The Donald Trump Phenomenon

This appeared in The Post Journal 

I recall in the early 1990s coming out of New York City from a meeting and picking up one of the newspaper tabloids at the airport-the headline read: “Ivana Better Deal” It was describing a divorce controversy involving our current President. Apparently, his first offer to his first wife for divorce terms was not being accepted.

Donald Trump, at the time, was generally perceived in the New York press as being a self-promoter from Queens who sought the limelight and was becoming a factor in the big real estate deals in Manhattan. Some of his deals went sour, like paying too much for the Plaza Hotel on the corner of 59th St. and 5th Ave. Others worked out. The investment in Atlantic City casinos initially worked out but, eventually, some of them slid into bankruptcy or needed restructuring by the bankers who held the paper.

But there was a perceivable constancy in the way he built his business; the Trump name was always at the forefront. When interviewed by a biographer, Donald Trump recommended one major change to the book…that the name “Trump” be made larger on the title and book jacket.

During his campaign for the Presidency, this worked to his advantage. Some of his campaign rallies were at airports where the Trump airplane would pull into a hangar full of cheering supporters. When he flew his Trump airplane to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, it came in low over the City to essentially claim his primary victories as the Republican nominee for President.

Frankly, I never thought that a New York City real estate tycoon with no governmental experience could ever be nominated or elected to the Presidency of the United States.

My parochial, upstate political views were that unless you lived south of the Mason Dixon line or west of the Allegheny River that your chances of being elected President were nil. I was wrong. Though steeped in the politics and business world of New York City, people in rural areas from Texas, to Louisiana, to Alabama and Ohio voted for him to be the 46th President of the United States.

Admittedly, the Democrats underestimated his candidacy. The Democratic candidate had national and international visibility as a experienced professional in government, but politics often is more a “gut-instinct” and emotional business than it is rational or intellectual. Donald Trump connected with more people in the States needed to beat Hillary Clinton in the electoral college.

As we look today at the Trump Presidency it is interesting that its success or failure will probably go back to his business dealings. It is clear that Russian investors were involved with his business investments Those relationships led, to among other things, the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013 when Trump owned that business.

It is noteworthy that President Trump has never denied his business relationships with Russians. He has only alleged that there was “no collusion” with them in influencing the outcome of the 2016 elections.

Fortunately, we live in a country where the truth or falsehood of allegations can be determined through a system of justice and the courts.

Fortunately, we live in a country where the truth or falsehood of allegations can be determined through a system of justice and the courts. To what extent the President was aware of, knew of or supported Russian influence in the election is the issue at hand.

An independent prosecutor is looking into all of this, and we will eventually know what did or did not happen. That is as it should be in a nation which prides itself in the rule of law. It is a good thing that, in our country, an elected official is not the one assigned to investigating himself or herself when it comes to such matters.


Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

A Tale Of Two States

This appeared in The Post Journal on Apr 29, 2018

Cynthia Nixon, running in the Democratic Primary for Governor, was recently asked where she thought “Upstate” started and she said she thought it was “somewhere around Ithaca.” Everyone Upstate chuckled about that. There has always been debate about it, but the consensus has generally been that anything north and west of the Tappan Zee Bridge could qualify as being “Upstate.” (An Assemblyman friend of mine from Manhattan once introduced me to his mother as a “friend from Upstate.” Her response was: “Oh, that’s nice. I’ve been to Poughkeepsie!”)

Ithaca, known by some as the “Independent Republic of Ithaca,” is actually an island of liberally-minded, highly educated voters hunkered around the halls of Cornell University. It could more readily be incorporated into New York City than Upstate.

The division between Upstate and Downstate has been around at least as far back as Martin Van Buren (circa 1830.) Though Andrew Jackson was popular in rural New York, the Democratic Party built by Van Buren was focused in New York City. It was the fear of Downstate by Upstate that eventually led to the Republican Party becoming the bastion of Upstate political clout… a position which it still solidly holds.

So, the upstate/downstate division in New York State goes way back. It is cultural: urban vs. rural. It is economic: manufacturing and agriculture vs. the financial industry and banking. It is political: Republican upstate and Democratic in the City and many of its suburbs.

What has changed over the years is that the New York City urban area has participated in the economic and population growth of the country, but Upstate has languished. Republicans have become stronger Upstate, but over a diminished piece of the pie. There are now over 2 million more Democrats than Republicans in the State. The urban area around New York City continues to be the “tail that wags the dog”… much more now than in the past.

We don’t like being pushed around, out-voted, told what our social policies should be, and treated like a second-rate step child.

The one thing that hasn’t changed is the minority status of we Upstaters. The New York City area has always been our big cousin that we resent because of its bigness and smugness. Economically, it actually contributes much more to the treasury of the State of New York than we do but, to us, that is incidental.

