Mozart and Shostakovich Symphonies at Severance

Contrasting symphonies from the 18^th and 20^th centuries were on the program at this weekend’s Cleveland Orchestra concerts led by music director Franz Welser-Möst.

First, a personal note: I was returning from a quick trip to Florida yesterday and landed in Cleveland a mere three and a half hours before the concert.  I collected my luggage, raced home, had dinner, and headed to Severance Hall in time for the pre-concert lecture.  What I had not anticipated was that, despite wearing my noise-cancelling Air Pods during the flights, my tinnitus was aggravated by the plane ride.  Accordingly, I had some difficulty hearing high frequencies during the concert.  I was also quite tired.  Fortunately, the concert was made available via the Adella app and I was able to watch again in the morning before writing this review. 

The concert began with one of my favorite symphonies: Mozart’s Symphony No. 41 in C major, K. 551 – the so-called “Jupiter.”  The nickname likely originates with the work’s first publisher, who probably appended it to add to the sales appeal for the work’s first publication a few years after Mozart’s death.  The composer created this work, his last symphony, in a mere 16 days.  It was one of several works composed for a concert in 1788 which apparently never took place, and it appears the work was never performed in Mozart’s lifetime.  The work has a propulsive quality that anticipates what Beethoven would achieve early in the following century.  Welser-Möst’s approach balanced this propulsiveness with Viennese elegance, favoring transparent textures and tempos that were on the fast side, particularly in the work’s second movement.  Welser-Möst injected some humor into the Menuetto’s trio via some naughty rubato – maybe as a reminder that Mozart liked to imbibe. 

Dmitri Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 11 in G minor, Op. 103 – titled “The Year 1905” by the composer, could hardly be more different than Mozart’s.  About the only thing the two works have in common is that they both have four movements – but even this similarity is deceptive as Mozart’s are distinctive while Shostakovich’s are interconnected.  The latter composer’s work is double the length of Mozart’s, uses a much larger orchestra, ends tragically, and commemorates an event: the  Russian Revolution of 1905, which began with the massacre by Tsar Nicholas II’s guards against workers who were delivering a petition protesting working conditions.  Further protests and strikes followed, capped by a mutiny on the Battleship Potemkin, which forced the Tsar to grudgingly accept some reforms which instituted a Constitutional monarchy.  The reforms were watered down over the next twelve years, which led to the 1917 Revolution which gave the world the Soviet Union – a new form of totalitarianism.

As for the Symphony itself, I first became familiar with the work’s opening during Carl Sagan’s 1980 series, Cosmos, and later the soundtrack LP from the series.  The world premiere recording by Stokowski was featured and I eventually bought the complete performance, which imprinted itself in my mind as how the work went.  In retrospect, as the work was new, neither Stokowski nor the Houston Symphony Orchestra had fully assimilated it, and as gorgeous as the 1958 sound was for the time, the interpretation as a whole was sectionalized.  Welser-Möst brought a much more direct, cohesive approach to the sprawling work.  The opening, set on the Square of the Tsar’s Winter Palace, was atmospheric without being blurry, with chaste horn and trumpet solos from Nathaniel Silberschlag and Michael Sachs.   Throughout the movement, Welser-Möst kept the dynamics muted, which made the crescendos of the second movement all the more startling.  This movement, which depicts the brutal massacre of the 9^th of January, was brilliantly brought off; seldom have I heard the climax presented with such controlled, mechanistic violence.  The third movement, titled Eternal Memory, was given a restrained performance, which is unusual in Shostakovich interpretation; but it worked and set the stage for the devastating finale.

Though this symphony was completed in the Soviet Union of 1957, and the orchestra planned for this program months in advance, my mind still made a connection to the events in this country over the past year – particularly the recent murder of a Minneapolis woman at the hands of an ICE officer this past week.  In Lee County Florida, a Donald Trump stronghold, I saw an anti-ICE protest on my way to the airport, and there were larger protests all over the country.  It seems that after the events of the last few months – the increasingly disturbing revelations of the Epstein report; the US intervention in Venezuela, which is entirely about oil; Trump’s threats against Greenland; and the continued oppression of US citizens – that the American people are finally awakening to the growing danger from within. 

Trump’s gauche vandalism of the Peoples’ House

Donald Trump’s decision to demolish the East Wing of the White House, along with his, ahem, questionable decorating choices within the Oval Office, have left Americans with working eyesight and good taste astonished and appalled.  Trump’s shrinking cadre of defenders have replied by bringing up the Truman reconstruction, secret tunnels, and even President Obama’s rather benign partial conversion of the tennis court (far removed from the actual buildings) into a basketball court.  Much of what they share is, at best, incomplete.  Some of it is flat-out misinformation.

