Opinion

Charlie Christian is generally regarded as the first electric guitarist in a band.

John Hammond discovered Christian and brought him to Benny Goodman.

Goodman wasn't sold on an electric guitar as a lead instrument in a band, and Christian came to his audition dressed flashy.

The band jammed on a few songs and Goodman still wasn't impressed. He called out Rose Room, figuring the song would leave Christian in the dust. But Christian knew the song well and launched into an hour-long jam.

Goodman signed him.

Goodman was a leader in the Jim Crow era in racial integration. Among his band members, besides Christian, were vibraphonist Lionel Hampton, and pianist Teddy Wilson.

In Harlem, Christian joined in with the likes of Charlie Parker and Dizzy Gillispie and helped invent a new style of jazz, Be Bop.

He was only 25 when he died of tuberculosis in 1942. He is among the most influential guitarists in history.

As a young man growing up in Mississippi, Muddy Waters fell under the delta blues, acoustic blues influence of Robert Johnson and Son House. When he moved to Chicago, he found what worked in small juke joints back home couldn't be heard in the Windy City's crowded bars, so he started playing electric guitar.

And Chicago Blues was born.

He's one of the most influential artists of the 20th Century.

Robert Johnson was barely known in his lifetime. He was 27 when he died, leaving behind only 59 recordings of 29 songs.

He remained largely unknown until 1961 when Columbia Records released King of the Delta Blues Singers.

Young kids like Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Keith Richards, and many other early rock and roll guitarists heard the album and were transfixed.

Johnson became one of the most influential guitar players in history though he died in obscurity.

That obscurity helped foment many legends, some that started in his lifetime, such as meeting the devil at the crossroads and trading his sole for talent.

The roots of that legend is that Johnson used to show up at juke joints and could barely play. Then he went away for six months and came back as a transformed musician.

That's likely due to taking lessons from another accomplished player, but he was so much better, other musicians couldn't believe how good he became.

George Harrison once observed,

"If there was no Lead Belly, there would have been no Lonnie Donegan; no Lonnie Donegan, no Beatles. Therefore no Lead Belly, no Beatles.”

For those who don't know Lonnie Donegan -- he was a British musician who, as a side project, started performing American folk music, which started the Skiffle movement. He was hugely successful for a time and influenced a host of young teenagers in England to put together bands. Often they were poor and played homemade instruments. This is how the Quarrymen got started, with John Lennon at the helm, and the Quarrymen evolved into The Beatles.

Lead Belly also influenced Bob Dylan.

By Deacon Steve Schumer

Over the past several months, the Western New York community has been reeling with losses and tragedies, each one reminding us how fragile life is. But in spite of, or because of, these adversities, signs of hope, strength and unity have continued to emerge rather quickly.

Consider the recent blizzard where we saw countless acts of selflessness and heroism by first responders, volunteers and just everyday folks who stepped up and helped – and even saved – their neighbors.

At Catholic Charities, we thrive on the hope we see every day. In a mother who escaped a violent situation for her and her children. In a young man who started a new life in America after fleeing Afghanistan. We see hope in people of all ages and of all faiths – from the support our foster grandparents give, to teens spreading awareness about the importance of good mental health. Hope is everywhere. It is at the root of what we do.

During and after these overwhelming events that have shaken our community, Catholic Charities has been here as a beacon of hope. Our counseling services, food pantries, and basic needs and housing assistance offer crucial support. We are here for the most vulnerable among us and for anyone in need. We are here for the community. We are here for you.

In fact, Catholic Charities has been a beacon of HOPE here for 100 years. In October 1923, Catholic Charities was born out of the Diocese of Buffalo from a collection of institutions serving the very young to the elderly. During its first year, Catholic Charities served about 12,500 people. Last year, Catholic Charities’ programs and services supported more than 134,000 individuals, families, and children.

We are inspired by our centennial year, and recently launched this year’s annual Appeal, with a goal of $9.5 million. Support of the Appeal will help ensure critical programs and services administered by Catholic Charities and many diocesan ministries through the Fund for the Faith, so needed in our community, will continue to be available. The Appeal is always needed. Some years, like this one, it is particularly meaningful.

The annual Appeal has been an integral part of Catholic Charities’ century-long history. In the 98 years of the Appeal, close to half a billion dollars has been raised. That figure alone illustrates how vital the annual Appeal is.

When you donate, you play an essential role not only in the growth and success of Catholic Charities, but in the Western New York community at large. Your gift provides more than just a meal for a family, or the stability of a home for someone in need. It provides hope.

Donations to Appeal 2023 can be made at ccwny.org/donate through June 30. Thank you for your continued support.

Deacon Steve Schumer is president and CEO of Catholic Charities of Buffalo.

