Voting ‘Yes’ On A Constitutional Convention

This commentary originally appeared in the The Post Journal on Oct 15, 2017

From all of the press reports and lawn signs I have been seeing, I may be the only person in Chautauqua County voting in favor of having a Constitutional Convention.

The leaders of both the Democratic and Republican majorities in the state legislature are against it. The Governor is quietly opposed (or seems to be.) The public employee unions are opposed. Most of the lobbyists in Albany are opposed.

Upstate thinks it will be over-powered by downstate. Downstate worries that Upstate will try and secede from the State. Environmentalists are opposed because they think that bad things could happen. Business interests are worried that environmentalists will cause havoc and shut down industry.

In my view, the organized voice to vote “No” on having a Constitutional Convention by most of the entrenched interests in Albany… is probably a good reason to vote “Yes.” A “No” vote is essentially a vote to keep doing business the same old way. The kind of structural reforms that are needed to address the dysfunction and bad habits of state government will not be addressed by those who would be affected by them. The only way that citizens of the State can be assured that reforms will be made is by voting to amend the Constitution.

The vote coming up in November is just the beginning of a process. If approved by voters, a Constitutional Convention would be convened in 2018. Any recommended changes by such a Convention are required to be submitted to the voters in 2019 for approval. The Convention itself does not have the power to amend the Constitution.

In my view, Constitutional changes are the only way to address the governance problems in Albany. For example, do you think that the Governor would ever support limiting the terms of his/her service to 2 terms (8 years) similar to our Federal Constitution? Do you think that the Speaker of the Assembly or Majority Leader of the State Senate would ever propose limiting their tenure as leader to 10 years, as has been done in some other states?

The problems (and criminal indictments) that come from keeping the same people at the top jobs in perpetuity in Albany can only be changed if voters change the State’s Constitution.

I am not surprised that the entrenched interests in Albany want to stay “entrenched” and want you to vote “No” on the November 7th ballot.

Though it may be futile in a low turnout election as predicted for this year and defeat seems likely … I am still going to cast a “Yes” vote to have a Constitutional Convention. The only way we are going to clean up Albany is to put limits on the current power structure. Hoping that the legislature and Governor will solve this problem is not a solution. They will never vote to limit their power and authority. I know, I was there once.


Rolland Kidder

Rolland Kidder is a Stow resident and former member of the New York state Assembly.

A Third Party?

This commentary originally appeared in the The Post-Journal on Oct 1, 2017

There has been more talk recently about a third political party emerging out of the chaos we see going on in Washington. A lot of people, whom I would call “common sense” Republicans and Democrats, have been talking about it. Why shouldn’t they?

For example, for some Republicans it gets tiresome to have to try and defend a plan to spend billions on a new wall along the U.S./Mexican border. They still remember President Ronald Reagan’s “tear down this Wall” speech which he made in Berlin in 1987.

On a totally different issue, many Democrats cringe when they turn on their natural gas furnace in the winter because the official “line” of their party keeps putting up obstacles to natural gas development. In places like New York State its production has essentially been banned and it is next to impossible to build a natural gas pipeline.

What is going on here is that in the Republican Party, the right wing is calling the shots on foreign policy: “Build the Wall!” On the other hand, in the Democratic Party the left wing is calling the shots on energy policy: “Ban all fossil fuels!” Most middle-of-the road Americans see things exactly the opposite. They “Oppose the wall!” and “Support natural gas!”…maybe these “middle Americans” should organize themselves into a new political party that more realistically represents their views.

"If there were such a political party, I might join it"

If there were such a political party, I might join it. The Democratic position on energy (and especially natural gas) is totally disingenuous. Natural gas is the cleanest and most cost effective way to heat a house. The new ways of drilling and completing natural gas wells are environmentally safer than the old ways, natural gas is produced domestically (not dependent on the Middle East) and the energy is needed to back up and provide firm service for the new, but interruptible, forms of energy like solar and wind. Being against natural gas? How could the Democratic Party be so wrong on such a common sense issue?

In a similar way, the Republican right-wing position on building a Mexican wall is equally as crazy. Don’t people understand that airplanes fly over walls? Afghanistan has always been one of the prime sources of opiate production. Our military now essentially controls the country. Has anyone been suggesting that we build a wall around Afghanistan to stop illegal drug exports to the U.S.? In the end, the Great Wall of China failed to keep out the Mongols, but at least it was an architectural marvel which became a tourist attraction. Building “walls” doesn’t answer anything.