We are worried that downstate Democrats will soon take over the State Senate, and then every political office and power center in Albany will be in hands of those south of the Tappan Zee Bridge. Alas, this has always been our trial and our tale of the two states which make up the one we call New York.

Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Chautauqua Lake: Financing Sewer Extensions

We knew that getting sewers built around Chautauqua Lake would be a long, involved process—and it is proving to be so.  I would describe the current scenario as being sort of a “good news/bad news” situation.

A good news / bad news situation.

The “good news” is that the county legislature recently approved a bond issue of $16.9 million dollars to finance the construction of a sewer line and laterals from the area around the BOCES school in Ashville up to Stow. 

The “bad news” is that the county needs to receive additional state or federal aid in order to keep the user costs down to what the New York State Comptroller deems to be affordable.  (That number is about $950 per user/per year.)  Though the state has committed $ 5 million to the project, there is still an approximate $3 million shortfall in order to make the project “affordable” so that construction can begin.

In my view, the biggest “bad news” is that nothing has been done in Washington to support such projects though there has been a lot of “bally-hoo” about building infrastructure.  Under the old federal Clean Waters Act, 50% of the cost of such projects was eligible for federal funding.  (This is what enabled the extension of sewers in the 1980’s to the Bemus Point area and provided funds for the construction of the sewage treatment plant in Celeron.)

Unfortunately, the absence of federal funding this year was virtually guaranteed when the big $1.5 Trillion-dollar tax cut was enacted.  Had the tax cut been for $750 billion and the other $750 billion designated for national infrastructure… then we would have seen some money from Washington.  However, now, after the massive tax cut, the federal government is really broke and there is no money left for infrastructure.

So, this leaves us with our only other real option, more money from Albany.  

If the County doesn’t get an additional $3 million from New York State — forget about starting to get sewers built up the Lake.

I hate to be bearer of bad news but, as of this writing, there is not sufficient funding to begin constructing sewers up the west side of the Lake.  This will mean that we will continue to “limp along” trying to upgrade septic systems which are failing and, which by their nature, are not able to remove phosphorus from the waste being discharged into the Lake.  This is unacceptable—somehow, we need to secure the additional funding.

More phosphorus means more food for the algae.  When will Washington get that message?  Your guess is as good as mine.  Albany has gotten the message.  Let’s hope that they can finish the job and help us get this project started!

Rolland Kidder

Stow, NY

This commentary originally appeared in the The Post Journal on April 8, 2017

The Best Super Bowl

It says something about my age, but I have lived through all 52 Super Bowls. I went to three of them, including the defeat of the Buffalo Bills in Minneapolis.

Thus, I deem myself to have some credentials when it comes to judging the quality of this national sporting event. I would put last Sunday’s defeat of the New England Patriots by the upstart Philadelphia Eagles right at the top.

In the paraphrased words of the great sports philosopher, Yogi Berra, this game truly “wasn’t over until it was over.” Because of his incredible skill as a quarterback, Tom Brady kept the Pats in the  game until the final throw when we saw the incredible hulk, Rob Gronkowski, jump high in the end zone to catch a Brady “Hail Mary” pass which everyone expected Gronkowski to catch… everyone, that is, except the Philadelphia defense. Somehow those green-shirted Eagles players put enough hands and bodies in the air to deflect the pass… and the Eagles won.

We saw some things in that game which we will probably never see again—a quarterback (Foles) catching a touchdown pass, over 500 yards of offense by each team, and, yes, perhaps the last Super Bowl for Tom Brady though he sounds like he will keep playing until he is 50 years old.

Before the game, someone in our family sent a photo of a cartoon by David Sipress to our family football group text.  The cartoon showed an old guy, like me, sitting on a couch in front of a TV, speaking to a young boy and saying: “Remember—we’re not Eagles fans or Patriots fans. We’re “Tom Brady Somehow Gets Humiliated fans.”

My seven-year-old grandson immediately picked up on it, and kept reminding me of it during the game. Last year, while visiting him in Washington, D.C., an SUV passed our car on the highway honking its horn. As it zipped by us, written in the dirt of its rear window, during the time Brady had been suspended for a few games, were the words: “Free Tom Brady!” The driver had seen the Buffalo Bills sticker on my car, and was just trying to rub-it-in a bit. There has never been a quarterback who has beaten the Bills more than Tom Brady.

Admittedly, I was rooting for the Eagles last week just because of that but, in my heart, I expected that the Patriots would find a way win the Super Bowl. (One member of our family was so irate when it looked like the refs might reverse a Philadelphia touchdown, that he texted in that if it were reversed, he would never watch football again!) So, when both teams put on a show which was one for the ages and which went way beyond my usual bedtime…I had to stay up and watch it. Out of the 50 some Super Bowls I have watched, this had to be the best ever!


Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

Focus on Capitol Hill

Usually, in Washington, the focus for a legislative agenda starts in the White House, especially early in an administration. (This is particularly true when the majority in both houses of the federal legislature is of the same political party as that of the President.) But not this time.