Letter to the Editor:

New Year, New You

New Year’s Day symbolizes fresh starts and new beginnings. People use January as a benchmark to reprioritize their lives. Wellness is often at the top of people’s priority lists with things like making time for self-care, ending harmful habits, or wasting less and saving money.

With the introduction of Mobile Sports Betting last year, the Western Problem Gambling Resource Center (PGRC) has seen a dramatic impact on people’s lives in a variety of ways linked to emotions, behaviors, and finances. Young people ages 18-24 and their families are being most affected, many of whom have had little experience dealing with other addictions or mental health issues.

Like other types of gambling, Mobile Sports Betting includes negative effects like sleep issues, strain on relationships with loved ones, financial problems and increased alcohol or drug use. People who struggle with gambling are also at a higher risk for other mental health problems. The ease of access and lack of awareness about risks of MSB are fostering the development of problems quickly at a point in time when many of these young adults are learning to navigate life on their own.

The problems associated with gambling are not reserved only for the person engaging in the activity. Other loved ones, particularly parents in this case, are finding themselves worried about their loved ones, trying to help financially, and wondering how to best handle the situation. 

The most important message for the beginning of this new year is that help is available if you or someone you love has been exhibiting warning signs of a gambling problem, such as unusual financial problems; feeling stressed or anxious over sporting events or other gambling activities; low school performance due to absence or preoccupation with gambling; or lying to family and friends about how much money and time is spent on gambling. January is a great time to reach out to the Western PGRC.

The Western PGRC is here to help anyone who is looking to reprioritize their lives and overcome the problems that gambling has caused. Private-practice counselors, behavioral health and treatment facilities, recovery groups and other community services throughout Central New York make up a vast referral network. When people call (716) 833-4274 or email WesternPGRC@nyproblemgambling.org, they confidentially connect with a knowledgeable PGRC staff person who will listen to and connect them with the resources that best meet their needs. Whether you are ready to get help, or you are just curious about your options, call us today. We’re here to help.

Jeffrey Wierzbicki
Western & Finger Lakes Team Leader
Western & Finger Lakes Problem Gambling Resource Center's
NY Council on Problem Gambling

Op-Ed submitted by Paul Wolf

In January, many will start the New Year with goals to exercise more, eat better, lose weight etc. January will also be when newly elected public servants or incumbents starting another term take office across New York State.   

Old habits are hard to change in people and especially hard to change in government. The biggest issue in government today is the lack of trust the public has in their elected leaders. The best way to build trust as an elected official is through transparency. Elected officials should begin 2023 by conducting the public’s business in an open and transparent way. To show their commitment to open government, elected officials serving on a village board, town board, city council or a county legislature should introduce and pass a New Year resolution stating they will:

1)    Post timely notice of all meetings at least one week prior to all meetings.

2)    Meeting agendas and all meeting documents will be posted online, at least 24 hours before a meeting occurs.

3)    Post draft meeting minutes online, no more than two weeks after a meeting occurs.

4)    Allow members of the public to speak at the beginning of a meeting regarding agenda items and non-agenda items, whether attending in person or remotely.

5)    Live stream their meetings by video and post the video recording online afterward.

6)    Only conduct private executive sessions on rare occasions in accordance with the New York State Open Meetings Law. Just because you can hold executive sessions does not mean that you have to. A motion to hold an executive session to discuss “litigation,” “personnel,” or “collective bargaining” is not sufficient, as the Open Meetings Law requires motions to state more information when holding an executive session.

7)    Agree not to hold private political party caucus meetings. There is no reason at the local level to hold private political party caucus meetings to discuss political business or public business. Secret meetings build a lack of trust among the public.

8)    Have information regarding the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), posted in a visible place on your website. Proactively post documents online as much as possible so that the public can access information without having to file a FOIL request. Post an easy fill-in-the-blank form that assists the public in filing a FOIL request by email on your website.

9)    Commit to ensuring that all FOIL requests are acknowledged within five days as required by law and that information is provided to the public promptly.

Paul Wolf, Esq., President, New York Coalition For Open Government

Sen. Patrick M. Gallivan apparently is eager to help increase profits for oil companies and chain gas stations.

He proposed legislation to cap taxes on gas.

This is economic nonsense. It's also a form of socialism, and like all socialist measures, it is doomed to fail.

In Genesee County, we have a front-row seat to how ineffective government efforts are to reign in gas prices.  While neighboring counties enacted gas tax holidays, the Genesee County Legislature, on the recommendation of County Manager Matt Landers, kept its local gas tax in place.  The result is that gas prices locally have risen and fallen right in line with the counties that cut gas taxes.  There is no evidence that consumers in neighboring counties have saved even a single penny on a gallon of gas.

If folks in Erie County aren't seeing a break in gas prices, who do you think is benefitting?  It's not the consumers. It's the oil companies and gas stations, in the form of higher profits. 

