Skip to content

An interesting legal question

Friday, October 7, 2016

My wife and I own property in Chester, Vermont, so I have the Chester Telegraph‘s newsfeed on my RSS reader.

Chester is right down the road from Grafton, where they used to make Grafton cheeses. That’s right, the factory is gone, as is the outlet shop, leaving nary a thing behind. It did not, however, go to China, but down Route 91 to Brattleboro.

I digress.

Grafton is currently being torn by controversy about a proposed wind farm that a foreign corporation is proposing to build in the area. The voters will decide whether the project will go forward on election day in November.

The company recently sweetened the deal it was offering. It has offered yearly payments to every registered voter in the affected communities. One letter writer estimates he would realize $23,240 over the life of the deal.

The Attorney General’s office has ruled that the offer doesn’t violate applicable state law, which reads as follows:

A person who attempts by bribery, threats or any undue influence to dictate, control or alter the vote of a freeman about to be given at a general election shall be fined not more than $200.00.

Of course, I don’t practice in Vermont, and I’m not an expert in election law, but I respectfully disagree. I should add that as a property owner I don’t have a vote, nor do I actually have an opinion, as I can see both sides of the wind farm issue. Anyway, although Chester is close to the action, it’s not close enough, and it’s residents have no say in the matter.

But, back to the legal point, I think where they go wrong is offering the payments to each registered voter, rather than to each resident. If the point is to make the community a “partner”, as the company suggests, then every resident, regardless of whether he or she is a registered voter, should get a cut. By offering the cash to registered voters, they are clearly singling out the very people who will decide the fate of their project for bribes partnership payments, while leaving similarly affected people with nothing. Plus, there’s really no question but that the whole point of the bribes proposed payments is to sway people’s votes, particularly as the offer was made just a few weeks before what is clearly looking like a very close vote. There’s no question that the offer never would have been made if a favorable outcome were certain, so can there really be any question but that the payment is being offered to “alter the vote” of the voters?

Filed in Corporate Crime, Lawyer stuff | | Comments (0)

Is there a way to resign?

Friday, October 7, 2016

As a white male, I find it rather disheartening that I am a member of the only demographic that supports Donald Trump, unless you count white people generally, but that’s a bit unfair to white women. You have to wonder, is there something in the DNA of white males that makes them particularly susceptible to small handed con-men? Why is my demographic the only one that can’t seem to see through the Donald, in particular, and in general, can’t seem to vote in its own interest? I mean, to paraphrase a song by the great Louis Armstrong, “What did we do, to be so white and dumb?”.

So, I ask, is there a way to resign from a demographic? Can I make myself an honorary something else?

I guess I’ll just have to content myself with the knowledge that the genetic flaw that runs in the genes of most white men, does not run in mine. Cold comfort, for my wife has pointed out a disturbing pattern among members of my demographic as they pass farther and farther into geezerdom, as I am currently doing. We remember so well the lifelong local Democrats who became weirdly conservative as they passed into senescence.

Still, it doesn’t happen to everyone, and I’m sure I’m proof against it. My genes may be compromised, but my will is strong.

Hey! Wait! Is that Fox News playing on that television? You know, sometimes they make a lot of sense, especially that Bill O’Reilly. I think I’ll watch for a while.

Filed in Cranky old man | | Comments (0)

Great piece of writing

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

I read about this book review on another blog, unfortunately, I’ve forgotten which one, so I can’t give proper credit. Anyway, as that blogger pointed out, It’s an amazing piece of work by Michiko Kakutani of the New York Times. The book under review is a new biography of Hitler. But the review is really a well cloaked attack on, and warning about, Donald Trump. The review is well worth reading. I bought the book, and it’s pretty good as well.

Filed in The Donald | | Comments (1)

A bit of sympathy for Dave Collins?

Sunday, October 2, 2016

I’ve written a number of posts about the New London Day’s columnist, Dave Collins. Dave, despite the cynical tone of so many of his columns, is, it turns out, a fairly naive guy. He decided that any Republican who refused to renounce Donald Trump was beyond the pale. I think he actually thought that the local Republicans would pass the test. So far, not a one of them has passed, though some have failed to turn in their little blue books.

Poor Dave has already had to read Heather Somers and John Scott out of the ranks of the respectable. That must have hurt, but nowhere near as much as the latest. Last week Republican State Senator Paul Formica failed the test. Dave may be working on his column as I write this, and I’m sure it’s breaking his heart.