So, if I am opposed to wall building as a basis for foreign policy and support natural gas development as an energy policy… maybe I should be looking for a new political party. Maybe it could be called the “Americans United Party.” It would try to solve common problems by people pulling together on the same oar. (Think of national unity during World War II.)

Of course, pragmatically, it is next to impossible to form a new political party. (Remember Ross Perot?) All the states have Boards of Elections essentially controlled by the Republican and Democratic parties. So I am not sure how it could be done. Yet, I do believe there is growing public support for a return to common sense politics which address the primary concerns of voters and are not dominated by the views of fringe groups which now drive the policies of the existing major political parties.


Rolland Kidder, 
Stow, NY

The New Politics of Washington

This commentary originally appeared in the The Post-Journal on Sep 24, 2017

Whether you like Donald Trump or don’t, it seems apparent now that he is operating on a different wave-length at least when it comes to partisan politics. On paper, his party controls both houses of the federal legislature, yet he recently signed off on a deal to keep government running with Democratic support. What gives?

President Trump is essentially a transactional person.   He is not much driven by ideology.

In my opinion, President Trump is essentially a transactional person. He is not much driven by ideology. He wants to do things, and he also wants to be at the center of whatever that is. If “X” doesn’t work, he will try “Y.”

If casinos in New Jersey no longer work, let’s try building hotels overseas. If the Republicans on Capitol Hill can’t deliver on a vote (like repealing Obamacare,) then let’s see what the Democrats have to offer.

In a counter-intuitive kind of way, maybe we are finding a way forward for this Presidency. The White House will make a proposal today, and a “tweet” might reverse it tomorrow. Yet, if what ultimately gets done, requires the consent of both major political parties on Capitol Hill… maybe the country can move forward.

What is clear is that President Trump is beginning to realize that running the Executive branch of the federal government is a lot different from running a multi-million dollar private corporation. You can’t just lay down an edict which everyone will agree to. You have to find consensus which means compromise and vote-counting.

Some Democrats may find fault with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for his willingness to deal with this President. Yet, I find it laudable that our Senator is able to put aside some basic disagreements and try to find common ground upon which to run the government.

Even a person who doesn’t like government still doesn’t want it shut down. People want their social security checks, their healthcare, and definitely want a strong military protecting them.

Where is all of this going? It is still too early to tell but I think it is fair to say that our current President does not want the government to shut down on his watch.

Those of us who are essentially “observers” in all of this watch in amazement. Congressional investigations continue to go on, changes keep happening at the White House, sometimes it is hard to know who is on first, second or third base. Nevertheless, it is not boring.

One other “unknown” has, in my opinion, become a stabilizing force in our politics… and that is the impact of Hurricanes Harvey and now Irma.

In a “backdoor” kind of way, these tragic weather events have become a common experience in unifying the country. We all need each other and want to help each other.

Keeping the government running never seemed to be a priority, it was a given. It is clear that it is not something we can take for granted any longer; and, for now, it has become the catalyst for action on Capitol Hill. 

Rolland Kidder

Rolland Kidder is a Stow resident.

Memorials in American Life

I am a bit concerned about all of the recent news reports about moving or removing Memorials.  I am also empathetic with what I view as a legitimate concern about recent outbreaks of violence caused by the KKK and other neo-Nazi groups.

There may be Memorials supporting the old days of slavery, reconstruction and then the development of “Jim Crow” laws created to subjugate African Americans which need to be removed.   I remember a couple of such “removals” that occurred after the massacre of black worshippers at the Church in Charleston.  I believed that they were thought out and were justified.

Yet, I believe that we should not try to rewrite American history by taking down all Memorials that someone may find objectionable.  I have read from time-to-time that some find sculptures of Christopher Columbus to be objectionable.  What about President Andrew Jackson who, under federal law, created the “Trail of Tears” where Native Americans were forcibly marched from the Deep South to Oklahoma?  Does that mean that we should eliminate Jackson’s visage on the twenty dollar bill?

Some of our history as Americans is not pleasant to remember.  I recall a fairly recent tour that I had of Arlington Cemetery.  At the time of World War I, black Americans and white Americans fought in separate combat units.  Thus, when they were killed in action, they were buried in separate plots at Arlington.  Their commanding General, John Pershing, wanted to be buried “with his men” at Arlington.  So Pershing’s grave is located so that it looks out upon the grave plots of both white and black World War I veterans.  It is a sad yet powerful reminder of the days when we had segregated units in the U.S. military.