While local variables can cause differences in prices from region to region and even county to county when it comes to gas prices, fuel oil is a global market.  The price structure is set at a global scale and filters down to consumers from that basis.  There is nothing a local politician can do to change that, not if you believe in free markets, and despite regulations, cartels, and subsidies, at a global scale, oil and gas sales remain a competitive business. There are still numerous competing interests, each struggling to gain the upper hand, which leads to fluctuations in oil prices.

One tenet of socialism is central government control of prices. When that happens, it creates artificial winners and losers. That is what Gallivan is attempting to do with this legislation.  It's sad to watch the Republican Party drift further and further from conservative principles and embrace the tactics of progressives to try and control every aspect of our lives.  Gallivan has apparently joined the ranks of Progressive Republicans.  Hopefully, our local representatives, Steve Hawley and Ed Rath, won't follow suit and will oppose this brand of socialism.  

The social media debate on our story about Sweet Betty's closing has been, um, interesting.

Opinions have been wide-ranging, from "people don't want to work" to "restaurant owners don't pay enough."  

A sampling and my thoughts:

"Yet you have the government saying that unemployment is at all-time low but retail or restaurant has lack of employees."

Well, if unemployment is low, that means there are fewer people looking for work.  That means it is harder for existing businesses to fill open positions.  More people working leads to a "lack of employees" looking for work. 

That was a small business they should have been able to run themselves, with little help. I know, because I did the same exact thing. They either weren't willing to do what it takes to be successful or they weren't willing to pay someone what they were worth. Simple as that.

Clearly, a comment by somebody who has never owned a food service business.  Running such a business means multiple jobs overlap -- taking orders, cooking food, washing dishes, cashing out customers, and then somebody has got to keep the books.  It's not a one- or two-person business.

They are getting money to stay home and not work!!! Stop the free hand outs... And watch how many people look for work...

Extended unemployment benefits ended a long, long time ago and the economic evidence is the payments had little impact, when still active, on people's willingness to work.  There are currently 900 people drawing unemployment in Genesee County, according to the most recent Labor Department data.  That is not a number that screams "People are mooching off unemployment insurance payments."  

3% unemployment rate yet why are there almost a million on welfare! Time for workfare for the lazy!

Actually, in the U.S. there are nearly 60 million people drawing some sort of assistance, and nearly all of them who are of working age and not on full disability have jobs.

Then there are the people who blamed the owners:

Love how they say it's the workers why not blame the owners for not paying more for the work or putting on the work outfit and working themselves. Simple supply = demand and people have a life simple you wanna pay minimum wage you get minimum result

crazy how they’re closing and many other family-owned restaurants aren’t…time to stop blaming staff and look to themselves as to where the problem lie, whether it be their management or their product.

And some readers did jump to their defense, such as Susan Macomber:

The owners,family and friends worked there 99% of the time...They were very hard working and very friendly, and the food was delicious...The owners also closed for holidays and closed at times to give their workers some time off because they couldn’t get enough help. And they paid their workers well.

More blaming the owners from somebody who almost certainly never owned a business:

Unemployment is lowest it's been in 40 years... only the failed businesses are having trouble finding employees. The strong survive my friends, it's survival of the fittest, and you ain't fit.

Look around you, there are help-wanted signs everywhere.  There was a time, more than a decade ago, when economists considered an unemployment rate of five percent to be "full employment."  The idea is that at five percent, being unemployed was transitory.  People moved quickly from one job to the next.  It was temporary and the normal economic shuffling of the deck as businesses changed strategy, closed for various reasons, or people quit jobs just to have the time to find a better job. 

Also, COVID itself has taken a lot of people out of the workforce.  More than one million people in the U.S. have died, and nearly half of them had not yet reached full retirement age, and presumably, a lot of them were or could be in the workforce.

This is a very, very tight job market, probably the tightest any of us have seen in our lifetimes.

So let's talk about the free market:

This makes me so sad. I love Sweet Betty’s!!! But I get it. No one wants to work anymore, or if they do, it’s completely on their terms and hours. Businesses everywhere are impacted by this.

Here's the thing  -- in a free market, people can choose where they want to work.  They want to work on their terms.  I want to work on my terms.  You want to work on your terms.  We all want that opportunity.  I own my own business so I can work on my own terms.  When I worked for other people, I worked hard and improved my skills and knowledge so I could advance and make more money.  That's working on my own terms.  When there isn't a tight labor market, employers have the leverage to say, "work on my terms or leave" (perhaps with more nuance than that).  In a tight labor market, the power imbalance shifts to the workers.  But that's how free markets work, should work, and we want them to work if we want a thriving economy and an improving standard of living for everybody.

One reader asks legitimate questions:

How much were you paying? How many hours did you guarantee? Was it a regular schedule, or did it vary from one week to the next? Were your cooks treated with respect ot treated like they were disposable? People work when they feel like they are valued. If that's not the case, they go elsewhere. There are LOTS of jobs out there. Make yours the one everyone brags about.