Dave in particular, and the New London Day in general, has been deep deep deep in the tank for Formica ever since he declared for the Waterford-New London senate seat in 2014. Dave couldn’t disparage Formica’s opponent or distort her record enough. When she (Betsy Ritter) was appointed Commissioner on Aging after her loss, Dave railed against the appointment, even while conceding that she was qualified for the post. The Day itself ignored the fact that Formica was totally unaware of the contents of a very important ballot question (which would have allowed the legislature to liberalize our antiquated voting laws) and was, in fact, generally pretty much of a dunderhead. But then, he’s a Republican.

If there’s a single Republican candidate in the area who could risk passing the Trump test, it has to be Formica. He’s pretty popular, because he runs a seafood restaurant. Yes, you read that right.

It’s entirely possible that Formica doesn’t even recognize the danger Trump poses to the Republic, but if that’s the case, he’s far too dumb to be in the state Senate. Most likely he does, but feels that danger is worth risking if the alternative is his own electoral defeat, even though there’s not much chance of that.

Anyway, I almost feel sorry for Dave. But I don’t.

Filed in Local issues | | Comments (1)

What’s in store for debate two

Sunday, October 2, 2016

Although I might still be needing a clothespin when I cast my vote next month, I have to admit that I’m super impressed by the Clinton campaign, and the trap it laid for the Donald in the first debate.

It’s dollars to donuts that they have something completely different to bait him in the second debate, and my bet is that he’ll fall for it all over again.

One thing they have going for them is that he’s got so much sleazy stuff in his past (this morning’s Times notes that he took a very suspect one billion dollar loss in 1995) that neither he or his staff can possibly predict what they’ll pick and how they’ll present it. If anything, the town hall forum setting will make it even more difficult for him to respond in a way approaching rationality.

Who knows, I may even bring myself to watching it in real time, rather than waiting to watch the best snippets.

Filed in The Donald | | Comments (0)

A very disturbed man

Friday, September 30, 2016

Just bewildering. A guy whose living in a glass house shouldn’t be throwing stones. And if his wife is living there with him he ought to think twice again. First, the serial adulterer threatens to attack Hillary for Bill’s adultery, implying that it’s the woman’s fault if the man strays, which he probably truly believes. Now he’s attacking Alicia Machado over a non-existent sex tape. This from the guy whose wife’s nude pictures are all over the internet.

Also, what does it say about the guy that he gets up at 3 in the morning to spew this stuff. This is a man who is seriously mentally ill.

Filed in The Donald | | Comments (0)

Some good news

Thursday, September 29, 2016

A few years ago an occasional reader complained that I was a bit of a curmudgeon (who, me?) and that I rarely talked up good news. So, once a week for about five weeks I religiously posted some good news. I’m not sure if the well ran completely dry, or I just returned to my natural ways, but it’s been a while since I clicked the good news category.

All this is by way of saying that there is good news today, and it has nothing to do with Donald Trump:

The federal agency that controls more than $1 trillion in Medicare and Medicaid funding has moved to prevent nursing homes from forcing claims of elder abuse, sexual harassment and even wrongful death into the private system of justice known as arbitration.

An agency within the Health and Human Services Department on Wednesday issued a rule that bars any nursing home that receives federal funding from requiring that its residents resolve any disputes in arbitration, instead of court.

via The New York Times

This really is good news, one more positive action of the Obama administration, as it prepares to leave town. If we had a Congress that had any interest at all in serving the American people, these clauses would be banned outright in any consumer contract. The corporate world, with the enthusiastic assistance of the entire Supreme Court, has been slowly building an alternate and rigged “justice” system, just for itself. It’s a shame that Obama can’t see that the TPP does precisely the same thing, which is the real reason why most informed opponents are against it. In any event, this is a very good thing.

There is a legal doctrine under which clauses like this can be invalidated by a court. A “contract of adhesion” is a contract imposed by a stronger party upon a weaker. It’s one sided in the sense that the weaker party has no opportunity to really negotiate terms and has no bargaining power. It’s hard to imagine a contract that fits this bill more than one for a nursing home. (If you’ve ever been involved in the transfer of a person from a hospital to a nursing home, you know what I mean.) A court can step in and invalidate outrageous terms, such as the arbitration clauses at issue here. However, courts rarely take that step, and there’s no reason why the burden should be on the victim to go through the time and expense involved in litigating the issue.

Obama really has done a lot of good things, much of it under the radar, during his last year in office. All the more reason to make sure it doesn’t all get reversed by the Orange Man.

Anyway, good news.

Filed in Good News | | Comments (0)

Miracles do happen

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

As I said in a recent post, I did not intend to watch the debate, and I didn’t. However, my wife did, and while she very considerately removed her Ipad and herself to another room while she watched, I couldn’t help overhear some of it in real time. My own impression was that she was making mincemeat of him, but it remained to be seen whether the meat would be highly spiced enough for the media to acknowledge the rout.

