Hey Democrats- Stop Whining And Step Up

Note To Democrats - Stop Whining

by Bill Gouveia for the Sun Chronicle
One thing that stands out as a major difference between Democrats and Republicans at the national level is this: Democrats whine more.

I believe that whining and pettiness cost the party the presidency in 2016, and there is an excellent chance it will pay that same price in 2020. Quite frankly, Republicans are more focused on the ultimate prize than their opponents. When Republicans assemble a firing squad, they face the target. When Democrats assemble one, they form a circle.

Nearly 90 percent of registered Republicans support President Trump. If you think that’s because they agree with his ideology (he literally does not have any) or his adherence to party principles (he is loyal only to those useful to him), you are kidding yourself.

After a very nasty and contentious primary in 2016, Republicans rallied around Trump for two distinct reasons. First, they saw a strong personality who had harnessed the public anger and could ride it into the White House. Second — and perhaps most importantly — they absolutely could not stomach the thought of Hillary Clinton as president.

Republicans overwhelmingly support Trump because he wins and gives them control of the system. Many know and understand he is a pompous, arrogant, narcissistic egomaniac. But he is THEIR pompous, arrogant, narcissistic egomaniac. And they would rather be in control of the system with him, than on the outside looking in without him.

Democrats have been unwilling or unable to reach that realization.

You could see that in 2016 when Bernie Sanders supporters stayed home and sulked rather than support the person they thought “cheated” their candidate. They took to what they saw as the moral high ground, refusing to support an imperfect candidate who did not embody many positions they felt were important. In essence — they took their ball and stayed home, whining about the unfairness of it all.

And the reward for their efforts (or lack of same) was — Donald Trump. Congratulations, folks. You must be so proud of what you have accomplished.

If Democrats nationally truly want to win rather than whine, they need to take a page from the Republican playbook. They have to accept the candidate their party has chosen, forgive him where he differs from themselves, and focus on the unacceptable and unforgivable alternative: Four more years of Donald Trump, who would then be unrestrained by the need to seek re-election.

Those Democrats disappointed Joe Biden will be the Democratic nominee have to suck it up and get involved if they care about their country and their party. To those folks, I say — think of it this way:

If Joe Biden is three times worse than whoever you wanted to be the nominee — he’s still 100 times better for your national objectives than Donald Trump. Now go back and read that last sentence again.

It’s okay to not be totally enamored with your nominee. I believe many Republicans think Trump is a nut. But they need him to accomplish their goals. They get past their individual preferences, and advance their cause with the tools they are given.

If Democrats are smart, they will quit whining and do the same.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print
• Save

There Is Nothing Worse Than The Problem, Mr. President

The Cure Is Not Worse Than The Problem

by Bill Gouveia for the Sun Chronicle

“We can’t have the cure be worse than the problem.”

— President Donald Trump, March 22

Maybe President Trump doesn’t understand, but the “problem” is people are dying. The numbers are rapidly rising. In Italy, people over 60 are sometimes denied ventilators because there aren’t enough and they are being “prioritized.” Is the “cure” worse than that, Mr. President?

I’m concerned about the economy, my job and my employees. I’m terrified at the thought of not being able to pay my bills. I hate not going out, find social distancing difficult, and can barely stand not being able to hug my grandchildren.

But I like being alive. I want my spouse, my family, my coworkers and my friends to be alive also. And I do not want to seriously and knowingly be a party to spreading a new disease that can kill people — all for purely economic reasons. I don’t want to intentionally increase the chance of people dying in order to protect my 401K.

In this country we ask people to go to war, risk their lives, leave their families and suffer severe hardships. They do it, and thank goodness they are willing to make those sacrifices for us. Same with our courageous doctors, nurses and health workers. But the rest of us can’t survive what we hope and pray will be a relatively short-term period of severe sacrifice to save the lives of Americans and others across the world?

There is no doubt what is going on can and will have severe economic impact which will affect millions of us in a negative way. No one should make light of that.