Let’s review the history of the White House.  The President’s House, as it was then called, was constructed between 1792-1800. The builders were a combination of enslaved African-Americans (who quarried the stone used for the construction) and employed whites.  The structure was built to the finest standards for American private residences at the time.  But it was deliberately designed to be modest compared to the residences that heads of state occupied in nations like Britain and France. This modesty pertained not just to size, but to design. The décor was simply dignified rather than ostentatious – a reminder that the new nation was neither a monarchy nor particularly wealthy. 

By the time the building was inhabited, George Washington was already dead.  John Adams was the first President to inhabit the home, and only for the final year of his presidency. 

Even before the White House was constructed, several exterior structures were built, including outhouses for the construction crew and, eventually, the first family and others who spent time at the White House.  Under Thomas Jefferson, colonnades were built on the east and west ends of the mansion. 

British troops invaded the Capital in 1814 and burned the White House.  First Lady Dolly Madison, aware the troops were on the way, famously removed  many of the home’s possessions – including artwork and furniture.  Then she laid out a feast for the approaching troops giving the first family and staff time to escape.  The British enjoyed the feast, then set the mansion ablaze.  The building’s internal structure was essentially destroyed with only the four exterior walls left standing.  As with the original construction, cost was a factor when the house was rebuilt.  The original wooden beams and joints were visually inspected for fire damage and approved or rejected for reuse.  But the engineers of the time lacked both the knowledge and the technology to make an accurate determination as to which pieces were fit for reuse.  They were unaware that even without burning, the extreme heat caused by the fire could compromise the material’s integrity.

The British did it...

The first known photo of the White House from 1846

Over the next century, the building and grounds were renovated numerous times.  Several greenhouses were built at various locations.  In the mansion itself, holes were drilled into the wooden supports to create conduits for indoor plumbing, gas lines, and electric wiring.  These invasions caused further stress on the structure.  

The north portico of the White House during the Lincoln Administration.

Other structures were intended as permanent additions – and these were submitted for design review and were rightly paid for with public funds (the use of private funds would have raised accusations of robber barons trying to curry favor with the increasingly powerful Federal government). 

Theodore Roosevelt’s creation of the West Wing was the most significant addition to the complex up to that time – though it should be pointed out that this change didn’t affect the original building itself.  Neither did Roosevelt’s creation of the first part of the East Wing.

It was Calvin Coolidge’s project to add a third floor to the White House in 1927 which sealed the building’s fate.  For the next two decades, groans and cracking sounds could be heard from within the walls, leading the gullible to believe that the building was inhabited by ghosts.

The West Wing was destroyed by a fire in 1929 and hastily rebuilt.  In 1934, Franklin Roosevelt had the West Wing rebuilt to accommodate the growing administration.  He also collaborated with famed architect Eric Gugler, creating a new Oval Office which has been used by Presidents ever since.  Many of the details remained visible nine decades later: built-in bookcases; hidden doors as well as doors topped with robust pediments; the Presidential seal on the ceiling; the subtle, recessed lighting.  That is, until 2025, when Donald Trump began festooning the room with gaudy accoutrements.

FDR in the new Oval Office in 1934.

In 1942, Roosevelt – with Congressional approval – expanded the East Wing.  Part of this was to conceal wartime tunnels which connected the White House to a bunker underneath the treasury department.  It’s worth remembering that from the time the US entered World War II until the day FDR died, a gas mask was strapped to his wheelchair. 

As ambitious as their expansions were, both Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt knew the main building was having troubles.  But they felt little could be done due to the constraints of the Great Depression and World War II. 

Shortly after taking office, Harry Truman noticed significant issues.  As recounted in Robert Klara’s superb “The Hidden White House,” whenever White House butler Alonzo Fields, who stood over six feet tall and was strongly built, walked in the Yellow Oval Room on the second floor, the floorboards would creak and the chandelier in the Blue Oval Room below would sway as its crystals made a tinkling sound.  The floor in another room was beginning to tilt. Truman’s bathtub was starting to sink into the floor.  When a leg of Margaret Truman’s piano crashed through the ceiling of the floor below, Truman knew action had to be taken.  A team of engineers was hired.  They looked behind the walls, under the floors, above the ceilings and delivered their verdict: the building was standing only from “force of habit” and was in danger of imminent collapse. The Truman family moved to Blair House across the street for the duration.

A broken beam under Margaret Truman's bedroom.

