“ChatBot Boundaries”
Ethical Perspectives On the News – 05.14.2023 – KCRG Cedar Rapids
Inter-Religious Council of Linn County
Moderator: Beth Parker
Panelists:
Dara Schmidt, Cedar Rapids Public Library Director;
Leon Tabak, Professor of Computer Science Cornell College;
Jackson, 9th grade student;
Nicholas Johnson, Former FCC & Cyberlaw Professor.
This was a fascinating discussion.
From our inbox: Here is a summary by Iowa House Democrats of the 2023 session which has been called “the most harmful and destructive in our state’s history.”
Follow Iowa House Dems on Facebook and Twitter
SESSION ADJOURNS- HERE IS OUR RECAP
When the 2023 Iowa Legislature began in January, Democratic lawmakers focused on putting people over politics by acknowledging that Iowans are tired of politics as usual and vowed to listen to Iowans.
Democrats heard from many Iowans this session who were frustrated by Governor Reynolds and Republican lawmakers continuously playing politics with people’s lives, which included:
Democratic legislators worked on a host of bills this session that received overwhelming support from across the state, including lowering costs for Iowans, investing in public schools, protecting reproductive freedom, and legalizing marijuana. Here are just a few highlights of bipartisan work that got done this session:
Before session begins next January, Democratic lawmakers will be touring the state and knocking on doors to listen to Iowans about what’s important to them.
BLUE STATEHOUSE ALERT LIVE IS BACK!
House Democratic Leader Jennifer Konfrst is back this Tuesday, May 16 at 7pm to give you an update on the end of the 2023 Legislative Session and where we go next.
Watch live on Facebook
NEWS FROM THE IOWA HOUSE DEMOCRATS
ADDITIONAL TOWN HALLS SCHEDULED: We are continuing our town hall tour! Reminder that this weekend, Saturday, May 20, we will be in the Quad Cities at 1pm. We will also be in Muscatine, Clinton, Washington, and Fairfield in the coming months!
PEOPLE OVER POLITICS: Iowa House Democrats fought hard and offered common sense ideas to improve the lives of Iowans. We’re going to keep listening, speaking out, and putting people over politics.
NEW STATE REP. ADAM ZABNER REFLECTS ON FIRST LEGISLATIVE SESSION: “Attacks on trans youth, taxpayer money for private schools, and an erosion of oversight in state government are just a few of the backward steps that Republicans took this session.”
WATCH LEADER KONFRST’S END OF SESSION SPEECH: House Democratic Leader Rep. Jennifer Konfrst gave her end-of-session speech where she reflected on the divisive agenda pushed by GOP leaders, and highlighted the places where we could and did find some common ground.
As you may have heard Governor Reynolds is being sued by Iowans for unlawfully cutting off their pandemic related jobless assistance. Details below. Reynolds has only herself to blame for this one. She can’t blame Rob Sand or President Biden for her poor judgment.
Reynolds was on Iowa Press last Thursday and wasn’t asked about that but was asked by Dave Price if the recent civil sexual abuse judgment against former President Trump bothered her. Obviously expecting the question, the governor didn’t miss a beat changing the subject. What bothers her, she said, is what’s going on at the border and mean Joe Biden and on and on.. I’ve often wondered if the guests, particularly Republicans, get the questions in advance. They always seem to have their non-answers ready.
Not getting an answer to his question, Price managed to break in to the middle of Kim’s two minute Biden rant (in which she appeared to check the timer several times), to repeat, wasn’t she planning to weigh in on it? She said, “Why should I?” I kind of agree. I suppose he was trying to see if she would defend Donald. But really who cares. We know what she’s all about. There are more pressing issues to ask the governor about it seems to me since the show is only 26 minutes long.
Btw, no one on the Iowa Press panel asked her about the potential class action suit. If she ever allows herself to be questioned by an Iowa news outlet again I hope someone asks her if it bothers her that she is being sued by constituents who she put in harm’s way by denying them benefits they were entitled to when she refused federal Covid funds. In my opinion it is one of the worst things she has done as governor and that’s saying something.
I’ll write more about last Thursday’s Iowa Press program later. It was so bizarre I didn’t know where to even begin.
Happy Monday!