It was the Republican majorities in the House and Senate that really got the tax cut bill going and kept it going. The President sort of sat back and gave them a blank check. He just wanted a “win” and what that would look like was pretty much left up to legislators on Capitol Hill.

Passing legislation is comparatively easy where tax cuts are the issue… everyone likes a tax cut and nobody really worries much as to how to pay for it.

Passing legislation is comparatively easy where tax cuts are the issue… everyone likes a tax cut and nobody really worries much as to how to pay for it. However, when it comes to other matters like putting a national budget together, raising the debt ceiling, dealing with immigration issues, trying to find money for an infrastructure bill, etc.—that is tougher to do. Trying to find a consensus among 435 Congressman and 100 Senators on tough issues is akin to trying to “herd cats.”

According to press reports, the retreat held at Camp David by the President and Republican leadership soon after the New Year revealed the problem of “focus.” The legislative leaders had come to talk with the President about a legislative agenda but, unfortunately, the timing was just a day or so after the publication of the “Fire and Fury” book describing an author’s experience inside the White House. The President’s mind was on the allegations in that book, so not much happened in forging a unified legislative agenda to say nothing of dealing with a pending shut down of the federal government.

Though Republicans control both houses of the Congress, they are having a tough time governing. Their party is fractured between the Tea Party/Freedom Caucus and a more moderate/conservative/traditional Republican brand. Democratic votes were needed to keep the government running. Yet, that doesn’t mean the Democrats had an easy time of it. Conservative columnist David Brooks probably said it best when he wrote cryptically after the vote to restart the government: “Democrats, when you lose a negotiation to a President who doesn’t know his own position, you’ve really impressed me.” The Democrats have their own divisions between the more liberal “progressives” and the “pragmatists” who come from red, purple and rural states.

So where do we go from here?

So where do we go from here? I see more short term “continuing resolutions” needed to keep the government running. Somehow, the Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill are going to have to find common ground and initiate legislation. The usual leadership expected from a White House is not going to be coming from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

Senate Minority Leader Schumer described negotiating with the White House as trying to negotiate with “jello.” Senate Majority Leader McConnell has also expressed frustration when trying to get decisions from the White House. Maybe it is time for these two leaders of the Senate to negotiate with each other, find and pass legislation which has bi-partisan support, and then send that to the President. He will probably sign it for another “win.”

Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

The New Year in Washington, 10 Predictions for 2018

In keeping with the general observation that in politics, as in life, 

“things don’t change more than they do change”… 

what can we expect in 2018 in terms of our national politics?

These are my Top 10 predictions for 2018:

1. The Mueller investigation will come to a close. If indictments are handed down, there will probably be pardons. As to the President, it will come down to “what did he know and when did he know it”… much like the facts surrounding the Nixon-Watergate scandal. However, unlike Nixon, I can’t envision our current President getting on a helicopter on the South Lawn of the White House and quietly leaving town.

2. I see more Democratic involvement on Capitol Hill. The Republicans already have one seat less in the U.S. Senate and the tough issues of passing a budget are not going to get any easier. The Tea Party Republicans will stop supporting Continuing Resolutions to fund the government, and so the President will have to reach out to Democrats in order to keep the government running.

3. Infrastructure legislation will pass, but it will not have a lot of money tied to it. Since we have already gone into debt another 1½ Trillion dollars for tax cuts… there just will not be enough money to do much of anything else other than support the ongoing existing obligations of the federal government.

4. The Democrats will have a chance of winning back both the House and the Senate, but it will be a lot closer than people think. There aren’t that many “swing” seats and as observed above… our politics tend to change slowly.

5. There will be some key elections around the country including the Governorship of New York. New York’s current Governor would like to run for President and so needs a strong re-election. If a viable Republican emerges in the race for Governor, Mr. Cuomo might decide that a path to the White House is more probable if he does not run for re-election.

6. There will undoubtedly be some big event or events which will dominate the political debate. In 2017, the news was headlined in many ways by weather… the hurricanes in the country and in Puerto Rico, and the fires in California. We will be paying for those costs for many years to come. Yet, we can deal with calamities from mother-nature a lot easier than we can an outbreak of war someplace in the world that would drag us into a major conflict.

7. There will be more proposals on getting the new Wall built along the Mexican border… but I don’t see a major construction start. There will continue to be more restrictions in international travel which will reduce immigration but hopefully not American engagement in the world at large.

8. China will continue to become a larger factor on the international stage.

9. I believe that the politics of the country will move more toward the center. People have had enough polarization and in “in your face” political engagement. After a while it becomes like an ongoing fight within a family… you just get tired of it and want a return to comity and normal discourse. In the end, Americans will find a way to work together.

10. And finally, I predict that in 2018 the Buffalo Bills will make the play-offs!

Rolland Kidder
Stow, NY

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