George Therit passes on a little too early

     When George Therit Jr. passed away this week just short of his 91st birthday, it occurred to me that he died about seven years too soon.
     That's how many years I figure he lost when he thought he killed a six year old kid in Manchester many years ago.
     Mr. Therit, known as Junior to most adults in town, was just about 27 at the time. He was home from serving in the army during the second world war, and he and Mrs. Therit -- Miriam -- had two little boys of their own. They were known and respected as solid, decent, clean-living folks who would never hurt another person for all the world.
     But events conspire against us, and as George drove at a reasonable speed west on York Street, near the intersection with Main, a mop-headed kid came out of nowhere, dashing into the path of his gray '38 Plymouth. There was a thump!, and the kid went flopping and rolling into the gutter.
     I figure that's when George lost those seven years, even though the kid jumped up and started yelling, "Am I dead? Am I dead?"
     The kid was lucky, and a little slow afoot, as well as on the uptake of what constitutes dead. Beheaded chickens might run around after the big moment, but the kid was just bruised and scared.
     Almost as scared as George, they say.
     I was that kid. I recall that the steel in the right front fender of a pre-war Plymouth was as substantial as a cast iron frying pan, and could give you a fat lip, but that was better than going under the big front tire, which was a split second alternative.
     Not being dead, I was deemed fit to return to duty, which at the time was attendance in first grade class at Manchester Elementary School. I took an ice cube with me and a story to tell.
     The Therit family went to the same Immanuel Lutheran Church as my family, and his son, Dean (I always thought that had something to do with my luck) and I were in the same Sunday School class. Over the years, we would recall that moment and share a chuckle at the thick-headed kid who jumped up demanding to know if he was dead.
     I always figured I owed Mr. Therit something for scaring the life out of him.
     That close call was a lesson for me; everything can change in the flicker of an eye.
     A few years later, I grabbed a handful of my sister's hair as she was about to drown in the creek up at Dick's Dam, and held her there until adults could come and help.
     Many years after that, I saved a young man from choking to death on a burger in a Hanover restaurant, and later repeated that performance by smacking the back of a friend in a Taneytown restaurant when he was choking on steak.
     What are the odds?
     One day on a quiet street in Hanover, an elderly lady stepped out of her car to put mail in a corner box, but the vehicle was left in reverse. It backed up, the open door knocked her down, and she was about to be run over by her own car. I was able to get her out of the way in time, just because I happened to be walking by.
     So, George, you lost seven years because of me, but I like to think they got put back into the bank to give four others some extra time. Maybe it was part of some master plan.
    In any case, God bless you in your new adventure.

What if we used facts instead of talking points?

     We can't be too hard on that fella Todd Aiken for his comments about rape and abortion: He simply found his mind unable to conceive a thought and reverted to the talking points in his pocket. He may have aborted his campaign.
     That means he was trying to make a thoughtful comment about a complex issue, which is a bit over the head of the hard core right, which is his base.
     Talking points are sheets of answers to questions. Whether the question is related or not, give the response on the sheet handed out by the partisan spin managers.
     If you are not sure why talking points exist, think about how many times you've said to the person who shares your TV, "He didn't answer the question. Why don't they ever answer the question?"
     It's called deflection. It turns candidate forums into a verbal food fight.
     Watch the Sunday talk shows. Flip channels and pick up a few comments from either side -- Republican, Democrat, it doesn't matter. You will hear the same litany from the party line all morning line. See, they had a meeting, and passed out talking points.
     Sen. John McCain, still pretty candid, said the other day, "We have to keep the focus on our story, and stick with it."
     That's our story and we're sticking with it.
     If the question is, "What will your party do better than the incumbents?", the response will be, "The incumbents have had four (six, eight) years to keep their promises and they have failed. It's time for a change."
     There is never any acknowledgment that one of the reasons for failure was partisan gridlock. The side that loses the election spends four years pushing back to ensure the new leaders get only one term, never mind separating good ideas from bad, or perhaps -- gag -- compromise.
     It happens at the state level, too. When the Democrat Glendenning was Governor, the Republicans did everything they could to undermine his agenda. To hell with the fact that the people elected him governor.
     Then, when Ehrlich was elected, the Republicans whined for four years that the Democrats would not work with the Republicans.
     These wars are fought with talking points. Reporters -- good ones -- hate them. TV reporters and print slackers rely on them for quotes.
     Business uses talking points, too. Oil spill choking the gulf? We are leading the world in environmental research. Medications killing people? America's health care is the best in the world.
     Like that. Talking points.
     Facts are too inconvenient.
     Talking points are easy, and everybody has some. but if the dialog was based on facts, we'd see right away that no one has all the answers.