Reynolds sued for denying jobless Iowans federal pandemic assistance
by Clark Kauffman, Iowa Capital Dispatch
May 11, 2023
A potential class-action lawsuit claims Gov. Kim Reynolds’ refusal to pay pandemic-related jobless assistance to 30,000 Iowans was unlawful and deprived those individuals of “life-sustaining benefits.”
Lawyers for Karla Smith of Pleasantville and Holly Bladel of Clinton have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa claiming the two women and thousands of other Iowans were illegally denied unemployment benefits in 2021 due to the actions of Reynolds and Iowa Workforce Development Director Beth Townsend.
The lawsuit alleges Reynolds and Townsend violated Iowa’s Employment Security law, which requires the state to “cooperate with the United States Department of Labor to the fullest extent” and make available to Iowans “all advantages available under the provisions of the Social Security Act that relate to unemployment compensation.”
Lawyers for Smith and Bladel are also seeking class-action status in the case in an effort to recover damages for thousands of Iowans who may have been harmed by Reynolds’ decision.
The state has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.
Iowa was one of at least 25 states, all led by Republican governors, that chose to terminate federal, pandemic-related unemployment assistance before the programs expired in 2021. The states did so largely in response to labor shortages, claiming the enhanced benefits were encouraging people to remain unemployed rather than return to the workforce.
At the time, the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee warned that the states that pulling out of the unemployment programs stood to lose up to $13 billion in economic activity by refusing the infusion of federal money.
In March 2020, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security — better known as the CARES Act — to address mass layoffs, business closures and soaring unemployment.
The act provided enhanced unemployment benefits, provided for cash payments to be made to qualified recipients, extended the period of eligibility for benefits, and allowed for benefits to be paid to people who wouldn’t otherwise have been eligible.
Iowa then entered into an agreement with the U.S. Department of Labor to provide the state’s residents with Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) and Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) benefits, effective March 29, 2020.
Iowans later received letters from Iowa Workforce Development stating they would be eligible for the benefits through Sept. 4, 2021. However, in a May 10, 2021, memorandum, Townsend recommended that Reynolds terminate Iowa’s participation in the federal programs effective June 12, 2021.
The next day, Reynolds officially adopted the recommendation and announced that IWD, which administers many elements of Iowa’s unemployment programs, would be withdrawing from participation in the federal, pandemic-related unemployment programs, despite the fact that they were entirely funded by the federal government.
Iowa’s participation in the programs was terminated on June 12, three months before the programs were set to expire.
The lawsuit alleges Reynolds’ “refusal to ensure continued access to federal pandemic-related unemployment benefits” deprived approximately 30,000 Iowans, including the two named plaintiffs, of “life-sustaining benefits” to which they were entitled. The lawsuit also notes that the number of Iowans affected by Reynolds’ decision may exceed 55,000.
The governor’s decision to prematurely terminate Iowa’s involvement in the programs “violated clear legislative mandates and constituted an unlawful exercise of executive authority,” the lawsuit claims.
The plaintiffs allege Iowa’s Employment Security Law specifically requires the state to provide citizens with “all advantages available under the provisions of the Social Security Act that relate to unemployment compensation,” which directly contradicts Townsend’s published claim that “Iowa can elect to participate in some federal programs and not others.”
Smith, who worked at Casey’s General Store when the pandemic hit, alleges that in mid-March 2020, her doctor told her a preexisting lung condition made it dangerous for her to continue working in a retail setting that had yet to install Plexiglas dividers at workstations and didn’t require face masks.
Smith alleges she quit her job to self-quarantine and began collecting PEUC benefits of $408 per week in addition to FPUC benefits to pay for food, housing, and other monthly expenses. Reynolds’ and Townsend’s decision to terminate Iowa’s involvement in the federal programs left Smith without a critical source of income just as the Delta variant surged, the lawsuit claims.
Bladel worked for a restaurant and gas station but was replaced after seeking time off to care for an elderly relative who was immunocompromised and at risk for COVID-19. She then began collecting PUA and FPUC benefits until Iowa terminated its involvement in the programs.
The lawsuit alleges the federal Social Security Act through which the unemployment programs are administered requires that the states’ administration of benefit programs “be reasonably calculated to insure full payment of unemployment compensation when due.”
