From the Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN – looks like a really excellent site): SWAN on the Lackland AFB Scandal

From NPR: Military under pressure to crack down on sex abuse

From Minnesota Public Radio which seems to be covering it well: Sexual Assault in the US Military

HuffPo: Tailhook whistleblower demands Congress investigate Lackland Sexual Assaults

The Daily Beast: Lackland Rape Scandal Shines Spotlight On Military Failure

I moved to Cleveland for graduate school – that joint degree in law and social work which I thought would lead me to juvenile court, truly. That’s what I wanted to be – a juvenile court judge. And so when I landed a clerk position in juvenile court after my first year of law school but before my first year of social work school, I felt like the luckiest person.  I was placed in the courtroom of a brand new judge in the late spring of 1989, the courtroom of Peter Sikora.

How many people know or recall that he was in the courtroom in Playhouse Square? Yup. That’s where I went – I took the bus. Every day.

Although the first thing most people may have noticed about Peter was that he was in a wheel chair, I remember what I consider to be an iconic smile. I think of how he used his hands and his chair and seemed about as mobile as an Olympic athlete.  And what seems so ironic about that is that indeed if he hadn’t had the trampoline injury he suffered at age 17, maybe he would have been.

I got to see all kinds of sides of Cleveland because of meeting Peter, who I actually had a really hard time calling anything other than Judge Sikora – because that’s who he was to me.  Dining places, social gathering places, people – all totally utterly emblematic of Cleveland, which he always always loved, just loved – at least that’s the impression I believe he gave nearly everyone.

I met his family members many, many times – his mother may she rest in peace and sibling and nieces and nephews. Then the other people in the courtroom – it was like a family in many ways, the good and the bad.

Two people I remember very well meeting I believe even the first summer I was invited to view July 4th fireworks from near his West side home: Jimmy Dimora and Bill Denihan. And for years after, I would always think when they were in the news, “Yeesh – those guys? They seemed like they’d been around a lot when I met them in 1989!”

I remember his runs for office and the campaigning – the events. I recall very well the ethnic events he organized, at least a couple of times if not more than that held in Playhouse Square venues, full.

Something about him made me be loyal as a friend and we remained in touch for years after I graduated from law and social work school – but not after I spent more time in juvenile court working in the diagnostic clinic and clerking for other attorneys who had cases in juvenile court and when I was at Bellefaire – not a lot of occasions but a few to get there.

Peter never ever wanted or for as long as I knew him engendered pity of any kind – I certainly never felt pity for him in the least. And the reason I believe is because he presented and acted so clearly like a judge, using all his faculties and then some, compensating perhaps – I don’t know. But I never felt he had any deficits when it came to his work. Disagreements – arguments – policy and otherwise? Sure – with people in the court and beyond like the attorneys or family members in his courtroom? I’m sure.

But nothing I ever detected that made me regard him as anything other than a role model for how to make a difference in the life of young people – something I’ve always wanted to do.

For 23 years, this man was a juvenile court judge.  I imagine there are many people who cannot imagine what that must be like.  But thank God there are good, smart, caring people willing to not just imagine but be that, through thick and thin, for so long, even with higher aspirations because why not.

As we say in Judaism, may he be of blessed memory. I called my parents who met him several times over the years and would often ask about whether they might get to see him when they came to town and I said to my mother, I think I just can’t believe he is gone.  I think I’m going to feel that way for a long time.

Here in Northeast Ohio, Monday morning shattered when news of a high school junior shooting several of his schoolmates started streaming into my inbox via news alerts.

At 8:18 a.m., I read: Breaking News: Report: Geauga County Sheriff’s Department and OSHP heading to Chardon High School (the original item isn’t even there anymore, there’ve been so many updates)

I didn’t have to read another word before saying the trifecta out loud to an empty house, “G-ddamnit. Shit. Fuck.”

Even as I write this, my stomach cramps up, my lower lids fill up and I bite my lip drawing in a huge sigh.

I thought that the first thing I’d write about in this post would be about what we know. But ha. Really — just ha. Because I also think about all that we don’t know. And what of either category simply doesn’t matter?

For anyone wanting to keep up or catch up, so far, the best source for information has been the Cleveland Plain Dealer and you can find all their reports on the Chardon shooting here. I’ve heard multiple news outlets congratulate them throughout the week, and I’d say they’re deserving.

Read my full post here. Many thanks to BlogHer.com for letting me contribute there.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Media Contacts:   John Kohlstrand: (216) 698-2099 or jkohlstrand@cuyahogacounty.us
                                Nicole Dailey Jones: (216) 263-4602, (216)338-0863 or ndjones@cuyahogacounty.us

OHIO VOTERS WILL BENEFIT FROM AGREEMENT REACHED BETWEEN
ED FITZGERALD AND OHIO  SECRETARY OF STATE

All Ohio voters to receive application to vote by mail in 2012 presidential election

CLEVELAND — Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald announced today that he has reached an agreement with Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and state legislative leaders to have voters in all 88 Ohio counties sent an application to vote by mail next year.

