While planning an East Coast poetry reading tour, I learned that Alice Paul was in the Greenleaf Extension Home in New Jersey. I contacted the facility and requested a visit, which was granted. We decided on ten o’clock on a weekday.

The day I arrived, I was told they were expecting me and that she was ready. She was sitting up behind a small table. I introduced myself and sat facing her. We exchanged pleasantries, and then I asked how things were going. “I don’t understand why my letters get no response!” she was distressed by the lack of response to the letters she had been writing to Congress about the Equal Rights Amendment. We talked about how women needed to be elected to Congress. There were a few men who were supportive, but in 1977. there were no groups of women legislators to turn to for support. I said I would talk to the manager of Greenleaf and see if there were a problem with the mail.

A nurse came in asking who I was. An interview had been arranged, and the writer had arrived with a photographer, expecting to see Alice. What was I doing there? I explained that I was from California and had asked to visit her while on a reading tour. I also was willing to leave, which reassured everybody, and I told Alice I would ask about the confusion regarding the mail and get back to her about what I learned. 

I went to the front desk and asked to see the person in charge. I told her "Miss Paul continues to be perplexed as to why her letters get no response” and did she have an idea of any problems? 

The woman said, “She’s such a dear. Full of energy every morning with a new idea of which Senator should be contacted." 

I nodded, “So she is writing letters?”  

“Well,” the woman said, “the nurse just pretends to write them. Miss Paul thinks she is writing to Senators. They aren’t letters to family or anyone real.” 

I took out my notebook, “Is there a way I can hire a private secretary to come regularly to help her with her correspondence?” 

The woman looked startled, “Well, I suppose so.” 

I continued, “How would I do that? Can you recommend someone for me to contact?” 

“Oh, yes! We have a wonderful woman who comes when someone needs to contact family or for legal matters; she would certainly be able to do what you’re asking.” 

“Great. Can we start next week, say, 2 mornings of 3 hours each?" I made a note of her name and contact information. 

Before leaving, I knocked at the door of the interview room, and said, “I’m leaving now; just want to say goodbye.” I walked over & took Alice’s hand and said, “I’ve hired a private secretary for you. She’ll be coming next Tuesday to work on your correspondence. I’ve requested 2 days a week at 3 hours each visit.” Alice nodded, "Thank you.”  

“It’s an honor to meet you. I’ll call in a couple of weeks to see how it’s going.” 

As I left, Alice was talking with Robert S. Gallagher. That interview appeared in American Heritage in February, 1974. It is available online. 

The secretary I hired was excellent; she did as we requested and the letters got to their destinations and mail began to arrive for Alice Paul within weeks. Some were from Congress; one from a suffragist she had worked with in 1919. Her friends were afraid she had died, as all their mail to her house had been returned. 

Of the surviving Suffragists, six were well enough to plan a visit. They came together, and spent hours with Alice. Soon after their visit, she died. 

I was crying, hearing about her death, worrying that the excitement may have been too much. 

My Mom consoled me, “Everybody should get a party before they die.” 

Alice Paul had worked both in England and America to get the vote for women. No country in the world had women’s right to vote when they began, and it took years of marches and meetings and getting arrested to get support from President Wilson. She told interviewer Robert S. Gallagher that she expected that the right to vote would be approved by Congress, and was optimistic that it “could be done in a year...We would explain it to every congressman, and the amendment would go through... But it took us seven years.” 

The focus had been on the vote, and once accomplished, many suffragists returned to private life. 

Alice Paul and a handful of other women’s rights activists turned their attention to the Equal Rights Amendment. 

"We hadn’t been able to get a lawyer, so I drafted one in simple ordinary English.”  

This is the Equal Rights Amendment Alice Paul wrote : 

Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

I write to ask that you vote to separate the park improvements from the proposed development at 600 Addison and that you urge the city to reject the development.

This seems to be some sort of replay of the terribly inappropriate proposal for the property directly adjacent to Aquatic Park on the east that was presented to the city in 2017. It poses a similar threat to the health of Aquatic Park as highly-valued bird habitat and a place of respite for Berkeley residents, and in the longer term a resilience zone for the city against sea rise. This project would require the destruction of many mature trees, and the two huge buildings would almost totally fill the existing built site and its parking lot as well as the adjacent property to the south, now benignly storing soil and wood chips.

