letter to editor stock image
With temperatures rising, more families are struggling to afford their increased energy bills. Riverbend Family Ministries’ Client Service Department is working hard to keep up with the high demand of clients’ higher-than-average summer utility bills.
“Our Client Services Department is seeing an increase in the people walking in the door that need help paying their energy bill, especially our senior citizens,” Riverbend Family Ministries Executive Director Tammy Iskarous said. “Although we offer solutions to help offset these problems, funding is limited and our families struggling to balance the rising cost of food, housing, and utilities are finding themselves in real crisis.”
Just a reminder for those not familiar with RFM’s Client Service Department — they are open to the public Monday through Thursday from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. They do accept walk-ins during those office hours; during that time, each client will be asked to fill out paperwork and asked back for an interview.
Anyone who lives within the Riverbend community area is eligible for financial assistance for rent or utilities. You must live at that residence for at least six months, and balance cannot exceed $750.
RFM is seeking donations to help support their high demand of summer utility requests. If you are interested in learning more about their services and know how you can help, visit their website at riverbendfamilyministries.com.
Riverbend Family Ministries
Nations building arsenals while security deteriorates
Has our country and the world in general lost sight of the true meaning of security?
The geopolitical divides between the United States, Russia, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and China have spilled over into the sphere of nuclear weapons. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute recently stated in the SIPRI Yearbook 2018 that all nuclear-armed states are developing new systems and modernizing their old ones. This represents a misallocation of resources, considering how unstable some parts of the world have become in recent years.
At the start of 2018, nine states — the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea — all possessed 14,465 nuclear weapons. This marked a decrease from the approximately 14,935 nuclear weapons SIPRI estimated these states possessed at the beginning of 2017.
The decrease in the amount can be credited to the United States and Russia. Together the two nation-states account for 92 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons. Various arms control agreements allowed both countries to reduce their nuclear arsenals, including the 2010 New Start Treaty. Despite the success of these agreements, both countries are seeking to replace and modernize their nuclear arsenals and nuclear production facilities. The arsenals of other nations are smaller, but they are deploying new weapons or have announced their intentions to do so.
While nations spend trillions in a new nuclear arms race, global security is declining through the lack of funding for multilateral peacekeeping operations. The total number of personnel deployed in peacekeeping mission in 2017 declined by 4.5 percent. Nearly three-quarters of all personnel are based in Africa, but others are based in Europe, the Americas, Asia, and the Middle East.
The United Nations is the primary actor when it comes to peacekeeping. However, Africa is playing a larger role in this area with the formation of the Group of Five for the Sahel. The efforts of the Donald Trump administration to cut the U.N. peacekeeping budget have not helped this matter.
The trend toward more funds for nuclear arms and fewer funds for peacekeeping doesn’t understand the nature of security in the 21st century. The world is currently suffering a refugee crisis, with refugees leaving their own countries and relocating to other countries in search of a better life or maybe a secure environment until things improve in their home countries. Political opposition, primarily from various populist right movements, is building to refugees relocating in wealthy countries.
If more lesser-developed nation-states find themselves unable to provide the necessities of life to their citizens — food, clothing, and shelter — then the world will have more and more stateless people, which will lead to more problems in terms of how to provide security for those people. More spending on nuclear arsenals will do nothing to help this problem.
On a similar note, more nuclear weapons make us even less secure. Former Defense Secretary (1994-1997) William Perry, who served President Bill Clinton, has spoken on the need to abolish nuclear weapons. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Perry served as director of Sylvania’s Electronic Defense Laboratories. He often speaks of the horror he experienced during the crisis when he helped the Central Intelligence Agency analyze photos. While serving as President Jimmy Carter’s undersecretary of defense, Perry experienced a situation where a malfunctioning computer told the Defense Department our country was under attack from Soviet Russia. This false alarm could have led to a nuclear war. Perry has joined others, including former secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George Schultz and former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), in fighting for the cause of nuclear arms abolition.
In looking at the state of international relations, the world seems to be suffering from a state of irrationality. The poverty conditions that led to the flow of refugees are being ignored and underfunded, while security destroying nuclear weapons are being overfunded.
Jason Sibert, Peace Economy Project
St. Louis
Behind the numbers
Mr. (Barney) Murrell presents an impressive collection of statistics and deploys that data well in his expostulations. But his cause and effect are questionable. Engineers are taught to be cautious drawing conclusions from test data. Do not confuse correlation with causation. As a simple postulate — increasing age in children causes increase in shoe size, then increasing shoe size causes increased aging in children. The correlation here is symmetrical, but absurd.
