Editorial Roundup: New England

Editorials from around New England:

CONNECTICUT

Gov. Lamont, get the data before expanding gambling in Connecticut

Hartford Courant

Feb. 19

Gov. Ned Lamont should take a cue from the professional gamblers: Don’t get in the game before you know the odds.

Recent news shows that the New England gaming market is facing saturation. Armed with solid data, the major players in Connecticut - MGM Springfield, the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and the Mohegan Tribe - are scaling back expansion plans and expectations.

The MGM Springfield casino has not brought in as much money as anticipated. The planned casino in East Windsor, a joint operation of the Connecticut tribes, is being scaled back. Foxwoods Resort Casino has reduced the number of gambling tables.

Those are informed decisions.

Connecticut politicians are weighing whether and how to expand gambling here, but they don’t have independent data about Connecticut’s gaming market to help them make the best decisions for Connecticut residents, and that’s a mistake.

What would a casino in Bridgeport do to the market? What about sports betting? What if one of the tribes got a green light to establish gaming in other locations - such as in the XL Center, a plan that has been floated before?

The intricacies of the market are bewildering, with so many players and so much money involved. But Gov. Lamont must lead the charge on the conversation - not by cutting a slick and complicated deal as if he’s Scott Boras, but by first getting solid data about the market and about the broader effects of expanded gaming from an independent firm.

The professional gamblers do it. But their primary goal is to make as much money as possible. The state of Connecticut has other concerns, such as the job market, the social welfare of its citizens and so much more.

Going into the game with no real sense of how expanded gambling would affect Connecticut’s residents, in all of our cities and towns, is a mistake.

Get the data, governor.

Online: https://bit.ly/2VdAMlW

___

MAINE

Maine should lower the high cost of cash bail

Portland Press Herald

Feb. 21

Cash bail can be as little as $50 or $100. Still, it’s costing us a fortune.

When someone who is charged but not yet convicted of a crime is held in jail, it is almost always because that person cannot afford the bail, however low, placed on the crime with which that person has been charged, however minor.

Once the exception among Maine’s incarcerated population, these people are now the majority. Before the mid-1990s, only about 40 percent of the state’s county jail inmates were there awaiting trial. By 2007, however, more than 60 percent of people held in county jails were pretrial. Now, according to the ACLU of Maine, it is as high as 80 percent in some counties.

It was the rise in pretrial detention that drove the surge in Maine’s jail population during that time, causing problems with jail costs that county officials, sheriffs and state lawmakers have yet to find an answer for.

In just one example, Penobscot County, where the cost of boarding elsewhere inmates who cannot fit in its overcrowded jail is expected to soon reach $1 million a year, has been struggling with plans to build a new jail because of criticism over its size and cost.

Aside from all the tax dollars spent on pretrial detention, there is an immense personal cost. Incarceration, even for a relatively short time, can mean the loss of employment, housing or child custody. It is also undeniably traumatic.

And if you’re in jail awaiting trial, then you’re subjected to all those things without being convicted.

In fact, that’s just one way the bail system runs counter to American ideals. Just as everyone has the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty, we all too should have access to a fair and equitable justice system.

Now, we have one system for people who can afford bail – one that ends with that person home in bed not long after an arrest – and another, much worse one for everyone else, one that includes days, weeks, even months in jail before their case is adjudicated.

Lawmakers can help correct this injustice. L.D. 1421 would drop cash bail for the most minor crimes, such as littering, driving on a suspended license or petty theft. The bill would also require courts to consider a defendant’s health and personal needs before setting bail, and would make it more difficult to refuse to release someone on personal recognizance.

The bill, supported by many prosecutors, won’t make all the problems with Maine’s pretrial system go away. But it certainly would push things in the right direction.

There is no evidence that bail in these cases makes Maine safer, or helps in any way to ensure justice. It only raises costs, both for taxpayers and for thousands of individual Mainers, while perpetuating an unbalanced justice system.

Online: https://bit.ly/2T7N2Se

___

MASSACHUSETTS

Put the phone down, please

The Sun Chronicle

Feb. 21

Most of us have done it at one time or another: Talked on the phone while driving our cars.

Perhaps you’ve even scanned your contact list, found who you were looking for and hit “call.”