In the past few years several new five-story apartment buildings have been built along University Avenue just a block from the park, adding several hundred new residents. This alone should be cause to protect and enhance the park, rather than allowing a huge increase in the built density of the adjacent site to the east. More than 80 mature carbon-absorbing trees would be destroyed including 10 Coast redwoods in good condition and a Coastal Live Oak, since the development covers virtually all available space. Obviously, such a large, dense development would totally change the character of the park that runs alongside it, now bordered by the lake and a tranquil, wooded space enjoyed by families, hikers, rowers, and birders. The Park saves a bit of Berkeley’s natural setting and provides an important bird habitat. It also, importantly, provides resiliency in the face of climate change and sea rise, which we need in the open areas close to the Bay such as that targeted by the proposed development.

If the Parks Commission is not already actively working with the Zoning Board to establish a formal resiliency zone in the flatlands of Berkeley nearest to the Bay shoreline, surely that should be done as soon as possible, to discourage future inappropriate building projects such as this from wasting city commissioners’ time.

In 2017, I recorded numbers of birds seen in the park over the summer. Above is a photo by Bill Woodcock taken then of some of them.

Preliminary data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicated the number of fatal drug overdoses hit a record high last year, reversing the progress made in 2018. In 2016, for example, more than 100 people were dying every day because of an opioid-related overdose, and over 11 million people misused prescription opioids, per Drug Rehab Services. The data released by the CDC show that within 50 states and the District of Columbia, overdose deaths are occurring in everyone at different degrees of severity. The number of Americans who died from a drug-related overdose surged to over 70,000 in 2017. However, by 2018 the number declined by 4.6%, which was the first decrease in almost 30 years. 

The progress made in 2018 was erased in 2019, and the number of overdose deaths increased by the same number, 4.6%, from 2018 to 2019. Approximately 37 states and the District of Columbia reported an increase in drug-related overdose deaths in 2019. The state of South Dakota reported the biggest increase at 54%. In 2018, more than half of the overdose deaths involved synthetic opioids such as fentanyl. The CDC also indicated that the number of overdose deaths involving cocaine and methamphetamine increased from 34.7% in 2017 to 45.4% in 2019. Fentanyl was responsible for most of these overdose deaths, which included fentanyl mixed with cocaine. 

Overall, the data suggest that 2020 could be worse because of the pandemic, government restrictions, self-isolation, stay at home orders, job loss, and financial struggle. Even data that was released by the White House was suggesting that America already saw an increase in the number of drug-related overdose deaths in 2020. If the trend continues and it seems that it is, 2020 will be the sharpest increase in annual overdose deaths since 2016. 

There are countless reasons why people choose to abuse drugs or alcohol. Unfortunately, many Americans are feeling more despair, anxiety, stress, and other issues caused by the pandemic and the on-going civil unrest. It has been a collision of two significant issues involving the stress of uncertainty with the pandemic and the uncertainty of your future, whether with work, school, or future goals. Social isolation has been devastating, and it made it more difficult for people with substance use disorders to manage their conditions, and it increased the likelihood of overdose. 

It was a domino effect because, at the beginning of the pandemic, many of the outpatient and inpatient treatment facilities had to suspend their in-person services, which limited access to care. Countless residential programs shut their doors and left addicts with nowhere to go. The year has been unbelievable, and it seems almost impossible to predict what will happen next. Behind everything, opioids continue to destroy families and rip communities apart. For example, the Shelby County Health Department in Tennessee reported 391 suspected overdoses from April 7, 2020, to May 7, 2020—58 of which were fatal. 

The Franklin County Coroner in Ohio reported the first four months of 2020 showed 50% more deaths than in the same period of 2019. Milwaukee County’s Emergency Medical Services Division in Wisconsin reported March and April 2020 displayed a 54% increase in drug overdose calls when compared to 2019. The numbers for 2020 are showing these problems are going to persist, and it will result in more funding to help treatment centers survive. However, there have been past trends with funding and support being reduced and allocated elsewhere. 