Those are all things that will impact the ability of a business to hire good and qualified people.  However, there is only so far a business can stretch on pay and hours and benefits.  Running a business is not as easy as this reader makes it sound,  as I'll address later.

Another take on the "people don't want to work" theme:

To all who wonder why they can’t get help….. PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK TODAY! THEY WANT TOP PAY FOR DOINB LITTLE! There are plenty of jobs all over…. It seems to me that if you REALLY want a job or NEED a job…. Then take one of the jobs!!! Money is money!

Let's just say there are in fact people who don't want to work.  There are undoubtedly some people who don't want to work. Period.  There is no wage that will entice them to leave their bedroom.  But this poster seems to assume that just because there are jobs, there are jobs that the people without jobs want to take those jobs.

There are a number of reasons that people not working won't take a job you think they should take: They're not qualified. It doesn't fit their career path.  The hours won't let them take care of their children or go to school.  The job won't help them advance their career and could even derail it.  Or maybe the job you think they should take isn't just offering enough of an incentive to give up fishing to go to work.  Money is, as the poster says, is money.  And yes, sometimes it takes more money to entice a person to take a job.  

In order for a worker and an employer to find each other, the worker needs to be qualified to work the job that's open.  Even if a worker who has spent the past few years pushing a broom is willing to take a job as a line cook, that doesn't mean he's qualified to be a line cook.  Employers don't like to hire unqualified people because they don't have the track record to ensure they can do the job or will stick with it.  Unqualified workers cost money and can be a disaster.

A more nuanced take that deserves a response:

Restaurants took the worse beating when that Covid crap shut N.Y. down. The ridiculous cost of living made it so minimum wage skyrocketed. Instead of putting caps on rent increases and utilities the more pay made prices go up MORE. Small business owners suffer because with their overhead and insurance payments they cannot afford to hire as much workers. Everyone suffers. And people complain about higher costs in restaurants. They HAVE to raise prices just to make ends meet.

Restaurants got a lot of financial help during and because of the pandemic restrictions.  All of that money being pumped into the economy is part of the cause of current inflationary pressures (it's basic economics: increase the money supply and prices generally go up).

Restaurants by and large stayed alive with delivery and curbside pickup while maintaining lower overhead with the dining rooms closed. When the economy kick-started again, companies were scrambling to fill open positions.  A lot of former workers found new jobs, retired, started their own businesses, went back to school, decided to become stay-at-home spouses, picked up a job with Uber, Door Dash, or Instacart, or otherwise left the workforce (and not just because they became lazy, but in the human condition, there is always some of that, too).  With a shortage of workers, restaurants and other businesses were forced to raise wages. That started before the current inflation cycle and is one of the multiple causes of today's inflation.  The sad thing is, the wage gains workers first realized after the end of the pandemic have been wiped out by inflation. 

Adrian Fitzgerald Harris has an informed view:

Low Birth rates, massive boomer retirements and no one solving the immigration problem have caused some of this.

The decline in the stock market might coax some people out of their early retirement. The low birth rate isn't going to change so long as we remain a first-world economy. So that leaves immigration.  Want more workers?  Let more workers into the country.  We need about one million working immigrants flowing into this country ASAP.  That would spur the kind of economic growth we need to stave off a recession and stem inflation.  The economy would boom.

Terry Paine left an intelligent comment:

You can tell the people that have never had a business with employees before. Maybe these business geniuses could offer some advice on what an employee's pay should look like since we know $14 to $17 is not enough. Then the employer can make a decision whether they can themselves take that big of pay cut or if raising the cost to the customer will reduce sales enough that the business has to close anyway. Tough balance.

I can say that their standards for hiring wait staff is pretty high since I have enjoyed every one I've ever had wait on me. That standard might be just as important of more important than the food.

So to sum up.  There are two main camps here: blame the employers and blame the employees.

How about if we not blame either?

Running a small business is hard, especially a food services business.  You have government regulations to worry about, employees stealing (a big problem in a mostly cash business), taxes, insurance, lots of overhead, employees who have their own lives and own issues that you need to balance, supply issues, competition to worry about, customers who complain, and so on.  You pretty much have to be insane to run your own business.  It's a hard life.  Thank God there are people who do it though, because small business owners are the true backbone of America and our communities.  They offer more charitable support to their communities, give communities a sense of cohesion and pride, and the owners are often more involved and more often make fine mentors for the young people they meet.  

And employees have their own wishes and desires. They have aspirations, dreams, ambitions.  They might have families to care for or passions they wish to pursue away from work.  They are often not business owners themselves because of these other constraints or priorities.  But humans evolved to acquire resources to make their lives more stable and better.  For the vast majority of us, we want more money and better things, so naturally, we want better pay.  And if we can't get better pay, then we look for other tradeoffs, such as more time to go fishing or play in a rock and roll band.  