But the mere suggestion that what is being done to keep people alive is even remotely “worse than the problem” is idiotic. A statement made out of immense selfishness, immaturity, a lack of empathy and common sense and failure to understand the responsibilities of leadership.

We can recover from economic devastation. America has shown before it can handle terrible financial woes, although at great cost to many. It is heartbreaking to watch everything you have worked so hard for be threatened in this manner.

But it is far, far worse to watch your parents die while waiting for a respirator. It is worse to infect thousands around you without even knowing it, and having that contact lead to more deaths. Far worse to further risk the lives of healthcare professionals

The economic impact pales in comparison to the cost of human lives. Listen to the medical experts. Ignore the selfish and stupid leaders who don’t listen to them. And rally around leaders who are doing the right thing.

Stay at home when ordered. Deal with a toilet paper shortage. Survive the extreme anxiety that comes with having your financial future in jeopardy.

The cure isn’t worse, President Trump. You — and people who can’t stomach the inconvenience of sacrifice — are what is worse. Your rhetoric and recklessness are damaging our country and putting lives at risk. This isn’t politics, this is people’s very lives. Can’t you understand that?

Be more worried about doing your job than running for it. Please.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Coronavirus Hit Local Government Also

Coronavirus And Local Government

by Bill Gouveia for the Sun Chronicle

As the effects of the coronavirus continue to be felt across the world, it’s time to start thinking how it will affect our lives here in the Sun Chronicle area.

I’m not talking about the testing aspect, or the ability to get supplies, or even the economic impact on local businesses and families — as serious as those things may be.

For just a minute, I’d like to focus on an under-appreciated yet very dangerous aspect of the coronavirus pandemic: The effects it can have on local government, the officials who serve in and work for it, and the people who participate in it.

We all have to be cognizant of the danger to first responders as this contagious virus works its way around the planet. Public safety personnel are the people who come when we call, who often put their lives on the line for the rest of us. It’s one thing to ask them to battle what they can see, but now more than ever they also have to beware of things they can’t.

But the danger doesn’t stop with them, it gets spread to the people working back in the stations. The dispatchers, the mechanics, the clerks and all the other support staff who allow the police and firefighters and emergency personnel to do their job. They become exposed, and they bring that danger back home to their own families and friends.

In fact, the people who work in your city and town halls face tremendous exposure just for doing their jobs. They interact with a wide swath of the public, and as a result can become infected.

For just a second, think of those who chair or serve on local boards and committees.

They hold public hearings on many matters, interacting with crowds and gathering facts and opinions. Sitting in meeting rooms where others have been, at the same tables and chairs. Exchanging papers and exhibits and microphones.

And for those communities with open town meetings — how will those be handled in light of the coronavirus pandemic? If you think about it, that’s quite an opportunity for the virus to spread.

You gather a few hundred people (depending on a lot of conditions) in a school gymnasium or auditorium, in relatively close quarters. You have many of them sharing microphones and standing in line to get to them. You have people checking in attendees as they enter. You have tellers tallying ballots, or mingling among the people as they count those who stand to vote.

Already there has been legislation drafted to extend the time frame during which town meetings can legally be held, in an attempt to perhaps outwait the virus or let mitigation and containment efforts progress. Not to exaggerate the threat, but how much risk is acceptable for ordinary citizens to assume in order to participate in their local government?

Municipal government may rate fairly low on the priority list of things the average citizen worries about given the pandemic today. But let’s remember those governments are made up of people who work to represent us all. They are our friends, our neighbors our family.

They are us.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Sharing My Stories With My Grandkids

Stories Help Us Share A Part Of Ourselves

by Bill Gouveia

(This column appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Monday, February 24, 2020.)

So let me tell you a story about — well, stories.

About a decade ago, I was trying to put my first grandchild (did I mention his name is William?) to bed during a weekend trip to New Hampshire.

My wife had run out to the store, and Will was having trouble getting to sleep. So primarily out of desperation, I asked him if he wanted me to tell him a story.