Reconstruction

Congress was notified about the situation, and although some Republicans tried to use the issue for partisan gain, most were supportive of Truman’s desire to save the building.  Congress proposed what was the least expensive solution: tear the building down and replace the whole thing.  Truman, who despite his plain-spoken and occasionally profane manner was well-read in history, would have none of that.  He insisted that, no matter the cost, the look of the original White House be preserved.  To do that, engineers found a way to shore up the four outer walls while removing everything within those walls.  Equipment for demolition, excavation, and reconstruction was disassembled, the parts brought in through doors and windows, then reconstructed once inside.  Furniture was removed and stored off-site, the original interior was dismantled with parts labeled and numbered, and what was left was demolished.  Two sub-basements were excavated (partly for support services, partly for security in case of nuclear attack), a new steel frame was built, and the rooms were rebuilt largely based on the original plans.  Through the entire three-year project, Coolidge’s third floor was held in place by steel supports.  The Truman Reconstruction was the first significant building restoration in the history of the United States.  It was far from perfect, mostly because Truman ran out of money before the project was complete.  A decade after Truman returned to the rebuilt White House in 1952, First Lady Jackie Kennedy remarked that much of the décor looked like something out of a Sheraton hotel.  It was she who brought timeless elegance to the building.

Other Presidents have made smaller changes to the White House – mostly a matter of décor.  Presidential families are free to decorate the residence (the top two floors of the building) as they see fit.  Under George W. Bush, Congress approved a major modernization of the White House, renovating electrical work and HVAC, and installing security measures – including a system to detect airborne biohazards – which was carried out during the Obama administration.  Obama also added a basketball hoop to the tennis court and painted the appropriate lines – which is recently causing consternation even though Obama paid for the changes himself and has been out of office for over eight years.  Gee, I wonder why people get worked up over such a minor change, not to mention the tan suit Obama once wore…

This past week, Donald Trump had the entire East Wing torn down to create a vast, vulgar, gilded ballroom.  The welcome center, colonnade, the famed movie theatre, and First Lady’s offices are all gone.  Neither Congress nor the National Park System were consulted – technically a violation of law since the White House complex is part of the park system and federal property.  Who is paying for this: corporations wanting to curry favor with the Trump administration.  Teddy Roosevelt’s nightmare has come to life. 

What about those doing the actual demolition and construction?  Have they been properly vetted by the FBI and/or Secret Service?  Who knows what could be hidden within the walls of the upcoming grandiose monstrosity.

I can’t think of any past president, of any party, who would approve of what has happened to the White House over the last few weeks.  But Republicans nationwide are largely looking the other way.  I’m old enough to remember than despite their deep political disagreements during the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill would regularly get together to have drinks, swap stories, and share a few laughs.  During one such conversation, the Republican President and the Democratic Speaker commiserated on the loss of historical architecture and its replacement with “ugly” modern buildings.  That conversation led to the Rehabilitation Tax Credit, which has made possible the renovation and reuse of many older buildings.

Unlike Reagan, Donald Trump has no respect for historical architecture.  He famously destroyed several friezes from the 1929 Bonwit Teller building to build Trump Tower after he said he would preserve them and donate them to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. He destroyed Jackie Kennedy’s Rose Garden for a tacky concrete patio. Now he’s destroyed the East Wing after he said he wouldn’t. This level of contempt for simple beauty is unique in our nation’s history. 

Every previous change to the White House was to enhance or add to the existing sight, respecting the original while increasing functionality to account for modernization and the growth of both our nation and the Presidency.  There was nothing “wrong” with the East Wing to justify its demolition. 

I believe Trump’s more vociferous supporters will stand by anything he does.  He could bomb the White House and they would come up with an excuse to rationalize his every action.  Then there are those who simply lack the respect for our nation’s history and the simple good taste to comprehend that Trump’s gaudy, gilded, bloated addition is the definition of tacky.

90 years of Social Security

Every once in a while, I like to peruse Redfin and other realty sites and look over house listings.  As they say, the three most important things in real estate are location, location, and location.  It continues to amaze me how a modest mid-century modern three-bedroom, two-bathroom home in Palm Springs will sell for over a million dollars.  Despite the increase in local property values over the past five years, one still gets far more for one’s money in northeast Ohio. 

Lately I’ve been looking at homes in Shaker Heights.  There is a section in southeast Shaker with some very attractive two-family homes – although they appear to be single family homes to the casual observer.  Many of these homes have a larger upstairs unit on the second and third floors, and a smaller unit on the first floor.  Closer to the center of Shaker, there are numerous homes with the following layout: social spaces (living and/or family room, sunroom, dining room, and kitchen) on the first floor; bedrooms with two full bathrooms on the second floor; and small bedrooms with a small bathroom (often with a tub but no shower) on the top floor.  I find this layout interesting as the top floor would be ideal for flex space: workout room, office, or guest bedroom.  Nearly all of these houses were built prior to 1930.

