Consumer Electronics and Chicken Feet- A Cautionary Tale

Of all the advancements in consumer electronics, the progress in televisions has been one of the most revolutionary. Flat screen TVs have improved at an amazing pace, and the prices have fallen dramatically. Now with the advent of the 4K UHD sets, the “old tech” 1080P sets can be bought for a bargain. I guess that is to be expected with anything in consumer electronics. Almost anything that is bought is obsolete as soon as one leaves the store.

TVs have always had a base or stand located in the middle of the set. No matter the size of the screen, one could set it on most tables already around the house with the pedestal base. 

Which brings me to the latest TVs and chicken feet. If you have bought a new TV recently, you may have encountered them. They have nothing to do with the electronics- they are the result of a design decision that did away with the center pedestal. Now, when you try to place your new set on almost any size table, those chicken feet that are positioned almost to the ends of the set fall off the sides.

I spoke to the manufacturer of a popular brand of 48” TV that I had just purchased. His response? Go to ShopJimmy- they’ll fix you up with an aftermarket universal pedestal base! I did- they sell them for $69. At least they offer free shipping.

D. Norman

The Celebrity as Politician

The political landscape since the late sixties has been notable for the fascination with celebrities and the elevation of some of them into political office. California has seen the elections of George Murphy, Ronald Reagan, Sonny Bono, Clint Eastwood, and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Minnesota turned Jesse Ventura and Al Franken into politicians, as did Tennessee with Fred Thompson and Iowa with Fred Grandy.

Name recognition is certainly a factor, and seems to outweigh other qualifications that would ordinarily expect to be valued. With celebrity comes wealth, which in recent years has been a paramount consideration in campaigns. Celebrities also attract wealth, as donors are eager to be associated with them.

Darrell West, in his 2003 book Celebrity Politics, foretold the current presidential race:

“Celebrities furthermore are advantaged because of the weakness of political parties. It used to be that those who wanted to seek elective office had to serve lengthy apprenticeships in lower positions before they could run for governor, Congress, or the Senate.

“Now, candidates from outside the world of politics who are famous, adept at fundraising, and able to attract media coverage can leap-frog career politicians and run for coveted office. They do not have to wait years serving on city councils or in state legislatures to get a chance to be governor.

“Finally, celebrities make good candidates because of the ‘white knight’ phenomenon. In an era of extensive citizen cynicism about conventional politicians, voters often see celebrities as white knights from outside the political process who are too rich to be bought and thereby deserving of trust from the electorate. This gives celebrities a kind of credibility that normal politicians do not have.”

Voters are entitled to wonder whether a celebrity from outside of politics will be effective. West goes on:

“The ultimate question of Hollywood celebrities is what kind of office-holder will they be. Do celebrities make for effective Governors, Senators, and Representatives? What challenges face them when they win a major office? What determines how successful they will be in the governing process?

“In looking at past cases, celebrities have a mixed record in terms of office performance. Governor Jesse Ventura came to office in Minnesota amid high hopes. He had surprised the experts and become one of the few Independents to win executive office in the United States. By assembling an unusual coalition of new voters, young people, and those who had just moved to the state, he was able to beat an established Democrat and Republican.

“However, as his governorship unfolded, Ventura alienated the state press, made a series of outrageous statements that aggravated the public, and had difficulties working with the Minnesota legislature. Before long, his popularity had dropped and Ventura was not considered a very effective governor.”

Ronald Reagan has become a mythical figure in American politics. Numerous examinations of his time in office have surfaced, which serve to remind us of easily (or readily) forgotten facts about his performance. I found this recent article in Salon to be especially revealing. An excerpt:

“In all fields of public affairs—from diplomacy to the economy—the president stunned Washington policymakers by how little basic information he commanded. His mind, said the well-disposed Peggy Noonan, was ‘barren terrain’. Speaking of one far-ranging discussion on the MX missile, the Indiana congressman Lee Hamilton, an authority on national defense, reported, ‘Reagan’s only contribution throughout the entire hour and a half was to interrupt somewhere at midpoint to tell us he’d watched a movie the night before, and he gave us the plot from War Games’. The president ‘cut ribbons and made speeches. He did these things beautifully’, Congressman Jim Wright of Texas acknowledged. ‘But he never knew frijoles from pralines about the substantive facts of issues.’”