In our rush to make everything political these days, we miss how complex our economy really is and how something as seemingly straightforward as a restaurant closing is really about a world of competing economic forces. Sweet Betty's closing is sad. It shouldn't be fodder for scoring political points.

Today, ballot access in New York State is more restrictive for independent parties than it is in Putin’s Russia. In a cynical attack on third-party ballot access, then-governor, Andrew Cuomo, attached a (rouge-painted pig) campaign finance reform package to his “must pass” 2020 budget. It was his coup de grace, having been shut down by the courts after his hand-picked commission contrived a similar move to banish third parties from the ballot in 2019. That maneuver was struck down when a Working Families Party court challenges prevailed. So far, Cuomo’s 2020 election sabotage has held up in the courts.

The draconian provision that has stripped the upcoming state election slate of all but Democratic and Republican candidates (WFP-endorsed Democratic Party candidates) was an increase in the number of votes required to retain a ballot line. The requirement is based upon statewide election totals for governor or U. S. president. The prior requirement of 50,000 votes was jacked up to 130,000, nearly triple the former standard.

The Conservative, Libertarian and Green parties all failed to retain their place on the ballot. The Libertarians and Greens also failed to place candidates via petitioning, having been successfully challenged by the major parties. Zeldin petitioned for the Conservative line, but he was disqualified due to his campaign submitting 13,000 fraudulent signatures.

It may seem practical to boot parties that cannot muster more than a 10% share of a presidential or gubernatorial contest, but that ignores local races where third-party candidates have won contests. That argument also ignores the role of minor parties in the grand scheme of political discourse. In the current political spar between the major parties, a sampling of campaign ads shows that the two major parties are focused on a handful of polarizing issues, most of which do not poll as major voter concerns. Win or lose, third-party candidates bring salient debate to the table and, without question, overcome the inertia of two major parties content with the security of the status quo.

Moreover, legislating ballot access with unreasonable quotas is not “regulation,” it’s suppression. After years of arguing with pollsters who wanted to put me in the “undecided” camp (I’m a Green), I received a letter this spring from the Board of Elections notifying me that I am no longer a Green; I’m an “other.” I chose to be a Green before a Green Party even existed in the U. S. After reading about the rise of Greens in Europe, I waited a decade and a half to register as a member of the U. S. Green Party. In one fell swoop, Andrew Cuomo, chagrined, having been called out by Howie Hawkins in a gubernatorial debate, spitefully voided tens of thousands of New Yorkers’ chosen party affiliation.

Despite not being on the ballot, Howie Hawkins is running a write-in campaign for Governor along with Gloria Mattera, Lt. Governor. I encourage readers to give them consideration, if not for their credentials, for their challenge to the arrogance that deprived independent parties of a spot on the ballot.

C. M. Barons
Bergen, NY
Member of the Green Party

I swear some of you folks out there think we live in a socialist community -- a community controlled by central planners who decide what business goes where.

And you pretty much think those central planners are pretty stupid.

Everytime news gets out of a new retail development, social media explodes with comments about what "they" should put there -- A Wegman's, an Olive Garden, a Sonic, a Mighty Taco, or whatever chain some commenter thinks is his or her favorite.  Always a chain, by the way, not "I hope some ambitious local person opens a locally owned business there so the community realizes a greater economic benefit."  

I often want to ask, sometimes do ask, "who is 'they'?"  I really want to know who these people think the "they" is who decides what businesses get to open where.  I think I've gotten an answer once.  He said "the bureaucrats." And when I explained it didn't work that way, his rejoinder was, "It was just a figure of speech."

I think it's important that people understand there are no central planners in our economy.  It's important that people understand how free markets work.  If people don't understand, we are in greater danger of the socialists taking over.

But after more than a decade of dealing with people on social media and the "they" comments, it's clear it's a losing battle. They just won't learn or listen.

When a business is announced for a location, the "they" comments persist.  "Why are they putting that in there?  The last thing we need is another of that type of business."  For example.

Often, that's followed by a prediction of failure for the new business location.

One thing to say about chains, they didn't become big chain operations without knowing what they are doing.  Before they even scout a specific location, enter into negotiations for a lease, or start drawing up plans, they've done market studies.  They know the population, the demographics, the wages earned, how much of the market there is to capture with what they have to offer and how they plan to offer it.  The executives are not just rolling the dice and hoping for the best.  They don't operate under the delusion of "if we build it they will come." They have pretty good data that predicts a high likelihood of success.

All the data in the world, of course, doesn't guarantee success but the probability of success is high when the data suggests there is an opening in the market.  You may think they are wrong but be humble: you don't have the data they do. You're just guessing and chances are, you're guessing wrong.

And here's the thing -- this isn't a socialist economy.  Private property owners and private business owners can spend their own money however they wish, and take whatever chance suits their fancy.