What’s the story behind these houses?  Simply, the top floor was meant for servants – usually one cook and one housekeeper.  Before the Great Depression there was a surplus of people who worked as servants.  Most were single younger females or widows and, in the era before the minimum wage was established, they worked for a pittance with no benefits aside from room and board.  Often the servants’ quarters were accessible only through a separate staircase.

My maternal grandfather came of age in a family which had servants under this setup.  He died long before I was born, but I remember visiting his sister’s home in Columbus.  Even as a small child I was impressed with the place, especially the door from the kitchen to the dining room that opened both ways and, yes, they had a servant.

With the growth of the middle-class that accompanied the post-war economy, the live-in servant paradigm came to an end.  In particular, older people were not obligated to work until they died thanks to the Social Security Act, which was signed into law 90 years ago today.

Politicians of both parties, but especially Republicans, have been tampering with Social Security for the last few decades, to the programs detriment.  Early in his second term, President George W. Bush tried to move the Social Security Trust fund toward private investments, which was met with widespread disapproval and began to fracture his political coalition – a fracturing which accelerated after his administration’s inept response to Hurricane Katrina.  Others within the right-wing have tried to mislead people into believing that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.

This need only be stated for those who don’t understand how Ponzi schemes work: Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme; it is an insurance program which has worked extraordinarily well for 90 years.  As with any insurance program, not every payer of premium receives a benefit, e.g., some die before they reach retirement age.

Today, Social Security is in profound danger of collapsing.  A few simple fixes would make the Social Security trust fund solvent into the 22^nd Century: First, raise the cap on taxable income.  Second, gradually, over time, raise the retirement age by six-month increments every five years commencing in ten years.

Democrats seem unwilling to fight for this multi-generational contract which has saved literally tens of millions of senior citizens from poverty ridden old age.  MAGA Republicans seem desirous of ending the program – even though it is revenue neutral. Part of this worsened by their clamping down of immigration, since migrant workers pay into Social Security but will not draw benefits unless they become citizens. As Harry Truman once said, “The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know."  Truman, an economic populist who tried to institute national health insurance, would be appalled not only by Republican actions, but by the lack of Democratic fire over the issue.  Even Republicans like Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon, who believed in Keynesian economics, would be shocked at the direction their party has taken.

The economic goal of today’s MAGA Republicans is not merely to destroy the social safety net which has helped prevent another Great Depression, they want to take us back to the age of the Robber Barrons and possibly instill a neo-feudalistic economic system.

Unless the average citizen fights back, that’s exactly what they are going to do.   

One term

There have been 14 Presidents who have served exactly one term.  They were John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, James Polk, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, William Howard Taft, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, Donald J. Trump (who has inexplicably been elected to another term which will likely be at least as disastrous as his first), and Joe Biden.  

I have no doubt that Joe Biden will be judged by future historians as among the greatest of these.

This is not based on sentiment, but on objective reality. None of the above listed one-termers inherited the disaster that Biden had to face. 

Lincoln faced a massive crisis when he took office, the collapse of the union and rise of the Confederacy.  He ended the Confederacy with the bloodiest war in our history, and he ended slavery.  He was elected to a second term, but was assassinated only six weeks into his second term.

Franklin Roosevelt took office at the depth of the Great Depression, and led the nation through a halting, uneven recovery.  Then he rose to the occasion and led the US to the brink of victory in World War II – tragically dying twelve weeks into his fourth term, and a mere three weeks before Germany surrendered.

Barack Obama inherited the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession.  His policies rescued two of the big three automakers and turned the economy around.  He also passed comprehensive health care reform, something which had eluded FDR, Harry Truman, and Bill Clinton.

Joe Biden faced not one, not two, but three crises when he took office: Pandemic, Recession, and Insurrection.  He slew them all.  That fight, along with the other battles and tragedies of his life, took a lot out of him.  Though it took some prodding, ultimately he showed the wisdom to pass the torch to a new generation – something which Franklin Roosevelt was unwilling to do. 

Joe Biden is a true public servant who will be fondly remembered by those of us who have actually studied American history.  

Americans would do well to heed the warnings 

President Biden made in his Farewell address.

Project 2025 – a disaster for American preparedness

The bulk of this post was written before the assassination attempt on former President Trump.  However, the events of July 13^th have no bearing on the content of this post.

By now you’ve heard about Project 2025, MAGA Republicans’ and the Heritage Foundation’s plans for a “reform” of the Federal government if Donald Trump is elected in November.

Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, saying that he doesn’t know anyone involved with it. In fact, his own Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, is working for P2025.  One of the architects of P2025 is John McEntee, Trump’s Director of White House Personnel when he was in office.  A board member, Russell Vought, was named policy director of the Republican National Committee this past May.  Further, Trump’s own Agenda 47 bears a striking resemblance to P2025.