He happily agreed, and at that point it occurred to me that I now needed an actual story to tell. The first one that popped into my mind was “The Three Little Pigs.”

A few minutes in, I realized I didn’t remember a lot of it. But with a rapt audience hanging on every word, I couldn’t stop. So I made it up as I went along.

That’s why in my version, the first little pig had a house made of grass, and the second a house of newspapers. When my wife returned and listened, her muffled laughter was quite a distraction.

But a few weeks later, Will asked for the story again. When the details differed somewhat, he would correct me. That taught me something important.

A story told can be more lasting and memorable than a story read.

Since then I have told stories to all my five grandkids. Some they quickly forgot, others they ask for time and time again. Granted, the now 11-year-old eldest is pretty much done with them. But most of the others still request some of their favorites.

Granddaughters Avery and Addison, along with grandson Sam, are particularly taken with the tale of “Harold The Left-Handed Dog Catcher.”

This is a story I made up one night when one of them insisted on a “new” saga. For those who missed it, this involves a man named Harold who loved dogs and worked for a small town that couldn’t afford a good truck. So he drove one with no door on the driver’s side and no brakes, having to learn to rescue dogs with his left hand and put them safely in the truck as he drove by.

Grandson Tommy, the youngest, is obsessed with the story of “Grandpa’s Giant Shoe.”

I made that one up when his impatient brother Sam had to spend some time with me in the car. That centered — surprisingly enough — around a giant shoe created by Grandpa’s Fairy Shoe Godmother when I was just a lad.

Other stories are “The Yellow Tomato,” “Stinky The Garbage Truck,” and “Bosco Bisquik” — the latter being the adventures of a talking pancake.

The look on their adorable faces when asking me to relate one of them is worth its weight in gold.

My wife says I should write them down, but to me that defeats the purpose.

They remember these stories better than I do.

And it is my fervent hope they will continue to remember them, and maybe tell them someday to their kids and grandkids.

The trick to connecting with kids is to share something of yourself with them.

I’m happy to have discovered that, even if it involves a left-handed dog catcher.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print
• Save

Mayor's Removal Action Is Overreaction - Again

MAYOR'S ACTION ILL-ADVISED IN ATTLEBOROby Bill Gouveia for the Sun Chronicle
“Board and commission members are appointed by the mayor to help support the mayor’s agenda.” – Attleboro Mayor Paul Heroux.

If you agree with that statement, you would see nothing wrong with Mayor Heroux’s decision to remove veteran traffic study commission Chairperson Joe Caponigro, despite reappointing him to a three-year term just nine months ago.

But if you believe the main responsibility of appointed city officials is to serve the citizens first by doing their particular job honestly and openly, then you might find Heroux’s approach a bit self-centered and political. Maybe it’s just a matter of perspective.

Heroux recently demanded Caponigro resign or be removed. Caponigro can contest that removal via a hearing before the city council, but the sole judge is the mayor. So in effect, Heroux is firing the official who has served for more than a decade.

The mayor won’t specifically cite reasons other than referring to “ideological differences” and a failure to support his agenda. When pressed, Heroux said he had no obligation to reveal the details.

This raises questions. Are appointed city officials simply tools designed to implement and support their leader’s policies and plans? Or should they respectfully voice to the people their honestly held views regardless of the mayor’s agenda?

No one denies Mayor Heroux has the legal right to remove an official for virtually any reason. But is that the right way to run a city government?

Heroux says he is merely carrying out the expressed will of the voters. He noted he was re-elected in what this columnist called a mandate. He says that means officials should be working on advancing his goals and promoting his plans for the city. He argues those who differ should back him or resign and run for office.

He likens it to the administration of a president or a governor. He says President Trump or Governor Baker would never put up with officials acting in such a manner.

But Mayor Heroux is not president or governor. Local government is not like running a country or state. The role of citizen volunteers at the local level is largely what makes local government so much more efficient and representative than the giant behemoths in Washington and Boston.