According to the plaintiffs, the federal government pays the full cost of PUA, PEUC, and FPUC benefits, and alleges the U.S. Department of Labor had instructed the states that unemployment benefits provided under the CARES Act were nondiscretionary and must be promptly paid to any individual who was determined to be eligible.
The lawsuit goes on to allege that Iowans were not given a hearing or opportunity to contest the termination of their benefits. In fact, the lawsuit alleges, the form letter received by some beneficiaries specifically instructed them not to call IWD unless they needed assistance filing claims.
The lawsuit accuses the governor and Townsend of the unconstitutional taking of benefits the plaintiffs were eligible to receive, the denial of due process, and the violation of Iowa’s Employment Security Law.
The plaintiffs are asking a federal judge to declare Reynolds’ actions unlawful and order the benefits to be paid.
Iowa Capital Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com. Follow Iowa Capital Dispatch on Facebook and Twitter.
In short, it stunk.
I will just pass on a couple of observations. Over at the Iowa Capital Dispatch Kathie O’Bradovich calls the most recent sessions “small.” She then goes on to explain:
We heard from Republican lawmakers that the recently completed legislative session was “historic.” It sure was — historically small.
With a few exceptions, the major GOP priorities of the legislative session will benefit relatively small numbers of Iowans, in some cases at a gigantic cost to the most vulnerable among us.
O’Bradovich expounds on all the ways in which the rich got richer and the poor got poorer in Iowa:
She does give them credit for doing something about the huge property tax increases. She also notes at the end that they also left many problems untouched.
Over at Iowa Starting Line, guest columnist state Rep. Sami Scheetz of Cedar Rapids labels the session “the most harmful and destructive in our state’s history.” Scheetz then fleshes his claim out with several points:
A billion-dollar voucher scheme that gives handouts to private schools and wealthy Iowans in our largest, richest cities — legislation that will destroy our rural public schools and accelerate the degradation of our public school system statewide.
A series of laws that attack our LGBTQ youth: book banning; bathroom bills; a ban on life-saving care for transgender children.
Legislation limiting the ability for Iowans who die or are catastrophically injured by medical malpractice or negligent truck drivers to be fully compensated for their losses.
A child labor bill that turns the clock back on worker protections and encourages children to not complete their high school education.
Likely the most harmful bill passed this session: legislation that kicks thousands of working-class Iowans off of their food benefits and takes away health care from close to 1,000 Iowa children. This is at a time when Iowans are facing 40-year price highs for food and basic goods.
We all know that Iowa was frequently cited as what bad legislatures would be doing by news sites and bloggers around the country. What Iowa has become makes me sad for a once great state, but this is what fear and hate leads to.
Meanwhile up north of us in Minnesota we have examples of what progressive government could be. Last Friday Governor Tim Walz signed a bill into law that expanded and simplified voting in the state. The “Democracy For The People Act” also increased transparency of campaign money plus allowed pre-registration for 16 and 17 year olds and expanded mail in voting.
This bill came in a session that has seen many progressive ideas become law:
Jan. 31: A bill codifying abortion rights and reproductive health care for all (HF1/SF1).
Jan 31: A bill banning race-based hair discrimination (HF37/SF44).
Feb.7: A bill mandating Minnesota utilities transition to carbon-free energy by 2040 (HF7/SF4).
March 3: A bill restoring voting rights to people still on parole or probation (HF28/SF28).
March 7: A bill allowing undocumented residents to obtain driver’s licenses (HF4/SF27); Minnesota has about 80,000 undocumented residents.
March 16: A bill codifying federal Indian Child Welfare Act language into Minnesota law (HF1071/SF667).
March 17: A bill providing free breakfast and lunch for all Minnesota students in the majority of schools (HF5/SF123).
April 27: A bill banning “conversion therapy” for minors and vulnerable adults (HF16/SF23).
April 27: A bill deeming Minnesota a refuge state for transgender people and protecting them from legal repercussions for traveling to Minnesota for gender-affirming health care (HF146/SF63).
And they are still working on it.
It’s like night and day – regressive Iowa and progressive Minnesota. What a contrast across the border.
Who has better Mother’s Day comedy than SNL? (4 minutes):
Would love to say on this Mother’s Day that women’s rights are on an upswing in this country, but you and I both know that is far from the truth. A recent example I came across is the desire by the extreme right to end no-fault divorce. For those of us who are old enough to remember what contested divorce was like, it could be very ugly, expensive and dangerous.