You’ve no doubt read some of the major items of P2025, but here’s a quick refresher:

Social issues and Reproductive Rights:

• End marriage equality
• Complete abortion ban - without exceptions
• Restrictions on contraceptives
• Use taxpayer money for religious schools and include Christian beliefs in public school curricula
• Pack the Supreme Court with Justices who will ban all DEI initiatives and enable the above

Medicare and Social Security:

• Raise the retirement age
• Cut Social Security benefits
• Cut Medicare
• Repeal the Affordable Care Act
• End price controls on medications, such as the Biden-era price cap on Insulin

Environment:

• Defund the EPA
• Deregulate Fossil Fuel production
• Increase Artic drilling

National Security:

• Defund the FBI and Homeland Security
• Use the military to break up domestic protests
• Retire senior military personnel and stack the upper-ranks with Trump supporters.

 

Let’s talk some more about the military items, which are not getting the publicity much of the rest of P2025 is receiving.

Buried among the nooks and crannies of P2025 are items detailing benefit cuts for veterans and active-duty military personnel.  Part of that is to move part of the VA to the private sector.  Part includes benefit cuts to disabled veterans.  What an outrageous slap in the face to those who have been harmed defending our nation.

Do we really want our active duty and retired military to have to jump through more hoops?  Particularly those who are disabled or need mental health care? 

Our nation’s defenders are not especially well paid.  You may have heard “they get free room, board, and food on Uncle Sam’s dime.”  That’s not exactly true.  Military personnel receive a modest salary, from which certain things are deducted, along with some supplements. 

Live on base or on a ship?   That’s $380 per month deducted from your pay since the food is provided.  And if you only serve part time on the ship, and get food elsewhere some days?  Too bad, they take the whole $380 anyway.  It doesn’t help matters that most base galleys have limited hours which often do not fit well with the realities of military scheduling.  Low ranking personnel, such as Army and Marine Privates, Navy Recruits, Sailors and 3^rd Class Petty Officers (E1-E4), live in barracks.  This is exactly what happened with a young Sailor friend of mine when he was at his post-boot camp technical school and after he had been assigned to his ship.  

There are also supplemental allowances added to base salary, such as a uniform allowance.  An enlisted Sailor’s wardrobe includes Dress Blues, Dress Whites, Service uniforms, camo-style Type III Working uniforms, and, if on a ship, Coveralls.  Sailors are expected to have at least one of each Dress uniform, two Service uniforms, three Type III uniforms, and three Coveralls.  There are also accoutrements to the various uniforms, from the proper footwear to straps to hold dress shirts in place to rank and rating patches – all of which the Sailor must pay for.  Being American made, uniforms are expensive; and service members are expected to keep them well maintained – dry cleaning is recommended for Service uniforms.  Plus, one must remember many of those entering the military are teenagers who are still growing and will need replacement uniforms.  If the Sailor keeps in good shape and maintains his uniforms, they won’t have to be replaced as often and he can keep the unspent allowance.  This encourages military personnel to be thrifty and healthy by taking good care of their clothes and their bodies.

Once promoted to E-5 (Sergeant or Petty Officer 2^nd Class), they are moved out of the barracks and provided with a housing allowance.  That’s what happened with my dad when he was promoted to PO2 in the 1950s, and that’s what happened to my young sailor friend when he was promoted to the same rank in 2023.  The housing allowance varies based on the cost of living where the sailor is stationed, and my young friend happens to be stationed in one of the most expensive locations in the US.  It’s certainly not his fault that the Navy decided to build one of its largest bases there.   Thus, his housing allowance is relatively high.  The apartment building where he lives is on base and part of a private/military cooperative effort.  In exchange for the convenience of living on base, they take his entire housing allowance.  He’s currently looking for a less expensive apartment off base, which will allow him to pocket any leftover housing allowance and use that money to get a used car.  (My dad rented a room above a woman’s garage.)  If you think that means he’s ripping off the taxpayers, then remember: once he moves off base, his on-base dwelling becomes available to another newly promoted Sailor.   

P2025 proposes to “reform” these types of allowances by making military personnel return any unspent allowance.  This is a false economy because active-duty personnel will not be incentivized to maintain their uniforms and find less expensive housing.  They will simply neglect their uniforms and find the nicest place their allowance will cover.  P2025 also proposes to penalize married military couples who live together by making them share the same housing allowance, even though families require more space than single people.

I recently spoke with my Sailor friend about some of these points.  This person is politically moderate and not affiliated with any party.  But when I advised him of these proposals, his reaction was what you’d expect of a Salty Sailor: “[Unprintable quote redacted.]”