Variables are always lurking. Scientists have the luxury to isolate results vs. controlled experimental conditions, but it demands cautious use of that data in final conclusions. However, Mr. Murrell moves immediately that an $11 trillion U.S. debt increase was a result of President Trump’s first 16 months in office. He ignores some facts.
Fact — Obama inherited a 2007 economy moving into recession. Those statistics can be confusing. Talk is 2 percent downturn is a recession. A 2 percent upturn indicates the economy has turned around. From Obama’s first year, 2009, the recession was over in 2010. Yet Keynesian logic is government money put into the economy will stimulate a recession into growth. That was not the case here. Obama put $800 billion into his idea of local “shovel-ready” stimulus projects. Problem was, it was mostly political payoffs to his supporters. The stock market trades that much in one day.
Any job takes two to three years to get up and running. The recession was over and Obama’s investments became insignificant in an annual economy of $15 trillion. An immediate stimulus would have been to cut taxes across the board and step back for increased personal income to take affect, then look for interim actions such as upgrading highways and bridges that always pump money into a local economy.
Is one year of government spending equivalent to private investment in long-term ideas and businesses that grow in size and expand year after year? Government invests for near-term political payoff to supporters, whereas businesses invest for growth and return on capital. Their expenditures employ people and stimulate economic activity, supporting businesses and their employees for years to come.
Government spending is fiscal year to fiscal year. It lasts only until the next election. And governments spend more than they take in taxes, so they borrow. As Barney states, $4.5 trillion was accrued interest on debt and revenue loss during the recession.
Remember please, government has no money. Government money comes from what they confiscate from taxpayers. I do not know how, but we must shrink government size and deficit spending. Sadly, Democratic and Republican politicians alike are guilty. Without term limits, I do not see that changing. So you, I, our grandkids and future taxpayers will pay off these trillions of dollars of debt. So hang on, folks.
Ron Jones
Alton
Local municipalities in running for grants
EDITOR’S NOTE: This is Report to the People No. 57 by Philip W. Chapman, County Board District 3 representative.
The purpose of this report is to provide information and aid in government transparency.
Highland news — $450,000 in grants
(a) I attended the June 20 Grants Committee and, despite opposition, argued for the $400,000 Highland Villa grant and the $600,000 Granite City grant. Highland, along with Granite City, were the top scorers in the grant competition. They will be voted on at the next meeting. (b) On June 20, the full board voted for the $50,000 Veteran’s Parkway-St. Rose Road roundabout I moved and Judy Kuhn seconded at the June 13 Transportation meeting.
District 3 appointments
On June 20, the full board approved appointments I provided to (County Board) Chairman (Kurt) Prenzler; New Douglas Fire District, Jeffrey Lesicko; Worden Fire District, Jason Steinmeyer; and Tri Township Water District, John Barr and Sally Ferguson; I voted for George Ellis and Mary Goode for the Zoning Board of Appeals.
PTELL Tabled: At the County Board meeting, I voted to table indefinitely PTELL. PTELL would adversely affect District 3 taxes. The following municipal tax increases could take place; Grantfork, 23.18 percent; Hamel, 99.44 percent; Highland, 12.54 percent; New Douglas, 34.66 percent; Pierron, 86.12 percent; Livingston, 138 percent. Other municipalities affected are Bethalto, 20.83 percent; Glen Carbon, 11.27 percent; Roxana, 103.58 percent; Troy, 59.5 percent; and Williamson, 77.45 percent. Sound great?
Advisory referendum on incurring bond debt: Shall units of government within Madison County first seek voter approval by advisory referendum before incurring any bond debt? YES or NO
The Tax Cycle Committee unanimously passed this referendum for consideration by the full board on June 5. On June 20, the County Board passed it for voter consideration 21-4. The question asks voters if they want government to incur bond debt before coming to the voters first. Currently, government can incur heavy bond debt through “backdoor referendums.” Backdoor referendums are illegal in Missouri. Let elected officials know what you think.
Second Amendment Advisory Referendum
On June 20, the full board approved the following referendum 15-10 for consideration on the fall ballot; “Shall Madison County become a sanctuary county for law-abiding gun owners to protect them from unconstitutional gun laws passed by the General Assembly?” YES or NO
Some constituents asked me if consideration of this referendum is legal. This is the exact wording recently passed in eight other Illinois counties and was reviewed for legal sufficiency by the Madison County State’s Attorney’s Office. An emotional issue, I hope we choose consider it rationally in a robust public discussion.
Respectfully submitted,
Philip W. Chapman, County Board District 3