Escape the heat with sizzling Baker’s Dozen of films

Bill Knight column for Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, Aug. 7, 8 or 9

Despite recent, pleasant weather, these are summer’s “Dog Days,” so if you suddenly find yourself huddled around wheezing air conditioners, retreat to fantasies that It Could Be Worse: Warm up your television and watch someone else perspiring under temperatures “healthy for plants, unhealthy for humans” (as a thermometer reads in the movie “Macao”); watch the torching of Atlanta in “Gone with The Wind.” From “Towering Inferno” and “Ring of Fire” to “Dune” and “Sea of Sand,” Hollywood loves heat.

In “The Desert Fox” and “Desert Rats,” sunbaked soldiers wage war as they risk sunstroke. In “Beau Geste,” Alec Guinness and Paul Newman swelter in sweatboxes in “Bridge on The River Kwai” and “Cool Hand Luke.” French Foreign Legionnaires withstand stifling temperatures in Africa’s deserts. That continental hothouse also housed Tarzan, who hot-footed it through jungle underbrush like a treetop commuter.

So, pull up a tumbleweed, sip on a cool drink and escape into these movie mirages:

“Backdraft” (1991). Fire has a supporting role in this picture about Chicago firefighters and an arsonist. Kurt Russell and Robert DeNiro star in Ron Howard’s film.

“Body Heat” (1981). Kathleen Turner and William Hurt combust in this steamy thriller. Director Lawrence Kasdan uses shimmering images of heat to stress lust in the dust, a vibrant visual effect. Turner (in her film debut) is a smoking, smoky seductress; Hurt plays an enflamed attorney.

“Beach Blanket Bingo” (1965). Frankie Avalon and Annette Funicello show a dizzy, Disney world as ever-optimistic teens frolicking on broiling beaches and scalding sand.

“Cat on a Hot Tin Roof” (1958). Elizabeth Taylor is the frustrated Maggie the Cat in Tennessee Williams’ scorching story about hot tempers and hot sex. Positioning for an inheritance is the subplot to a story of disappointment, ambition and greed. Co-starring are Paul Newman as a hard-drinking, ex-athlete son of dying Big Daddy (Burl Ives).

“The Day the Earth Caught Fire” (1962). This science-fiction movie asks, “Is it hot in here, or are we just hurtling toward the sun?” Atomic blasts at the North and South poles knock Earth off its orbit, in an accelerated global warming. (Newspaper editors prepare two front-page headlines: “World Saved” and “World Doomed” – never asking WHO WOULD BUY A NEWSPAPER in the latter situation.)

“Do the Right Thing” (1989). The heat’s presence propels the plot about racial tensions getting tighter with rising temperatures. It’s the hottest day of the year, and a pizza joint in a predominantly black New York City neighborhood becomes a flashpoint of unrest. Danny Aiello stars as the pizzeria owner, and director Spike Lee co-stars as a delivery man. The movie starts as a comedy, then becomes a study of racism’s roots.

“Donovan’s Reef” (1963). With John Wayne and Lee Marvin, director John Ford creates a funny buddy picture set in the South Seas, and viewers can almost feel burning breezes blowing through palm trees.

“Hellfighters” (1969). You’ll check the wick on your kerosene heater after watching John Wayne as a globe-trotting oil-derrick fire specialist. Vera Miles co-stars, but this isn’t a romance, it’s a roaster.

“Hideous Sun Demon” (1959). Released during the Cold War, this B-movie’s previews promised a “thermodynamic horror of outer space ... the blaze of noon made him a monster.” Actually, it was exposure to radioactivity from a nuclear power plant that changes a scientist into a walking blowtorch. The low-budget flick stars Robert Clarke, who also produced and directed (and maybe handled catering).

“In the Heat of the Night” (1967). Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger star in this deep-fat-fried suspense yarn about a cracker cop in muggy, small-town Mississippi helped by a Northern black detective on a murder.

“Lawrence of Arabia” (1962). Peter O’Toole leads his camels across sand dunes bigger than glaciers in this epic about the Englishman who during World War I rallied rival Arab tribes into a unified force against Germany and ally Turkey. Director David Lean’s epic depicts the desert as a beautiful, menacing resource.

“Sahara” (1943). Humphrey Bogart plays a World War II tank commander stranded with his crew in the Libyan desert. The group seeks refuge in a fort with a dried-up well (Dang!), then survivors are attacked by thirsty Nazis. (Bogie, it should be noted, also starred in another heater, “African Queen.”)