We can’t reinvent all of our history.  As a matter of fact, we shouldn’t.  Places like Arlington remind of us of that history, both good and bad.

Take all of this a step further.  I was on the Commission directed to find a site, design and build the National World War II Memorial.  World War II was the pivotal event of the 20^th century for our country.  There was probably no time in our history that the Nation was more united. Yet, our military still maintained segregated units including separate combat battalions for Japanese Americans.  Despite that, Americans united in a common effort to defeat totalitarianism in both Germany and Japan. The cost in human life was incredible. Over 400,000 Americans died in the War, and millions died in Asia and Europe.  In that sense, the war was a great catastrophe.  To end the war, America dropped the atom bomb.  Could a future generation decide that the Second World War should not be memorialized?  Would efforts be undertaken to take down that Memorial?  I would hope not.   It stands now, on the National Mall, as a testament to that time in our history.

Hate groups are always going to find a place to gather.  Our focus needs to be on such groups and their threat to our freedoms and to civilized society.  We shouldn’t allow their anger define or rewrite our common history as Americans.

Rolland Kidder

Stow, NY

Drug Deaths Skyrocket

Originally published in The Post-Journal on Sunday, June 18, 2017

Back when I was a kid, heroin addiction was something we read about happening in places like New York City. Now it has become a plague here in Chautauqua County.

When the final numbers are in, it is expected that drug overdose deaths in the United States for 2016 will total over 59,000. According to one news report, “drug overdoses are now the leading cause of death among Americans under age 50.”

Think about that number! American war deaths from the entire Vietnam War totaled 58,000. This year, that number or more will be dying from drug overdoses in the United States. It is a war that every year is being waged on our own soil.

Most of us probably know families who either have loved ones on drugs or have experienced a death caused by a drug overdose. What we know now is that this is not just a Chautauqua County problem — it is a national crisis. Alcoholism, as I understand it, tends to primarily affect a certain percentage of the population. Drug addiction, on the other hand, can affect anyone. Young people are especially vulnerable.

How do people get hooked and descend into this black hole? A lot of “reasons” can be given including personal trauma or getting addicted to prescription pain pills. Human beings are frail. Drugs that make you “feel good” can be the Pied Piper that leads you to your death. Once you start injecting drugs, your slide into oblivion becomes nearly irreversible.

“Users” also have to be supplied and that side of the darkness means that people looking to make easy money will provide the drugs. Every day the newspaper has headlines or police reports of “busts” being made. The county jail is probably half full of either dealers or addicts stealing and committing crimes to support their habit.

Government, at all levels, needs to be energized to attack the menace.

There is no quick panacea or easy answer to any of this. However, what we can do collectively is support efforts to address the problem. Government, at all levels, needs to be energized to attack the menace.

Not-for-profit organizations like the Mental Health Association and Special Drug Courts are helping. Families and friends who are fighting the problem need our prayer and support. Law enforcement needs the tools to ferret out the drug dealers who are supplying the deadly poison.

Probably the beginning of an answer has to be an admission of just how serious the problem has become. When every year, the war deaths of a Vietnam are repeated by drug overdoses in this country, no one can argue about the severity of the crisis.

The nation as a whole is being diminished and a unified national effort is needed to attack the problem.

Rolland Kidder, a Vietnam veteran, is a Stow resident.

Thoughts on Memorial Day, 2017

Originally published in The Post-Journal on Monday, May 29th, 2017.

I am a fortunate person. For nearly 15 years I have been privileged to serve as a Commissioner of the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC.) During that time, the agency was given the responsibility of finding a site, developing a design, raising the money and then building the National World War II Memorial. However, its primary mission has never changed–maintaining the overseas cemeteries for America’s war dead.

The North African American Cemetery near Tunis, Tunisia

When an American visits one of these cemeteries, the most-visited being Normandy, their outlook on the world gains a new perspective. The row-on-row of Crosses and Stars of David are a testament to what America has invested in making the world a freer and better place. They are reminders that being the leader of the free world has required a costly investment in American lives. We can’t walk that back. Those lives are gone.

When I hear people talk about isolation or withdrawal from the world, I want to take them to these places. We have invested too much in blood (and treasure) to pull back into some kind of cocoon and pretend that what happens in the rest of the world doesn’t matter. Our current status as a vibrant democracy has come at a great price. Whether we like it or not, what happens in the rest of the world affects us.