The desire for this arises from the opinion of the highly corrupted Clarence Thomas in the Dobbs decision last summer where he opined that the Court should look at all “substantive due process precedents.” Going backward on this issue would be disastrous, but the right cares not a whit about that. Here is a little reading to see what is afoot.
Another wild week on the democracy ride:
A) Here’s an easy one: what 2024 presidential candidate was given 70 minutes of free time on CNN to pretty much say what he wanted?
B) This free air time came just a day after this candidate was found liable for what in a New York trial?
C) who was the person who sued this candidate in the above trial?
D) What president signed a bill into law that made Mother’s Day a national holiday?
E) The mass murderer in Allen, Texas had what initials as a patch on his shirt and what did it stand for?
F) In another mass murder in Texas last weekend, the murderer used what as a weapon as 8 were killed and nine injured?
G) Surgeon General Vivek Murthy highlighted what as a health risk, especially for older people last week?
H) What US Senate candidate from last fall may have dipped Ito campaign funds for personal expenses last fall?
I) Republicans constantly claim fraud in many government programs. Now they got one. What US Representative has been indicted for getting unemployment payments while working?
J) According to the US Census in 2022 there are 10.9 million one parent families in the US. What percentage are headed by women?
K) Athletes from the U of Iowa and ISU have been accused of doing what that is against NCAA policy?
L) In the case of one state forcing another state to raise its pork humanely, (basically California v. Iowa) how did SCOTUS decide Thursday?
M) Margery Taylor Greene, instead of proposing to regulate guns better, proposed what solution to school shooting?
N) In a similar vein, a state legislator in Texas proposed what solution to school children being shot?
O) Elon Musk claims he has hired a what for twitter?
P) Despite claims of whistleblower evidence, Republicans had to admit last week that they had no evidence of corruption by what elected official?
Q) What state is bleeding doctors after their legislature enacted extremely strict abortion restrictions?
R) An Oakland A’s broadcaster was suspended after he did what on the air last Friday (May 5th)?
S) A California panel recommended payments to the descendants of what ancestry to address past injustices?
T) The FDA this week relaxed rules for what group of people for blood donations?
I like how Democrats don’t applaud sexual assault. – John Collins tweet
Tip of the hat to EarlG on democraticunderground.com
Answers:
A) Donald Trump
B) Sexual assault
C) E. Jean Carroll (Happy Mother’s Day, Ms. Carroll)
D) Woodrow Wilson in 1914
E) ‘RWDS’ for Right Wing Death Squad
F) His SUV as he drove into people waiting at a bus stop.
G) Loneliness
H) Herschel Walker
I) George Santos
J) 80
K) Betting on sports which is against NCAA policy – stay tuned
L) That California could make rules on how the meat is handled
M) Arming Grandparents to roam the halls of schools
N) That children be taught how to make and apply tourniquets
O) A new CEO – a woman at that. Expect an announcement as to whine 6 weeks.
P) President Biden. This lie was pushed hard in the senate by Chuck Grassley
Q) Idaho
R) Used a racial slur when describing a trip to the Negro baseball Hall Of Fame in Kansas City
S) former black slaves
T) gay and bisexual men
Who is the celebrity guest on next week’s episode of CNN’s new show “Applaud a Sexual Predator”? – Mrs. Betty Bowers
Tip of the hat to http://all-hat-no-cattle.blogspot.com
(3 minutes) Video from when the case was taken up by SCOTUS:
Thursday brought a surprise from the US Supreme Court in the case of Pork Producers v. California – actual case name National Pork Producers v. Ross.
With a 6-3 conservative majority most folks probably thought that the pork producers would win this one hands down despite the fact that the suit was based on what is known as the “dormant commerce clause.”
Bloomberg Law summed up the dormant commerce clause this was:
The National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation contended the measure violates the so-called dormant commerce clause, a legal doctrine that says the US Constitution limits the power of states to regulate commerce outside their borders without congressional authorization.
Justice Gorsuch wrote for a splintered majority that had no ideological cohesion. The majority included Gorsuch, Thomas, Sotomayor, Sagan and Barrett. No ideological cohesion among that group. Nor was there ideological cohesion with Roberts, Alito, Kavanaugh and Jackson.