In fact, if a proposed business location meets all the zoning requirements, it follows all of the applicable laws, government officials can't deny private business owners the right to risk their own money as they choose.  They cannot deny a business the opportunity to open just because they might personally think that particular business is a bad idea.  That is how government agencies get sued.

If a proposed business objectively meets the standards laid out in the zoning code and all other applicable laws, municipal planners have no choice but to approve any application that is before them.  And those applications are narrow in scope to ensure the only criteria being considered are issues of zoning -- the number of parking spaces, setbacks, environmental impact, signage, size, and so on.  There is no law that limits the number of pizza joints, donut shops, or coffee houses that can locate in a community.  

You can't put a concrete factory in a residential neighborhood and many jurisdictions limit strip joints to specific sections in town (municipal officials cannot, on Constitutional grounds, totally bar adult entertainment establishments) but other than those broad definitions, there is no legal way for local officials to block a business based on the type of business it is or its perceived chances of success.

In a free market, we wouldn't want government officials to have that kind of power.  Economies thrive because people come up with new ideas and risk their own money trying to push those ideas forward.  When you put artificial barriers up to entrepreneurship, whether it's for the chain owner or the local owner, you are beating a path toward poverty.

When I was a child, talking about Hitler with my mother -- she turned 18 at the start of World War II -- I said to her, "that could never happen here."

"Oh, yes it could," she told me.

Still, until the past few years, it was something I could never fathom.  Not here. Not in the United States. Not in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Not when we so seemingly revered the men and the women who paid the ultimate price to protect freedom. 

These days, I worry about authortarianism every day.  So do the folks over at Reason Magazine.

On the left, a new crop of socialists hope to overthrow the liberal economic order, while the rise of intersectional identity politics has supplanted longstanding commitments to civil liberties. On the right, support for free markets and free trade are more and more often derided as relics of a bygone century, while quasi-theocratic ideas are gathering support.

What has not changed—what may even be getting worse—is the problem of affective polarization. Various studies have found that Americans today have significantly more negative feelings toward members of the other party than they did in decades past.

But partisan animosity suits the authoritarian elements on the left and right just fine. Their goal is power, and they have little patience for procedural niceties that interfere with its exercise. As history teaches, a base whipped up into fear and fury is ready to accept almost anything to ensure its own survival. Perhaps even the destruction of the institutions and ideals that make America distinctively itself.

The United States was founded on the most radical and liberal of all ideals in human history up to that time: That all people are created equal and have a natural right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  The struggle of 1776 pitted the liberalism of the founders -- the belief in individual liberty and limited government -- and the conservative authoritarianism of monarchism, those who thought all humanity should bow to a king.

Once the country was established, the great political divide was over just how much power a central, federal government should have, but both camps were solidly liberal.

As a child of the 1970s, I grew up thinking liberal was a bad thing.  Now I understand that if you're a lover of liberty, you're a liberal.  If you want to defend the tradition of individual liberty in the United States, you're a conservative.  You want to conserve that tradition and those values.  Anything else that people use to define themselves politically is just a sideshow.

We've lost sight of what liberalism and conservative really mean, which only feeds the authoritarians on both the left and the right who want to demonize the people who oppose their brand of extremism.  On the right, all people who oppose their version of a perfect society are "libtards" and for those on the left, all who oppose their version of a perfect society are "Nazis."  

On the left, progressives and socialists want to use the power of government to achieve an economic leveling and their idea of a perfect society.  On the right, authoritarians want to silence those who disagree with them and install a government based on their version of religion and morality. 

The Reason Magazine article is full of examples of politicians and political activists on both the left and the right pushing liberal agendas.  Is a sad commentary on the state of America.

I'm reminded of Karl Popper's warning about the paradox of tolerance.  If a tolerant society tolerates intolerance it will eventually be crushed by intolerance.  To me, that only fuels my pessimism that individual liberty, the great achievement of humankind, and the gift of the Enlightenment, and part of the human experience for less than 250 years, will be snuffed out across the globe within a generation or two.

All of this makes it a very scary time to be a person who believes the greatest human achievement and happiness occurs when we're all free to conduct our lives as we each determine for ourselves. It is a scary time to believe in this core value that fueled the American Revolution.

Trade policy expert Scott Lincicome famously (among economists, at least) coined the phrase (which was made into a t-shirt):

Tariffs Not Only Impose Immense Economic Costs but Also Fail to Achieve Their Primary Policy Aims and Foster Political Dysfunction Along the Way

What this means is that tariffs increase costs, either to other producers or eventually to consumers, which reduces the flow of cash to other productive uses, which ultimately increases inflation and harms productivity.  Tariffs -- a form of central economic planning, aka, "socialism" -- harm economic growth.

Some of the current inflation we face now is the result of tariffs imposed over the past four years. 