Many current politicians, serving now or running for office, have identified with him and utilize a revisionist version of his presidency, adding to and burnishing his myth. At the Yale University Commencement in 1962, John F. Kennedy said this about myths:

“For the great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

Donald Trump, with his celebrity and name recognition, has been able to maintain his front-runner status. He has attracted many with his “white knight” status, being able to say that he is not a politician and isn’t interested in being politically correct. But interestingly, he is now beginning to pivot, taking the advice of political pros. He is toning down his rhetoric. By necessity he is becoming the politician he said he would never be. Will that be a turn-off to his celebrity-obsessed supporters? Time will tell.

D. Norman

The Buenavue- a Casino in Ione’s Future?

Of all the development projects being discussed for Amador County, the proposed Buenavue casino in Ione on Coal Mine Road is one that has created a good deal of confusion and controversy. Issues of Native American lineage, corporate involvement, citizen activism, and numerous court challenges have been in the mix for a long time.

When first made aware of a new casino there some years ago, I heard it characterized as a bogus effort by one or a few people who weren’t really Indians trying to build on land that wasn’t even a reservation. I confess to have held on to that impression ever since. Perhaps I had also read about it back in 2002 in an article in the New York Times. I have no interest in going to casinos, but appreciate that the Jackson Rancheria employs many people in the county, and laud them for their tremendous help during the Butte fire last year. I write this to hopefully provide needed clarity.

A recent piece in the Ledger Dispatch contained much information that attempted to explain all of the issues and the players involved. The subject is so complex that, in my opinion, the attempt ended up creating more questions. And in trying to sort it all out, the names of the various tribes got mixed up. Actually, the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-wuk Indians is trying to develop the Buenavue casino, not the Mewuks. The Jackson Rancheria Band of Miwok Indians operate the Jackson Rancheria, not the Me-wuks.

The article seemed to give the impression that Amador County will ultimately prevail in its effort to block the casino, calling the March 16 summary judgement from a U.S. District Court “a temporary setback”. Central to the effort has to do with whether the site involved is in reality “Indian land”.

What is generally understood about the proposed Buenavue casino site and its tribe:

“The Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California is a federally recognized tribe of Miwok in Amador County, California. The Buena Vista Miwok are Sierra Miwok, an indigenous people of California. The tribe conducts business from Sacramento, California. The tribe is led by an elected council. The current tribal chairperson is Rhonda Morningstar Pope.

“The Buena Vista Rancheria is [a] 67 acres (0.27 km2) parcel of land, located just outside the census-designated place of Buena Vista. The land once belonged to the Oliver family and was purchased by the federal government to establish an Indian rancheria in 1927.

“The rancheria was unilaterally terminated by Congress, along with 42 other rancherias, under the California Rancheria Act of 1958. In 1970, President Richard Nixon declared the Rancheria Act a failure. The Buena Vista Rancheria tribe joined 16 other native California tribes in a class action lawsuit, Hardwick v. United States to restore their sovereignty, and in 1987, the tribes won their lawsuit. On 22 December 1983 the Buena Vista Rancheria tribe ratified its constitution. The tribe has been federally recognized since 1985.”

Regarding the issue of recognition:

“In 1987, the Buena Vista Tribe entered into another Hardwick Stipulation for Entry of Judgment, specific to the Tribe and Amador County. The 1987 Buena Vista Stipulation provides in pertinent part that:

The original boundaries of the plaintiff Rancheria … are hereby restored, and all land within these restored boundaries of the [Buena Vista Rancheria] is declared to be ‘Indian Country.’

“The plaintiff Rancheria shall be treated by the County of Amador and the United States of America, as any other federally recognized Indian Reservation, and all the laws of the United States that pertain to federally recognized Indian Tribes shall apply to plaintiff Rancheria and the Plaintiffs.

“In a letter dated June 30, 2005, the National Indian Gaming Commission wrote:

‘Hardwick, Stipulation and Order, Dec. 22, 1983. The effect of the judgments was that all lands within the Rancheria boundaries, as they existed immediately prior to the illegal termination, were declared to be “Indian Country” as defined by 18 U.S.C. 1151. Amador County expressly agreed to treat the Rancheria like any other federally recognized Indian reservation. Thus, the Rancheria consists entirely of the original reservation land base of approximately 67.5 acres.”

From the above, it seems clear that the issue of whether the site of the proposed casino is Indian land has been long settled. Perhaps that explains why the summary judgement was handed down last month. Why go through the time and expense of a trial when the outcome is obvious?

Anyone interested in reading more about the history of the Me-wuks in Upusani (Buena Vista) can refer to this and this. I found that this collection of letters from Mr. Glen Villa Jr. of Ione, a casino opponent of Miwok ancestry with cultural and historical ties to the Buena Vista Rancheria, to be very interesting. Also, this from Stand Up California, a casino opponent who incorrectly call the tribe Mewuks.