Here is the crux of the Gorsuch opinion as reported by scoutusblog.com:
Gorsuch writes that “Companies that choose to sell products in various States must normally comply with the laws of those various States. Assuredly, under this Court’s dormant Commerce Clause decisions, no State may use its laws to discriminate purposefully against out-of-state economic interests. But the pork producers do not suggest that California’s law offends this principle.”
Instead, Gorsuch writes, “they invite us to fashion two new and more aggressive constitutional restrictions on the ability of States to regulate goods sold within their borders. We decline that invitation. While the Constitution addresses many weighty issues, the type of pork chops California merchants may sell is not on that list.”
A comment at scotusblog notes that “Pork Producers opinion is looking like a MESS.”
This case also attracted unexpected supporters again not based on ideological stances. Once more from Bloomberg:
The industry argued that a ruling for California would pit states against one another, letting them impose their own moral and ideological demands on companies elsewhere before products could be sold.
The Biden administration took the pork producers’ side. The pharmaceutical industry also backed the pork lobby, saying the case could affect litigation over state laws that seek to regulate the nationwide list prices of drugs.
California said the dormant commerce clause guards against economic protectionism, not against neutral restrictions on in-state sales. The state accused the industry of overstating the impact of the law, arguing that pork producers already segregate supply chains to sell products labeled as “antibiotic-free” and “crate-free.”
Will this decision have effects that flop over into other industries? Will the Pork Producers come at the California law from another angle? Stay tuned. I have a feeling we have not heard the last of it.
And just in case you did not know it, Iowa is by far the top pork producing state in the country with approximately 33 million hogs or about 1/3 of the national production. I would daresay that much of that is done in CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations) which appear to be against the California law that state a pregnant sow must have at least 24 square feet of space.
We bring the press conference to you to highlight a few things:
(19 minutes)
Most of this deficit has come from tax cuts for the rich. Republican concern about the debt can be considered serious when they talk about raising taxes, particularly on those who have been the major beneficiaries of fiscal policy since Reagan. Until then they are only manufacturing a crisis to hurt their perceived enemies.
Please write or call your congress member and tell them using the debt ceiling as a hostage situation is totally unacceptable.
Fact: Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling three times when Donald Trump was president, with no preconditions. Talking with Al Franken, Paul Krugman provides information including what the options are for getting through the GOP’s shenanigans.
Ed Fallon does an excellent job in this article of taking the gun violence discussion out of the either-or (guns v. mental health) and moving it to a comprehensive examination of many factors at play in the U.S. that contribute to our epidemic of gun violence. Ed highlights something so obvious, we don’t even think about it – 97.7% of perpetrators of gun violence are men. In a misogynistic culture, we tend to accept that as natural, but it is decidedly unnatural.
After you read Ed’s great post find a Students Demand Action event here. studentsdemandaction.org/
###
Stopping mass shootings is about more than gun control
by Ed Fallon
Des Moines, Iowa
May 10, 2023
Gun violence in the U.S. has gotten so bad it’s hard to keep up with all the senseless killings. Already this year, we’ve had over 200 mass shootings (defined as more than four people injured or killed). Some say the answer is gun control. Others insist we need better mental health services.
My contention? We need both, and so much more. A 2022 report on mass shootings by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is a helpful guidepost. It analyzes 53 years of gun violence, from 1966 through 2019.
Quoting the report: “In public discourse, mass shootings are often blamed on mental illness. But the research indicates the role of mental illness in mass shootings is complicated, not clear-cut. … [P]sychosis play[ed] a minor role in nearly one-third of the cases, but a primary role 10% of the time.”
So, to those who are against gun control and instead try to blame gun violence strictly on mental health problems — nope, you’re wrong.
The report also points out that most individuals who engaged in mass shootings used handguns (77.2%). Just 25% used assault rifles.
Think about that. If you want more gun control and your focus is banning assault weapons, you’re missing the biggest part of the problem. Don’t get me wrong. I support an assault weapons ban. But as indicated in the NIJ report, simply banning assault weapons won’t substantially reduce the number of mass shooting victims.
If you believe the perpetrators of gun violence are mostly angry White men, well, you’re largely correct. The report found that 97.7% were male. Also, 52.3% were White, 20.9% Black, 8.1% Latino, 6.4% Asian, 4.2% Middle Eastern, and 1.8% Native American. Most killers had a criminal record (64.5%) and a history of violence (62.8%). Thirty percent were or had previously been suicidal.