Removing someone from office is far different than appointing or reappointing them. Removal is a punitive action that should only be taken for cause. It should not be a political tool at the local level, used to kick out unpaid volunteers because they aren’t “loyal” enough to the agenda of those in power.

It is one thing to appoint someone who will help advance your cause. It is yet another to remove someone mid-term just because you believe they have not demonstrated sufficient loyalty to your agenda.

Good volunteer public servants are hard enough to find without demanding they put loyalty to the administration over loyalty to their neighbors and their city.

This action by the mayor is ill-advised. Rather than harping on “my administration” and “my agenda,” he would be wise to remember that for Attleboro citizens, this is “our government” and “my city.”

And that is more important than any administration’s agenda.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print
• Save

Town Meeting Passes Rules Most Did Not See

Know What You Are Voting on...

by Bill Gouveia

(This column appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Monday, October 28, 2019)

Even longtime defenders of the venerable town meeting system of government have to be shaking their collective heads after what happen at the Norton Town Meeting last week. In fact, had I not been there (I’m the town moderator — full disclosure) I might not have believed it myself.

The cemetery commissioners wanted town meeting to accept a newly-compiled list of cemetery regulations. The motion called on the meeting to accept the rules “as filed with the town clerk’s office.” Town counsel said this was acceptable.

There were just a couple of problems. The rules had apparently been filed with the clerk’s office hours just hours before the town meeting, thus making it nearly impossible for most voters to review them. Additionally, neither the commissioners nor anyone else had enough copies of the regulations to give people attending the meeting. In essence, voters were being asked to accept rules 95% of them had never seen.

And yet despite that, by a vote of 70-67, those in attendance did exactly that. They accepted rules they had not seen and that had not been detailed. Kind of reminded me of the old saying about “you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.”

Now, this was not exactly high-level stuff. It was about adopting a list of cemetery rules. Maybe people just trusted officials who told them the rules were just “standard stuff taken from other towns.” It’s not like it was changing a zoning bylaw or voting to build a new school.

But think about it. Norton’s legislative governing body voted to formally adopt a list of rules they never saw and knew nothing about. That’s pretty amazing.

Imagine what would happen in a town like North Attleboro, which recently changed from a town meeting to a town council format, if this had happened there. Suppose a proposal came before the council to adopt a new list of cemetery rules. The councilors were told there was no actual copy of the rules available for them to review, but not to worry — a copy was filed with the town clerk’s office hours earlier, and they can view them later.

And the councilors said sure — and went ahead and voted them sight unseen. Can you imagine the public response that would generate? The charges of failing to do their duty, or even read the regulations before adopting them?

Well, that is what Norton’s town meeting did Monday night.

To be sure, folks at that meeting had the absolute right to do what they did. It is perfectly legal. They violated no rules. Town meeting is free to do as it pleases, whether it makes sense or not.

But this situation clearly highlights one of the obvious flaws in using a town meeting form of legislative government in a municipality the size of Norton.

This time it was just a list of cemetery rules. Who knows what might get through without explanation next time? Is it really too much to insist legislators — even volunteer “citizen legislators” — actually look at what they are voting on?

If local governments start voting on things without reading them, pretty soon we’ll have to start calling them “Congress.”

Bill Gouveia is a longtime columnist and local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Why The Debate Is Worth The Effort - Sometimes

Why The Debate Is Worth The Effort

by Bill Gouveia 

This column appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Monday, October 21, 2019

“Why do you talk to and argue with that person? It’s a waste of time, they’re never going to understand or change.”

If you have ever posted an opinion on social media, or gotten involved in a conversation concerning government and politics on any level, or perhaps occasionally penned a newspaper column — then you have probably been asked this question before. I know I have, and have probably been the subject of it also.

To be sure, there is some merit in ignoring certain folks. In today’s world where bipartisanship and compromise are seen as weaknesses instead of strengths, it can be extremely frustrating to try and have a conversation about goings on at the local, state or national level without being attacked by those who believe their opinion supersedes the facts. Or those refusing to believe anything that does not reaffirm their own beliefs.