Between 2009 and 2013, some states during those fiscal years cut at least $4.35 billion from their budgets for mental and behavioral health services. As of 2020, some states are already reducing their funding for mental and behavioral health services due to economic losses because of the pandemic. The state of Oregon, for example, is preparing to cut $69 million in 2021, and other states like Colorado, Florida, New Jersey, and Utah made similar cuts. The most vulnerable in the country has been made even more vulnerable. By the end of 2020, there will be more people addicted to drugs and more people who have suffered from a fatal or non-fatal drug overdose. The need for substance abuse treatment will increase, and countless programs are funded at the state and federal level, which could make it difficult to help those in need if there is no funding. 

https://www.addicted.org/opiates-detox-treatment-programs-in-the-united-states.html 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm 

https://files.constantcontact.com/a923b952701/dbf0b5a5-f730-4a6f-a786-47097f1eea78.pdf 

Seventy-five years ago, the U.S. dropped the world’s first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima causing shock waves, radiation and heat rays resulting in the agonizing death of some 140,000 people, Three days later, the U.S. dropped a second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, killing another 74,000 people. Multiple generation birth defects followed. Secret records have shown how the U.S. gov’t and Hollywood secretly colluded to produce a sanitized version to justify the atomic bombings. 

Chief scientist, of the bomb Robert Oppenheimer, describes his dark role - “Now I have become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” quoting the Bhagavad Gita. Authors and journalists Greg Mitchell and Robert Lifton (’Atomic Cover-up and Hiroshima in America’), challenge the official narrative and argue the atomic bombing was totally unnecessary. What is conveniently omitted from the official American justification is Russia’s declaration of war on Japan on August 9th leaving no option but Japan’s imminent unconditional surrender. Following the bombings, the Truman government aided by a compliant media, went into feverish damage control to mitigate the aftermath of the bombings. All film footage and other evidence was immediately confiscated. 

Hollywood eagerly jumped into the act releasing a propaganda movie to allay public misgivings about the enormous civilian population that died. 

Reports have since emerged that the U.S. government secretly filmed the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not just from the sky, but the devastation on the ground, brought the film back to the bomb making scientists at Los Alamos, who were unable to comprehend their science would be used to commit such appalling atrocities on a civilian population. The films would be highly classified for decades. Appalled on what they had seen, several scientists produced a counter narrative documentary in the MGM movie,” The Beginning of the End”. Leading scientists who turned against the bomb were surveilled, followed, and their phones tapped, by the FBI. 

The film ‘Atomic Cover-up’, explores how both the Japanese footage and the American footage was suppressed for decades, because it just showed the catastrophic impact on the civilian population. Have we learned anything from our past mistakes? Sadly, no! 

YouGov and The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists found that more than a third of Americans would support a nuclear strike on North Korea, if North Korea tested a long-range missile capable of reaching the U.S. We still maintain a ‘first strike policy’ and given the temper tantrums of the stable genius President this could mean the death of millions of civilians. 

For more go to, http://callforsocialjustice.blogspot.com/

International comparisons of social and political services provided to a nation’s citizens is certainly not flattering to the United States. The US is the only industrial country without a medical leave policy. In many countries where employees want to take care of a seriously sick family member they are paid for some of the time taken off from work. In the United States federal employees are allowed up to 12 weeks of time off. However, the caretakers, who are mainly women, are unpaid.  

Before we can consider what options working women have as caretakers, let us first take a look at their personal and economic situation. Not least, caring for sick or elderly family members is still, according to the research, mostly women’s work. Also, many of these women who work as caretakers have to cope with exhaustion, isolation, and depression. So working as caretakers can be quite draining. 

Their very low income compared to male earnings adds to their tension. Women make up more than 2/3rds of the low wage workers. That is, they earn a poverty wage of $11 or less. And their unemployment rate exceeds 15 percent. Although women make up 46 percent of the workforce they experience 54 percent of the jobs lost.  

