Lake Elsinore Blocks Public from Viewing Poppy Superbloom in February 2023

 I just read that Mayor Natasha Johnson has blocked the public from viewing the February 2023 California Poppy super bloom in Walker Canyon.  See this news article in SF Gate: 

• https://www.sfgate.com/california-parks/article/public-banned-california-superbloom-site-17771678.php 

I wondered why they were doing it.  But thought that maybe the public had to park in front of private homes and maybe walk through private property.  But after looking at Google Maps, it appears that isn't the case. The poppy fields and access trails are on the other side of the I-15 freeway from the populated portion of Lake Elsinore.  It does appear that this open space area is within a short extension of the City of Lake Elsinore boundaries.  So the city does have some jurisdiction over the access point.  The article seems to say that most access to the public is blocked.  However, I watched the youtube video of Mayor Johnson's announcement.  See this link:  https://youtu.be/1pVGSmFBGiY  I think she did a very good job of speaking and seemed confident that what she was doing was correct.  However, she was not clear about what people could do to be able to visit and view the flowers -- only what they couldn't do!  Also, she did NOT want any feedback on her announcement, because all comments were "turned off"  The mayor did mention shuttle busses, but no explanation of when or how they would be available.  She also said they'll make a video and share it with the public.  My experience with poppies is that photos do not capture their beauty.  There is something about the surface texture of the poppy that does not get captured in a photo or video.  You really do need to see it in person!  

The rationale given for blocking the public was pretty sketchy.  First of all, it was based upon apparently a larger super bloom in 2019 that they were "unprepared for" -- Now they've had 4 years to "prepare" for a similar (although possibly fewer blooms) and the best they can do is a blockade and ban the public.  The reasons cited include: "Trampled flowers, injuries, and a headache for residents"    I understand the situation.  The public can seem to be totally irresponsible.  Stepping on the flowers they came to view is very inconsiderate.  Not sure what injuries occurred.  But whenever a large number of people go anywhere there would be a natural increase in people getting hurt from falling etc.  These are public parks and trails that the City is blocking.  Oceanside has a huge influx of people on certain summer weekends to visit the beach -- somewhat similar, but much more predictable.  

I assume that the crowds of concern are on Saturday and Sunday mid-day.  They are also only on a few weekends until the bloom subsides.    Now that the problem has been identified, the mayor should meet with her "partner cities and agencies" and plan for the next time this happens.  Here are some suggestions to consider:

1. Plan for a fleet of rental shuttle buses and drivers for the weekends during a super bloom.  They should be only needed if and when the super bloom occurs.  Arrange for a "decision date" when the mayor would need to make a decision to trigger the use of shuttle buses. --There must be some way of determining from measuring soil moisture and seeing how many seedlings have sprouted whether or not a super bloom is going to happen. 
2. Plan parking areas a distance away from the viewing area.  Plan traffic flow to/from the viewing areas.  Plan signage to inform people of the restrictions, as well as the options for viewing using the shuttle bus. 
3. Arrange for an appointment (and payment) app such as Park Mobile to allow people to make parking spot reservations and pay for the spot.  The pay should be enough to cover all costs related to staff time and shuttle bus operation.  In theory, the City should be able to make a profit from such an operation. 
4. Arrange for a group of volunteer "docents" to staff the entrances to the flower fields.  One of their jobs is to stop people from trampling the flowers.

Police Violence -- is it Mob Mentality?

 There have been several articles talking about the root cause and effect of the recent police violence. 

Here is one in today's Union-Tribune by Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times:

• https://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribune.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=b328425c-7790-4a62-8c83-8411f5a66e05

And here is one by the Union-Tribune Editorial Board about release of police recordings

• https://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribune.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=c474d157-383d-41f1-b6a6-671b57b4f0ef

There was another recent incident on June 14 2022 where the SDPD harrassed the head of the Taxi Driver's union for apparently no reason.  Then now 9 months later the police still have not released the body cam video as promised.  It seems that there should be some sort of discipline for the officers involved, but apparently, nothing has been done. 

• https://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribune.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=fe9fbe8a-6667-4dba-be88-a90ba6cf3cf3

Its clear that we've come a long way in the past 20 years.  20 years ago, police would arrest people taking video of a police incident and often confiscate or break their camera or phone.  Now the police are supposed to be wearing a camera themselves.  I really wonder how many people over the past 100 years have been treated badly by police, but there was no video to refute their story.  

