afdestephano@aol.com

LET’S HOLD OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS BY THE SAME STANDARDS THAT NOTRE DAME UNIVERSITY FOOTBALL EXPECTS FROM ITS COACHES

By: Andy DeStephano

            Why do we allow those in public office or seeking public office a free pass when they blatantly lie about their accomplishments? If we were to lie about our achievements or positions, would we keep our jobs or be promoted? We are quick to chastise celebrities for their indiscretions; however we are expected to forgive and forget the improper doings of our elected officials. I ask why don’t we start holding our public officials to the same standards of integrity Notre Dame Football expects from its coaches.

            Last week the New York Times broke a story tarnishing the creditability of Connecticut Attorney General and Democrat Party Senate Candidate, Richard Blumenthal. On countless occasions Blumenthal has commented about his experiences as a Vietnam Veteran and the hardships he endured throughout the years. Upon further investigation Blumenthal’s statements were contradicted and thus proven to be false. The only records found were the five deferments he obtained from 1965 to 1970 avoiding having to serve.

After being exposed as a fraud and liar Mr. Blumenthal acknowledged that he ‘misspoke’ about his service record. He made the following statement as he accepted his party’s nomination for the United States Senate:

"This week, as you all know, I had a little bit of a tough time myself. You all have been hearing what my wife, Cynthia, has been telling me for almost 30 years — that I am not perfect. That I make mistakes."

            It is not uncommon for candidates to use the excuse of misspeaking for their embellished tales of valor. During her failed campaign to gain her party’s nomination for President of the United States in 2008; current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recanted her statements about a trip abroad with her daughter Chelsea involving having to dodge gunfire from nearby snipers. When video footage surfaced disproving the former First Lady’s account, she than stated she ‘misspoke’.

            As Major League Baseball pitcher Roger Clemens testified in front of Congress about his involvement with steroid use he coined the phrase ‘misspoke’, thus being ridiculed for the nonsensical term. It is even more hypocritical when our elected officials use this term to defend their blatant lies.

            Blumenthal and his error remind me about the story of current University of Central Florida Head Football Coach, George O’Leary. O’Leary is not remembered for what he has accomplished at UCF and very rarely mentioned for leading Georgia Tech to the National Title in 1991; however his infamous five day stint at Notre Dame University will never be forgotten.

After seven successful seasons as Head Football Coach at Georgia Tech, George O’Leary was selected to coach at one of the most prestigious schools in collegiate athletics, Notre Dame University Football. O’Leary’s tenure was brief to say the least; less than a week after his acceptance O’Leary resigned when inaccuracies about his resume surfaced in the media.

            O’Leary claimed to have earned a Masters Degree in education and three Varsity Letters from his alma mater. It was soon discovered that O’Leary had accomplished neither. In fact one school did not exist nor did the grant degrees and not a single person remembered O’Leary as a teammate. Once a dream of a lifetime position quickly turned into a nightmare and O’Leary resigned immediately.

            It has taken several years for O’Leary to obtain a second chance after misrepresenting facts about his qualifications and yet we overlook and forgive the same errors of our public officials. Blumenthal and Clinton are fortunate they have found careers in government since they certainly do not have the integrity it takes to coach at Notre Dame University

Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics.

SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, THE INVISIBLE HAND OF COMPETITION IN A FREE MARKET SOCIETY.

By: Andy DeStephano

            In 1776 economist, Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations. Since that time those principles have served as a guide for the economic system of The United States of America. In recent years government regulations driven by the interests of a select few have hampered economic growth and crippled the innovators, creators and entrepreneurs of our nation.

            The Transportation Planning Rule was enacted in the state of Oregon in 1991. The purpose of this legislation was to reduce the reliance on automobiles and the need for parking spaces throughout the state. Land preservation and conservation served as the reasoning for placing such an oppressive law upon the residents; thus placing the objectives of the state ahead of the citizens. The verbiage of the legislation is vague and ambiguous which leads to confusion in interpreting, applying and enforcing the actual law. Unfortunately the law has not been repealed or amended.

            In a Discussion Paper authored by Professor’s Sy Adler and Martha J. Bianco presented in 1998, the Transportation Planning Rule was dissected and their findings were true and made the point. The Transportation Planning Rule is nothing more than legislation fueled by special interest groups with damaging effects upon free enterprise within the state. As both authors concluded:

“Implementation of the Rule has encountered a number of difficulties due to a number of weaknesses in the policy process. These include the lack of a clear casual link between requirements and goals, lack of resources, inconsistent levels of support among implementing officials, unclear and vague objectives, inflexibility and lack of discretion among implementers, technological constraints, political infeasibility and a Portland-centered approach.” (Adler, Bianco ’98)

As non-resident of the State of Oregon, with no affiliation with the parties involved, I can clearly observe the rule has inadequately served its originally stated purpose, thus allowing special interest groups to interpret the legislation to suit their personal objectives. My observations and comments can be further supported   Jaqua v. The City of Springfield and Peacehealth a case heard by the Oregon Court of Appeals.