“A Streetcar Named Desire” (1951). Set in New Orleans, Tennessee Williams’ drama revolves around love and lust “all in the family.” Vivien Leigh stars as a disturbed woman who gets by living a fantasy, disrupting the lives of her sister (Kim Hunter) and her bullying husband (Marlon Brando). Elia Kazan directed.

Chill!

Weirdness diverts attention from dangers

Bill Knight column for Thursday, Friday or Saturday, Aug. 3, 4 or 5

So Anthony Scaramucci’s 10-day stint as White House Communications Director is done.

So?

So, call it another in a series of Distraction Actions.

The Oval Office Occupant encourages clashes between Scaramucci and Chief of Staff Reince Priebus; criticizes fellow Republicans Jeff Sessions and Congresswoman Lisa Murkowski; “fires” thousands of transgender troops without Pentagon input; threatens Special Counsel Robert Mueller if his assignment to investigate suspected collusion with Russia, wherever evidence leads him, touches on business records; and more. Trump’s outrageous speeches to Boy Scouts and police officers, his falsehoods and boasts, social faux pas and displays of ignorance, and a torrent of tweets that make Looney Tunes seem like Holy Writ all together can cause people to stop paying attention to the dangerous shenanigans that could directly affect us all.

If it’s intentional, the misdirection tries to trick us to focus elsewhere while extremists look to change not just the rules of the game, but the game itself.

If it’s not on purpose, intervention or impeachment seems reasonable.

Media may share some of the blame, but shocking comments or incidents, significant facts unearthed or political strategies employed shouldn’t be ignored. So, it’s up to regular Americans to notice what’s happening elsewhere.

In Washington – where Trump is challenging the Constitution and bullying those who don’t show the version of loyalty he craves – the administration’s targets are workers’ rights, health care, budget priorities, environmental protections, public education among various civic issues under attack.

Americans, especially workers, face a future with budget cuts jeopardizing government oversight; anti-union nominees for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the U.S. Labor Department; anti-union bills in Congress; and moves to reverse sensible executive orders and other regulations supporting workers.

The White House’s proposed federal budget slashes 20 percent from the Labor Department. On Capitol Hill, three bills affecting organized labor percolate through the building like painful gas bubbling through the belly. The Employee Rights Act rigs union-representation elections by treating employees who don’t cast ballots as “No” votes. The Employee Privacy Protection Act permits employers to keep employees’ contact information from unions during organizing drives. And the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act lengthens waiting periods that delay representation elections and lets companies gerrymander the composition of bargaining units eligible to vote.

“These bills are chock full of malicious intent to render elections absurdly undemocratic, strip workers of rights, take control of unions away from union members, drain union treasuries, and otherwise destroy labor unions," said Jody Calemine, General Counsel for the Communications Workers of America.

Throughout the U.S. Labor Department, at risk are modest reforms on overtime pay that increased the level after which employees are eligible for time-and-a-half pay (the first change in 12 years); a rule prohibiting companies from getting federal contracts if they’ve violated wage, labor or safety laws; requirements for law firms to disclose work they do for companies during unionizing drives; and the protection for workers and consumers against surrendering the right to a day in court as part of class-action suits through “forced arbitrations.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of Labor, who supervises daily operations there, is Patrick Pizzella, who’s worked for Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist convicted of corruption, and the National Right To Work Committee.

At the NLRB, Trump nominees approved July 19 by the Republican-controlled Senate Labor Committee are William Emanuel, an owner of the Littler Mendelson law firm (which U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren [D-Mass.] called “a noted union-buster”) and Marvin Kaplan, ex-counsel to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, where he worked against the NLRB.

“As I look at your records, I see anti-union, anti-worker and even anti-NLRB stands,” said U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.).

Trump’s tweets, the bedlam and the question of collusion with Russia all interfere with regular Americans noticing sinister schemes, says author Noam Chomsky (“Requiem for the American Dream: The 10 Principles of Concentration of Wealth & Power”).

“While everything is focusing on that, the Paul Ryan Republicans – the most dangerous and savage group in the country – are busy implementing programs that they have been talking quietly about for years,” Chomsky said, “which have very simple principles. One, be sure to offer to the rich and powerful gifts beyond the dreams of avarice, and [two], kick everyone else in the face.

“The parts of the governmental structure that are beneficial to human beings and to future generations are being systematically destroyed, and with very little attention,” he added.

[PICTURED: Editorial cartoon by Mark Hurwitt, opednews.com.]

Unionist announces for state Senate seat: a trend?

Bill Knight column for Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, 7-31, 8-1 or 2

A Quad Cities union activist on July 20 announced his candidacy to re-take Illinois’ 36th Senate District, lost to the GOP in 2014, and it could be the first of many non-politician progressives stepping up and standing up for regular Americans.