I think there needs to be a post-event analysis of what was going through the police officer's minds when they were busy beating a suspect?  I know that's difficult because the officers don't want to admit what they did, since they are subject to discipline and legal action.  But what causes these highly trained people to treat their neighbors so violently?  Is it revenge for something the suspect said?  Is it because adrenalin is flowing through their veins and they can't think straight?  What actually goes on?  

When I see a police action underway in the streets, or when I see videos of the notorious interactions when police have killed or permanently injured suspects, it always seems like there is a mob of police gathering around the suspect.  In my small town of Oceanside, I've seen a couple of police detain a 12 yr old, search him and while that was going on, 5 other police cars show up, each with two officers.  So with 12 officers and 6 total cars, it would seem the entire Oceanside police force on duty was there.  It looked like the police spent about a half hour intimidating the boy, having him sit and lie on the ground, for example.  Then they all left and the boy just walked away.  I have no idea what went on!  However, the incident certainly didn't call for more than 2 officers to handle it.  Why were the others there? For certain the young boy will never trust a police officer again.   

I wonder if the primary arresting officers feel different when they are being watched by a crowd of fellow officers.  Do they need to act like tough guys because their peers would think they were too "soft" on criminals?  When one officer starts beating or abusing a suspect, do the other officers join in because of "mob mentality?"  What should the nearby public do in such a situation?  It seems that if they yell at the police to stop, it actually infuriates them.  Of course if they tried to physically interfere, they'd be arrested also.  It seems like a subject that deserves a serious study.  If we understood the dynamics maybe something could be done during police training that could reduce the effect

Ukraine Humanitarian Aid - Berlin Airlift Style?

I've got to admit that I'm worrying a lot about the situation in Ukraine. I get the feeling that a lot of other people are also. I wake up in the middle of the night thinking about the situation. The world has been in similar situations throughout history where a powerful country has abused its power and all of the other countries stood by and did not take action to protect the weaker country or population. I believe that prior to World War II, almost everyone knew that Hitler was abusing the Jews, but not many knew about the Holocaust it was. I have often wondered that if the people of the US knew more about what Hitler was doing, would we have entered the war earlier? Would we have done more to stop the killing? Or would we have just said: "It's not our problem!" In the case of Ukraine, we know what Putin is doing. He is trying to kill all Ukrainians and destroy all of their infrastructures. He does not appear to have a quick plan to take over the country.  

However, I have the feeling that Putin has been a couple of moves ahead of the West concerning Ukraine. But since Russia has asked for help from Syria and China, maybe things are changing, and the West has a chance to get caught up.

When Russian forces began to mass along the Ukrainian border, the West seemed to do nothing! I believe Putin did it slow and methodical and declared it an exercise to wait and see what the West would do. If we took action, he may have stopped the exercise. The US and maybe some allies as well should have moved at least a carrier battle group into the Black Sea. We have a few cruisers there, but it isn't significant. A battle group would be a symbolic move that would show that the West was going to be ready. In addition, we could have at least had agreements to equip Ukraine's Air Force with additional aircraft, and announced plans to install more sophisticated anti-air & missile systems. It is much harder to do all of those things after the fighting started.

Putin has also been very good at drawing "red lines" that if the West crosses, will start World War III. Putin has also been acting a little "crazy" -- which would be necessary to make the West believe he would do it -- since a sane person would never do that. I think it is an act to enhance his "poker hand." In fact, President Biden has stated that he doesn't want to start WW III as a reason for not providing more support for Ukraine. So he must believe Putin. The West, in turn, has not drawn similar "red lines" for Putin.