The deal was reached Thursday after a meeting between FitzGerald, Husted, senior staff of both leaders, and Cuyahoga County Councilman Mike Gallagher, a Strongsville Republican. It ends a standoff between the chief executive of Ohio’s largest county and the state’s chief elections officer.

“We went to bat for our constituents here in Cuyahoga County, and we ended up making voting more convenient for millions of Ohioans,” FitzGerald said today. “This is great news for anyone who believes public officials should try to keep voting simple.”

In the agreement:

n  Husted has agreed to have his office send an application to vote by mail to voters in all 88 Ohio counties in advance of next year’s presidential election.

n  In return, FitzGerald will freeze a county plan to send all active voters in Cuyahoga County an application to vote by mail this fall. The mailing will be replaced by an public outreach effort to make sure Cuyahoga County voters understand how to vote early this fall.

FitzGerald said he has spoken with House Speaker William Batchelder and Senate President Tom Niehaus. Both are publicly committing their support.

“This agreement represents one of the largest steps forward in access to the ballot in years,” FitzGerald said. “

# # #

Secretary Of State Husted Statement On Absentee Ballot Applications And Uniformity Of Ohio Elections

9/2/2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, September 2, 2011

SECRETARY OF STATE HUSTED STATEMENT ON ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF OHIO ELECTIONS

COLUMBUS – The following may be attributed in whole, or in part, to Secretary of State Jon Husted regarding the mailing of unsolicited absentee ballot request forms and maintaining uniformity in how elections are administered in Ohio:

“Yesterday I met with Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald and Councilman Michael Gallagher to gain a better understanding of our mutual concerns regarding the distribution of unsolicited absentee ballot request forms.

“Through a productive exchange of ideas, we were able to develop a plan and achieve consensus to preserve the uniform standards I have sought statewide.

“Cuyahoga County officials have agreed not to send out unsolicited mailings for the 2011 General Election and the Secretary of State’s office will distribute absentee ballot request forms to voters in all 88 counties for the 2012 Presidential Election – so that each Ohio voter has uniform and equal access to their ballots.

“Leaders in the General Assembly, House Speaker William Batchelder and Senate President Tom Niehaus, have graciously agreed to support this plan and will appropriate the necessary resources from existing and available federal Help America Vote Act funds.

“I am glad we have been able to work out our differences but ultimately it will be the voters who benefit from this agreement. This will help reduce the chance of long lines at the polls during the Presidential Election and voters in smaller counties will have the same conveniences as voters in larger counties.”

-30-

For more information, please contact Matt McClellan at 614-995-2168 or mmcclellan@ohiosecretaryofstate.gov.

1. This is about the voters, as Republican County Council member Mike Gallagher has said.

2. Voting is a constitutional fundamental right.

3. Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted is not a lawyer, though State Auditor Dave Yost is.

4. Husted’s threat to not process vote by mail applications was petty, mean-spirited and a personal attack on County Executive Ed Fitzgerald’s plans for how to keep our county’s voting system from sinking back into the morass it was under Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.  It shows the gut level at which Jon Husted is viewing this issue, rather than at the independent level of securing all the rights of all the voters to the best of our abilities.  And frankly empathizing with the way in which the large counties’ boards of elections have prioritized spending on making sure that vote by mail is utilized more and more so that the day-of voting problems for voters, as well as the costs and resources, can be reduced.

5. The state auditor’s suggestion that the public spending to be done by the County may in some way be contrary to law and therefore actionable is likewise petty, mean-spirited and a personal attack on the county executive.

6. Has it occurred to these fellas that maybe it’s Husted’s directive that bans county boards of elections from mailing out vote by mail applications that is the unconstitutional step because, despite how many time he uses the word “uniformity,” the reality is that his ban disparately affects voters’ rights which include access.

7. Finally, I will again point out that Husted knows exactly what it means to not abridge voters’ rights and we know he knows this because of his recently announced plans related to military voters.  In other words, Husted, through his actions, has demonstrated an appreciation for the reality that uniformity of process is not the highest priority when it comes to voters rights.  And in the case of military voters, he has decided to provide them with mechanisms that other voters will not get.

Voters in large counties, as law experts cited in today’s Plain Dealer confirm, likewise need mechanisms that other voters may or may not get in order to safeguard their voting rights.

The side on which Husted should be erring is on the side of the voters. This is a ridiculous fight for him to be picking – now or at any time.

The links:

Plain Dealer editorial today: Brainstorm, don’t battle:

Husted shouldn’t have raised the specter of not honoring legitimate ballot applications — whether they are produced by Cuyahoga County, a political party or a Kiwanis Club….

Mailing applications has helped make balloting in Cuyahoga and other large counties more efficient. We want to see it continue and think it’s possible to develop a reasonable consensus — something Husted and FitzGerald have a history of doing well. Sound bites won’t help with that, but some fresh ideas might.

Plain Dealer hard news story today on situation including input from legal experts

Kucinich asks US Attorney to investigate Ohio over Cuyahoga ballot controversy

WCPN/WKSU report this morning with audio from State Auditor re: action he may take against the county

Ohio Daily Blog has several posts on the issue and I suspect that they will continue to write about it too

Absentee Wars from Progress Ohio

But for additional, worthy reflections on today:

A great post about what it is.