Fifty-three-year-old Gregg Johnson (right) is a 35-year member of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), where he was a steward and president of his union local.

“The role of organized labor in creating a level playing field for all has been a driving force in my efforts to protect my co-workers and all workers,” Johnson said. “Each generation has a responsibility to ensure that for the next. Here in Illinois, however, our legislators are neglecting this responsibility. We need to do better by demanding more.”

Johnson and his wife Celia have four children.

“I am concerned about my young daughters and their future education,” he said. “I worry about my grown children and how our lackluster economy will affect their jobs and whether my four grandchildren will have the same opportunities that I had.”

Johnson’s entry into the race might be part of Democrats finally investing in candidates and messaging, seen in efforts at state and national levels. In Illinois, Democrats this year picked up seats in areas where they’d struggled, possibly a result of increased activism after Donald Trump won, or from support from incumbents and the party.

Some Democratic candidates benefited from a program launchd by Congresswoman Cheri Bustos (D-Moline), “Build The Bench.” Her day-long “boot camp” offers tips for campaigning, and a dozen “graduates” from the program ran for local offices this year, with eight winning. (A ninth, Peorian Rita Ali, lost by one vote in her City Council race.)

“If we want to be successful in the heartland,” Bustos has said, “we need to connect Democratic candidates for office at all levels with the best practices, skills and expertise needed.”

In Washington, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on ABC-TV July 23 said, “Economics is our strength, and we are going to get at it. Democrats will start presenting that Better Deal to the American people.

“First, we’re going to increase people’s pay,” Schumer’s said. “Second, we’re going to reduce their everyday expenses. And third, we’re going to provide workers with the tools they need for the 21st-century economy.

“We’ll offer additional ideas, from rebuilding rural America to fundamentally changing our trade laws to benefit workers, not multinational corporations,” Schumer continued. “In the last two elections, Democrats failed to articulate a strong, bold economic program [and] failed to communicate our values to show that we were on the side of working people. We will not repeat the same mistake.”

Back in northwestern Illinois, Johnson’s opponent will be one-term conservative Neil Anderson, a 35-year-old former firefighter. In 2014, Anderson defeated 10-year state Sen. Mike Jacobs 54 to 46 percent after campaigning on reducing spending, cutting taxes, and reforming the judicial system to reduce victims’ ability to sue or to lessen potential damages.

Anderson’s credited Ballotpedia ywith sponsoring seven bills over the last two years (including two benefiting firefighters), plus 18 memorials to area residents. However, two bills originated in the House in February, and Anderson became a co-sponsor in May, weeks before they passed. Gov. Rauner signed insurance reform to help families facing pediatric autoimmune disorders (which passed unanimously). The other, establishing a veterans’ suicide task force, awaits Rauner’s response.

Anderson – who in 2014 stressed, “We need to give employers more of an incentive to do business in Illinois” – in legislative scorecards is a business-oriented conservative. The National Federation of Independent Business gave Anderson an 88%; the American Conservative Union gave him 69%, and the progressive Civic Action Illinois scored him as “poor.”

Meanwhile, Anderson showed 2014 campaign contributions of $1.8 million, according to “Follow The Money” data, with considerable funds from GOP power brokers. The Republican State Senate Campaign Committee of Illinois gave Anderson $1.3 million; the Illinois GOP $243,000; former Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno $52,600; the House Republican Campaign Committee of Illinois $35,000; U.S. Rep. John Shimkus (R-Collinsville) $25,000; the 18th Congressional District Republican Central Committee of Illinois also gave $25,000 and that District’s Congressman, Darin LaHood, had his campaign committee donate $10,000; Bruce and Diana Rauner together gave $10,600; and lesser contributions came from Citizens for [state Rep. Norine] Hammond, Ameren, the Illinois Merchants Association, the Illinois Manufacturers Association, and the Illinois State Medical Society.

Despite such resources against him, Johnson sounds upbeat reaching out to everyday working people.

“We can do better,” he said. “But positive change occurs at the grassroots level, and as I undertake this difficult journey, this is where this race will be won.”

Incomes getting more unequal, tied to anti-union efforts

Bill Knight column for Thursday, Friday or Saturday, July 27, 28 or 29

It’s been almost six years since the notion of income inequality became part of the national conversation, and recent evidence shows a correlation between that harmful phenomenon and the decades-long war on organized labor.

Income inequality had been discussed globally for some time. However, it wasn’t until Occupy Wall Street in September 2011 demonstrated throughout New York City’s financial district – and encamped at Zuccotti Park there for two months, protesting greed, the influence of corporations on public policy, and resulting income inequality – that Americans started talking about the powerful and prosperous 1% and the rest of us – the 99%.