It is clear that Putin has given up hope of a quick victory, and is now digging in and trying to just simply destroy all of Ukraine's infrastructure. As part of that, he is committing war crimes by targeting civilians and civilian structures. He is also establishing a siege around all of the cities he has taken and is not allowing any food, water, or supplies to get in or letting refugees out. When Putin starts his attack on Kyiv and a siege there, the humanitarian disaster will be magnified many times. I think the US, NATO, and EU should start drawing some red lines and do some serious planning for an airlift to Kyiv similar to the Berlin Airlift. It may be needed during the next few weeks!
What "red lines" should we draw?
1. If Putin continues to target civilians, and destroy infrastructure, the West will increase sanctions further
2. All participants in the indiscriminate bombing, shelling, and missiles shall be charged as war criminals, and will be treated accordingly.
3. If a country, such as Syria or China helps by providing arms or soldiers to Russia, they will also be subject to increasing sanctions
4. The current sanctions will continue until Russia has paid for Ukraine to rebuild its infrastructure. 50% of all revenue Russia will earn in the future from oil and gas exports will go to rebuild Ukraine.
5. If Russia continues, we will blockade the Bosphorous and not allow any cargo to or from Russia to pass through.
6. Finally, if Russia attacks Kyiv and continues indiscriminate bombing and shelling there, the West will establish a protected corridor from the Ukraine border to Sikorsky airport in Kyiv and will protect the corridor and airport with modern anti-air and anti-missile equipment. Then that corridor will be available for humanitarian assistance.

When I was a teenager living in the Washington DC area, I was very concerned about nuclear war. I helped my father build our family fallout shelter and keep it stocked and ready. We had exercises at school where we got under our desks. All of that helped keep the tension and worry-level high. In the Air Force, I ran a Minuteman Missile Test Facility at Hill Air Force Base that had full-size mock-ups of two models of launch control facilities and launch facilities (missile silos and dummy missiles). I also knew a lot of officers who served as launch officers and figured that I would probably be assigned as one as well. So I believe I have a good understanding of nuclear war. I understand the threats that Putin is making and the risks involved. But I believe the US should step up in this situation and provide more than material support to Ukraine.

Delay the return to the office -- save fuel!

 Because of the war in Ukraine, the supply of oil and gasoline is momentarily disrupted and is driving up prices.  At the same time many businesses are pushing to bring their employees back to the office after two years of "virtual" offices.   If the business could delay that return to the office for just a few months, it could reduce the gas consumption caused by commuting and help hold the gas prices down until the supply chain gets a chance to rebalance. We're all in the habit of working from home so it won't be disruptive to continue it a while.   Suggest that President Biden talk to businesses and maybe ask them to postpone the return to the office for the next three months. 

We have got to make Putin worry more

It doesn't seem from today's news that Vladimir Putin is going to stop his invasion of Ukraine. I think the US and NATO needs to increase sanctions even further as soon as possible. If we wait too long, more lives will be lost and possibly a nuclear power plant disaster will occur. What can we do to make Putin worry more?

Executive Order 11905 signed in February 1976 by Gerald Ford banned the US from assassinating foreign leaders. EO12036 signed by Carter in January 1978 and EO12333 signed by Regan in 1981 reinforced that position. Russian History shows a tradition of the assassination of their own leaders and those abroad. Vladimir Putin has ordered hundreds of assassinations of political enemies. Yet even now as he threatens Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his family, Putin can feel safe knowing that the US would never try to do the same to him. I believe Joe Biden should amend the existing EO12333 to make an exception: If Putin assassinated Zelenskyy or his family, he will be considered to be "fair game" from the US for the rest of his life.

Yesterday, Putin declared that the Western-imposed sanctions are a "declaration of war." He used a similar argument against the US declaring Ukraine a "no-fly zone" If Putin already considers war declared by the West (as opposed to his undeclared war on Ukraine) then what is stopping us from going ahead with a no-fly zone? Putin's long caravan of tanks on highways should be an easy target. NATO should also consider a blockade of all vessels going to or from Russia or Ukraine from traveling from the Black Sea through the Bosphorus Straits to the Mediterranean.

Russian Invasion of Ukraine -- Cyber & Drones?

Russia did a slow, methodical build-up of troops and equipment along the Ukraine border with Russia and Belarus that seemed to take at least 6 weeks. I would assume the US knew this was happening in November or December. I completly doubt that anyone in the US Government, or military really believed that Russia was just doing this as an "exercise." I believe Putin was "testing the waters" to see what sort of reaction he woud get from the US and NATO. The US and NATO could have (and I believe SHOULD HAVE) responded in force by deploying massive amounts of troops, weapon systems, and aircraft in the nearby countries, such as Poland. Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary. The US and NATO has not done such an exercise for decades. NATO should have also set up medical centers and refugee processing centers in advance. I'm not sure why the US wouldn't our couldn't establish a no fly zone over Ukraine. We have done it in other parts of the world that were not part of NATO. I just finished reading the fall edition of Air Force Magazine. As retired USAF, I was very interested in the articles describing the space force, Cyber warfare, and drone modernization. I hope the US Cyber experts were attacking the Russian forces in some way to cause chaos. I'd think that the space force would be working to turn off or jam the Russian GPS system and space communication. I also would think that we would be able to use or help the Ukranians use drones to decimate the Russian tank force. On 60 minutes tonight there was an episode that talked about "The Grid" and it said that Russians had the power to damage our electrical grid. We've heard that they also have the ability to damage the Ukranian's "grid" -- I wonder if the US has done the same to the Russian grid? After all, Russia and Russian trolls interfered with US elections on multiple occasions

