Is Drug Culture A National Security Issue?

In a June 7 cover story, MSNBC.com profiled the sharp increase in the use of heroin as a result of a recent law enforcement crackdown on prescription painkiller abuse. Much of that story focused on the lives of a few central Ohio residents along with comments from officials about the growing drug abuse problem not only in Ohio, but nationwide.

Drug abuse is nothing new. But what has gripped the USA is an insidious additive lifestyle among a growing number of Americans. Drug abuse and related crimes, do not discriminate among cultures, beliefs, ethnic origins, incomes or place of residence. In fact, the story pointed out that drug abuse, particularly herioin abuse, is as prevalent as if perhaps the young man or woman living next door to you could be a drug abuser or former drug abuser.

What I find to perhaps be remarkable about this situation—this long-time “breaking news story” -is that it appears to be such an acceptable part of American culture and society. Americans not only encourage drug abuse, we as a society support it. As a leading point of evidence is our vast spectrum of marketing and advertising pharmaceutical drugs – some of which are the very ones fueling America’s drug addiction. Painkillers anyone?

A second point of evidence that America encourages and supports the prescription drug and illicit drug abuse culture is that government refuses to identify the matter as one of national security. And a third point of evidence is found in the absence of Americans’ demands to really put forth a meaningful nationwide effort to severely reduce the magnitude of the drug culture in this country. You certainly can think of additional reasons or manners by which America supports this overreaching and destructive drug abuse culture.

I do not have an ample answer beyond attempting to devise and implement a strategy that seeks to develop a new and meaningful caucus or national consciousness whose goal – perhaps similar to eradicating or severely limiting tobacco use in this country – is to severely reduce the scope and destructiveness of the illegal drug trade and culture. What are your thoughts? 

Leading By Example At The Masters

Here’s a question about leadership for you to consider: Is it truly best to lead by issuance of a policy or directive, or instead to lead by example? In other words: “Do as I say, or do as I do”?

The true issue I’m putting forth is this: What would be the public reaction if say some of the PGA Tour’s top stars (beginning with Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson, and then perhaps 2012 Masters winner Bubba Watson, and Jim Furyk, Fred Couples, Lee Westwood, Ernie Els, Tom Watson and others) were to announce they will no longer compete in the Masters Tournament until the Augusta National Golf Club modifies its policy to admit women as members?

Think about it - especially on the heels of a number of recent high-profile issues concerning gender and race equality. If a person knew some thing or some policy to be wrong, would they stand up for their belief that change be made to ensure fairness and equality is achieved? In many cases, probably not. What if the issue was of high significance in the court of public opinion?

PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem recently said, according to published reports, that the Masters Tournament held each April at Augusta National is too important a golf event to remove from the PGA Tour schedule because the host club’s policy has never in its 80-year history permitted women to become club members. Maybe 80, 40, 20 years ago this policy was acceptable to most and I predict now that if one were to poll the American public – a majority would today say this golf club policy is discriminatory toward women and ought to be changed.

What do you think?

I guess that same thinking within the PGA about the importance of a golf tournament in the face of discriminatory policies at Augusta National also applied prior to 1990 when African-Americans were banned from becoming members there. That’s right and club officials have long defended their previous and current policies by citing the fact  Augusta National is a private organization.

So I ask, what if Augusta National also had a policy that banned gay persons from becoming members? What if Latinos and Asians also were each banned from membership? What about a gay Latino or gay Asian woman?

Here is what I imagine many people might say to Finchem and the PGA:  “Hey stupid, it’s a golf tournament. A sporting event among millionaires is too important to “your schedule” that you instead would condone the continuance of a sexist and discriminatory policy?

And what perhaps is so ironic in all of this is that Finchem’s remarks were made during a May 9 news conference to announce a new corporate partner of the PGA’s First Tee program – a program that is designed to invite children of diverse cultural, racial and ethnic backgrounds to become introduced to golf – children, some of whom would not be allowed membership at Augusta National today and perhaps for many tomorrows. Let’s not forget too, that their mothers, grandmothers and aunts also are today prohibited by policy from attaining membership at the very club that hosts this grand golfing competition known as the Masters.