Recently, I received a copy of a quarterly newsletter which is sent world-wide to ABMC employees who work in these cemeteries. Most of them are not American though they are cutting grass, cleaning headstones and maintaining these sacred grounds so important to Americans. The United States has entered into agreements in these foreign countries which guarantee, in perpetuity, our rights to these lands where our war dead are buried. We also depend upon their citizens to maintain these places to our highest standard.

We have invested too much to pull back into some kind of cocoon and pretend that what happens in the rest of the world doesn’t matter. 

Though located in various countries, the mission of caring and supporting these cemeteries is common. The newsletter is printed in six languages: English, French, Dutch, Spanish, Italian and Arabic. Did I say “Arabic?” Yes, one of our cemeteries, where 2,841 of our war dead are buried, is located in Tunisia. In our efforts to defeat Germany in the Second World War, we first had to defeat them in North Africa.

We have very dedicated employees working at the North African American Cemetery near Tunis. It is located on a historically important plot of land, right next to the ruins of ancient Carthage. A few years ago, during the “Arab Spring,” Americans, for their safety, were ordered out of Tunisia. During their absence, work and maintenance at the cemetery continued unabated by Tunisians. These employees, citizens of Tunisia and Muslim by faith, continued their daily work in mowing the grass, polishing the stones and providing security for the cemetery where our war dead are buried. They are proud of the work they do, and the high standard of care at the cemetery continued without interruption.

So if people preach to you that our country should abandon contact with the Arab world and with the Islamic community or with other foreign lands–please remind them that too many Americans lie buried in these places for us to pull out now. American cemeteries around the world remind us on this Memorial Day that American values of freedom and democracy are still real and worth fighting for. The grave stones, memorials and markers tell the story.

Rolland Kidder
Stow

A Tough Vote

Whatever you think about the “Repeal and Replacement of Obamacare” which recently passed in the House of Representatives, most observers would agree that it was a tough vote. It just passed the House with one extra vote (217 “yeas”), 216 was the needed threshold.

I recall some “tough votes” when I was in the New York Legislature. In 1975, when New York City was going bankrupt, there were a lot of them. Usually, they occurred in the middle of the night after hours of floor debate… after members had been worn to a frazzle. Often the legislation had been negotiated only hours before and opponents would allege that “the ink is still wet on this bill!” The goal was always to have at least one more vote in favor than the bare minimum to pass. You didn’t want members voting “yes” on a controversial piece of legislation who would then have to go out and defend themselves in the next election with an accusation that “without your vote, it wouldn’t have passed!”

“If you’ve got the votes, call the roll!”

There was also another axiom on tough voting that, I believe, was coined by former Speaker of the House, Sam Rayburn: “If you’ve got the votes, call the roll!” Another way to state that would be: “Don’t call the roll until you have the votes!” You don’t want to put members on the spot where they may end up making a tough vote only to have it fail to pass. (That is why a similar bill on Obamacare had been pulled from the floor in March.) So by all counts, the recent vote to “repeal and replace” met the criteria of being a “tough vote.” It also qualified for the “ink not being dry” on the bill, since the Congressional Budget Office did not have the time to estimate the financial and human impact of the legislation prior to its passage.

There is one aspect of the vote which might make the recent action in the House even tougher. If someone goes on the line to cast a difficult vote, it is usually best, politically, if the bill becomes law. Perhaps the worst situation in voting in a legislative body occurs when you go on the line in support of a controversial “one-house” bill. That is, it might pass one house of the legislature but not the other.

I remember a lot of walks I made during those days in 1975 from the Assembly chamber over to the State Senate floor to discuss legislation with my counterpart in the State Senate, Jess Present. Jess and I both subscribed to the position that it was best that bills which were difficult to pass should “end up on the Governor’s desk” and signed into law. We weren’t much interested in passing “one-house” bills.

The matter of whether the “Repeal of Obamacare” actually makes it to the President’s desk is something that still seems unclear in Washington. The Republican Party controls both houses of the federal legislature and also the Presidency. Yet, the U.S. Senate has made it clear they will not be putting a “rubber stamp” on what was passed in the House. They want to hear what the Congressional Budget Office and health care providers have to say about the legislation.

If the Senate makes substantive changes to the legislation, it is questionable whether the “Freedom Caucus” in the House would accept those changes. If that happens, there could be a stalemate and no legislation would go to the President. (For those interested in maintaining coverage for the uninsured, this might be a good result.) We have been debating health care politics for the past 8 years. It would be nice if we could finally settle on a national health policy and move on to other issues… like rebuilding our infrastructure and investing in public works such as sewers around Chautauqua Lake!

Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Should New York Have a Constitutional Convention?

Originally published in The Post-Journal on Sunday, April 16th, 2017.

A view from the original New York State Constitution Ratifying Convention in July, 1788 by Gerald Foster.

Every 20 years, New York residents get a chance to vote on whether or not to have a “Convention” to evaluate and propose changes to the state’s Constitution. Any recommended changes from such a Convention would need to be submitted to the voters for approval. 

Usually, every two decades, this proposal gets voted down. Opponents say: “It will be too expensive.” Others just vote “No” because that is the default position for people who don’t like government. However, the biggest opponents are usually the entrenched interests in Albany like the large state public employee unions and can include the Governor and leaders of the legislature. Why change things if you believe the system is working on your behalf? 

The difference this year is the tremendous cloud that hangs over Albany because of the convictions and indictments of so many of the big “players” on the statewide scene. The past Speaker of the Assembly and Majority Leader of the State Senate are appealing their convictions of selling influence. A grand jury has indicted key individuals in the Governor’s office of rigging the bidding for state contracts. It is not a pretty picture. There is talk of ethics reform but tough new laws on oversight and accountability are difficult to accomplish when they are related to the power structure of state government. 

Because the problems that have evolved are “structural” in nature, the only way to effectively deal with them is through amending the state’s Constitution. 

I have some understanding of the issues since I viewed the process during the four terms I served in the New York State Assembly. Because the problems that have evolved are “structural” in nature, the only way to effectively deal with them is through amending the state’s Constitution. 

For example, should New York limit the terms that a person can serve as Speaker of the Assembly or Majority Leader of the State Senate? This approach has been implemented in California. Should the state limit the number of terms that a Governor can serve… as we do at the federal level in limiting the President to two terms? To implement such structural changes in our state would require a change in the New York State Constitution. 

Other structural changes could include establishing a non-partisan commission perhaps consisting of jurists to implement the reapportionment of legislative and congressional districts that takes place every ten years. Right now, the legislature and governor make these decisions based more on political considerations that anything else. Other states have implemented non-partisan redistricting panels moving away from the “gerrymandering” approach still followed in New York. 

Realistically, the only way to make any changes of this magnitude would require a Constitutional Convention. Such proposals are not going to come from the Governor or state legislature. Is the state ready for this? These are not ordinary times. The political quagmire that our state politics has become requires change. In my view, this is a year to vote “Yes” on a Constitutional Convention. 

The voters will have the last say. They will first need to vote for a Constitutional Convention…then they will subsequently have to approve any recommended changes to the New York State Constitution that would be proposed by the Convention. The important vote on having a Constitutional Convention only happens every 20 years. Citizens of New York need to be thinking about how they will vote in November. 

For more information on the New York Constitutional Process and critical timelines, visit 

The New York State Constitutional Convention Clearinghouse.

Rolland Kidder 

Stow, NY

Spring Starts with the Masters

Frank Deford, NPR, April 5, 2017

Amen Corner at Augusta, where treachery and beauty blend together as well as any James Bond villainess

In days of yore, Opening Day of the baseball season was special, signifying that spring had come at last.

Today, however, Opening Day sort of dribbles into existence, and the spiritual start of spring now belongs to the Masters golf tournament, where the azaleas and magnolias and dogwood bloom. And if they dare look like they're gonna bloom too soon, in March the groundskeepers are rumored to pack them with ice to make sure spring comes as God intended it, which this year is on Thursday.

By now, in fact, the Masters course is a federal treasure, to sports what Old Faithful is to the National Park Service. And once again it is peaceful at Augusta National Golf Club, after some rather ugly stand-offs in recent years, when the club balked at changing its all-white, all-male membership tradition. African-Americans and female Americans are on the club manifest now along with other golf-Americans, and all is serene once again.

Yes, some people do find the Masters too snooty and the closing ceremony is so painfully precious that even the man who for years himself produced the coronation admitted that it was "the worst thing in the world." But I'm being picayune. The Masters is otherwise a thing of efficient beauty.

Start with the name.  Masters sounds almost too elegant to be American. 

And when it comes to names? There are really only two discrete pieces of official U.S. sports real estate which are familiarly known by a title. One is a huge ugly slab, but besides that Green Monster at Fenway Park, there is only Amen Corner on the back nine at Augusta, where treachery and beauty blend together as well as any James Bond villainess.