Since then, studies have tied income inequality to the strength or weakness of unions, which helps explain why the well-to-do often attack labor.

Meanwhile, statistics on financial survival show that income inequality – which has manifested itself in “Fight for 15” campaigns since 2012 – is hurting millions of Americans.

Since 1957, when union membership peaked (representing 34.8 percent of all U.S. workers), overall income inequality has risen dramatically.

Today, the top 1% takes 25 percent of all pay and also owns about 40 percent of the nation’s wealth, according to economist and Columbia University professor Joseph Stiglitz, author of 2015’s “The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We Can Do About Them.”

True, other factors also occurred in the last 60 years. More and different skills increasingly have been demanded compared to decades ago, many requiring less-affordable college educations. Also, globalization tempted too many employers to exploit workers in low-wage countries, forcing U.S. workers to compete with virtual slave labor.

Nevertheless, there’s a clear correlation: The nation’s wealthiest gained enormously as union representation fell. Dierk Herzer of Helmut-Schmidt University in Hamburg, Germany, in Economic Development Quarterly last year wrote that “there is a negative long-run relationship between unionization and income inequality in the United States, and that causality is unidirectional from unionization to inequality.”

As unionization falls, inequality rises, he showed.

Besides deepening divisions in a relative sense, in the absolute, almost half the country is now at or near poverty. That’s according to the Census Bureau’s “Supplemental Poverty Measure,” which pegs it at 47.1 percent, or its “Selected Economic Characteristics” report, which totals households earning less than $50,000 at 46.6 percent. That’s 54.2 million Americans.

The poverty level, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is $12,060 for an individual and $24,600 for a family of four.

Remembering that the U.S. minimum wage is $7.25 an hour and Illinois’ minimum wage is still $8.25 an hour (despite popular support for a wage hike), it’s not difficult to appreciate how difficult it is to achieve or remain in the middle class. That requires making a “living wage,” meaning wages needed to pay for the basics without public assistance and letting families deal with emergencies and plan ahead.

A “living wage” in Illinois is $17.57 – more than twice what a minimum-wage worker earns, according to the People’s Action Institute report “Waiting for the Payoff.” And it’s worse for working families. A household with two working adults with two kids needs an income of $22.78 per hour to make ends meet.

Workers must organize, and voters must demand that labor laws reflect the economic goals of a society aspiring to empower its citizens to be taxpayers, consumers and stable neighbors.

“When unions are strong, they can advocate for rules and regulations that help all workers,” wrote Alana Semuels in The Atlantic. “European countries also experienced waves of globalization and increased reliance on technology, but their workforce hasn’t seen the same declines in union membership or non-union wages.

“It could be hard to return to substantial wage growth, and greater income equality, without organized labor,” she added.

But the political party now most beholden to the 1%, the GOP, is also behind the worst anti-union efforts in decades. Such Right-Wing attacks not only divide the nation farther, but ultimately harm the country.

“I think Republicans need to take income inequality more seriously,” said social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who teaches Ethical Leadership at New York University's Stern School of Business. It’s “not because I favor equality of outcomes. I do not. I think the Right is correct to stress merit and earned rewards, not handouts and forced equality. But I think what Republicans are blind to is that power corrupts.”

[PICTURED: economic Policy Institute chart, based on "Historical Statistics of the United States," unionstats.com, Piketty and Saez 2003 and "The World Top Incomes Database."]

Rural areas still losing people, opportunities

Bill Knight column for Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, 7-24, 25 or 26

The nation’s rural population declined again last year, according to recent Census data, and statistics also show fewer jobs to attract new residents, in a chicken-or-egg dilemma. Does population loss contribute to fewer employers, or does less job opportunity discourage people staying in or moving to small towns?

In downstate Illinois, for example, Fulton County since 1980 lost 18.7 percent of its population, according to the National Association of Counties’ breakdown of the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis’ “Local Area Personal Income and Employment Data, 2015” and Census estimates for 2016. Other counties’ population loss in percentages: Henderson (24.9), Henry (14.8), Knox (17.3), Livingston (11), McDonough (17.1), Mercer (18.3) Peoria (7.4), and Warren (20.6).

Two area counties showed population increases since 1980: Tazewell (+2.7 percent) and Woodford (+17.6).

In the 1980s, America’s trouble spots seemed to be cities, with traffic, crime, costs of living, and slow economic growth since factories and other employers were moving to suburbs. Meanwhile, the country’s smallest counties used to be on an upswing, generating about one-third of all new businesses in the 1990s, according to the bipartisan Economic Innovation Group.