Marching out of step, too much to the right

     Earlier this month, I wrote that it might be time to take the school impact fees off the table for awhile, but I forgot who was in the County Office Building.
     If there is a way to get things backward, it seems, this board will find it. Too much right angle marching gets them out of sync with reality.
     It turns out they cut the fees retroactively, instead of at some future date. It never occurred to me that they would bend over that far backward to accommodate development interests, but they did. And then they allow the ones who have already paid fees for plans on the board to come in and get refunds. They can still fill up schools with new development when the market warms up again, but they get to keep the money that would have helped build classrooms to house new residents' children.
     Then, they compound the error by entertaining school redistricting AFTER the fact. You should get a handle on how many classrooms you need now and for the next seven years before you eliminate some. Especially if you are eliminating fees that help the government keep up with development.
     It takes more time to build a single school than it does to erect the houses that will fill it.
     A riverboat gambler has a better plan for paying future bills than this board, particularly Robin Frazier and Richard Rothschild.
     State and federal funding will continue to be down. Carroll will probably continue to get short shrift for capital funding, not only for schools, but for roads and water and sewers.
     The self-described conservatives on the board think they're saving money, but all they're doing is putting off the day when all the needs will arrive at once, and there will be nothing in the kitty, and no plan for fixing the problem short of a massive, immediate tax hike.

Impact fees can be shelved -- for awhile

     Putting a hold on residential impact fees is probably the right thing to do, at least until planners send the message that it's time to reinstate them.
     And  that's the rub:  Commissioners Frazier and Rothschild are on record as being generally against any restraints on what they euphemistically refer to as "property rights," and would be only to happy to see impact fees go away altogether. They don't have mush use for planning and zoning, and would be happy if we had only enough government to keep conservatives in power.
     I believe the overwhelming majority of residents, giving it some thought, want more than that.
     I recall budget director Ted Zaleski raising the idea that impact fees can and should be reduced when housing and population growth slows. It makes sense to me that if you are going to raise the fees when sheer numbers of people strain resources -- schools, roads, police and fire safety -- you can turn back the fees when the numbers subside.
     That's predicated on the concept of catching up and then keeping up, a mantra I kept repeating even before I was in office. People asked me, when I was a candidate, if I would cut taxes, as if that was the only criteria for election. I candidly said I had been hearing too much from firefighters and educators about how far behind we were, and could not in good conscience promise to cut taxes until I was assured we were caught up.
     But ideologues don't care about subtleties: Cut taxes, cut spending, and then it's everyone for themselves. Okay if you're talking about a sports event, but not avoiding chaos in a community.
     If the commissioners choose to turn off the impact fees for the time being, that may be appropriate.
     Those of us whose definition of property rights includes having a plan for growth will be watching, and ready to mobilize others who are willing to invest in protection against having a junk yard next door to us, or a solid investment in public education, fire and ambulance response.
     Planning and zoning and adequate fees for residential growth also ensures that we do catch up and keep up to provide quality of life programs like  recreational facilities for our kids and others, senior accommodations, and safety nets for people with needs.
     We want more than a collection of tribes; we want a cohesive community that respects individuals with differing requirements, within reason.