Even the fans, who must be called "patrons," are more polite and litter-conscious than at other sporting venues. The Masters is not greedy. You wanna buy a Masters souvenir logo shirt? Sure, let's go over to the nearest Ralph Lauren boutique. Oops, you can only purchase Masters memorabilia at the Masters, this one week of the year. And most meaningful of all to patrons watching at home, the tournament has fewer commercials than other sports events.

Well, yes, the Masters is too stylish to be an American icon. It's as out of character for Uncle Sam as a McDonald's is for France. But hush now and stay behind the ropes. Spring begins on Thursday.

A New Governing Coalition

Published April 2, 2017 in The Jamestown Post-Journal

If you are my age, you probably remember the great old western movie “High Noon.” The Marshall (Gary Cooper) of a frontier town meets a gun-slinger and his outlaw gang at noon in a shoot-out. It is a tense, decisive moment.

On a recent Friday, it was “high noon” in the halls of Congress as the time approached for a decisive vote on the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. But then, it didn’t happen. The votes weren’t there. “High noon” was a fizzle.

I am sure many in our community were watching since in the midst of all the legal language in the bill was a provision that would have prohibited New York state’s current mandate of requiring that a significant portion of Medicaid costs be paid by counties. Since 50% of our local county property tax bill goes to Medicaid, this could have ended up being a tremendous benefit to local tax payers.

However, that provision, along with everything else being proposed never saw the light of day. Action on the repeal of Obamacare was called off, and I doubt will be tried again in this current Congress.

What the blow-up in repealing Obamacare highlighted was the continuing story we have seen since John Boehner was Speaker of the House of Representatives. There really is no true governing majority in the Republican Party in the House when it comes to tough issues.

It appears likely that we are entering a time of national political gridlock where very little is going to get done.

The same kind of impasse is likely to be seen again in upcoming tough votes like extending the national debt limit or passing another budget. It appears likely that we are entering a time of national political gridlock where very little is going to get done.

Let’s hope it doesn’t result again in a shutting down of the government.

What it means for our new President is that he is going to have to try and cobble together a coalition which can govern. The “Art of the Deal” is now going to be more difficult. Somehow a coalition of Republicans and Democrats will need to be formed in the House of Representatives so that the governing of this great nation can continue to happen.

One idea might be to look at what the Republicans in New York state have done in the State Senate.

They have agreed to work with a splinter group of Democrats (who call themselves the “Independent Democratic Coalition”) to cooperate on major legislation and in putting together the annual state budget. So far this effort of bi-partisanship in Albany has been productive.

Are the Republicans in the House of Representatives in Washington ready to embrace such an idea? Is there a group of independent minded Democrats who will break with their established ranks to do this?

The lesson being learned again in Washington is that it is a lot easier to get elected than it is to govern. Yet, good governance is actually what the people need and want. What we are going to find out in the coming months is whether the Congress is capable of doing it.


Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Two Options for Public Service

Published March 26, 2017 in The Jamestown Post-Journal

Most people, I believe, support the idea that public service is a good thing. It may have fallen out of favor recently as we have started “draining the swamp” in Washington. Nevertheless, I am confident that most Americans still rally around the idea that public (government) service and good public servants help us all.

As an example, we have two public organizations in Chautauqua County which require leadership. One employs a CEO who is paid approximately $160,000 a year, has an employment contract, a good benefit package, supervises 158 employees, has a regular work week and administers a $25.5 million budget. The other organization has a CEO with no employment contract, who makes $95,000 per year, administers a $273 million budget, supervises 1200 employees and works a regular work week plus is required to attend virtually non-stop evening and week-end meetings/events with constituents.

If one of your children were seeking employment and wanted a CEO position in the public sector in our area… which job would you recommend they take? I would imagine that for most people it would be a “no-brainer.” You would recommend the job with higher pay, fewer employees, a smaller budget and more free time.

So what does this boil down to in Chautauqua County? In this particular case, it would mean that you would recommend the position of Superintendent of the Southwestern Central School system vs. that of becoming the County Executive as being the best employment option for one of your kids. As a matter of fact, it might even evoke the thought of “who in their right mind” would even want to be the Chief Executive of Chautauqua County?

Who in their right mind would even want to be Chief Executive of Chautauqua County?