It appears, and this really is a miracle, that it was. The media set the bar extremely low for the Donald, but instead of stepping over it, he tried to limbo under it, and it didn’t work out well for him. As many have already noted, we can now expect several days of whining about how mean the media is to him, with the future of his debate appearances in doubt. I’ve had my problems with Hillary from a policy standpoint, but I’ve never accused her of not doing her homework, and she certainly did it for this one. She played him like a fiddle. It must be hard for them, but for the most part, based on the reaction I’ve seen, with the exception of Fox, they are playing it for the disaster it was for the Donald. I guess if you come across as an ignorant, unhinged coke head, even our media has to take notice.

Speaking of low bars, a few thoughts occurred to me about the frequent media refrain that this or that candidate must merely meet media defined low expectations in order to succeed in a debate. The obvious point is that the media itself defines these expectations, with no scientifically valid input from the public. In addition, I’ve searched my own memory, and I’ve failed to come up with a single example of the expectations game being played with a Democratic candidate. So far as I can recall, Democrats are expected to win on points, with the Republican often spotted a few points (or more) by the media prior to the opening bell. Not all Republicans benefit from the expectations game, but to my recollection, only Republicans (best off hand examples: Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle) do.

I wonder why that is.

No, I really don’t.

Filed in Media, Politics, The Donald | | Comments (0)

I won’t be watching

Sunday, September 25, 2016

I’ve watched most of the presidential debates over the course of my lifetime. I’ve missed a few due to other commitments. I remember, for instance, having to listen to the Quayle-Bentsen debate, of lasting memory, in the car as I drove home from something or other.

But I’ll be giving this debate a pass.

As Bill Meyers pointed out recently the entire debate process has been corrupted, but that’s only part of my reasoning.

It’s my blood pressure. It’s actually pretty good, but I don’t see any compelling reason to put it at mortal risk. Despite the Lauer debacle, you can count on the moderator letting Trump off easy, if for no other reason than that he won’t have the slightest idea how to deal with the Donald. It also doesn’t help that Trump’s been playing the refs, as Republicans always do. Trump is even more effective than the average Republican at that sort of thing.

Despite some tentative move towards cleaning up its act, the media as a whole has been setting the table to declare Trump the winner if he makes it through without totally melting down. By that standard, he might still lose, but it’s going to take a mighty effort on his part. High school debaters are expected to know what they’re talking about, but not people running for President, particularly Republicans. At this point, the Republican passes so long as it is an open question whether he is legally competent or not.

Anyway, getting back to my blood pressure, I have found from past experience that when I yell at the people in the television, they totally ignore me, so the best course of action is to let other people watch for me. For this type of thing, hearsay evidence is fine, so long as you call the right witnesses. I’ll be hitting the blogs Tuesday morning, for informed opinions about the Monday night media fail.

Filed in Media | | Comments (0)

I’m an overachiever

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Turns out, I’m a special person. Today I got an email at work, which starts out like this:

Hello John,

I am just getting in contact with regards to my previous email regarding your selection as one of AI Magazine’s Top 25 Fund Managers of the Year 2016. Would [My law firm] like to move forward with one of the below packages?

Since early 2016, our research team have been assessing a wide range of key firms and individuals from across the financial and asset management industries.

Following this initial research stage, our directors, calling upon 30 years of experience and access to a worldwide network of industry experts, carefully selected businesses that they regard as having excelled in their sector. These awards are designed to celebrate companies that offer innovative services and solutions to those in the fund management industry. AI gives you an opportunity to showcase increasingly sought after expertise that keep the wheels of your industry turning.

As one of our 2016 winners, you are free to advertise your win in any way you see fit. However, if you would like to get a head start on your promotional activity, we offer a number of editorial packages that will help you to get your firm reach more than 108,500 CEOs and top-tier professionals.

If this is something that sounds of interest to you, we have four packages available for your consideration, as detailed below, each providing varying levels of exposure for [my law firm].

Editor’s Choice £3,450

The main image on the front cover of the publication
The main headline
A double page spread and Brown Jacobson Pc will be the lead firm profiled
6-month web banner
5 crystal trophies*
Reproduction of your piece on the website

It goes on to give me some lower cost ways to advertise my fabulosity, but those are for cheapskates.

I should add that this is only one of many awards I’ve won for things that I don’t even do. (Lawyers get their very own type of junk email) In a way, maybe I am among the top 25 money managers in the world. I do manage my own money, and, unlike some money managers I’ve heard of, I haven’t crashed the economy or done lasting harm to thousands of people. So maybe I will collect my award.

It will look great right next to my diploma from Trump University.

Filed in Ramblings, Uncategorized | | Comments (0)