In addition, many of their obligations often include very difficult non-wage responsibilities -- childcare, caring for the elderly, taking care of sick relatives, cooking, and cleaning.  

In the United States, although the role of the federal government is minimal, six states, Washington D.C. and San Francisco provide some medical leave options. They offer in the aggregate medical leave service to 14 percent of the American public. On the whole, these programs are not very generous. Rhode Island, for example,allows employees only up to 4 weeks of care. San Francisco employers can limit the paid sick leave to 72 hour, which on a full time basis would be less than two full days.. In short, the paid sick leave programs do not suffer from being too generous. 

The state which offers among the best medical leave programs is California. In brief, employees can take up to eight weeks to care for a family member. Governor Newsom in June increased the number from six weeks. Also, caretakers can receive up to 70 percent of their salary. But even the best programs are inadequate. It is not just because salaries take a substantial cut. The duration of service is often shorter than needed. 

Of course states and cities should do what they can. But only the federal government can provide the resources that are needed. However, just more is never enough. The spending must be based on ethical and humane considerations, which so far have been absent.

A few concessions ought to be given those afflicted with life-changing, mind altering diseases. Many of us don't have anything gratifying to anticipate--and it would be nice if we could get a few perks in our lives. Maybe this could take the form of a part time job, one that is within our ability to perform, without it being humiliating and bottom of the barrel. Maybe this could take the form of an annual extra three hundred dollars in our measly SSI checks. Or maybe this could take the form of a trip to a museum--this field trip was once common for mentally ill people in groups but has evaporated along with the other good things we used to get. 

Contrary to the beliefs of some ascetics, some clergy, and some beginning Buddhists, gratification is a necessity. If there is no gratification, the body loses its power. When the body loses power, the mind, heart, and soul start to give out. Do monks live longer? Some do, but only the ones who find their lives gratifying. 

Those of us who aren't monks may need some material things about which to be gratified. We should not neglect this impulse. This includes the desire to have money. While this doesn't mean we should steal money or harm people, it does mean that we should seek legitimate avenues to find gratification, and not just "meaning" (in the spiritual or philosophical sense). 

Mentally ill people work. The job is that of struggling with cognitive issues, social issues (including rejection by society), body issues (such as medication side effects, greater health risks and premature aging)...additionally dealing with the work of managing our disorders to remain stabilized, and many more things, that mentally ill people face and most people do not. So, to tell us, "Get a job," shows a complete lack of understanding. This is even though many of us do in fact "get a job" and work at that job despite the prognostication of treatment practitioners and others--that we can't. 

We ought to be rewarded for our efforts, not punished for things we didn't create. Many of us aren't after anything really big. Those who are, are said to have "delusions of grandeur." A mentally ill person saying they're trying to become a famous author--"delusion of grandeur." 

I am happy to say that the field of writing is mostly a level playing field. Most editors with whom I've interacted haven't cared one way or another that I have schizophrenia. I also haven't announced it to them. Editors want good writing. 

Politics? Not a level playing field. Not when Russia handpicks a puppet President and rigs our election system to get him into office. But I'm not interested in going into politics and couldn't handle any of it. 

Kamala Harris? A fabulous choice. Maybe, if and when she is VP or later becomes President, I'll write to her and ask her to throw a bone to us mentally ill people. I would expect she will have some empathy.

Russia claims to have a coronavirus vaccine — Sputnik-V. The director of the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology in Moscow, where the vaccine is being developed, has yet to publish any results from large-scale human trials or published data from earlier trials, which typically involve three phases to check a drug’s safety, efficacy, and dosage.  

Gamaleya may have jumped dangerously ahead of critical, large-scale testing that is essential to determine if a possible covid-19 protection is safe and effective.  

As Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, opined, “I hope that the Russians have actually definitively proven that the vaccine is safe and effective. I seriously doubt that they've done that.”  

I can’t wait to hear Trump’s response to the news. Now that Russia claims to have a vaccine, will Trump announce that his good friend Putin will supply the vaccine to the U.S. just in time for the election? Remember, Trump has been touting hydroxychloroquine, which has proven an ineffective — and possibly even dangerous — treatment for Covid-19. Why then would he hesitate to champion Sputnik-V?