This all, of course, is becoming relevant because our current County Executive, Vince Horrigan, has announced that he is not running for re-election. Most of us, I believe, feel fortunate that Mr. Horrigan has been our county leader for the past four years. He is a retired Air Force Officer who has worked hard on our behalf to stabilize county finances, encourage investment in sewer and water infrastructure, and promote job growth in the county. But the larger question is: how long are we going to be able to find good people to run for this job?  Something is out-of-kilter in how we value this leadership position.

Years ago, I was involved in the decision to create a County Charter form of government with an elected County Executive. We debated having the Executive be an appointed official but thought, at the time, that accountability to the voters should be the over-riding concern… and the voters approved direct election of the Executive in adopting the County Charter. However, I am having second thoughts now about that decision.

Something is out-of-kilter in how we value this leadership position.

Maybe the County should implement a structure more aligned to that in the private sector. You could have a Board of Directors (the legislature) who are responsible to the Shareholders (the voters), and the Board would appoint a CEO (the County Executive) to run the day-to-day affairs of the County. At least, it seems to me, this system might be more appealing to those who want to commit to being a CEO in a position of public service. It shouldn’t be that the position of School Superintendent (of which there are 17 in Chautauqua County) should be so much more appealing than that of the County Executive who is responsible for the largest portion of our non-school, governmental functions.


Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

A Tale of Two Days in the Federal City

Published February 5, 2017 in The Jamestown Post-Journal

This week we sat down to dinner with great friends over many years. They had gone to D.C. to attend the Inauguration of Donald Trump. We had gone primarily so that my wife, daughter and other family members could attend the Women’s March on Washington.

One of the pluses of living in a small town is that you don’t have to go far to have a stimulating political discussion! Our friends thought the new President’s speech was fine and that he essentially restated what he had promised to do in the campaign. They had prime standing room near the Capitol and looked out on a vast sea of enthusiastic supporters who had come to participate in the celebration.

What I saw was an unsmiling new President with his fist raised. He seemed to be announcing that Washington would now be introduced to a new “no holds barred” type of political confrontation. The Lincolnesque words that I was hoping for to pull the country together like “malice toward none, with charity to all”… never came.

Common in our interest was witnessing the peaceful transfer of power

Nevertheless, we and our friends were experiencing the same event. Common in our interest was the witnessing of the peaceful transfer of power in this great democracy which must be a marvel to the rest of the world. Once the speeches were over, the Trumps accompanied the Obamas to the east side of the Capitol where they shook hands as the former President and his wife left by helicopter.

During the Inaugural festivities the camera near the top of the Capitol dome scanned the crowd. The Mall was packed with people near the Capitol, but you could see open space down toward the Washington Monument. That wouldn’t have usually resulted in acrimony, but became controversial when the new President, the next day, criticized the media for underestimating the crowd.

At our vantage point, our daughter’s home about 10 blocks east of the Capitol, Inauguration Day on Friday was relatively quiet. However, on Saturday, the day of the March, nearly every street heading toward the Capitol was jammed with people walking. The D.C. government announced that 200 bus parking permits were issued for the Inauguration, but that 1200 had been issued for the March. Many people were walking 2-3 miles from the bus parking at RFK stadium to get to the National Mall.

People were happy to be there and involved in their democracy… 

though not necessarily excited about their new President

Those from our family who joined in were amazed at the dignified and courteous demeanor of the crowd. People were happy to be there and involved in their democracy… though, not necessarily, excited about their new President. There were so many people on the Mall that, at first, there was no place to march. Finally, the crowd began to move toward Pennsylvania Avenue and many ended up walking toward the White House along the same route the parade had taken the day before. If you combined the crowds from Friday and Saturday it could have been the biggest Inaugural event ever!

Two trips over two days to the Federal City experienced by two couples who saw things a little differently and retold it over a lively dinner conversation… that is one of the beauties of living in Chautauqua County. It is good to keep talking with each other!


Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Uncharted Territory

Published January 15, 2017 in The Jamestown Post-Journal

One of the exciting aspects of being alive in 2016/2017 is that we have witnessed a lot of “firsts” in American politics. It is the first time that we have elected a person with no governmental experience to the highest office in the land. It is also a “first” that he did this with little support from the establishment of his own party and he did it single-handedly by being his own communications director. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

In saying that President Trump had no “governmental experience,” we must acknowledge that others came to that office who had never been elected before. Herbert Hoover comes to mind. However, Hoover had extensive experience dealing with public issues and had been Secretary of Commerce in the 1920’s. Presidents Grant and Eisenhower also had no elective experience, but they had been deeply immersed in the politics of the Nation through their military service. Because of that, they had a strong sense and appreciation of the complexities and challenges associated with becoming President and Commander-in-Chief.