Reasonable solution to the Russia-Ukraine situation

For decades, everyone has been awqare that Russia wants a warm-water seaport with land access. That is why Russia took Crimea. Now they only want a "land bridge" to get there. It would seem that a 99-year land lease of a path along the border from Russia to Crimea would be a simple thing to negotiate. A fair price might be denominated in barrels of oil to eliminate the risk of currency inflation during that period. I wonder if the idea is on the table?

Air Safety and the 5G Rollout? Poor Planning? Or Airline industry CYA?

The Union-Tribune reported this morning an Associated Press column that the mobile phone industry rejected the request from the airline industry to delay the 5G rollout. The planning and design efforts for 5G cellular service started many years ago starting in 2013. The airline industry knew this. My understanding is that the millimeter wave 5G band is well above the frequencies where the airline radar altimeters operate. I also believe that the radar altimeters are a backup capability and are only relied upon when there is a problem with the normal landing system. The airline industry --both the manufacturers and airlines had plenty of time to not only test their devices against mock-ups of mobile phone towers, but apparently did nothing. Now, after the phone carriers invested heavily in buying the bandwidth, and installing hardward all over the country, they are complaining about the risk to flight from the phone towers near airport landing paths. They do not seem to be conducting any tests. In 2019 Korea went active with 5G service and many other countries have also. Did the airlines fly any tests against those systems? I believe this situation is a failure of the airline industry, the mobile phone industry, and the Federal Government -- FCC and FAA. I think if interference is found, it can be mitigated with better RF filters on the mobile phone tower transmitters and the radar altimeter receivers. There are also operational work-arounds, such as reducing the permitted tower antenna patterns around airport landing patterns. Meanwhile, I think the airline industry is just trying to "cover their ass" CYA in case there is some sort of an accident. They were asking for a "short delay" in 5G rollout -- but why a month or so now after not doing anything for 8 years?

Maybe applying Darwin's theory would resolve anti-vaxer's problem?

I saw this article in today's San Diego Union Tribune. Singapore is going to require anti-vaxers to pay for care should they be infected with Covid. Below is the text of it: Singapore won’t pay COVID costs for some Singapore will no longer cover the medical costs of COVID-19 patients who are eligible to get vaccinated against the virus but choose not to, the country’s Health Ministry says. “We will begin charging COVID-19 patients who are unvaccinated by choice,” starting Dec. 8, the ministry said in a statement Monday. Those who are not eligible for the shots will be exempt from the rule, it said, including children younger than 12 and people with certain medical conditions. The announcement came as the number of severe cases, which have been mainly among unvaccinated people, has stabilized but remains high, the ministry said. Of about 280 intensive-care beds for COVID patients, 134 are occupied, and most are among those not vaccinated, a senior minister of state, Janil Puthucheary, said at a news conference. Would a similar policy in the US make sense? Why should an insurance company (or the Government) pay the high cost of medical care for someone who blatently ignores medical advice? It isn't clear to me why the anti-Covid vaccination people believe what they do. These vaccines appear to have been tested more thoroughly than any of the previous ones, and also seem to perform better. I've never heard that same group protest against the huge series of vaccinations that we all get routinely -- Diptheria, pertussis, typhus, tetanus, polio, flu, smallpox, pneumonia, measels, mumps, rubella, varicella, menangitis, hepatitis, etc. Yes, they were all tested, but not with the latest technology, and their efficacy was not as high as the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine is against Covid. Maybe if the people who refused the vaccine were also refused from receiving care, future generations would not have to deal with this sort of distorted logic?