Games in Annapolis over gaming in Carroll

     Carroll County's request for changes in the gaming law to allow local fire companies and other community charitable groups to raise funds failed again.
     Why?  One thing among many that I learned while in local government is that games are played withing games in Annapolis and Washington, and if you don't have a pass to the back rooms, you may never know for sure what's going on.
     Transparency is the last thing that power brokers want. They want public relations, they want spin, they want money from their base contributors, and they want the votes of the people, and maybe they want what's best for their constituency. Maybe, sometimes.
     What could have happened to keep the local bill from being passed one more time?
     I speculate here, but perhaps there is a carryover from when Sen. Larry Haines used his influence to keep his word to conservative Christians. Even though he is no longer in office, that  constituency is still here, and local reps know it. They're caught between the rock of the church and the hard place of volunteer fire companies who are the drivers for new funds.
     Perhaps the local delegation is being spanked -- again -- for (1) being too conservative for a state government now led by Democrats; (2) for being divided, in public or not, over the gaming bill for the larger statewide bill. Carroll's electeds in Annapolis get spanked a lot by Democrats, and they tend to squabble among themselves, too, so they don't have a lot of friends in the state house.
     They say the local bill will get a better shot at passage in the next regular session, but firefighters and others have been hearing that for a long time.
     Time will tell, and time is more credible that most of the PR you're hear until actions speak for themselves.

Ryan would have been my choice -- in another life

      The selection of Paul Ryan for his vice presidential running mate shows that Mitt Romney is giving up on middle ground votes.
      There was a time when I might have applauded. That was before I walked in the shoes of someone who had to acknowledge that government in the modern era can not be premised on a simple ideological theory.
      It's complicated, because people are involved, not just theories.
      In a way, Paul Ryan would work better as a VP running mate for Ron Paul, the wizened Libertarian who has an ardent following among the extreme Right, but whose candidacy was rejected in primary elections across the country. Ron Paul and Paul Ryan are political and philosophical soul mates.
      Their ultra conservative ideas are not evil, but they just won't work today, and even conservative Republicans were wise enough to see that when Romney and the rest were in races in the primaries earlier this year.
      Much is being written now that Paul Ryan is a brilliant budget wonk who knows the Federal budget as well, if not better, than anyone in Congress.
      But that's not the same as understanding the consequences of the proposals he has espoused.
      Maybe that's because he is a disciple, of sorts, of the controversial novelist Ayn Rand, whose views made popular fiction in the post-WWII years, when Americans feared the statist extremes of Stalinist USSR, and totalitarian government that was vying with America for world dominance.
     You've heard of Rand by now. Maybe you've read her novels, Atlas Shrugged, and The Fountainhead; one was made into a movie -- one of the few bad movies Gary Cooper ever made.
     She used those books to push her ideas of a society where selfishness was a good thing, the ultimate virtue, because it would require every citizen to scratch out their place in the world without regard for anyone else. Only reason, not altruism, not emotion, should lead to success. Enough reason would ensure prosperity. She had no use for religion or personal sacrifice on behalf of others. Every man for himself.
     I can't do Rand justice here, so take some time to read up on the one influence that would-be vice president -- potentially, president -- Paul Ryan says forms his political philosophy.
     Look up Objectivism on the web. Google Ayn Rand, or Nathaniel Branden, who was her colleague for 18 years before he split with her.
     Learn more about the ideas behind this up and  coming Republican named Paul Ryan, and maybe you, too, will be left  with some serious misgivings about how much humanity will be left in American governance if he and his ilk gain too much political power.