On August 8th, Donald Trump's 2020 presidential campaign reached a critical juncture in the struggle to stabilize the U.S. economy. Faced with an epic financial crisis, Trump had a leadership opportunity, a chance to bring Republicans and Democrats together to develop a realistic recovery plan. Instead Trump opted for a political stunt, signing four faux "executive orders." It was a "tipping point." In his 2000 book, "The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference," Malcolm Gladwell defines a "tipping point" as a moment when there's a critical change of social perspective because a key determinant has reached critical mass. For a long time, Trump's political strength has been his perceived handling of the economy. Now he's lost that. 

The Economy: In June, the U.S. officially entered a recession (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/09/the-us-is-officially-in-a-recession-will-it-become-a-depression.html). In the first quarter the real GDP decreased by 5 percent and in the second quarter it decreased by a whopping 32.9 percent -- the worst plunge ever recorded. 

The current unemployment rate is 12.1 percent but that doesn't count Americans who have given up looking for work. To get back to where we were before the pandemic, the U.S. economy has to add 30 million jobs. 

The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/13/recession-is-over-rich-working-class-is-far-recovered/?) detailed a new labor study that says the U.S. is in the midst of a "K-shaped" recovery: "As much of the economy has moved to work-from-home mode, the shift has mainly benefited college-educated employees who do most of their work on computers." Workers whose wages are over $32/hour have seen jobs increase. All other workers have seen employment decrease: "Employment is still 20 percent below pre-pandemic levels for workers earning under $14 an hour, and 16 percent down for those making $14 to $20 an hour." 

Donald Trump doesn't understand this. He does not have a plan to deal with this recession. The latest Quinnipiac pollindicates that only 44% of people approve of the way Trump is handling the U.S. economy. To date, it's his lowest rating -- on this parameter. 

The Democratic Stimulus Response: To understand where we are now, it's useful to reconstruct how we got to this point. On May 15th, the Democratically-controlled House of Representatives passed HR 6800, the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions or "Heroes" Act. This includes:
1. $1.13 trillion of emergency supplemental appropriations to federal agencies, as well as economic assistance to governments at the state, local, tribal and territorial levels.
2. $485 billion in safety net spending, including the expansion of unemployment benefits, increased Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, increased funding for utilities payments and job training for low-income individuals, and a 25% increase in aid to disabled veterans.
3. $435 billion for additional rebates, which would include an additional $1200 stimulus check per individual.
4. $382 billion for health care, which would include reimbursing health care providers for lost revenue, covering the COBRA premium costs for employees laid off between March 2020 and January 2021, increasing funding for testing and contact tracing, eliminating cost-sharing for coronavirus treatment, and increasing funding for health agencies and centers.
5. $290 billion to support small businesses and employee retention, with modifications to the Paycheck Protection Program. This would expand employee retention credit, provide credits for employer expenses, extend and expand paid leave (such as paid sick days, family and medical leave), and provide a 90% income credit for self-employed individuals.
6. $290 billion to reduce income taxes.
7. $191 billion for student loan relief and funding for higher education.
8. $202 billion for housing-related costs and expenses, including the establishment of a emergency rental assistance fund and a homeowner's assistance fund. Some eviction and foreclosure moratoriums would be expanded as well, being extended for up to another year and expanding the moratorium to cover all renters and homeowners rather than specific cases as previously done in the CARES Act.
9. $190 billion for hazard pay for essential workers.
10. $32 billion for communication systems (such as the U.S. Postal Service), $48 billion for pensions and retirement relief, $31 billion for agricultural spending, and $25 billion for limited business loss deductions. 

The HEROES act allocated $3.4 trillion for relief from the pain caused by the pandemic. The bill wasn't perfect, but it provided a good starting point for discussions with Republican legislators. 