We hope you haven’t texted someone or scanned the internet or browsed social media while operating a vehicle. But you know plenty of people do when you see their heads down and the blue glow on their smartphones on their faces. Or they wait forever to move after the traffic light turns green. Or, scariest of all, you see them heading in your lane.

Beginning Sunday, that kind of behavior is also against the law.

Massachusetts’ long overdue ban on cellphone use while driving begins then, and police locally and across the commonwealth will be looking for scofflaws.

The statute will bring Massachusetts in line with most states in the Northeast, including the other five in New England, which already have bans in place.

The ban was held up by legislators in heavily minority districts who feared police would use the law to stop black and Hispanic voters.

To counter those worries, the Registry of Motor Vehicles is required to collect demographic data for every traffic stop ending with a hand-held device citation, and the data will be analyzed by an outside agency for any irregularities, such as racial profiling, and made available to the public.

Any department found to have engaged in racial or gender profiling will be required to undergo bias training.

The law calls for a $100 fine for the first offense, $250 for the second and $500 for each subsequent violation. If you commit a second or subsequent offense, you will be required to complete an educational program focused on distracted driving prevention. A third or subsequent violation will also likely mean a surcharge to your insurance premiums.

Here are a few do’s and don’ts about the law:

DO use hands-free technology such as Bluetooth, a “single tap or swipe” to activate or deactivate hands-free mode and navigation technology mounted to the vehicle.

DON’T use your phone while stopped at a traffic light. That’s against the law.

DO pull over - if it’s safe to do so - if you get a call or text you believe you must answer. Drivers may still use their phones if they are stationary and not in an active traffic lane.

DON’T get angry if you see a cop on the phone. The law does not apply to public safety personnel or first responders while operating an emergency services vehicle and doing their jobs.

DO use your phone if it’s an emergency. That’s allowed but be sure it’s a true emergency.

The state is giving motorists a break to get accustomed to the law.

There’s a grace period through March 31 during which you will get a warning if it’s your first offense, rather than a fine.

But, please, put down the phone. As the saying goes, it can wait.

Online: https://bit.ly/2Pe7Vu4

___

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Three-day wait is reasonable

The Nashua Telegraph

Feb. 21

The New Hampshire House of Representatives this week passed legislation that would impose a waiting period between the purchase and delivery of a firearm.

Last year, a similar bill was vetoed by Republican Gov. Chris Sununu. The difference with this year’s bill is that it shortens the waiting time from seven days to three days. The legislation also includes exceptions to the waiting period, including for those who are in fear for their life in domestic violence situations.

Opponents of the bill say the Granite State is one of the safest in the nation, and that enacting such legislation only would be a slippery slope for future increases in waiting periods.

Those who support the bill note that their main goal is to curb potential suicides, especially with rates in the state on the rise.

The simple fact is, a waiting period would really do no harm. It does not curb rights in the Second Amendment, and there are few situations where a firearm is an immediate necessity.

A three-day waiting period seems reasonable, in that if it could prevent even one death from suicide, it would be more than worth the tiny sacrifice of such a short period.

Suicide rates are sharply increasing in our state, partly because the lack and sparse availability of mental health care.

This has been seen among the civilian population, as well as the law enforcement population, something that truly is alarming.

While this bill has a long way to go before it reaches Gov. Sununu’s desk, it definitely is worth serious consideration.

What residents must remember – and lawmakers, too – is that the government definitely isn’t trying to take their guns away. They are not trying the curb the right to bear arms, either.

A measly three days is worth it when it comes to purchasing any type of firearm, especially if it saves lives in the process.

Online: https://bit.ly/2SMwXCE

___

RHODE ISLAND

The Providence Journal

A niche hospital proposed for R.I.

Feb. 18

In many states, a company that wanted to come in, build a $45-million facility, employ 100 to 160 people at very high wages ($64,700 per year per full-time employee), pay taxes, and ask for nothing in return, would be greeted with open arms.

But this is Rhode Island, so it is uncertain what will happen.

Encompass Health, which operates 130 inpatient rehabilitation hospitals across the country, wants to build a new 50-bed facility in Johnston. As a for-profit facility, it would pay taxes, including property taxes to the town.

Construction would create another 100 temporary jobs.