And they are hurting the domestic production of other goods.  A current example is the harm tariffs have imposed on nail manufacturers, who have been forced to pay more for steel.

Rather than eliminate tariffs on steel, however, the U.S. trade policy position is that other countries that produce nails are selling their nails too inexpensively so imported nails should be taxed at a higher rate.

The Cato Institute:

Third, the case shows how “injury” to a domestic industry is often blamed on foreign competition but is actually the result of bad U.S. policy. In particular, the U.S. government has spent the last four years working to increase the domestic price of steel (nails’ only major input) via tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. As discussed here last year, the tariffs quickly increased U.S. steel prices far above the prices of the same materials abroad, thus undermining steel-consuming manufacturers’ competitiveness versus their foreign counterparts. In this case, the tariffs made American-made nails more expensive—a fact that Mid Continent Nail (the company petitioning for these AD/​CVDs on nail imports) itself confirmed. In particular, the company experienced direct cost increases of 25 percent resulting from the Section 232 tariffs, 19 percent of which it passed on to its customers.

Protectionism isn't good for American consumers nor is it good for American workers.  If we want to put America first again, we will reduce and eliminate tariffs on imported goods and let the free market flourish.

Rep. Chris Jacobs is potentially and sadly right when he states concerning lowering the overtime threshold for farm workers:

... this is a devastating decision made by out-of-touch bureaucrats which will bankrupt family farms throughout our state and end farming as we know it. If Governor Hochul approves this recommendation, she is signing the death warrant for thousands of farms ...

Being right isn't the same thing as doing the right thing.

I'm old enough to remember when conservatives -- of course, this was back when the GOP was the conservative party -- believed in federalism, or the right of states to govern themselves with little interference from the federal government.

How Jacobs, who seems to think of himself as a conservative, wants to use the heavy hand of the federal government to overrule a state's right to govern itself.

As wrong as New York would be to lower the overtime threshold, it really is a state, not a federal issue.  

Instead of increasing the power of the federal government, Jacobs should introduce legislation to strip the federal Department of Labor of its regulatory power, leaving that power to states, not the national government.  

Federal legislation to strip a state of its power to govern itself is the tactic of progressives, not conservatives. 

Cassandra Elmore — charged with three counts of animal abuse and/or torture — deserves her day in court, and it’s too bad she didn’t take advantage of that for the second time.

Charged after her dog was found to have overdosed on some type of narcotics three times, Elmore, 30, was granted an extension during her brief appearance on July 26 after requesting time to obtain her own attorney. She agreed to the terms and was warned that a warrant would be issued if she didn’t show up. The case was to be at 1:30 p.m. Aug. 11 in City Court, and Elmore was a no-show.

A warrant was issued, but apparently it didn't reach the Batavia Police Department, and Elmore was given another court date for today, Sept. 8. Once again, she did not show, and a warrant was issued again. Meanwhile, Elmore was recently charged after a traffic stop on Aug. 30 with criminal possession of a weapon, obstruction of governmental administration, aggravated unlicensed operation 3rd, uninspected motor vehicle, and insufficient tail lamps.

Elmore was allegedly driving on a suspended license. During a search of the vehicle, she was allegedly found in possession of two sets of metal knuckles as well as various items of drug equipment.  Elmore was processed at Batavia PD headquarters and released on an appearance ticket. 

While people may have mixed feelings about the case, and a final decision has yet to be made, there is one true victim: Oddey, the dog diagnosed as having ingested narcotics to the point of overdose.

Elmore has been free during this time, however, Oddey was remanded to Genesee County Animal Shelter more than two months ago. If that doesn't seem like a long time, imagine your own pet being at a shelter with people and surroundings that are unfamiliar to the pooch. Sort of ironic that the accused criminal is free while the victim sits behind bars.

Nothing against the shelter or the dedicated animal control officers and volunteers that work with the animals there, but Oddey was apparently, and quite likely accidentally, drugged, and now must wait out his fate at a strange place. No doubt, staff and volunteers are treating him well, but it's got to be confusing at the very least. 

This may not seem at all atypical of a victim’s plight upon waiting for a court case to finish  — suffering more repercussions than the perpetrator — but it still remains unclear whether this canine will go to another home or be returned to Elmore.

That’s often the forgotten part in these stories: what about the animal victim? Shelter volunteer Wendy Castleman has said that Oddey is doing well, which is great to know. However, he can't be sent to a foster home or put up for adoption while the legal case against Elmore is pending, or until she surrenders ownership.

Hopefully there will be a really good-news story at the very end. Just as Elmore has deserved the benefit of doubt up to now, Oddey deserves his own due process to relax in a safe, comfortable and loving home.

• For prior coverage:
• Elmore asks for more time    
• Oddey showing signs of drug intoxication 
• Woman charged in dog overdose arrested again

According to the CDC (CDC, 2020) suicide is the 10^th leading cause of death in the United States. This is a concerning statistic and many people struggle with their mental health every day. There are many factors that may lead someone to think that suicide is the only option, but have you ever thought about problem gambling as a source of emotional distress for someone?