For those unfamiliar with the case, I will briefly summarize the situation. Peacehealth intended on building a hospital that in turn would have served the community and directly stimulated economic growth in the surrounding area. Local residents John and Robin Jaqua with the support of 1000 Friends of Oregon petitioned to have the project denied citing the Transportation Planning Rule. Although the Jaquas did not have a financial stake in the project; they claim their lives would be personally affected and placed their personal agenda above the needs of many.

1000 Friends of Oregon was founded by Former Governor Tom McCall and Henry Richmond in 1975. The organization was to serve as a citizens’ group and a proverbial “Watchdog” concerning state land issues. According to their website their mission is:

Working with Oregonians to enhance our quality of life by:

·         Building livable urban and rural communities.

·         Protecting family farms and forests.

·         Conserving natural and scenic areas.

If you are to sift through their professionally written mission statement, you can conclude the group’s true intention of placing the beliefs of a select few upon the rest of the masses thus empowering the government and inhibiting the individual.

The Transportation Planning Rule enacted in the State of Oregon and Jaqua v. The City of Springfield and Peacehealth sets an unsettling precedent for every other state in the union. In a free enterprise system competition is determined by the market and demands of the people, not through legislation. Allowing the government to prohibit economic growth driven by the agenda of special groups was never the “Invisible Hand” Adam Smith imagined. The Transportation Planning Rule is a clear example of why it is imperative for the government to have a limited role in private industry.

Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics, he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics.

CORPORATE PARADIGMS: THE UNAMERICAN STRUCTURE OF FREE ENTERPRISE.

It was not long ago when then Senator Obama campaigned on the notion the he was the advocate of change in our country. The old ways of governing were to be eliminated and replaced with a fresh approach. The power that lobbyists and special interest groups once held were to be placed after the needs of the private citizen. As time has passed, it is clearly apparent these were only tones of campaign rhetoric.

Corporate paradigm forms when the influence of a third party dictates how the government determines legislation affecting private industry. In most Socialist nations, this theory is commonly seen within the policies implemented in the private sector. Taxes, labor practices, environmental policies, and zoning laws are only a few areas affected by government interference. Although there is no debate as to whether or not a civilized nation requires a limited amount of governing; the underlying problem is allowing private agendas to affect free enterprise.

If you were to examine the reasons why this is occurring within our economic system, you will conclude that it is purely greed. Special interest groups fund campaigns and most of our lawmakers either come from or end up working within one of these organizations. This problem is bipartisan and not limited to one political party. Our lawmakers have spent too many years in the public sector and not enough in the private sector, thus inhibiting the innovators, creators, and entrepreneurs.

Ask yourselves this, if there wasn’t any money being generated within non-profit organizations, would any individual be involved? These special interest groups generate money in the form of donations that give them a great deal of influence. Although not all organizations abuse their power, it is hard to find many with strictly altruistic purposes.

Former Vice- President Al Gore will pontificate the dangers of climate change by traveling across the country in a private jet and earning a speaking fee. Former Governor of Illinois Rod Blagodivich attempted to auction off President Obama’s Senate seat for a position for he and his wife within a non-profit group. We have empowered these organizations while silencing those in private industries, thus making positions within the organization lucrative and powerful

Our great nation relies on the individual and free enterprise; however, we are losing our way by inhibiting these very same principles through legislation. If we are ever to solve the economic challenges of today, we must once again support the concepts that our foundation is based upon. Instead of limiting the power of the individual, we must start by restricting the power of influence of private agendas within government legislation.

Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics, he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics.

BLAMING BUSH, PLAYING GOLF AND HANGING OUT WITH BEATLES IS NOT A STRATEGY FOR SOLVING SERIOUS ISSUES

By: Andy DeStephano

            In the words of White House Chief of Staff, Rham Emmanuel:

                        “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

As we observe the recent events occurring around our great nation one must wonder why the Obama Administration has been slow in their response regarding the Arizona Immigration Law and the BP Oil spill in the Gulf. If their original position, as stated above, is to act upon the first mention of crisis, it appears as if only select issues are added to the agenda.

If we were to only listen to supporters of President Obama, you would think he has been inundated with pressing issues facing our nation. Liberal commentators, such as Joy Behar, have even gone as far as blaming current catastrophes upon the previous administration.