Retain Sand On the Beaches of Oceanside CA

A hundred years ago, Oceanside had beaches 100 yards wide. Since that time, we have lost about 3 feet of beaches each year so that in much of Oceanside we have no beach. The only good beach remaining is North Harbor Beach, which is retained by the Jetty (or Groin) at the mouth of the San Luis Rey River. Throughout Oceanside's history, the residents and City Council has rejected installing jetties or groins on the rest of the beaches. When sand is deposited on our beach it washes away in just 2 or 3 years. Millions of dollars in sand nourishment is wasted each time. The City of Oceanside needs to retain the sand on our beaches. Here's a video that shows a good way to do it: https://vimeo.com/577256118 #SOSOceanside

Housing Crisis in San Diego?

The San Diego Union Tribune ran an editorial today asking of the "public willing to tackle the housing crisis?" I'm not sure the public is willing! I'm also not sure the situation is actually a "crisis." Why do we need to have lower cost housing in an area where land is most expensive? Where are the economists? Economics would say that the normal situation is for prices to rise naturally until supply and demand come into balance. In a normal situation, retirees or disabled would move to lower cost areas so they could stretch their income further. There are areas throughout California that are lower cost, and there are places all over the United States that are lower cost. As those people would move away, their housing would become available to workers in the area. Why wouldn't retirees want to move to the huge amounts of open spaces available for affordable housing in other states? Why must Southern California accomodate so many people? The problem is that governmet policies have distorted the market in such a way that aggrivates the shortage. Some of them are: 1. Proposition 13 which keeps taxes on properties low. So many owners of properties keep the homes even though they rarely use them. Buildable lots remain empty because it doesn't cost the owner much for keeping it and hoping the values will go higher. 2. Capital Gains taxes. Even though long-term capital gains taxes are lower than taxes on current income or wages, it is still significantly high on properties that were purchased in the 1970s or earlier. Why sell and pay the tax, when we can hold the property and enjoy it? 3. The tax basis "step up" at death. Many owners of properties in San Diego, particularly in the coastal zone have signficant capital gains. If we wait for the owner to die, the heirs get the benefit of the "step up" of the basis to the value at death. This is a huge tax saving! So many people are simply keeping properties off the market and are using it just for short getaways waiting for that "step up" -- 4. Affordable housing to most people means low rent. Investors would build homes, condos or apartments for rent, if they knew they had good opportunities to earn above-market rates of return. Why take the risk of building or buying a property when you can get returns on stock market investments with less risk? However the state, cities and counties have passed rent control laws that put significant caps on what could be earned. Even though the caps are not too tight, there are threats and attempts to tighten those caps -- particularly if we have significant inflation. 5. The recent changes in income tax laws have put caps on the SALT deduction which actually removes a benefit from first-time home buyers. 6. The Coastal Commission says they want to encourage affordable housing and much of San Diego County's housing stock is within the coastal zone. However their bureacracy has added another layer of paperwork, approvals, and risk involved in making those investments. The Commission puts restrictions on making minor improvements to coastal property. If an improvement is made, the property is no longer protected as "existing construction" prior to the Commission so basically loses important property rights. The commission is also pushing the concept called "Managed Retreat" for response to sea level rise. That concept prevents owners from defending their own property from sea level rise. So different from other parts of the country where, for example, the Army Corps builds levees to protect Louisiana homes. 7. The cost of buying a home in a PUD or Condo is usually less than a stand-alone single family home. The higher density, as described in the article is also considered desirable. However, the State and local governments make it very difficult for people to obtain mortgages in PUDs and Condos. The mortgage applications are subject to seemingly arbitrary standards concerning construction, insurance, association reserves, and rental occupancy. In addition, the state continues to make knee-jerk reactions to problems and passes laws which make it much more difficult for an association to be managed by volunteer boards. All of these above constraints could easily be resolved by the government. But because each of them involve short-term pain for long-term gain, the sound-bites would tend to make those changes unpopular. Until we get legislatures with guts, integrity and technical understanding, the problem will continue.

Adaptation to the College Admission Scandal

 For the past couple of years, the news has been full of the college admission scandal.  Celebrities, brokers, coaches, and administrators were all guilty of various forms of cheating to get students into "big name" colleges and universities.

What were the real "crimes?"  There clearly was lying, forgery, tax avoidance, tax cheating, identity theft, and other real, but minor crimes.  To the general public, it was wealthy people using their affluence to cheat the system and get their kids into schools that they probably would not have been admitted to based upon their own merits.  But the biggest "crime" was the secrecy involved.  School administrators, alumni, boards, and sometimes even the students did not know that this was going on. 

