of touch with reality. Thankfully though, U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Angus King of Maine are two co-sponsors of a bill to have the sailors’ names added to the memorial.

This follows Shaheen’s efforts to help secure a memorial at Arlington National Cemetery for the 129 men lost April 10, 1963, when USS Thresher sank and imploded during sea trials off the coast of Massachusetts.

“It is long overdue that these men join their fellow fallen brothers and receive the recognition they deserve on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall,” Shaheen said recently. “Boundary lines drawn in the water shouldn’t determine the respect we pay our servicemen and women killed in the line of duty - they gave their lives for this country and their sacrifice deserves equal recognition.”

Perfectly said.

Kevin Galeaz of Hooksett and commander of USSVI Thresher Base, led the effort to create the Thresher memorial in Arlington. Its creation, he said, “meant everything to me because the family members finally had solace. They had been waiting for 56 years for this memorial to be placed in Arlington National Cemetery.”

Galeaz also said the monument helps maintain the legacy of those lost aboard Thresher and perpetuates the story of the Thresher and the submarine safety measures enacted after its loss.

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall not only enshrines the legacy of the men and women who lost their lives during the war, it serves as a continuous source of healing in a nation divided by that conflict. It brings balance to how the soldiers and sailors of the Vietnam War were treated upon their return to the States.

Service to our country is one of the most noble things men and women can do. All steps must be taken to enshrine those who die in service of their country.

The legislation to add the “Lost 74” to the wall should be passed swiftly and those in charge of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall should follow suit with the same sense of urgency.

In the event some want to stand at an imaginary line, they might instead think of stating their case while looking into the eyes of widows, children and other family members left without a husband, father, son or brother. It’s hard to imagine one would be so entrenched as to not feel compassion and compelled to do the right thing.

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

___

RHODE ISLAND

A vote for R.I. development

The Providence Journal

Oct. 2

It is encouraging news for Rhode Island’s economy that the 195 Redevelopment Commission last week approved the final design of a $300-million luxury apartment tower that would be the tallest building in the state.

Hope Point Tower would house 800 to 900 residents, attracting people who work in hospitals, universities and other businesses, as well as “empty nesters” who want to live in the city, according to developer Jason Fane. That would breathe life into the downtown, encouraging business activity.

A 2017 Appleseed study estimated that the 46-story Hope Point Tower could generate $273 million in statewide economic impact, and a one-time increase of $146 million in the Rhode Island economy, Mr. Fane said.

And even with $25 million in tax credits from the state, the building would generate enormous tax revenues. The building is expected to produce $70 million in property taxes alone over the next 20 years, and some $250 million over the next 40 years, Mr. Fane contends.

But there are more hurdles to jump.

As Mark Patinkin wrote in his Sept. 29 column (“Tower developer runs into the height of bureaucracy”), Mr. Fane has been trying to get his project underway for three long years in Rhode Island, and he doesn’t have a shovel in the ground yet. He was 73 when he started; he is 76 now. How much longer will he retain the fire in the belly to build in Providence?

Mr. Fane confessed to Mr. Patinkin that “if he’d known it would be this hard, he wouldn’t have tried. In his half century as a developer he’s never faced delays like this.”

Rhode Island is a state badly in need of economic development. It should be rolling out the carpet for those who want to invest serious money here. Mr. Fane’s $300 million tower could be the biggest private project in Providence in decades.

Unfortunately, it was drawn into the abyss of local politics when opponents, some of them business competitors, protested against its modern architectural design. Mayor Jorge Elorza at one point foolishly vetoed it, despite presiding over a city with a pension debt in the range of $1 billion.

Others, of course, have argued that modern architecture is part of many historic cities, providing new energy and bringing in more business activity. Friedrich St. Florian, the esteemed architect of the National World War II Memorial in Washington, said such a stylish luxury building would complete the Providence “renaissance” by attracting highly mobile professionals to the city.

The state eventually had to take control of state land in legislation passed this year, which should streamline this process for future developers while providing checks and balances.

While Mr. Fane has been trying to build, the state rejected a plan to construct a state-of-the-art $1-billion energy plant in Burrillville. It also declined to make a $23-million investment in a new public ballpark that would have kept Triple-A baseball in Rhode Island and revitalized downtown Pawtucket. Meanwhile, it spent $22 million on one pedestrian bridge that went wildly over budget.