Here’s a fact that Putin enablers among the GOP and lefty-loonies like Jill Stein would like you to forget: America has enemies – two of which pose an existential threat to our nation.  The first of these is Russia.  Putin's stated goal is to reestablish the de-facto empire that existed under the USSR.  True, initially Putin played nice with us after 9/11, but the government over which he seems to have an iron grip has become increasingly hostile since George Bush took us to war with Iraq in 2003.  Trump and his enablers seem content to appease Putin on everything from his brutal invasion of Ukraine to his open interference in our nation’s elections and politics.  Joe Biden is the only President who has strongly stood up to Putin – not Bush 43, not Obama, and certainly not Trump - over whom Putin seems to hold some unspoken power.  As for China, though they are not exactly an enemy, they do not wish us well and mainly have exploited us for their own economic benefit.  Trump makes a big noise about China, but his businesses have benefited from Chinese (and Russian) investment.  Under Joe Biden, China has dropped from America’s number one importer to third place – behind Canada and Mexico. 

We have enemies aside from Russia and China, such as North Korea and Iran, but only Russia and China have the military potential to engage in a war with us which would be catastrophic for the planet.  China’s bullying of Taiwan is surpassed only by Russia’s bullying of Ukraine.  History has taught us the dangers of appeasing bullies.  Prior to 1939, the European powers declined to enforce the Versailles treaty and stood by while Hitler’s Germany rearmed.  Following Kristallnacht, not one European leader spoke out about what happened – only U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt issued a rather tame rebuke.  When Hitler invaded Austria, the world did nothing.  He continued to build his military, ranted about how ethnic Germans were being treated by the Czechoslovakian government (just as Putin would use the supposed mistreatment of ethnic Russians by the Ukrainian government 80 years later) and then was given tacit approval to invade the Sudetenland by Neville Chamberlain. 

Thus, we must maintain the world’s strongest defense as a deterrent to Russian and Chinese military aggression.  Trump and his P2025 supporters are content to throw uncountable money at the military-industrial complex to fill defense contractors' pockets.  But when it comes to the well-being of military personnel, they could not care less.

All branches of the US military are already dealing with shortfalls in recruiting and retention.  With unemployment at historic lows, fewer and fewer want to take on an arduous, potentially hazardous job with low pay.  As the nation moves slowly toward cannabis legalization, few want to subject themselves to periodic urinalysis tests which, if positive, could result in a dishonorable discharge and a blot on their resume.  That’s exactly why President Biden has pushed so hard to raise military pay and improve benefits. 

When I read of P2025’s plans for the military, knowing how they will affect recruitment and retention once implemented, I can’t help but wonder: Who stands to benefit if our military is less prepared; if the ranks are thinned from cratering recruitment and retention; if service members’ morale is low?

America’s enemies, that’s who.   And it would be very interesting to know where the backers of Project 2025, including the Heritage Foundation, are getting their money.  Is there a Russian connection?  Is there a Chinese connection?

2023 in review

2023 was an active year which included adventures, challenges, and triumphs.

I continued with my quest for fitness and, although I still have a bit of a belly, my weight is at its lowest level since the late 1990s and my waist is six inches smaller than in 2020.   I've also become a bit more muscular although I have no desire to become overly pumped.  

Since 2020, my life has been increasingly centered at home, as I’ve been a remote worker since then.  Daniel and I celebrated 17 years as a couple and 15 years in our South Euclid home.  What we’ve learned in the last decade and a half is that the work on our 83-year-old house never ends.  This year we had new storm windows installed – the previous ones were probably about 50 years old and rattled whenever a large truck or music blasting car drove by.  Our primary reason for replacing the storm windows was for better protection from the extremes of hot and cold one encounters in our region.  It will take several more months before we can gauge the impact on our utility bills, but the reduction in street noise was immediately noticeable and most welcome.

A new storm window being installed.

The storm windows held up well against the massive storm that struck in August, which left us without electricity for 86 hours.    

No review of 2023 in Northeast Ohio is complete without the state’s voters resounding endorsement of Issues 1 and 2, which guaranteed reproductive rights and allowed recreational cannabis, respectively.  Although Issue 1 is a constitutional amendment, Issue 2 was a ballot issue and state Republicans have been trying to restrict its impact.  It will be interesting to see how Ohio voters react to political interference in 2024.    