Waste not a chance to do the good by waiting for perfect

     I have always had respect and admiration for those who strive to protect the environment and reduce wasted resources, going back to when I was a kid.
     So it is with regret that I see that the county government has given Waste NOT Carroll what they want, instead of what the county needs, now and for the future.
     After months and months, meetings after meetings, including many public sessions and forums, Carroll County government joined Frederick County several years ago to participate in the planning, construction and operational policies of a waste to energy plant. It would be built in Frederick County to serve the two counties, and additional clients as approved by the principals.
     The plant design was based on the latest technologies widely in use in Europe, and would advance the ideals of reducing and reusing waste -- recycling it -- by turning it into electrical power.
     Educated, well-trained people visited the European plants to see first hand how efficient and environmentally feasible the latest waste to energy technology is. Staff, professional advisers and elected officials from both Frederick and Carroll Counties visited plants in this country to see, hear and attempt to smell waste to energy plants at peak hours.
     There was no smoke, odors or noise, and scrubbers effectively removed any particulates or chemical pollution to levels far below what is considered dangerous to health. The costs are high, but compared to the costs of current methods of collecting, sorting, treating or land filling trash, reasonable.
     Waste to energy makes sense environmentally, especially as a bridge for the 40 years or so that it will take newer technologies to become viable. It makes sense financially.
     But all the information and all the facts in the world are no match for emotional zeal and the heady rush of a populist movement. For so many years, American lovers of the environment have been ignored by big business and big government, and so the disciples of the earth have become entrenched in their beliefs -- even when the facts have changed, and the old paradigms they champion so fervently have shifted to irrelevance.
     I fear the fight to defeat the waste to energy plant is a case of well-intentioned people forgetting that it is, indeed, about the best course for the environment, and the lives in it, and not about winning a political or populist argument. Especially an argument that does not hold water.
     When the county announced it will withdraw from the contract with Frederick County, a leader in the Waste NOT ranks was quoted as saying something like, "Maybe we can come up with a better way of dealing with waste."
     We are well past the time for idealistic slogans and hoping. It's time to get something done.
     We were on the way. Well-intentioned people spent a lot of time and effort seeking a better way, and examined in great detail -- more diligently and open minded than environmental absolutists -- the current and emerging technology and costs for handling the waste that a growing population creates.
     We had made great strides in recovering, reusing, reducing and recycling waste, and there is more to be done.
     It takes half the time to shut down the contracts that the county counts on now to have other areas accept what's left when we have reduced the flow we have today.
     If you're going to presume a role of leadership, you should have a ready answer for the questions: What are you going to do when you can't truck it to another state? How long can you use current landfill space? When that's filled, how long will it take to find, permit, and develop another landfill in the county?
     That last answer is easy; there will be no more landfills in Carroll County, ever. What we see is what we get, and when that runs out, we will have to hope that Frederick County will let us in, if there is room, to use the facility we could have retained some control over.
     Bottom line is this: The opponents to the waste to energy plant have not won; they lost. The plant will still be built, but Carroll leaders will have no say in design, safety, overview.
     Carroll County was on the way to solving, not in a perfect way, but in the best way practicable, waste management issues for many years to come.
     The opponents have ideals, but no solutions to those continuing problems.
    

Tough choices

     We tell our kids that life is full of tough choices: You can have ice cream or cake, but not both. You can go to soccer camp or the beach, but not both.
     But we don't like it when we have to face tough choices ourselves, especially when the payoff is not always so immediate and personal.
     Raise taxes a penny to keep teachers and reduce class sizes at an average household cost of $40, or go to the sporting goods store and shell out $70 for a Ravens shirt?
     That's really a tough call for a lot of people.
     Shell out another five cents for the booze you drink watching the game on your 50 inch HD flatscreen, or keep it to buy an extra two cases of beer a year?
     Wink, shrug and nudge at the moral erosion of gambling casinos and the shady figures backstage, or have the fat cats who anonymously fund political campaigns and influence elections pony up more in taxes?
     Life is tough and there are contradictions everywhere. You go to church on Sunday and get weepy and full of self congratulations when you hear the sermon about the Good Samaritan, because you know that helping the poor man by the side of the road is the right thing to do -- What Would Jesus Do.
     But leave your health insurance plan alone and don't bring on a health care plan that includes people not as fortunate -- meaning wealthy, or just plain lucky -- as others.
     It's complicated. Less so for conservatives, for whom everything is pretty simple. More so for liberals, whose solutions sometimes lead to new problems. For moderates and the generally disengaged, it's just plain confusing.
     Isn't it great that we have all the negative ads during election season to help us sort it all out?