From all appearances, the Buenavue is more than a idea, with Warner Hospitality actively involved. In the early 2000s, the Cascade Entertainment Group, with their initial $10 million investment in the “Flying Cloud” casino, seemed to be in the driver’s seat. But they had relied on the tribal status of Donnamarie Potts, which proved to be a mistake. Lineage issues have since been sorted out, along with a more complete picture of the history of the tribe. Attempts by opponents such as Friends of Amador County to define differently the lineage have failed. And now the county’s attempt has been dismissed with the summary judgement.

The prospect of another casino in Amador county is controversial, and sparks emotions. All across the state and country, Indian casinos, like them or not, have become a fact of life. There are currently 486 gaming operations connected to 486 tribes in 28 states. As in most other business endeavors, market saturation will undoubtedly become a factor. Apparently we are not there yet, as evidenced by Warner Hospitality’s interest.

D. Norman

Facts, and the 2016 Presidential Race

As of this writing, it appears that the GOP is prepared for the possibility that Donald Trump may not be their nominee for president. His campaign is not viewed very favorably by “establishment” conservatives- perhaps they are worried about how he is viewed by the rest of the world.

Whether or not he is the eventual nominee, what many find particularly troublesome is Trump’s disdain for facts, and his being able to get away with it. What has happened to the ability of the press and fact checkers take him to task? 

The best take on it that I have seen so far calls this Trump phenomenon “gaslighting”:

“It’s a technique abusers use: through manipulation and outright lies, they so disorient their target that the person (or in this case, the country) is left defenseless.

“Political journalists have been repeatedly criticized for not confronting Trump on his lies. But of course they have. For political journalists, a politician caught in a lie is chum in the water. But when they confront Trump with his lies, he doesn’t behave like most people. He doesn’t blush or equivocate or argue. He steamrolls. He bullies. He lies some more. And the journalists don’t know what to do. They brought facts to an ego fight, and found them to be worthless weapons.”

In what turned out to be a prescient warning in an article published in the Washington Post last November, Chris Cillizza wrote:

“The obsession with disqualifying the ability of the media to referee what is factual and what is not is a terrible thing for the future of our democracy. Of course the media makes mistakes. Of course there are bad apples among us. Of course we are human.

“And, yes, the fracturing of the mainstream media has made it easier than ever to get your own set of ‘facts' and your own ‘evidence’ that supports those ‘facts’. You can now live in a world in which only your opinions, often loosely based on factual evidence, are not only never challenged but are affirmed. But just because you can do it doesn't mean you should do it. Challenging your assumptions, digging beyond surface claims, educating yourself on what's real and what's not are the basic tasks of being a citizen of this country and of the world. Refusing to do that allows this fact-less environment not only to continue to exist but to prosper.

“No matter your political affiliation or how negatively you view the media, think of Trump and this campaign more generally as the leading edge of what politics could look like if fact checkers and the media suddenly disappeared. Not too pretty, right?

“That is the path we are headed down as of today. Campaigns and candidates, seeing the success Trump has had, will imitate his cavalier attitude toward an established and agreed-upon set of facts. And, before long, the media will be helpless to fight for facts because the efforts to discredit what we do have been so sustained and successful.

“That's not the future I want to be part of — as a journalist or as a citizen.”

Amen to that.

D. Norman

The Bottle Bill in Amador County

The California Redemption Value (CRV) deposit has been a part of life in California since Assembly Bill AB 2020 was implemented in September of 1987. There are two separate CRV deposits- distributors pay into a state fund for covered containers. Deposit amounts are five cents (under 24 oz.) and ten cents (over 24 oz.). Consumers pay the same deposit at the store, which can be recovered by returning them to certified recyclers. The “bottle bill” was enacted to encourage recycling and reduce litter, and had a program goal of an 80% recycling rate.

According to the Bottle Bill Resource Guide:

“Since implementation of the deposit program, California's beverage container recycling rates have increased significantly, from an overall 52% in 1988 to 85% in 2013. In the eight years from 2006 to 2013 alone, the program has increased recycling from 13 billion containers per year to more than 18.2 billion containers per year. Because California is so large, that increase of 5.2 billion containers has an impact on the nation’s beverage container recycling rate as well. The 18.2 billion containers recycled in California are nearly 21% of the 88.2 billion containers that are recycled nationally each year. 1 out of 5 beverage containers recycled in the USA are recycled in California.”