There are many people who struggle with problem gambling in the United States. It is estimated that 2 million adults in the U.S. meet the criteria for gambling disorder, with another 4-6 million people in the U.S. struggling with problem gambling (National Council on Problem Gambling, 2020).

Many people, they can gamble and not have a problem. However, for some, gambling can cause problems in their lives.  Problem gambling is anytime gambling causes problems or negative consequences in someone’s life. Gambling disorder is a diagnosis by a qualified, trained professional determined by the criteria set forth in the DSM5.

 According to the DSM5, a diagnosis of gambling disorder requires at least four of the following during the past year:

1. Need to gamble with an increasing amount of money to achieve the desired excitement
2. Restless or irritable when trying to cut down or stop gambling
3. Repeated unsuccessful efforts to control, cut back on or stop gambling
4. Frequent thoughts about gambling (such as reliving past gambling experiences, planning the next gambling venture, thinking of ways to get money to gamble)
5. Often gambling when feeling distressed
6. After losing money gambling, often returning to get even (referred to as “chasing” one’s losses)
7. Lying to conceal gambling activity
8. Jeopardizing or losing a significant relationship, job or educational/career opportunity because of gambling
9. Relying on others to help with money problems caused by gambling

It is important to remember that while all those with a gambling disorder are experiencing problem gambling, not all those struggling with problem gambling have a diagnosable gambling disorder. Whether someone is struggling with problem gambling or gambling disorder, they are at risk of having the negative consequences from gambling seep out into their everyday lives. These effects may impact not only the person struggling with gambling but also impact their loved ones.

People who struggle with problem gambling are also at a higher risk for struggling with other mental health disorders. Two out of three gamblers reported that their mental health suffered as a result of their gambling problems.  In addition to struggling with gambling, they may be struggling with other mental health problems such as mood disorders like depression, personality disorder, and anxiety. Someone struggling with their gambling may be cashing in retirement funds, college funds, or taking out additional credit cards and loans. These impacts can cause someone to feel hopeless, desperate, and alone.

These negative effects can take a toll on one's mental health. Sadly, problem gambling has the highest suicide rate among all addictions. When we look at suicide in the United States, 3.9% of the adult population have suicidal ideations, and 0.6% attempt suicide each year (CDC, 2015). While this statistic is alarming, we find that for problem gamblers, the concern continues to grow. It has been found that 37% of those struggling with problem gambling and 49% of those with pathological Gambling Disorder have suicidal ideations. Statistics also show that 17% of problem gamblers and 18% of those with a Gambling Disorder attempt suicide. This rate is much higher than the general population, and we believe it’s important to raise awareness of this issue by educating community providers and clients.

Problem gambling is often referred to as “the hidden addiction” because there are no physical warning signs to “test for” problem gambling. It can be very difficult to spot, so it may be difficult to know if someone is struggling with this and maybe having suicidal ideations. While there are no physical signs, there are still signs to look for if you think someone may be struggling with a gambling problem.  Some things to look for are:

• being absent from friend/family events because of gambling,
• feeling stressed or anxious when not gambling,
• low work performance due to absence or preoccupation with betting, and
• lying to family and friends about how much money and time is spent on gambling.
• relying on others to get out of debt, asking for loans or bailouts
• using money needed for necessary expenses, such as food, rent, or medication for gambling

While we cannot physically test for problem gambling, there are screening and diagnostic tools that can be used to initiate a conversation about gambling. A common tool to use is the Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen or the BBGS. It is a simple three-question screen that consists of yes or no answers.

1. During the past 12 months, have you become restless, irritable or anxious when trying to cut down on gambling?
2. During the past 12 months, have you tried to keep your family or friends from knowing how much you gambled?
3. During the past 12 months, did you have such financial trouble as a result of your gambling that you had to get help with living expenses from family, friends or welfare?

If you, someone you know, or a client you work with answers yes to any of these questions, it may be time to start talking about problem gambling. Problem gambling can affect anyone at any point in their lives and can impact friends and families of those struggling with their gambling.  It can develop into a gambling disorder, which leads to damaged relationships with loved ones, difficulty at work, and financial problems. These problems can be detrimental to an individual's mental health. It is important that we start to realize the importance of talking about problem gambling, and what impacts it may have on individuals. If we take the time to educate ourselves and start the conversation, we can help break the stigma and shame out of problem gambling and get those struggling with the help that they need. If you or someone you know is struggling with problem gambling, please contact the Western Problem Gambling Resource Center, at (716) 833-4274 or email jwierzbicki@nyproblemgambling.org. We are “Here to Help”.

Jeffrey Wierzbicki
Team Leader
Western/Finger Lakes Problem Gambling Resource Center