Sadly, 2023 also saw the resurgence of the odious Donald Trump, to which I can only respond: Have the American people forgotten the non-stop issuance of virtual diarrhea during the four years he was in the White House?  Have they forgotten how badly he mishandled COVID?  How the economy suffered?  How the Federal deficit exploded?  How he enabled and even encouraged the most flagrant racism and even insurrection?  How many times must people hit their own heads with a hammer before they realize that they’d feel better if they stopped?  Sure, the last two years have had a few challenges, mostly due to the emergence from the COVID crisis and the revival of our supply lines.  The biggest challenge was inflation, which slowed throughout 2023.  The economy is strong, unemployment is low, and the Fed has indicated they are about to start cutting interest rates.  Life is not perfect, but it’s arguably better.  Even the problems at our Southern border are largely because America is the land of hope and opportunity – and it would be even better if right-wing obstructionists would just get out of the way.  

Cleveland’s Classical music scene has now fully recovered from COVID, and in some ways is even stronger than before 2020.  The Cleveland Orchestra continued with its savvy programming approach which included plenty of newer and unfamiliar older music alongside Classical favorites.  I went to too many concerts to go into detail here, but a highlight included Michael Sachs playing Wynton Marsalis’ new Concerto for Trumpet.   

Local business developments included the long overdue demolition of the Richmond Mall, to be replaced by Belle Oaks, a mixed-use development. 

Danny and I traveled to Palm Springs in the winter and New Mexico in the autumn, along with quick trips to Saugatuck in the spring and New England over Labor Day weekend.  The New Mexico trip was in part to scope out a potential winter home for when we retire, but the more I travel, the more I feel centered in Cleveland.  Life is so affordable here; everything we need – high culture, sports, cuisine, medical care – is within easy access; even the winters are becoming easier to manage.

Enjoying Maple Creemees in Vermont

I also made four solo trips: one trip to London which was, to be honest, not very enjoyable; and three trips to see family members from which I brought home happy memories.

In Florida with my niece and her son

With my sister and her husband.

This year also saw the continued evolution of a meaningful relationship with someone who had been in the periphery of my life until about two years ago.  We had some ups and downs in 2023, but the year ended on a high note and my friendship with this person has had a profound impact on my life – and I hope it has a positive impact on this person’s life.

On to 2024!

Ohio’s terrible politicians can’t keep it from moving forward

 

Yesterday, Ohio’s voters handed a decisive victory to those who believe that individual humans should have the right to control their own bodies. 

Both Issue 1 (guaranteeing reproductive rights) and Issue 2 (legalizing Cannabis) passed with 57% voting in the affirmative.  Doubtless most who voted “Yes” on Issue 1 voted the same on Issue 2; and there were some who split their vote.  But the issues both passed by a substantial margin, in the face of misleading claims from the opposition that bordered on hysteria.

The anti-Issue 1 group even resorted to illegal tactics, including placing their signs on polling center property, as shown in this video I captured Tuesday morning.

Ohio Republicans from Governor Mike DeWine to Secretary of State Frank LaRose (likely a candidate for Senate next year) to scandal-beleaguered Lake County commissioner John Plecnik beat the drums against these issues.  They lost. 

Ohio’s Democratic and unaffiliated voters must now band together to free Ohio from the iron-grip Republicans have inflicted upon our state.  DeWine is term-limited out.  We must not allow LaRose to defeat Senator Sherrod Brown in November.  LaRose would try to implement the same policies nationally as he was trying to do in Ohio. 

We can celebrate our victory for now.  But the fight is not over, and it never will be. 

2023 Election Endorsements

November 7, 2023, will mark an off-year election in Ohio.  Turnout tends to be low in this type of election, so each vote is especially important.  Vote by mail and early in person voting starts on October 11. 

Issue 1: Reproductive rights – YES

Officially titled "The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety," this proposed Constitutional Amendment is listed on the ballot as Issue 1, having been certified despite the efforts of Ohio’s Secretary of State Frank LaRose and other extremist Republicans and pro-birth activists.  The centerpiece of this issue is allowing women to control their own bodies, including the right to have an abortion. 

These same activists, having failed in their attempt to raise the bar for passage to a nearly impossible level, are kicking up quite the fuss over this proposed amendment.  They are claiming that passage will lead to a rash of partial birth abortions and underage people obtaining gender reassignment surgery.  To use a polite term from another era: Poppycock!  Even Ohio’s Republican Attorney General, Dave Yost, has pointed out that there is nothing in the text of the amendment that even references gender reassignment or transgender people.  Read the complete text for yourself here.  Besides, is there an epidemic of young people in Ohio, or anywhere, seeking gender reassignment?  How would those wanting such a change even pay for it?  I don’t imagine the hourly wages at McDonald’s or wherever young people work would be sufficient.  As for partial birth abortions, the proposed amendment guarantees the right to an abortion during the time the fetus is determined to not yet be viable, as decided by the woman’s physician – unless that physician determines that continuing the pregnancy poses a danger to the woman’s life or health.  Less than .2% of abortions nationally have involved intact dilation and extraction and have generally been performed following a miscarriage.