It is clear that wealthy parents are more than willing to pay to get their students into slots.  It is also very clear that schools can use additional money from endowments to help with their infrastructure or to use for grants for students who are qualified to enter but do not have adequate funds to attend.

Why not put the two together?  Why not allow schools to allow a very small number of freshman entry slots to be "bid" for by the parents.  I could see a large university allocating 100 slots or a small college with 10 slots to be bid on.  The students would complete their normal application process, and the parents would commit to paying the normal full tuition and room/board.  However, the parents could then place "endowment bids" of tax-deductible amounts online.  The school admissions panel could then take the top 10 bids and evaluate the student's application.  

I think it is a "win-win" -- the school receives funding, and students get a chance.  Someone could say that the wealthy student "displaced" a slot for someone better qualified.  But the additional funding provided would help fund more students

The Busy Repairman? --Help from Youtube

 I saw this article in today's Union-Tribune by Soo Youn from the Washington Post.:  "The Busy Repairman:  

Ovens, dishwashers and washing machines — all kinds of appliances —

are breaking down like never before, but there’s nobody to fix them"

The premise of the article is that because everyone is now at home much more, they are using their appliances more and they are failing.  Repair technicians are in short supply and it is now taking longer for them to be able to obtain parts.  

I have no reason to doubt Soo Youn's report.  But It did surprise me.  I had thought that the need for traditional repair services was dropping off rapidly.  Yes, appliances are now made better and are more reliable.  Yes, we can now get repair parts via eBay or Amazon within a day or so.  But the biggest improvement is having youtube with detailed instructions for how to repair every type of problem with every different model of device done by multiple experts in every language.   These youtube videos aren't just "available" -- they are heavily used!  Some have had many millions of views.  Just imagine how bad the "shortage" would be if we didn't have this new, wonderful youtube resource to help us repair stuff! 

  

College Student work at Trump Troll Farm

 Donald Trump presidential campaign is using teams of college students to spread disinformation over social media.  See this article: 

• https://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribune.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=00f3c1e2-cff3-4907-a949-771e11b019d1

The article cites a team in Arizona doing it.  But that probably is the only team that was caught or detected doing it.  I suspect there are teams all over the country (and probably in Russia too) who are doing the same thing.  

It sort of reminds me of Nov 1964 and I was a junior in college in Western Pennsylvania.  A group of us volunteered to go to polls and stand a legal distance away and hand out matchbooks printed with the name of a Republican candidate for the Pennsylvania legislature.  I still was not old enough to vote or drink at the time.  But the candidate offered to pay us $20 for the day, and to come to a party at his big home in the evening for free beer!  Of course, the beer was the big incentive!  At the time, however, I don't believe any of us would have thought to spread misinformation about candidates.

Why does Donald Trump want a "Pro-American Curriculum?"

 Today's Union-Tribune reported that Trump wants US School curricula to be "pro-American." -- See this link: 

• https://enewspaper.sandiegouniontribune.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=b3daef7e-6b2f-4db5-9592-207e34913f8c

From the article, it appears that he does not want our schools to teach about the mistakes made by America, but only the supposed good things that were done.  My elementary and high school education was in Maryland during the 1950s and 60s.  I did not remember ever hearing about how the US abused the Native American Indians, Blacks, Women, Chinese, or Japanese.  Many of these aspects of history were not even taught about in college history classes.  I always wondered why that happened!  

Now I think I understand!  The victors get to write the history and do not want to be shamed. The so-called "religious right" throughout history has claimed that the groups that were being oppressed were "inferior" and that God made them that way.  Of course, they were proven wrong time after time.  They now want to bury that past!

Medicare 3-day Rule seemingly a desperate attempt to control costs by cheating the unaware

Terry Savage's Column in Sunday January 19, 2020 issue of the San Diego Union Tribune cautions medicare recipients about a "trick" that Medicare and the hospitals try to play on patients in order to cut costs. 

Medicare.gov website tries to explain the complex rules and procedures for determination of whether a patient is "admitted" to the hospital or being "observed" at the hospital. Try reading them at the link yourself and see what you think!  The way it is worded is that there are complex, but vague rules that our Doctor and hospital must use in deciding whether the patient will be admitted or observed.  I've been unable to find any clear guidelines.  The appeal process that is mentioned says that some aspects can be appealed, but doesn't mention the admitted/observed decision. According to the Lexology website, it appears that Medicare has not been consistent in applying the rule, and supposedly has "overpaid" for services that should not have been approved under the 3-day rule.