As residents of Amador County were notified by KVGC radio and Capitol Public Radio on February 8, five rePlanet centers have recently closed, citing a decline in the commodity prices of aluminum and plastic, reduced state payments, increased costs for health insurance, and a higher minimum wage. People that live in Jackson, Pioneer, Pine Grove, Plymouth, and Ione are left with one remaining center in Sutter Hill. I wonder if that location will be able to remain open for the same reasons. Or if it does, if it will be able to handle the additional traffic. One might also wonder that if rePlanet’s costs have become so onerous, how are they able to keep their remaining 350 centers open?

What is meant by “reduced state payments” are processing payments. Again from the Bottle Bill Resource Guide:

“Processing payments are paid to all redemption centers and to curbside programs to help cover the costs of recycling materials with a low scrap value. Processing payment amounts vary by container type and are determined annually, based on audited data and scrap market prices. Part of the processing payments are supplied by distributors' processing fees, but the majority of processing payments come from unredeemed deposits. Unredeemed deposits are also used to administer the system and fund education programs.”

According to an article in the Environmental Leader:

“Prior to shuttering the recycling centers, rePlanet said it had several meetings with CalRecycle to resolve issues surrounding the state’s beverage container recycling fund, which is “critical” to rePlanet’s recycling program success.

“The recycling fund collects deposits paid for bottles and other covered containers and then pays out when bottles get redeemed. But it relies on bottles not being redeemed because the surplus funds pay for statewide recycling programs, among other initiatives. Because bottles are recycled at such a high rate, recycling programs are paying out more redemption money and thus keeping less of this money from the fund to support their operations.”

From the same article, CalRecycle spokesman Mark Oldfield explains:

“We’re staring at a structural deficit in the program, with more money going out than coming in,” he explains. “We have to look at reforming the program and that would include processing payments but it has to be looked at holistically.

“Clearly the closure of a large number of recycling centers all at once has a very negative affect on consumers in those areas and we’ve been working with industry stakeholders to come up with solutions to this.

“While falling commodity prices plays a major role, and CalRecycle can’t control commodity prices, that state agency can work with organizations that want to open new recycling centers and help speed up that process. CalRecycle also recently held a workshop to look at where recycling centers can realize cost savings and how the industry can better weather the ups and downs of commodity prices. The agency will continue to hold these discussions about how to make the recycling industry more sustainable”.

Part of the reason for the structural deficit is fraud, involving out-of-state “entrepreneurs” bringing in large quantities of bottles and cans from states such as Nevada and Arizona. The impact was estimated to be as much as $40 million in 2012. Recycling centers are supposed to restrict redemptions to no more than 500 lbs. of aluminum and 2,500 lbs. of glass from any one one person in any given day.

Of note is a recent article in the Orange County Register, that would seem to offer a different take on the issue of the profitability of the recycling industry in California. It relates to a case of wage and hour violations being investigated by the U.S. Labor Department:

“The Orange County crackdown is part of a statewide campaign aimed at what officials say are widespread labor law violations at California’s 1,837 recycling centers.

“‘This is an industry that doesn’t seem to be following the law,’ said Rodolfo Cortez, director of the department’s wage and hour district office. ‘It employs a large number of vulnerable workers who are afraid to speak up and don’t know their rights.’

“Californians redeem $900 million worth of beverage containers each year. Most of the recycled material is exported to Asia where it is reprocessed to manufacture new products. ‘Tax records show many recycling companies are highly profitable’, Cortez said, adding, ‘The annual dollar value is in the millions.’

“Besides Los Angeles and Orange counties, the federal probe is targeting recycling companies in San Diego, Fresno and Sacramento counties. ‘We find the exact same issues everywhere,’ Cortez said. ‘The underground economy is a big problem in California. We are trying to clean it up.’”

Last year, various companies including rePlanet closed 200 redemption centers throughout the state. Now the largest recycler has closed 191 more. Reducing the number of conveniently located recycling centers would seem to run counter to the aims of the program. Residents of Grass Valley find that their only recourse now is about a ten mile drive away. But that is nothing compared to those would-be recyclers in Needles. Now they have to make a 96 mile drive to Blythe.

What will happen to the consumers here in Amador County, regarding their ability to recoup the redemption deposits they have paid when purchasing their beverages? If the Sutter Hill location were to close (which I am not suggesting will happen), it appears that one of the next closest locations would be in Valley Springs. People in Murphys, Angels Camp, and San Andreas were left with that option last month.