On a recent show Behar offered this explanation as to the main cause for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico:

“The whole oil spill can be laid at Cheney's feet.'"

Someone should remind Ms. Behar that Vice President Cheney has not been in office since January of 2009 and his role in the current situation is inaccurate and irrelevant. In fact her statement is false and dangerously misguided.

            So if President Obama has been delayed in his response to handling the massive oil spill in the Gulf, what issues has he been addressing?

Perhaps he is strengthening and securing our borders? Although this issue is one creating controversy, President Obama does not seem interested in finding a solution for this problem.

            Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona have been placed upon a long waiting list of far more important dignitaries and their concerns. Who are these people and what matters have occupied the Commander in Chief for the past few months?

            For those not within the earshot of a media outlet, you may have missed the important issues and meetings that President Obama has made a priority. For example the New York Yankees, University of Connecticut Women’s Basketball Team, Duke University Men’s Basketball Team, Golfer Phil Mickelson, the U.S. World Cup Soccer Team and former Beatle Paul McCartney, all who have visited President Obama within the past month.

The White House has even spent time listening to Mexico’s President chastise Arizona for passing an immigration law which is less intrusive than the one which Mexico implemented and currently enforces.

            President Obama has only left the White House to shoot hoops or play a round of golf. His trip to the Gulf of Mexico can be cynically observed as perhaps an escape from scrutiny when the scandal of Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak and the Obama Administration broke prior to Memorial Day weekend. On a side note it is also insulting that our Commander in Chief, who has more troops in combat than the previous administration, found it unnecessary to attend the ceremonies held at Arlington National Cemetery and chose to spend time in his hometown of Chicago.

            Since many Americans continue to blame the Bush Administration, I have noted a few comments that were made regarding how the previous administration responded towards similar challenges.

            Years after the attacks on 9/11, writer Joe Klein had the following to say in his article in TIME Magazine:

“It is easy to cast blame in hindsight. Even if Bush had been obsessed with the terrorist threat, 9/11 might not have been prevented. But the President's apparent lack of rigor—his incuriosity about an enemy that had attacked American targets overseas and had attempted an attack at home—raises a basic question about the nature and competence of this Administration.”

            This opinion was formed after reports surfaced that President Bush finished his meeting with school children moments after the first plane struck the World Trade Center. What Klein failed to mention is during those moments the entire nation was in shock and President Bush was immediately taken into protective custody by the United States Secret Service.

            During the previous administration a natural disaster in the form of a hurricane challenged President Bush. After what many consider a delay in response, Hip-Hop and Rap artist Kanye West decided:

                                    “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.”

President Bush waited two days allowing for dangerous conditions to pass before his visit unlike President Obama who dispatched the Attorney General Eric Holder to file future criminal charges and delayed his visit to Louisiana for thirty eight days.

            In all fairness I do not commend or condemn President Bush for acting presidential. I do admire the fact that he acted within the scope of his powers regardless of the outcome. President Obama can deliver a well written speech but his actions are falling short.

            Maybe if the teleprompter switched the vowel u to an o in Gulf or Governor Brewer invited President Obama for a round of golf, his attention would have focused upon these matters instead of meeting with athletes and celebrities?

Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics

WHEN DID IT BECOME UNPATRIOTIC TO BE PROUD OF BEING AN AMERICAN?

 By: Andy DeStephano

            I personally find it appalling that wearing a shirt with the American Flag or drawing the American Flag in art class has become offensive to many people. When has society digressed and why have so many become ashamed of what our great nation represents? It seems as if we have taken an apologetic tone for our nation and it is a damn shame!

 We have always been a nation that represented a beacon of hope for the masses seeking a life free from tyranny and oppression; a country that is the epitome of all that is good in the world. In essence a true dream.

 Recently two incidents in California have shattered this understanding; provoking me to question the motives of my fellow citizens. As I sort through the headlines and listen to the interviews; my blood begins to boil and my anger is expressed through my words. Why would any American feel that the symbol of our very freedoms is offensive or controversial in nature?

 Over the past two weeks several young Americans have come under attack for expressing their love for our nation. Schools have made examples of these students who simply have shown their patriotism through art and clothing. These gutless educators and administrators have placed fear over patriotism.

 The first incident was reported late last week when six teenage males were sent home from school for wearing shirts with the American Flag. School administrators demanded that the students either remove or wear the garments inside out. After they refused to comply, the students were dismissed for the day and sent home. The reason given was a fear the shirts were offensive and would potentially lead to a fight. School officials assumed that since Wednesday was the Mexican day of Independence this act was disrespectful. Disrespectful? The last time I checked California was still one of the fifty states in the union. Did we happen to surrender the territory back to Mexico?