We just hope other developers around the country do not read of Mr. Fane’s travails and conclude they would have to be insane to try to invest in Rhode Island. With this approval, and the movement of this project forward, perhaps Rhode Island can take a sad song and make it better.

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

___

VERMONT

Doubts raised

The Rutland Herald

Oct. 2

Sen. Bernie Sanders has had a week of ups and downs as a candidate for the White House.

The Vermont independent raised $25.3 million in the past three months, his campaign said Tuesday, a total that continues to demonstrate his strength with small donors as he fights to maintain support in key early-voting states.

The financial haul, among the first that a candidate has announced for the third quarter, has again placed Sanders in the top tier of the field for fundraising.

Twenty-four hours later, a different news cycle took hold.

The 78-year-old Sanders was taken to a Las Vegas hospital after he experienced chest discomfort during a campaign event Tuesday and sought medical evaluation. Two stents were “successfully inserted,” and Sanders “is conversing and in good spirits,” according to officials in his campaign.

Furthermore, the campaign proved deftly opportunistic.

It noted the candidate had a heart procedure to highlight the benefits of his trademark Medicare for All health care plan.

Sanders would rest for a few days after the relatively common procedure, his campaign for the November 2020 presidential election said.

Sanders’ speechwriter, David Sirota, said in a daily newsletter that the unexpected medical procedure was “a perfect example of why the United States needs to join the rest of the world and pass Bernie’s Medicare for All legislation.”

Sirota cited a 2018 paper by researchers at the London School of Economics that found cardiac implant devices cost up to six times more in the United States than in some European countries with government-run health care systems.

Sanders advocates an approach that would extend the existing Medicare program for Americans aged over 65 to all Americans and largely eliminate the private insurance industry.

Sirota argued the gulf in price was in part due to the U.S. health care system’s “complex web of payers - rather than a single-payer Medicare for All system that can negotiate better prices.”

As many as 1 million Americans a year get stents, a procedure that involves inserting a balloon-tipped catheter to open blockage and deploy tiny wire-mesh tubes to prop open the artery. It is commonplace, and rarely life-threatening.

News of Sanders’ health scare sparked mean-spirited jokes pointing out the U.S. senator was treated by the health care system he wants to overhaul, according to Reuters.

“Any bets on whether he’ll be going to Cuba for their great communist medical care? Get well soon Bern. #SocialismSucks!” tweeted Ben Bergquam, a right-wing California radio host.

And worse, other questions were raised: Does this signal concern for the candidate’s long-term health, especially given the rigors of running for president? And, despite the pointed message about universal health care, should Sanders instead be considering handing the baton to another candidate?

Some would suggest such an idea is ludicrous. The Democratic field’s oldest candidate is raising a hefty war chest, and has remained on point, even when chest pains slowed him down to a dull roar.

But those are the Bernie supporters. Other critics were blunt in their estimation of the race moving forward. Social media was filled with armchair critics who said this marked the first day of Sanders’ demise. Pundits were also having a field day with the news.

Political watchers noted that any persistent questions about health and longevity could have ramifications not just for Sanders’ campaign, but also all the Democratic front-runners and President Trump.

All of the candidates in their 70s are “going to get more scrutiny if there’s any physical or mental issues that arise,” said Peter Hart, a longtime Democratic pollster and strategist who is neutral in the primary.

However, given recent history, they won’t necessarily “be ignored or passed over by voters” merely for undergoing a medical procedure.

“If you get multiple issues, or a very serious mental or physical problem, that will change the equation for the candidate,” Hart said. “What voters are really looking for is how this person performs and are his or her mental faculties all together.”

And this is the second time during the 2020 campaign that health problems have forced Sanders to ease up on what has otherwise been a robust schedule. Just last month, he canceled appearances in South Carolina because he lost his voice.

But in the high-stakes arena of U.S. politics, doubt has now been raised. We agree voters need to take health - physical and mental - into consideration. It remains to be seen how this blip on the Sanders EKG will affect the campaign overall. We still have our doubts.

Online: https://bit.ly/2Vg3O2q