What is the correct position for the PGA Tour and its competing golfers to take with regard to future Masters Tournaments and the policies of its host golf club? What do the wives, girlfriends and mothers of these pro golfers think about the irony? How about the advertisers associated with the PGA Tour? And you the public – how do you think the PGA Tour members should display its leadership on this issue – deny any responsibility or stand up to do what’s right and lead by example? You decide.

My prediction is that Augusta National Golf Club soon will seize upon the wonderful opportunity to enrich its leadership role in the golfing community as it has done so previously and will modify its policy to allow and welcome women to become club members – before the first ball is struck from the first tee of the 2014 Masters Tournament – the club’s 80^th anniversary Masters tourney.

JW

For Mother's Day

This March 8, 2012 blog, originally titled "International Women's Day", is reposted by special reader request to serve also in commemoration of Mother's Day. Please share......JW

March 8 is International Women’s Day – a century-old observance to increase awareness and celebrate the progress of women while also indicating the inequalities that still exist. It also is my Mother’s birthday, who today would have celebrated her 83^rd birthday. She passed away in Fall, 2008 just four months shy of her 80^th birthday.

As an added footnote for central Ohio residents, my Mother celebrated her final birthday observance March 8, 2008 by going to church in the early morning then remaining indoors the rest of the day and the next day as the greater Columbus area received 2 feet of snowfall during a late winter storm. It was a Saturday and the snow was melted and gone away by the following Saturday, March 15, 2008.

My Mother was not a feminist,  but a staunch supporter and avid fighter in the battle for women’s rights and equality in the workplace. She had married my Father at age of 19 on September 11, 1948. A high school graduate, my mother had taken one course in bookkeeping at a local community college in Grand Rapids, Michigan and one additional course in general business. She worked as a waitress at a local hamburger joint.

Upon relocating to Columbus, Ohio in 1955 when and where my Father had accepted his first civil engineering job, my Mother worked downtown in the LaVeque Tower as a bookkeeper. Within just a couple years, she joined and was an active member in the local chapter of the Business and Professional Women’s Association.

After a span of about seven years to raise a young son and daughter, my Mother returned to work. I was so distraught about this as a young boy that I became a behavior problem at home and at school. In fact, I was very disruptive and got to the point that my Father was at his wit’s end, so to speak, without any clue what to do. Then one evening, my Mother took a turn to put me to bed and tuck me in and while doing so she had a little Mother-to-Son chat with me about my emotional duress over her going back to work. It was 1966 and I was but 7 years old and this is what she said to me as if she again had said it just last night:

“Son, your Dad and I love you dearly and I especially love you so much. I’m sorry that you have been so upset lately, but I need for you to understand that it’s okay for me to be a wife to your Dad, to work as Mr. Frampton’s secretary, to volunteer at the school and to just be who I am. What I need for you to know is that while I can be all those things, I will always, always first and foremost, be your Mother.”

End of behavior problem; beginning of acceptance about a woman’s role in American society during the mid-1960s. Yes, I was just 7 years old.

My Mother soon joined the state medical association where she eventually rose through the ranks as comptroller and membership director and to serve as the only woman on the association’s executive staff. Her pay was not equal to her male counterparts and she did not feel she shared in equal respect among many of her male peers. Privately, she one day was told by the association’s executive director that the apparent inequality most likely resulted from her lack of holding a college degree. This was about 1972.

She came home from work and was furious beyond all compare. I’ve never seen my Mother more upset, but also more determined and this is what she said that night at the dinner table. “I’ll fix those sons-of-bitches and really show them who they are dealing with. I’ll show them.”

So this 43-year-old female executive, mother of two, loving wife, community volunteer and high school graduate with just a few community college credit hours on her education balance sheet from the 1940s, enrolled in night school at Ohio Dominican College. She was a dutiful and masterful student, earning high grades and praise from her professors. She was even more involved as a business leader, wife and mother – still able to adjust a schedule and come see her’s son’s high school baseball game, still able to alarm every family member on the summer vacation camping trips when she decided to swing an axe and chop wood, and remained devout to her marriage and her religious faith.