The May Republican Response: After the HEROES bill passed the House, President Trump and Senate Majority Leader McConnell declared it "dead on arrival" at the Senate. Republicans proposed a "pause" before they considered an additional stimulus package: Sen. McConnell remarked, “I don’t think we have yet felt the urgency of acting immediately,” and a White House spokesmen noted the administration had “a little bit of a luxury to watch and see” before further action on the economy and public health. 

At the time -- late May -- the official Republican position was that the pandemic was winding down and the economy was ramping up. (During the next 60 days, Donald Trump played golf 15 times.) 

The July Republican Response: In mid-July Republican Senators finally began to work on a response to the HEROES act. Even though they started with a modest proposal they were divided. (The initial Republican proposal included a second round of stimulus checks, a reduction to the federal jobless benefits, funding for schools and universities to reopen, more money for the Paycheck Protection Program and liability protections for businesses, hospitals and education institutions operating amid the pandemic.) Unfortunately, roughly half the Republican Senators had become deficit hawks and resisted any further stimulus action because they bemoaned increasing the Federal deficit. 

McConnell and company punted to the White House. 

The Trump Administration response: On July 20th, the Trump Administration began negotiating with Democrats on a response to the HEROES bill. Trump assigned Treasury Secretary Mnuchin and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. (Senate Majority leader McConnell was not involved because his caucus is split; Donald Trump was not involved because he does not talk to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- Trump last spoke to Pelosi on October 16, 2019.) 

The negotiations went on for two weeks but did not result in a compromise bill. There are many differences between the Democratic and Republican positions but the foremost two are the size of the unemployment benefits and economic assistance to governments at the state, local, tribal and territorial levels. Republicans favor lower benefits because they believe that the current level of benefit, $600 per week, "disincentivizes" workers from returning to their jobs -- that is, the Trump position is that workers are staying home because they are lazy rather than the obvious: either it's not safe for them to return to work or their jobs have disappeared. Trump: "There was difficulty with the $600 number because it really was a disincentive." (Salon reports that well-connected conservative groups, like the Chamber of Commerce and Club for Growth, lobbied to slash the unemployment benefit (https://www.salon.com/2020/08/07/right-wing-groups-took-millions-in-pandemic-aid--and-spent-millions-lobbying-for-unemployment-cuts/ )). 

Republicans do not want to provide economic assistance to state and local governments because they consider them to be poorly run. (Trump: "What [Democrats] really want is bailout money for states that are run by Democrat governors and mayors, and that have been run very badly for many, many years -- and many decades, in fact.") 

Trump's "Executive Orders": On August 8th, Donald Trump responded to the HEROES bill with four sham "executive orders."
1. Unemployment benefits: Trump reduced benefits to $300 a week for a brief period. (The $44 billion in new funds—whose reapportionment is constitutionally murky, at best—will run out in around a month.)
2. Student Loan Payments:Trump deferred these payments until the end of the year,
3. Eviction Ban. This order doesn't actually ban evictions; Trump settled for asking officials to “consider” whether a ban is even needed. The executive order provides no financial support for the 30-40 million renters currently at risk of eviction. Instead, it instructs administration officials to see if they can locate additional money to help out.
4. In addition: Trump delayed collecting payroll taxes (which fund Social Security and Medicare) from workers making under $104,000 per year.Although some workers would see their paychecks temporarily increase under the second executive order, they'll still owe that extra money back at the end of the year barring congressional action. 

Feedback: Republican Senator Ben Sasse blasted Trump's action, “The pen-and-phone theory of executive lawmaking is unconstitutional slop. President Obama did not have the power to unilaterally rewrite immigration law with DACA, and President Trump does not have the power to unilaterally rewrite the payroll tax law.” [Emphasis added] 

Summary: The website 538 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-economists-fear-will-happen-without-more-unemployment-aid/) predicts dire consequences if $600 in federal unemployment aid isn't renewed by September 1st: "decline in personal consumption, increased food insecurity, a wave of evictions, and more job losses." 

We are at a tipping point . Trump did not respond to the HEROES bill; he tried to stage a photo op and failed. Republican legislators don't have a response to the HEROES act. America needs another stimulus bill and the Republicans can't get their act together. 

On Trump's watch, the recession will turn into a depression. Americans won't forget.