 The second incident occurred a few days ago. A teenage female student was told by her teacher the drawing she had selected to draw of the American Flag with the words, ‘God Bless America’ included was offensive. The teacher went on to praise the work of another student that selected to a picture of President Obama. When questioned as to what was so offensive about the picture, this poor excuse for an educator had no response. I wonder if this educator has any student loans and if she does what country granted her the opportunity to further her education?  Perhaps it was the same nation in which the flag that represents it offended this woman.

 If these students decided to wear shirts depicting peace signs or drawn the flags of other nations would these same individuals have labeled them as controversial? I doubt those words would have been used to describe these patriotic children; most likely they would have been praised for their freedom of expression or worldly viewpoints.

 Our country and flag represent all that is good and all that can be good. American blood has been spilled on areas all over the world defending those yearning to share in the same liberties we quite often take for granted. Our nation is becoming over run with individuals entering our boarders illegally to share in our way of life. It is outrageous that any citizen would consider the symbol of our nation to be offensive! Find me another country in the world where people strive to live and are willing to do so illegally and I will proudly wear the symbol of that land upon my chest. Until that day comes we should all be thankful and honored to live in nation that in the words of the late President Ronald Reagan is truly, “ A shining city upon a hill whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere."                                                

 Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics

GREEN LEGISLATION ONLY LEADS TO GREEN BANK ACCOUNTS.

By: Andy DeStephano

In 2007 the Oregon State Legislature created the Oregon Global Warming Commission through House Bill 3543. Governor Ted Kulongoski has the executive power to appoint members to the commission. Is it a surprise that the majority of members have ties to companies that potentially benefit from legislation proposed by the commission? Is it shocking that most of the commission has donated to the campaign contributions of Governor Kulongoski? Once again, this is a clear example of misguided legislation spawning from greed and falsely being presented to the public under the disguise of “Climate Change Legislation”.

According to the mission statement found on the Commission’s website:

The Commission’s general charge is to recommend ways to coordinate state and local efforts to reduce Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions consistent with Oregon’s goals and to recommend efforts to help the state, local governments, businesses and residents prepare for the effects of global warming.

Although the role of the Commission appears to have altruistic purposes and proclaims that their role benefits the citizens of Oregon; one should look closely at the backgrounds of its members. After investigating several members, not only will you find their names listed as financial donors for Ted Kulongoski, but you will also discover that they represent companies that will profit from the legislation recommended by the Commission.

Angus Duncan is currently the Chair of the Commission. He has been highlighted by Sustainable Industries Journal as:

“Perhaps best known as the pioneer of “Green Tags,” the concept that there is value in the environmental benefits created by renewable energy generation, Angus Duncan is helping position Oregon as a leader in the emerging U.S. carbon market.” (LeCompte & Brun ’08)

Mr. Duncan is also the CEO of the Bonneville Environmental Foundation, a non-profit business responsible for selling carbon-offsetting “Green Tags” or in other words Carbon Credits. To summarize what a “Green Tag” or Carbon Credit does is it basically acts as an imaginary pass permitting a company to emit additional carbon monoxide into the environment.  Mr. Duncan does not receive money directly from the sale of these “Green Tags”, however he is compensated through the Bonneville Environmental Foundation which gains significantly from the sale of “Green Tags” regionally and nationally.

            I would be creating an unfair portrait of the Commission if I failed to mention the fact that no members are compensated for their participation; but Angus Duncan is not alone in the giant conflict of interest created by serving on the Commission.

            James Piro is the President and CEO of Portland General Electric Company. In the last Quarter of 2009, Portland General Electric Company reported a net income of $95 million up $8 million from the $87 million reported in December 2008.  Mr. Piro’s total compensation package for 2008 equaled $942,625.00. Serving on the Commission does allow Mr. Piro access to influence policies from which his company can potentially benefit.

            Gregg Kantor, President and CEO of Northwest Natural Gas Company, is also a Commission member. In 2008 Mr. Kantor received $1,246,952.00 in total compensation. His company earned $69.5 million in net income. He has influence similar to James Piro.

            Matt Donegan is co-founder and co-president of Forest Capital Partners, LLC. Forest Capital Partners is one of the largest private landowners in the United States. Although his compensation package is not publicly disclosed, Mr. Donegan is dependant upon investors and investors expect to profit from their investment.

            After examining the Commission and its members there can only be one simple conclusion, the only effects citizens need to prepare for are the increases in services created by legislation recommended by people who have a great financial stake in the policies.

            Andy DeStephano is currently a Professor of Management at Berkeley College and Bergen Community College, New Jersey and Consultant. Prior to his entry into Political Commentary and Academics he has spent over a decade involved with Intercollegiate Athletics.