The hospital would provide acute rehabilitative care for patients discharged from other hospitals, especially those suffering from strokes or brain injuries. Often, Rhode Island hospitals send these very serious and costly cases to rehabilitative hospitals outside the state, necessitating long daily trips for family members to the Boston area and back.

Thus, Encompass believes there is a market in Rhode Island for such expert acute care, and is willing to invest in a new facility. The company has experience in providing such care efficiently by stripping down office jobs while putting its money into nursing.

It’s a big company. Nationwide, in the area of inpatient rehabilitation, it employs 30,100 people and produces annual revenue of $3.3 billion. It operates three such hospitals in Massachusetts, one in New Hampshire and one in Maine.

The proposal is before the state Health Services Council. Unlike such freewheeling states as Texas, Rhode Island requires that such facilities prove there is a need for their services, lest unnecessary facilities and equipment drive up the cost of care.

In Rhode Island, that means a political struggle.

The group representing the state’s beleaguered nursing homes, the Rhode Island Health Care Association, is fighting the proposal. It fears some nursing homes may lose some business if such a rehabilitative hospital were located in the state.

The association notes that the state already has more licensed rehabilitative beds than it uses. It also argues there is no evidence the care at such intensive care facilities is better than at nursing homes.

That is something Encompass disputes. The Health Services Council should explore in detail whether this level of excellent care is truly available - and, if so, why so many patients are sent out of state to Massachusetts. The mere fact Encompass is willing to invest so heavily in Rhode Island suggests there is a market here that is not being served adequately.

Economically, the state’s health industry would certainly benefit by having a state-of-the art niche hospital that is expert in providing this specialized care. And the state can always use more high-paying jobs.

As a small state, Rhode Island should also weigh the possibility that Encompass might serve the market by locating a new facility just across the border, something that would benefit Massachusetts financially instead.

We hope the state’s bureaucrats and elected officials give a fair and careful hearing to the Encompass proposal.

Online: https://bit.ly/2HMIXxD

___

VERMONT

Ugly tide of racist propaganda continues to rise

Brattleboro Reformer

Feb. 17

This country waged a civil war over slavery in the mid-19th century. It struggled with the advancement of civil rights for all people, regardless of race and religion, in the 20th century.

The fight for equality has been going on for more than 200 years, and often it seems like real progress is being made, especially when an African-American was elected president in 2008.

So, why is the ugly tide of racism and religious bigotry, particularly the white supremacist strain, on the rise again?

According to data recently released by the Anti-Defamation League, every New England state reported at least a doubling of white supremacist propaganda incidents last year. In Vermont, 81 incidents of white supremacist propaganda were recorded in 2019, compared to 14 in 2018. That ranks second among New England states to Massachusetts, which recorded an alarming 148 incidents last year compared to only 35 in 2018. New Hampshire had 30 incidents in 2019, 10 times the number recorded the year before.

“Our data clearly demonstrates that white supremacists are doubling down on the distribution of propaganda across the U.S. and in our region, with a particular focus on campuses and the public square,” said Robert Trestan, ADL New England Regional Director. “By injecting a barrage of racist, anti-Semitic and anti-LGBTQ fliers, stickers, banners and posters into the public square and on campus, white supremacists are attempting to normalize their messages of bigotry and to bolster recruitment, all while hiding behind the cloak of anonymity, never having to face the consequences of their hate and intolerance.”

It’s happening right here in Brattleboro, where an anti-Jewish message was scrawled in chalk on an Elliot Street sidewalk in 2018, and white supremacist leaflets were distributed in Pliny Park last year. We have a self-identified white supremacist in Bennington who boasts about how he helped drive the only black woman legislator from the Vermont House, and faced no charges from either the town police or the attorney general’s office because they could find no laws he had broken.

Let’s call it what it is: racism, perhaps emboldened by a president who pandered to white supremacists after they held a violent rally in Virginia; who trusts as one of his key advisors, especially on immigration policy, a man (Stephen Miller) who promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof’s murderous rampage, according to leaked emails.

Here in Vermont, we can be more vigilant, more aware, more responsive to incidents of white supremacist propaganda, whether it’s leaflets distributed on the street, posters stapled on the public square, racist messages scrawled on the sidewalk, or online racial harassment with no repercussions.

Quite simply, we can do better.

Online: https://bit.ly/2HLfuEl

___