The tagline on rePlanet’s website reads “We’re creating real value for people, humanity and the planet”. Clicking over to their jobs section, it shows that many of their openings are in Southern California and look to be mostly part-time. Perhaps these latest closures, including our five, happened because they couldn’t figure out a way to staff them with part-timers. The PG site I frequented had one full-time attendant- I don’t know about the others. One might conclude that they are really closing locations to protest reforms in health insurance and the minimum wage.

D. Norman

Undoing the Plastic Bag Ban

The statewide plastic bag ban, SB-270, was passed in the California legislature in August, 2014 and signed into law by Governor Brown on September 30, 2014. It was to have taken effect on July 1 of last year, after which specified stores such as large grocery chains and pharmacies could no longer provide single-use plastic carryout bags. It would have been extended to convenience and liquor stores on July 1 of this year. The law includes $2 million in loans to plastic bag manufacturers for retooling to switch to production of reusable bags that are certified and designed for at least 125 uses.

Not covered are those bags used by pharmacies for prescriptions, bags used for produce, fruit, and other unwrapped bulk foods, and bags designed to be placed over clothing on a hanger.

But as is readily evident, July 1, 2015 came and went, and grocery stores are still distributing single use bags. The roadsides, waterways, and oceans are still being littered. The ink was barely dry on the Governor’s signing of SB-270 when the plastic bag manufacturers went to work to stop its implementation. On the very same day of the signing, the American Progressive Bag Alliance filed a request for title and summary for a referendum, and soon began collecting signatures. The required number of signatures were obtained to qualify it as a veto referendum on the November 6 ballot. According to Secretary of State Alex Padilla, the industry will generate $138 million in revenues by delaying the ban until November.

As of February 12, a second initiative from the group, characterized as a bid that could divide supporters of the statewide ban, had collected 25% of the needed signatures. The deadline for filing with county election officials is April 26.

According to Cal Recycle, as of January 1 there are already ten counties and 104 cities with ordinances that ban the bags, meaning that nearly half of California residents live in affected jurisdictions. SB-270 was intended to replace these varying ordinances with a single statewide standard. Overturning it will not affect them.

The plastics industry and dissenting politicians and media outlets have made a number of claims in opposition. The interested reader can fact check the issues here.

It is estimated that the state spends as much as $107 million per year managing plastic bag litter. San Jose estimates that it costs them $1 million per year in plastic bag-related repairs to their recycling facilities. A recycling facility in Sacramento has stated that they have to shut down at least six times a day to remove plastic bags from their machines.

The plastic bag industry plan to spend $50+ million in their 2016 campaign to overturn SB-270. Be prepared for a flood of commercials hitting your TV screen soon.

D. Norman

Pine Grove Shopping Center- An Update

The corner of Hwy 88 and Ridge Rd. has long been a question mark. Del Rapini Construction once had a sign there advertising a planned shopping center. It was an ambitious plan, featuring a three-story motel with 75 rooms. A fast-food establishment in the center area, with another restaurant further to the rear. A mini-mart with gas station situated in the corner next to Hwy 88. There was more room for R&D firms at the back part of the site.

For many years the site was undeveloped. It had been re-zoned commercial back in 1984 with an administrative permit, meaning that public hearings would not have to be part of the early process of any development. Only approved building permits would be required.

As memory serves, grading work on the site was started around 2010. It looked like the shopping center was soon to be built, but after some work was done it came to a halt. False alarm.

Then in 2014 the news surfaced that a Dollar General would be built, in the center area where the fast food establishment had been planned under the original Rapini concept. As I wrote in July of last year, after much controversy and attempts to prevent construction, the store is a reality.

Now that the Dollar General is built, would other businesses be attracted to the site? I checked in with Del Rapini by phone on Friday, 2/5, to get an update. He explained that he has been trying hard for a long time to get businesses to locate there. There have been a number of enquiries, and he is presently in preliminary talks with an interested party to build a convenience store and possibly a gas station.

He stressed that the main gating factors to moving forward with the shopping center are sewer hookups and traffic limitations. As the developer, he has needed to deal with the Amador Water Agency and CalTrans over these issues, necessitating a substantial dollar investment so far.

He went on to say that a motel had shown some interest, but due to the limited sewer system capacity it wasn’t possible to move forward. As for traffic impact, the site is approved for 1,550 daily “trips”. The Dollar General store accounts for around 400, so there are only enough left for possibly two more users. Should a prospective business require more, fees would be involved.

In summary, the Pine Grove Shopping Center could have another tenant in its future. Filling out the complete site appears to be a slim prospect as it stands now. But any addition would be welcome. In my view, the plain-looking Dollar General would benefit from some surrounding buildings and landscaping.

D. Norman