Opioids and Leeches

            Overdose deaths from opioids have totaled over 70,000 in each of the last three years. Compare that to 40,000 a year from highway fatalities and a 10-year total of 58,000 G.I. fatalities in the Vietnam war.

            This is obviously a serious problem. An epidemic. But I’m not sure that what’s being done about it is the right solution. The latest news has states and municipalities suing pharmaceuticals as the source of the problem. In Oklahoma, Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay a fine of $572 million for its role in manufacturing and promoting opioids, even though theirs are only 1% of the market. Purdue Pharma, maker of OxyContin, has agreed to settle suits in Ohio for $12 billion, and to file for bankruptcy as a result, thus ending the company’s R&D, not to mention the livelihoods of thousands of its employees.

            In both cases the legal basis for bringing these suits was not product liability, but the public nuisance of promotional advertising. In other words, the products involved are good, but their benefits exaggerated and addictive nature minimized. But is that the whole picture? Where is the responsibility of the doctors who over-prescribe opioids? Where is the responsibility of death merchants in the illegal drug market?  And where is the responsibility of the individual drug abusers themselves? Are drug manufacturers being disproportionately targeted because of their deep pockets?

            The answer to that question points to another epidemic, the insatiable greed of tort lawyers, especially the ones who rake in millions in class-action suits. These leeches who feed on the misery of victims have made the United States the most litigious country in the world. The villains can be any number of drugs with potential side effects (Abilify, Prolaxa, Eliquis, Valsartan, etc.), or products in common use like talcum powder and weed killers. We’ve all seen or heard the disgusting ads trolling for victims: “If you have been diagnosed with [you name it], you may be entitled to compensation…”

            By the way, attorneys represent 2,000 plaintiffs in the $12 billion Purdue Pharma settlement case. Care to guess how big their piece of the pie will be?

Dreams of Ferries

            At the invitation of Brian Roth, mayor of Plymouth (NC), I attended a conference last week to hear the latest on the Harbor Town High Speed Ferry project. I was highly disappointed.

            The main speaker was State Representative Ed Goodwin (1^st District) who has been the project’s most enthusiastic supporter since the idea was first conceived in 1993. Which makes one wonder why a project envisioned 26 years ago has not yet come to fruition.

            There was no lack of enthusiasm in the room, as most attendees were local residents, and Plymouth stands to benefit greatly if the Harbor Town project ever materializes. The idea is to bring ferry service to towns along the Albemarle Sound, like Columbia, Edenton, Hertford, Plymouth, and even Manteo and Elizabeth City. Conceivably, most of the passengers would be tourists exploring these towns—and infusing them with dollars, thereby contributing to their growth and financial welfare.

            Unfortunately, Representative Goodwin did not provide the attendees with a business plan to match their enthusiasm. Some of his optimism comes from the success of the Hatteras-Okracoke ferry. But ferries sailing the Albemarle Sound would face a different set of operational and financial challenges.

            It would appear at this stage that the Harbor Town High Speed Ferry project is still a dream that has not awakened from its 26-year slumber.

Red Flag on Red Flag

            “DO SOMETHING!” That’s what we hear people scream after every shooting. They want the government to do something about the guns. And our politicians react by proposing yet more laws to infringe on “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

            It doesn’t matter that the strictest gun laws in the country do not prevent the carnage in Chicago and Baltimore every week. It doesn’t matter that background checks already on the books would not have prevented the El Paso and Dayton shooters from acquiring their guns. What matters is the Second Amendment itself. It has to go.

            There is no possible way that politicians can abolish the Second Amendment from our Bill of Rights. So, the next best thing is to chop it up into little pieces. Enter the latest proposal: “red flag” laws. Some 15 states already have them. Now, politicians like Senator Lindsey Graham think it’s time for red-flag laws to go national.

            Except that there are a few problems with such laws, beyond the fact that data accumulated since 2010 reveals that they have had no significant effect on violent crime in the states that have them. The problem may very well be with the administration of such laws. Who decides that an individual is a threat? By what standards? By what evidence?