We all cheered her and supported her and in 1977 she attained her bachelor’s degree in business administration from Ohio Dominican College and was rewarded well at work with added recognition, equality and pay. But she went another step further – she stayed in night school and some Saturday classes at Ohio Dominican which had a shared instructional partnership with Cincinnati’s Xavier University and several years later also added MBA – Master’s Degree in Business Administration – to her list of accomplishments.

So on this March 8 – International Women’s Day (and on this Mother's Day) – I celebrate many of my Mother’s accomplishments and especially those for all the women who went back to school and who sought additional training and instruction, so that they may improve their position in the workplace and community, and still be a great Mother to her kids. Thanks Mom.

Your Ever Loving Son John.

Rural Post Offices Will Not Be Closed

I called it correctly in my “What A Life”  blog posted April 25 about the planned closure of thousands of small and rural post offices. (Go to my blog archive on this site to read the April 25 post.) Perhaps the policymakers in Washington heard your voice—and mine as well.

The Associated Press reported today (May 9) that the U.S. Postal Service now intends to keep many rural post offices open, but with shorter operating hours. This revised plan will save the government an estimated one-half billion dollars annually and still provide postal services to rural Americans.  

And as I wrote in my April 25 blog on this subject, I also stated that the revised plan would be a compromise between maintaining the status quo of doing virtually nothing and shutting down as many as 3,600 small and rural post offices as previously outlined, which motivated me to produce the April 25 blog. It’s not the perfect plan, but a far better solution than what was earlier proposed. Thank you policymakers.

The next step, according to the AP report, is for postal officials to get community input during the summer months and regulatory approval for this recently modified operations plan. Part of the proposal is to reduce open business hours at up to 13,000 stations nationwide as part of a broader plan to reduce agency operational costs. In any event, the people are being heard and a slice of America's cultural fabric is being preserved.

Nannies: Best of the Best

I’m guessing no one gets rich babysitting.

I’m also guessing no one gets rich by working as a nanny, which to me is babysitting 24/7 with perhaps some added job duties. Boy, was I ever surprised to read last month that some of the highest earning nannies in New York City command salaries as much as $180,000 per year. A nanny!

A recent New York Times article by Adam Davidson suggested the “best of the best” – the truly elite nannies who are excellent chefs, great personal assistants and who often are multilingual – can command as much as $180,000 per year. Davidson wrote that for this elite level salary, such nannies basically sign their entire 24/7 life and life’s schedule over to the client family. That eliminates any parental concerns over their nanny’s schedule.

The article can be found online at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/magazine/the-best-nanny-money-can-buy.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=nannies&st=cse

Can you imagine?

Typically nannies charge $10 to $20 per hour for their services. Yes, there can be price variations, but 10 to 20 bucks seems to be the ballpark norm for most nanny fees. Baby sitting and pet sitting likely come in a bit less because there’s less responsibility. But I truly wonder at times, what would it cost to hire an elite nanny for our dog? What services would be provided and how might that affect our relationship?

Our dog (Bourbon) sleeps almost in the lap of luxury in a climate-controlled environment and on a queen-sized bed with his own pillow and nearby bowl of fresh water. He also has a TV to watch (HD and cable) and his own alarm clock. He has access to regular meals and is driven twice daily to his dog park in one of two SUVs and also in a 4-door sedan. He gets to socialize daily with his other dog friends and has Internet and email access if needed at home. He has regular vet care, a weekend cabin resort in the woods an hour outside the city and is spoken to regularly. He has HDTV, an allowance, his taxes and dog license are paid yearly, and our dog  gets to eat dinner in front of the TV.

Yeah, Bourbon needs a nanny.

There’s a lot I don’t know about, but it strikes me that if a person can earn up to $180,000 for being a nanny, then perhaps there are other niche markets out there to be tapped. I suppose there’s something to be said for having an ideal job and perhaps much more to be said in response to this axiom: “They couldn’t pay me enough to do that job.”

  

Closing Small Post Offices Not The Answer

The federal plan to close as many as 3,600 small, mostly rural post offices is not the right answer to solving the financial woes of the U.S. Postal Service and I predict this plan will significantly change in the future and spare the closure of at least some, but not all, small postal stations.

Here’s why.