As an opinion columnist, you get used to having your words twisted and misrepresented by certain letter-writers promoting their own political agendas, as happened this past week after I wrote a piece criticizing the president. It’s an indication of how unimportant truth and accuracy is to some.

But despite this, I am not one who subscribes to the “just ignore them” theory of political discourse. It certainly is easier to do that, saves a great deal of time, and probably reduces your blood pressure by more than a few points.

But when we stop talking to those with opinions opposite our own, we make this country’s problems worse rather than better. Doing so surrenders the hard-earned right to engage in serious debate, which is the main principle upon which this democratic nation was founded.

That does not mean you waste valuable time engaging with “professional againsters” who merely want to get you to expend energy arguing for purposes of distraction. Debating “Facebook trolls” or similar types is a waste of time (see: Russian bots, etc.).

I still see great value in debating those I know will never agree with me or change their minds. Truth is, some of these people are my friends. I care about them and what they think, even though I totally disagree. They frustrate me, as I no doubt frustrate them, and I sometimes wonder how they can possibly defend taking the positions they take and spouting the stuff they do.

But if I block them, or ignore them, or unfriend them — what have I accomplished other than making my life a bit simpler? How have I helped advance the public discourse?

Those who disagree with this line of thinking (including many of my family and close friends) are adamant in their opinion that responding to obviously provocative and wrong opinions merely gives credence to both the arguments and the makers. I understand this.

But intelligent, honest debate is a casualty of our current political wars. It won’t come back if we all just stop talking.

So I keep responding to and debating even those I know are sometimes just baiting me. But perhaps I might convince others observing the discussion. Or maybe one of us will convince the other.

But don’t hold your breath on that last one.

Bill Gouveia is a longtime columnist and local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print
• Save

Trump Deserves Impeachment

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

This column appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Monday, October 14, 2019

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy: “We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.”

President Trump: “I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.”

That discussion is directly from the transcript of a call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy on July 25, 2019 and released by the White House. A transcript Trump calls “word for word,” a call he says was “perfect.”

Trump goes on to ask Zeleskyy as a “favor” to conduct an investigation into his top Democratic presidential opponent Joe Biden, mentioning him by name and stating “…whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.”

To review, the president of the United States flat-out asked a foreign nation to investigate his political opponent as a favor immediately after that nation told him they wanted to buy more weapons from the US. He asked the leader of that nation to enlist the help of the top US law enforcement official in doing so. All shortly after Trump had unexpectedly cut off aid to this same country, and then under pressure restored it.

As a result of this behavior, and a lot more, the president is on the verge of being impeached by the House of Representatives.

Reasonable people can disagree on whether or not this particular event with Ukraine rises to the level where impeachment is proper. But only the most partisan of political hacks can argue with a straight face that what Trump did was not wrong and did not compromise the integrity of both the presidency and the nation.

If you still support the president and his policies after this, that’s one thing. If you believe he is merely a victim and did nothing wrong – you are either in denial and woefully uninformed, or just dishonest.

And if you are employing the “but look at what they did over there” defense where you point at others because you can’t defend the president’s behavior — like Trump himself is doing — then you need to grow up. The president of the Unites States has to be responsible for his or her own actions.

Since releasing the transcript, Trump has flat-out lied about what it says. He has changed his story on why he said it several times. He has added China to the mix, claiming they should also investigate Biden.

I have been an opponent of impeaching of Trump. He will never be convicted in the senate, and it always seemed a useless exercise. I wanted to wait for the election.

But this has become a bridge too far. If you are willing to accept his disgusting actions and lies and self-serving ways for short-term economic gain — then you simply don’t care about the integrity of the nation any more than he does.

Donald Trump is a dishonest liar and unfit to be president of the United States. Whether he is removed or not, he deserves impeachment. Our nation needs to stand up to his treachery.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official. He can be emailed at billsinsidelook@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.