Apparently Medicare is considering eliminating the rule and counting the three days in the hospital whether in observation or admitted status.  Nobody seems to know how much has been saved in Skilled Nursing Facility costs to the Government due to this change.  Patients, Doctors, and Hospitals can game the system.  For example if a hip replacement patient is ready for discharge after 2 days, they can simply keep the patient for an additional day to allow qualification for Skilled Nursing Facility Coverage.  Did that save the Government money?  The costs for the additional day in the hospital may be much more expensive to the Government than the several days cost at the SNF.

When my wife went to a local Scripps Hospital for major foot surgery she had to sign a bunch of forms.  One form did declare that she would be in "observation status" rather than being "admitted."  Of course, being our first experience like this, we didn't know the difference!  We were told that the treatment in either status was exactly the same, so it appeared to not matter.  As it turned out, all went well, she stayed in the hospital overnight and did not need SNF.  My daughter-in-law was able to take a few days off and help me help her during the critical first few days of recovery. 

What gets me is that the hospital did not explain the trade-offs on the subtle difference between observe and admitted status.  The surgery was planned many months in advance, so we had time to shop for a doctor and hospital that would have given her "admitted" status.  But when completing the forms on the day of scheduled surgery it seems much too late. 

If Medicare is actually saving money from the 3-day rule, it is making it from those patients who are less informed, or who arrive at a hospital in an emergency state and do not have the time to make an informed decision. 

Work Shorter Hours

I saw this opinion item by Noah Smith in the San Diego Union Tribune, originally from Bloomberg.  The article points out that when people work fewer days they appear to be more productive, and maybe happier.  I think this could have some public policy implications.
Working shorter hours may be able to improve productivity in some jobs.  But other jobs required people to be in their position.  For example, a security guard or a retail clerk needs to be at their position.  Also, this article seems to ignore the possibility that the increase in productivity was due to the "Hawthorne Effect" where workers productivity improved when lighting was decreased, and it also increased when light was increased.  It was then determined that the benefit was because the workers felt management was paying attention to their welfare. 
In reality, many low-paying, boring, repetitive jobs are being replaced by technology.  Jobs like librarian, music stores, book stores, key punch operators, bank check sorter/filers, newspaper delivery etc have been mostly replaced by technology.  During the next decade, we expect that self-driving cars and trucks might eliminate those jobs.  A lot of "fast food" ordering and production may be replaced by machinery and electronics. 
As jobs are eliminated, it is likely that they will be replaced by other new jobs that we haven't even thought of yet.  But I have the feeling that there might not be enough new jobs to absorb all of the labor that will be released by automation.  If that does happen, the world has the choice of simply having many people sit idly by unemployed or find something for them to do.   Another option would be to shorten the work week such that more people work, but they each work shorter hours. 
The French achieved the first 12 hr day law in 1848, and the idea of a 10-hour day was raised in 1810.  But the 8-hour work day, 40 hour/week concept became an international standard in 1919, and was gradually adopted throughout the world.  Now 100 years later not much has changed!    The definition of a work-week and "full time employment" affects how other employment benefits are distributed.  Typically full-time employees receive medical, retirement and vacation benefits. 
I propose that the US lead the way in passing legislation that lays out a plan for gradual reduction of the workweek definition.  Hours beyond the limit would be compensated by overtime pay.  Businesses need to be able to plan for the future.  They make capital improvement plans, design facilities, and plan shift schedules based upon laws.  Below is my proposal

	2020	2025	2030`	2035	2040	2045	2050
Hours per day limit	8	8	8	7	7	7	6
Days per week limit	5	5	5	4.5	4	4	4
Hours per week limit	40	37.5	35	32	28	26	24

National Guard Reenlistment Bonus Clawback - Major Injustice

I just read in today’s LA Times (article by David Cloud) that the US Army National Guard is clawing back reenlistment bonuses that were paid out years ago as part a fraud.  I believe this is a total miscarriage of justice and could impact future recruitment and may increase future military labor cost.  Congress has the power to correct the problem and should do so quickly. I have written Darrell Issa and Dianne Feinstein asking them to take action.