If nothing else, Donald Trump is now living proof that, in America, experience in politics and government is not a prerequisite to becoming President. That also means that though we are rooting for him to be successful, we are also “holding our breath” a bit hoping that he doesn’t fail.

It also is becoming apparent that Mr. Trump’s ascension to the Presidency is coming at a time when the world, in general, is in a topsy-turvy mood. If this were another country (take Argentina as an example), one wouldn’t be much worried. The world doesn’t usually look to Argentina for global leadership. However, this is the United States of America which fought two World Wars in the 20th century and is now looked to as the leader of the world. It would have been reassuring had Mr. Trump been tutored at least a bit in the intricacies of international diplomacy.

As Van Miller used to say: “Fasten your seat belt folks!”

But, all of this is now conjecture. As Van Miller used to say in announcing Buffalo Bill’s games: “Fasten your seat belt folks!” We have a new President, and we must wish and hope for him to be successful.

I see some bright spots in his leadership team. His nominee for Secretary of Defense, James “Mad-dog” Mattis had a stellar career in the Marine Corps and was exposed to the quagmire of the War in Iraq. Mike Pence, his Vice President, served in the Congress and as Governor of Indiana—he knows how difficult it can be to run a government.

Then, there is his son-in-law, Jared Kushner: a young, 35 year-old man, but a person who seems to have depth and perspective. He studied sociology at Harvard, and received his JD and MBA at New York University. You cannot have gone through that and not picked up on the complexities and challenges of running a country like America which has obligations of leadership throughout the world. Mr. Kushner will now be Senior White House Advisor to the President.

So good luck, Mr. President. You won the election and now all of us will be affected and governed by your decisions. We are in the same boat now!

Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Electoral College Is Our System

Published January 1st, 2017 in The Jamestown Post-Journal

There are two issues that have surfaced since the election: one which, in my mind, should cause some real concern. The other should be forgotten and left behind.

The “real” issue is whether and to what extent the election was influenced by a foreign power(s) through hacking on the internet and abuse of the electronic media. The name most mentioned is Russia, but the issue goes beyond one country. If our elections can be interfered with or corrupted by any foreign power… it is a matter that should concern us all. Both Democrats and Republicans in the Congress have expressed concern about this, and hopefully, can they can get to the bottom of it.

The other issue which has received a lot of “buzz” is the matter of the Electoral College. Since Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over 2 million votes, there are a lot of voices calling for the direct election of the President. To that, an old cliche is probably the best advice: “Don’t waste your time, forget about it!” The Electoral College is a part of the U.S. Constitution and it is not going to change.

Back in college I read James Madison’s Journals of the Constitutional Convention. What came out in those journals is that the Constitution was created through a series of compromises. The agricultural states were concerned about the influence of the commercial/industrial states. Small states wanted protection against bigger states. And, there was an underlying concern about the wisdom of the populace in directly electing the President. The creation of the Electoral College was one of the compromises made to address these concerns.

So think about our politics today. Nothing much has really changed. The small states still want protection from the bigger states, and smaller states benefit by getting leverage through the Electoral College. Agricultural states, like Iowa, still worry about the overpowering influence of large populated, commercial states like California and New York. Southern states still resent the financial power of northern states, etc. The beat goes on!

Since the Constitution requires a vote of three-fourths of the states to amend the Constitution, what are the chances that smaller states in the union would ever approve an amendment diminishing their power by eliminating the Electoral College? I would say slim to none. If you lived in the Dakotas, Rhode Island or Wyoming would you vote for such an amendment? Probably not. 

If you lived in the Dakotas, Rhode Island or Wyoming would you vote for such an amendment?  Probably not. 

So we have to move on. This year the Electoral College benefitted the Republican candidate. Next time it could benefit the Democratic candidate. What we do know is that everyone running for President knows the rules. Not only do you need to win the election, you need to carry a certain number of states in order to secure your victory in the Electoral College. Usually, the popular vote winner also wins the vote in the Electoral College — but not this year.

It is not a perfect system, and it may seem undemocratic and unreasonable to people from other countries. However, it is our system. It has been our system since the founding of the union, and it is doubtful we would have had a union without it. It will continue to be the system used in our national elections for the Presidency of our country. Forget about trying to change it.


Rolland Kidder

Mr. Kidder is a Stow resident.