It’s significant that just over half the perpetrators were White. But let that first number sink in: 97.7% were men!
Given the ongoing horror of gun violence, and given the data that tells us so much about the problem, why can’t we find a solution? Ask the NRA. They’re the biggest part of the problem. There’s lots of money to be made selling guns. And like Big Oil’s insistence on expanding fossil fuel production in the face of climate change, Big Gun will keep making more and more weapons as long as our government lets them.
So yeah, we need tougher regs. Permits? Heck, you need a permit to perform music on a street corner. Background checks? TSA won’t let a suspicious person on a plane. Yet we think nothing of selling all kinds of guns to someone with a questionable history.
Better mental health services? Sure, that too. But it’s more than a gun problem, more than a mental health problem.
It’s an American male problem, especially White males. To solve America’s gun violence epidemic, we have to dig deep into the very fabric of the world we’ve created and embrace bold, systemic changes.
RACE AND GENDER. Whites, men in particular, feel threatened. That’s not surprising, given the world’s rapid momentum toward greater equality. When a class of people who’ve enjoyed power and privilege feel that their dominance is in decline, some in that class will inevitably push back, often violently.
Solution: If you’re unhappy with the growing power of non-White, non-male humans, seek counseling.
THE MEDIA. There used to be some degree of fairness and balance in the media. We lost that long ago. On some platforms, hosts spew whatever lies they want. Hatred, division, and fear-mongering are good for business. Right-wing talk radio’s audience is almost exclusively White, male, and angry. Check out Jen Senko’s excellent film and book, The Brainwashing of My Dad, and her appearance on my talk show, the Fallon Forum, last year.
Solution: Bring back the Fairness Doctrine and repeal the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
SOCIETY. The very structure of our homes, neighborhoods, and cities disconnects us from each other and from nature. No society has ever seen such deep, systemic isolation. To share a quote from my memoir, Marcher, Walker, Pilgrim: “[W]hen we’re isolated, we’re more easily duped by propaganda. When we’re confined in subdivisions, when our main source of information and ideas comes through a screen, not through direct dialogue with people facing similar life challenges, then the collective ‘we’ is weak, easily exploited, eager to scapegoat those who are ‘different.'”
Solution: Our entire built environment needs an overhaul. We need more festivals, more music, front porches, block parties. If you don’t know your neighbors, consider organizing a block party this summer.
ECONOMY. The endless growth paradigm is America’s national religion, a core tenant of which is “all growth is good.” Bigger hospitals? More divorce attorneys? More subdivisions and malls on prime farmland? More workers cleaning up toxic Superfund sites (246,000 are employed in that task)? All good for the economy. No wonder only 20% of Americans love their jobs. Recalling the words of Robert Kennedy, “[GDP] measures everything … except that which makes life worthwhile.”
Solution: Call out the failure of both capitalism and communism. Instead of measuring economic health using GDP, let’s employ a model that factors in health, happiness, and the environment. Prototypes exist, e.g., Index of Human Development, Genuine Progress Indicator, and Happy Planet Index.
SCREEN VIOLENCE. According to the American Academy of Family Physicians, “While multiple factors can lead to violent actions, a growing body of literature shows a strong association between the perpetration of violence and exposure to violence in media, digital media, and entertainment.”
Solution: Regulate violent imagery. Given the demonstrable connection between screen violence and violent behavior, guidelines and restrictions are essential. (Note: I strongly support the First Amendment. I also oppose yelling “FIRE” in a crowded theater.)
When it comes to mass shootings, the bottom line is we need a societal overhaul to address the problem at the deepest level. Sure, pass gun control legislation. Sure, do more to address people’s mental health challenges. Those will make a difference. But unless we make drastic changes to the very fabric of our world, the problems of mass shootings and gun violence will persist.
*******
[Ed Fallon is a former Iowa lawmaker who hosts the Fallon Forum, a talk show that has aired continuously for the past 13 years. Ed also writes a weekly blog, directs Bold Iowa, and runs Birds & Bees Urban Farm with his wife, Kathy Byrnes. He can be reached at 515-238-6404 or ed@fallonforum.com.]
Click on the image to find an event
Blog For Iowa 