As a retired USAF Colonel, I understand the importance of recruiting bonuses, and the tough decisions made by enlistees.  My 18 yr old granddaughter just signed up with the National Guard in response to generous bonuses offered.  How does she know if 10 years from now, the Government could try to claw back that money from her?  By clawing back those paid bonuses, the trust in Government bonuses could be reduced, and the salaries (and bonuses) required in the future to retain a quality force will increase as a result.  

When a soldier makes the often gut-wrenching decision to reenlist, a bonus is a key part of that decision.  Is the bonus being offered large enough to provide compensation for the expected years of hardship, family separation, and a chance of being killed or wounded in action? The soldiers who accepted the bonuses in question did so good faith when signing on.   In most “refund” situations, some product is returned in exchange for cash.  In this case, the soldiers are being forced to repay money received, but will NEVER get back the years of service they provided to the country.  

I believe it is necessary to prosecute, penalize, and obtain restitution from officers and recruiters who knowingly earned bonuses fraudulently.  It is totally unfair to force the victims to repay their bonuses. Congress should clearly state that the intent, in this situation, is to penalize those who knowingly committed fraud and not the victim enlistees!

San Diego County Tax Collector escheating of funds owed to citizens and business appears to be government theft

The San Diego Union Tribune today (Sep 10,2016) had an article by Joshua Stewart:  "Deadline Nears for County Refunds" that pointed out that monday Sep 12 is the deadline for people who may be due a check from the San Diego County Treasurer to file a form to request the funds or they will be "escheated" to the government, and the rightful owner will never again be permitted to claim the funds.  The San Diego County Treasurer-Tax Collector, Dan McAllister says he is confused:  "Why wouldn't anyone want some quick and easy money?"  There are more than $352,000 in funds waiting to be claimed. McAllister says he "has a team of investigators that try to track down people who might have a claim to the funds."  I looked at the list of funds, and the majority of the funds belong to banks, mortgage companies, title companies and even a trailer park.  You can't tell me that Dan McAllister's team can't find Chase Bank, Wells Fargo, or First American Title Company.  Is he really trying to find the rightful owners?  Or does he want to capture the money for the County?  I think it appears to be theft!
I understand that the county is authorized to do this under California Revenue and Taxation Code sections 5097 and 5102  It does make some sense to put pressure on citizens and agencies to "close the books" on old accounts.  In the past, when all records maintained on paper, it was expensive to keep, file, search, and find records.  Now that technology permits very easy record keeping, there is minimal additional expense involved in maintaining records.  I believe it is time the state rules on escheatment of funds be modified to allow for funds to be claimed after longer periods of time than just 4 years.  Of course, a penalty, such as 10% per year could be levied for periods after the 4 yr period to encourage closure of accounts.  In addition, the Government agency should not be permitted to escheat the funds unless it can honestly show that it really did make an attempt to contact the rightful owner.  I'm not sure that holding a little "press conference" or putting an article in the newspaper constitutes a valid attempt.
 .  I

AmeriCorps workers helped young women get abortions | TheHill

This is another example of why the United States doesn't need any more right-wingers in control.  The biggest problem in the world is that we humans are having too many unwanted, and unneeded babies.  Americorps (NCCC)  mission is:"To strengthen communities and develop leaders through team-based national and community service". Americorps has paid staff, but uses millions of volunteer hours and millions of dollars of donations.  Americorps includes programs such as Foster Grandparents, Senior Companions, FEMA volunteers, etc.,   So recently in New York Americorps "developing leaders" trying to help young women obtain abortions for babies they probably don't want, can't afford, and wouldn't be capable of raising properly, are in trouble for doing so.  See this article:  AmeriCorps workers helped young women get abortions | TheHill  So, it appears that anyone working or associated with AmeriCorps are "gag ordered" to not talk about abortion to women in need.  Why would people ever volunteer for such an organization?  Why would people now be willing to donate to such an organization?  In effect, the Republican right wing is trying to impose their religious beliefs on anyone working or volunteering for that agency.

Sometime after I registered to vote in California as a Republican when I moved here in the early 1970s, I think the so-called Christian right-wingers hijacked the Republican party's platform and somehow got their position onto the party platform.  I've never understood how the party could rationalize having their so called "pro-life" position, and at the same time be strongly in favor of death penalty, and no limit on ownership, use, or carrying of guns.  Of course they all claim to be followers of Christ.  But Christ would not have supported death penalty, and certainly would not have supported owning or carrying a weapon.