America’s rural voices truly will be heard in Congress and across the nation. The postal policymakers will actually “listen” this time instead of simply “hearing” -- and will then soon come to publicly admit their current plan does not fully appreciate or take into account that postal delivery across this nation is among the most basic fibers of American society – count on it folks. Having your mail delivered and then looking forward to that almost daily ritual is so ingrained in the American lifestyle that to take it away from those served by the 3,600 or so postal stations targeted for closure is like saying Americans no longer can have their apple pie or their favorite ice cream.

This fabric of American culture, as defined by mail delivery by hand to postal stations large and small, urban and rural, to post office boxes large and small and to households, has served as a lifeline for many generations of our citizens. And this friends, is what the policymakers need to “hear” and what I believe they will indeed hear --- that will lead to coming up with a different solution – a better, but not perfect plan.

I would ask policymakers to invite some key stakeholders to participate in a newly formed and diverse roundtable – a workgroup if you will – to forge a better postal service management plan. I will be the first to tell you that such a modified plan will indeed still involve closure of some small postal stations, just not 3,600 of them. I will also tell you that it will involve yet another postage fee increase and likely reduced services to many small and rural postal stations (as in every-other-day delivery or perhaps even less frequently.) I envision such a plan will still create heartache and inconvenience for some, but I do believe that a better plan can be, and should be devised that will afford the opportunity for as many communities and people as possible to retain their postal lifeline for years to come.

As a country we can do better. As policymakers, we can try harder. As a nation, we can preserve a lifeline and a fabric of our culture. No finger-pointing, no accusations, no negativity – just allow for the opportunity to devise a better plan for own self-governance and postal service. Our best in managing postal services is yet to come.

Is Shipwreck Salvaging Grave Robbing?

About 20 years ago I was an active recreational sport diver who enjoyed diving on a handful of various shipwrecks in the Great Lakes as well as the Atlantic Ocean. Our sport dive limit was a depth of 130 feet. Most of the shipwrecks I got to visit were anywhere from 30 to 120 feet deep.

Among the things of which I became immediately aware was a contentious debate among divers and shipwreck salvagers about retrieving objects left behind on shipwrecks. This debate has existed for generations and will continue do so, especially now on the eve of a giant auction by Premier Exhibitions of more than 5,550 artifacts recovered from the RMS Titanic that sank in the North Atlantic 100 years ago this day (April 15). Premier is the parent company of RMS Titanic Inc., which is the only company that has legal authority to recover artifacts from the sunken luxury liner.

In reading several stories about this anticipated sale of Titanic items and having visited several Titanic artifact exhibitions, my thoughts today on this 100^th anniversary of the ship’s demise and immense loss of life simply brought back to mind the continued debate about the recovery of artifacts from a shipwreck – any shipwreck.

And mind you, while it is true that the RMS Titanic will live in infamy as the most famous nonwar casualty shipwreck of all time, the debate about the appropriateness  of removing objects from a sunken ship continues on board the decks of sport diving and research boats worldwide regardless the ship’s name.

You perhaps can see the debate clearly, yet this discussion is anything but clear. On the one hand, there are those people who simply feel that removing objects (i.e. personal property) from a shipwreck, especially a fatal shipwreck, is wrong and is nothing more than grave robbing. Another camp feels there is nothing wrong with artifact recovery as a sort of “finders keepers; losers weepers” philosophy. I suppose a third legion of belief is one that is found among researchers and historians in that their goal is simply that of historic preservation – noble, acceptable, all for the common good kind of historic study and preservation.

Yet, there is this nagging notion that a good number of the RMS Titanic artifacts will one day soon become bookshelf, reading table, workbench and work station desk ornaments --- sort of adding to one’s personal home and workplace clutter. Well, I don’t have a response and certainly not a clear-cut opinion on this debate. My limited amount of previous amateur, nontechnical shipwreck diving was done under the personal rule of “Leave It Be”, and in many areas of the world this prohibition on artifact recovery actually is a law. I dove with others who saw nothing wrong with removing items from a shipwreck and that was their own choice. The issue is full of well-meaning sentiment and strong beliefs on both sides and is one that will continue to be debated with no single conclusion of a right or a wrong – it just is.