            The real danger is that red-flag laws can become a slippery slope. Certifiable nuts should not have a gun. What about white supremacists? Or Trump supporters? Or climate deniers?  Or religious zealots? They’re all dangerous people, aren’t they? As presidential contender Corey Booker has said, “Red-flag laws…they’re nowhere near enough to stop these rising levels of mass shootings.”

            The only solution is to get rid of the Second Amendment. If we can’t abolish it outright, then we can do it piece by piece until all the guns have been confiscated from everybody. To hell with the Constitution.

Trump, His Own Worst Enemy

            When it comes to national politics, we seem to be living in two different universes revolving around the singular figure of Donald Trump.

            The left sees the president as the source of all evil. The El Paso massacre gave the Democrat presidential hopefuls and their media sycophants all the ammunition they could possibly want. It was no longer enough to call Trump a racist or a Nazi and a fascist; he was now the leader of the white supremacists. The president’s speech writer might as well have written the killer’s Manifesto…Trump probably wished it to happen…the killer was acting out Trump’s wishes in targeting Mexicans. No accusation was too extreme, too vile, too obscene.

            Trump’s acolytes on the right cried foul or changed the subject. Some on Fox News ignored El Paso altogether to focus on “the greatest scandal in the history of this country,” i.e., the soft coup attempt by leaders of the FBI and the DOJ to remove the president from office. They were positively giddy at the release of classified information that confirmed the conspiracy theory they have been pushing for months.

            It was like the two sides were lobbing lethal missiles at each other to persuade the independents in the political center to come over to their side.

            Meanwhile, the man in the middle, our dear president, took to the air and to Twitter to counterpunch, as he always does, not realizing or admitting that his pugnaciousness is in large measure what provoked the war. He is a fighter who appealed to the “deplorables” in defeating Hillary Clinton, but he is also the thin-skinned egotistical leader who turned off the independents who switched to the Democrat party in 2018 and cost the Republicans the House.

            Policy proposals from Democrats on the left (Medicare for all, free tuition, open borders, etc.) in ordinary times would be a sure prescription for disaster. But as long as President Trump continues his impulsive, ill-considered, and abusive attacks on his opponents, Democrats will focus on him in the coming elections. It worked in 2018, it will again in 2020.

Racism, Racism, Racism

            One would think that the importance of the 2020 elections is enough for everyone to focus on the issues. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The more candidates and their supporters fight for attention, the more they begin to look like schoolyard brawlers.

            First, it’s the name-calling. The most popular among many invectives is the accusation of racism. Corey Booker accuses Joe Biden of racism for his role in legislation that resulted in incarcerating more racial minorities; Tulsi Gabbard accuses Kammala Harris of racism for the same reason while she was California’s Attorney General; Harris accuses Biden of being a racist for not supporting school busing; Alexandria Alelxandria  Ocasio-Cortez accuses Pelosi of racism, a switch from calling President Trump a racist on a daily basis; the leftist media piles on and sees a racist motive in Trump’s pointing to Baltimore’s rat-infested neighborhoods; Trump and Elijah Cummings call each other racist on the same issue. In the end, if everybody is a racist, then “racist” means nothing; the term is completely de-valued.

            So, let’s get physical. We already know about Hollywood celebrities and their threats. Madonna would like to blow up the White House, while Kath Griffin, Mickey O’Rourke, George Lopez, and Rosie O’Donnell would like to see Trump dead by various means. But for others like Booker, Biden, and Robert DiNiro, a punch in the face would be punishment enough.    

            Aside from the Pay-per-View attraction of Trump and Biden duking it out behind the gym, I think the American people would like to see an end to this nonsense. What would it be like if everyone took a solemn vow never again to utter the words racist, Nazi, and fascist? Or to threaten a political opponent with physical harm? Would that mean a return to civility? But didn’t Joe Biden get crucified for his civility toward segregationist colleagues?

            When even civility is racist, banning the term racist has as much of a chance of success as preventing weeds from popping up in my garden.