I’m a gay man.  The chances I would get a woman pregnant are, well, basically zero.  But when it comes to allowing women to control their bodies, I stand with the vast majority of women.  I also believe that, as former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop did, the only way to lower the number of abortions is to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies – which means better access to contraception.  Not coincidentally, this is also something pro-birth extremists are trying to curtail.  Ultimately, whether or not to terminate a pregnancy is a decision best left to the individual woman in consultation with her physician.  Do Ohioans and Americans in general want to align themselves with countries like Yemen, Myanmar, Pakistan, or Nicaragua – or would we rather stand with Ireland, Germany, the United Kingdom, or the United States before Roe v. Wade was repealed? 

I strongly favor passage of Ohio Issue 1.

 

Issue 2: Recreational Cannabis – YES

In 1975, the Ohio legislature passed, and Governor James Rhodes signed a bill decriminalizing cannabis – making Ohio the sixth state to do so. 

In 2016, the Ohio legislature passed and Governor John Kasich signed a bill allowing Medical use for Cannabis to treat 21 health conditions, and setting up rather byzantine regulations for creating Cannabis dispensaries.  It also severely restricted licensing for cultivation of medical cannabis.  By 2021, only 20 cultivators had been licensed and 125,000 patients approved for medical cannabis.

The Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol initiative, to be listed on the ballot as Issue 2, will legalize recreational cannabis within Ohio, subject to the following:

• ·        Legalize the possession of up to 2.5 ounces of cannabis and 15 grams of concentrate for adults 21 years of age and older.
• ·        Allow the cultivation of six plants for personal use, with a maximum of 12 plants per home by adults 21 and older.
• ·        Allow the sale of cannabis at licensed dispensaries, with a 10 percent sales tax imposed.
• ·        Divide tax revenue between social equity and jobs programs (36 percent), localities that allow dispensaries to operate (36 percent), education and substance abuse programs (25 percent), and administrative costs (3 percent).
• ·        Allow landlords and business owners to prohibit use of cannabis within their property.

Legalizing recreational cannabis does not equate to approval of same.  It’s simply an acknowledgement that people use cannabis, just as they smoke tobacco and drink alcohol.  Use of these is a decision best left to the individual, and regulations should be consistent: just as one is not allowed to smoke tobacco in public buildings or airplanes, cannabis use should take place where others will not be impacted by second-hand smoke.  Just as one must be over 21 to legally drink, cannabis should be similarly restricted.  The proposed issue makes provisions for all these matters.  As a homeowner, I will continue exercise the right to ask visitors to step outside if they want to smoke tobacco or cannabis.  Who is going to be harmed by passage of this issue?  Drug traffickers who profit over the semi-illegality of cannabis in Ohio. 

I favor passage of Ohio Issue 2.

 

Issue 5 – Cuyahoga Community College tax levy

I have stated elsewhere that I am in support of free community college for all who seek it.  While this property tax levy does not reach that goal, it helps keep the costs of a college education under control for the modest cost of an additional $14 per year for every $100,000 of taxable home value.  It’s a bargain which only the sociopathic would oppose.

 

South Euclid Mayor: Georgine Welo is running unopposed for her sixth term as mayor.  Just in case someone tries to mount a write-in campaign, let us review her accomplishments.  Welo became mayor in 2004.  During the decades before she took office, none of the previous administrations tried to stop the local slide in population, quality of life, or local amenities that began in the 1980s.  Here are just a few of the developments which have taken place since Welo became mayor:

·        Complete replacement of Cedar Center North shopping center.

·        Construction of Oakwood Commons shopping center.

·        Partial replacement of the May-Green shopping center.

·        Creation of the Food Truck Park.

·        Cutters Creek housing development.

·        Removal of several troubled houses on Greenvale Road; additionally, multiple decaying, unoccupied homes were torn down during and after the Great Recession – many since replaced by new homes.

·        Creation of several pocket parks.

·        Multiple infrastructure improvements on Green Road and South Belvoir Boulevard, with smaller improvements on side streets.

For the first time in recent memory, nearly every store front in South Euclid is occupied.  Further, home values are up, and South Euclid is now a sellers’ market.  There was a house Dan and I considered buying several years ago, and in retrospect I wish I had because it is now out of our reach. 

Mayor Welo wants to continue to build on these successes, and deserves to continue in the job.

 

South Euclid-Lyndhurst School Board

There are four candidates running for the two open seats on the South Euclid-Lyndhurst School Board.  I endorse Cathy Covarrubias for one of the two open seats.