Font Resize
On the First Amendment and Citizens United
Editor of the Reformer:
John McClaughry believes that the Left seeks to destroy the First Amendment ("The left’s campaign to destroy the First Amendment," Sept. 6). I disagree.
Two questions guide the Citizens United decision. First, is free speech limited to an individual person or does it include an organized group of individuals? Second, is the Constitution to be interpreted, as a matter of principle, only on the basis of the words of the First Amendment as they would have been understood by the framers or, as a matter of pragmatism, by comparing the results of alternative interpretations to the intent of the framers in writing the Amendment?
On the first, the Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ..." I take the "press" to be the publisher of a newspaper. The publisher is an organized group of individuals, as are corporations. I conclude that the First Amendment guarantees corporations the right to say what they want.
On the second, Our right to free speech is not absolute. As Justice Holmes pointed out, no one has the right to shout "fire" in a theater. The right has limits, and the behavior of persons exercising the right may be regulated.
Since the ratification of our Constitution, the division between the wealthy (Hamilton) and the masses (Jefferson) has been at the heart of our
This leads to a third question: The wealthy have a right to say whatever they please politically, but the spending of their resources may be regulated. Congress should set limits and the Supreme Court should act as an umpire (as Chief Justice Roberts said in his Senate hearing) to ensure that the limits are within reason. The Court did not act as such an umpire when it rendered a decision the result of which is to set no limits on spending by corporations or the wealthy.
Mr. McClaughry is not seeking to protect the First Amendment but rather to protect the permanent political advantage that the Supreme Court gave to corporations and the wealthy in their Citizens United decision.
This "lefty" is seeking to make the First Amendment function equally for the wealthy and the mass.
Tom Bertone,
Dummerston, Sept. 11
Don’t be so fast to blame VY discharge temps
Editor of the Reformer:
Once again, the Connecticut River Watershed Council is trying its best to make Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant the bad guy. This group, which according to its annual report is supported financially by an anti-Vermont Yankee charitable foundation, says Vermont Yankee’s heated water discharge may be hurting the Connecticut River shad population.
Marine fisheries scientists with the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seem to have a different opinion. These scientists say the Connecticut River shad population is at its highest in 20 years. They attribute the previous decline in shad populations to a number of factors: overfishing (commercial netting) in the lower river (shad spend most of their lives in the ocean, returning to the river to spawn); barriers such as hydro dams; and the population boom in predators such as striped bass. Biologist Kenneth Sprankle of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently said, "The fish lift in Holyoke (Mass.) does an OK job, but the ladders at Turners Falls (Mass.) and Vernon Dam just don’t seem to work for shad." This is a long-standing limitation, as I was personally responsible for installing underwater cameras to study the reluctance of fish to ascend the Turners Falls fish ladder in the 1980s. Even so, 9,855 shad swam over Vernon Dam while none swam up the Bellows Falls ladder this spring.
The state and federal marine fisheries scientists studying the shad population in the Connecticut River make no mention of heated water from Vermont Yankee as contributing to declines in fish returns, and for good reason. The water discharged from the plant is well within the levels allowed by its permit. This is confirmed by multiple independent studies, which continually find that Yankee’s water discharge does not pose a threat to the Connecticut River’s fish populations, including Atlantic salmon and American shad.
American shad migrate up some very warm rivers along the East Coast, including the slow-moving St. Johns River in central Florida. In the Connecticut River, the large reservoirs behind many dams result in solar heating that can be shown to be much greater than that of Vermont Yankee; solar heating is obvious to any experienced fisherman. And CRWC departs from responsible science by calling the discharge "hot," indicating a painful temperature, perhaps to prompt an emotional reaction by the public. This characterization is not true even at the temperature limit and most of the time the discharge temperature is considerably lower.
I encourage the public to put good science and clear cut evidence ahead of the advocacy hype.
Richard Schmidt,
Westmoreland, N.H., Sept. 11
The FDA is against life
Editor of the Reformer:
Could all of you readers please go watch this movie now on YouTube for free and explain to me how we let them get away with killing us: search on YouTube for "Dr Burzynski movie full version should his license be revoked, clinic closed." You decide.
Derek Doucette,
Hinsdale N.H., Sept. 8
Remembering Lynn Corum
Editor of the Reformer:
One winter evening in the 1970s or ‘80s, I don’t remember which, I was about to leave my Main Street shop. It had been snowing hard for an hour or more and every shopkeeper with any sense had closed early and gone home.
Main Street was deserted and the white stuff was piling up fast. There were no people or cars, no movement whatsoever, not even a snow plow has past yet and I was not sure I could make it to my house in Halifax, 10 miles distant.
I was sort of mesmerized into non-action as I stared out at the dark empty street. Then, seemingly, out of nowhere came a solitary figure on cross country skis gliding gracefully by my front window. It was Lynn Corum.
Larry Simons,
Halifax, Sept. 10
Gannett remembered
Editor of the Reformer:
On behalf of the Winston Prouty Center community, I would like to express our condolences to the family of Robert T. Gannett.
Bob and his late wife Sarah (Aldie) were early and consistent supporters of the Winston Prouty Center and our mission to provide inclusive early education and family support. In fact, our logo was inspired by the maple trees gifted to us by Aldie, which were planted at our Oak Street location.
When we moved to our new location near Memorial Park, we planted maple trees to continue the tradition. The trees are a tangible illustration of the often unseen generosity of supporters like Bob and Aldie Gannett. We are grateful for their kindness and their legacy will live on.
Chloe Learey,
executive director,
The Winston Prouty Center
for Child Development, Sept. 10