Two takes, here and here, on what to tell our daughters about it.

Three ways not to celebrate it.

A forward perspective that looks back at several key women.

A call to action from a sitting U.S. Senator who embodies what it means to bring other women along and be pro-woman (do not settle for any substitutes).

The launch of a campaign to make the vote we have count.

And last the lyrics:

We’re clearly soldiers in petticoats
And dauntless crusaders for woman’s votes
Though we adore men individually
We agree that as a group they’re rather stupid!

Cast off the shackles of yesterday!
Shoulder to shoulder into the fray!
Our daughters’ daughters will adore us
And they’ll sign in grateful chorus
“Well done, Sister Suffragette!”

From Kensington to Billingsgate
One hears the restless cries!
From ev’ry corner of the land:
“Womankind, arise!”
Political equality and equal rights with men!
Take heart! For Missus Pankhurst has been clapped in irons again!

No more the meek and mild subservients we!
We’re fighting for our rights, militantly!
Never you fear!

So, cast off the shackles of yesterday!
Shoulder to shoulder into the fray!
Our daughters’ daughters will adore us
And they’ll sign in grateful chorus
“Well done! Well done!
Well done Sister Suffragette!”

Read more from the Dayton Daily News and the Plain Dealer.

Hattip to none other than Jim Trakas, sincerely one of my favorite former electeds and Ohio political arena mainstays.

Where’s this observation of mine coming from? It really became highlighted for me in a thread about clean air regulations that got consumed by the philosophical differences related to how we prioritize what is important to us. The example comes from this post at The Moderate Voice where I’ve been co-blogging for years as an example.  Just read through the comments.  (I know several of the regulars and we have acceptable online rapports that have developed over years, so you can stick to considering the content of the arguments made, as opposed to anything that might seem kind of personal.)

I don’t think that the back and forth there is atypical at all in terms of how those who are prone to see matters in a binary way apply that to the topic of government regulation.  In fact, I think it reflects that type of vision extremely well.

My read of such dialogues has been that the two sides in the regulations binary debate line up like this, and not just when the environment and the EPA are involved but certainly that’s been a popular target: there are folks who see regulations as suffocating business (and therefore the creation of wealth and therefore the means for people to be able to, in a more general and pervasive way, protect health) and then there are those who see business practices that are governed by profit-making as suffocating humans.

Heavy claims, I know, but honestly, I don’t know how we can phrase it any other way.  There are other facets to the debate, but in their foundation, I believe that these two positions are rooted in those positions.

Now, the idea behind federal laws – regulation and other – often have to do with taking on issues that are best handled uniformly in order to benefit a wide swath of individuals equally, and have the swath of individuals or entities at whom the law is aimed all be expected to do more or less the same thing.  This eliminates variations in knowing the law and, theoretically, in applying the law.

While of course that’s just in theory and of course there are situations where state by state there is a need for differentiation, and of course we have state EPAs, the general idea is to be setting expectations known to all and applied to all and expected of all, within the confines of whatever Congress has outlined.  The United States Supreme Court decision in American Electric Power Co., Inc. v. Connecticut, generally speaking, reaffirms this kind of authority – in that case, the EPA’s authority to consider some specific issues assigned to it, by Congress, that are related to carbon emissions (and the overall topic of global warming).

But even with the SCOTUS decision implying the accepted role of an agency like the EPA, the philosophical debate over the use of regulation should not be expected to disappear.  Why not?

Because how you feel about regulation really boils down to who you trust.  I was going to write, who you trust to do the right thing, but the thing is? When you are more about not suffocating business than you are about not suffocating humans, for whatever reason that might be and however you may rationalize that being so can still lead to healthy people, you are not thinking about what the “right thing” is in terms of people’s lives.  You are thinking in economic terms, pure and simple.

And for those of us who want and expect and demand reasonable regulation of business in order to protect people and our planet? Well -I won’t speak for others though I believe I could, and I will speak for myself: I do not trust businesses to regulate themselves to the degree they need to regulate themselves so that we are protected at the level we should be protected, and I find the government regulation of business to be a necessary component to ensure that businesses will not disregard people’s health, among other things, as they seek to always maximize profit.

Would it be awesome if every single business that could function in ways that endanger us cared about and acted to minimize those dangers to the degree that we wish they would, even if it affects their bottom line, without government regulations? You better believe it.  But the failure for that to happen, and the bickering over when there is danger and actual damage to us, is precisely why government regulation must be deployed on behalf of all of us.

Our health and our lives – and our children lives – are not zero-sum propositions.  And we should not be expected to give up years on our lives or our kids lives in exchange for a business to make more profits simply because they do not find that doing what “is right” would also be able to be doing what is financially beneficial to them.

And the weekly reminder: Please consider joining the Moms Clean Air Force to help fight for clean air for our kids. Every voice counts and is needed.  If you haven’t already done so, you have through July 5th to email the EPAand show your support for the new Mercury and Air Toxics rule.  Thank you.