But cities rebounded.

Rural areas didn’t, or couldn’t.

Today – using factors ranging from poverty and teenage births, to deaths due to cancer and heart disease, disability benefits, etc. – rural areas’ attractiveness to residents ranks below cities, suburbs and small metro areas, and steady population declines aren’t helping.

“Taking a long, wide view from even before 1900, the trends for large swatches of rural America and its communities have been challenging and largely debilitating for many and beneficial for a few,” says Timothy Collins, assistant director of the Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs from 2005-2016. “The whole economic system is tilted toward urbanization.”

Collins, now retired, offers three general observations.

“First, the history of rural communities can be viewed in terms of their ability to adapt to mainly urban-driven events that took them out of relative isolation and moved them into regional, national and international economies,” he says. “Global competition is not new, and U.S. agriculture has long been part of the mix.

“Second, the byword for American agriculture has been ‘efficiency’ to increase farm income, compete in global markets, and provide lower-cost food,” he continues. “Widespread mechanization began after the Civil War and intensified in the following decades, reducing the need for farm laborers, and moving farmers toward specialization. Labor-saving devices, not only on farms, but in small-town factories, pushed workers into growing cities.

“Third, much of the time the ‘pull’ factor in cities is powerful,” he adds. “Follow the money and the opportunities and you'll see where the people are going. Urban economies typically grow faster and offer more employment opportunities.”

Tim Morema and Bill Bishop in a report from the Center for Rural Strategies said, “It’s a problematic trend because it usually means fewer people working, fewer kids in school, fewer people shopping and doing the other things that contribute to the local economy.

“On the other hand, the [2016] decline was the smallest since the trend started,” they added.

Indeed, those same counties’ losses from 2015 were: Fulton (0.4 percent), Henderson (1.8) Henry (0.4), Knox (0.9), Livingston (0.3), McDonough (1), Mercer (0.8), Peoria (0.6), Tazewell (0.3), Warren (0.8) and Woodford (0.2).

Despite such relative good news, Collins isn’t optimistic about promoting the attractions of rural areas.

“I'm unsure if any of the advantages of rural areas are even on the radar of most corporate decision-makers,” he says. “Rural communities in the U.S. have lost their low-wage advantage to global competition. Also, whatever the benefits of rural America – and I believe there are many – they are not enough to offset the benefits of city living, despite their high costs and congestion.

“It takes a different type of person to choose to live in a rural area” continues Collins, who lives in Bushnell. “We like to take it easier and don't need to be surrounded by all of the people and noise, even if there are great jobs, wonderful restaurants, and tons of cultural activities.

“Consider the loss of Caterpillar in Peoria, a decent-sized city with some good amenities,” he adds. “After years of rumors, the headquarters was finally moved to a Chicago suburb. I don't see how most rural areas can compete when international cities such as Chicago are in competition with other major global cities. The world’s population is now mainly urban.”

[PICTURED: This chart from Governing magazine shows the long-term trend of "rural flight" to cities."]

Lawmakers take positive step with modest tax hike

Bill Knight column for Thursday, Friday or Saturday, July 20, 21 or 22

Like most folks, I’m not crazy about paying more taxes.

But I’m not crazy.

The tax increase that was part of the General Assembly this month stepping back from the financial cliff the state was facing is understandable and tolerable.

Overriding Gov. Bruce Rauner’s veto and enacting Illinois’ first budget in 736 days, the bipartisan vote on a package of measures cuts operational spending $5 billion, cuts state-agency funding 5 percent across the board, cuts spending on pensions by $1.5 billion this year and reforms pensions to include a Tier III hybrid plan blending defined benefit and defined contribution parts, and pays more than half of the state’s $15 billion in unpaid bills. Lawmakers also approved raising the income tax from 3.75 percent to 4.95 percent – a tax rate Rauner previously agreed to. (Incidentally, the $36.1 billion balanced budget is less than Rauner’s $37.3 billion plan suggested in February.)

Some describe the tax increase as a “32-percent hike,” which is technically accurate but misleading. Raising the income-tax rate from 3.75 percent to 4.95 percent is a 32-percent difference using only a percentage difference. Using subtraction instead, it’s a 1.2 percentage point increase. (Who would see a discount moviehouse raising its $3 admission to $6 and consider that a “200-percent hike” without appreciating that it’d still be lower than most theaters’ $9 ticket?)

After all, Illinois’ flat-rate income tax is lower than nearby states, which have graduated income taxes, with higher incomes paying higher percentages. Again, Illinois’ new rate is 4.95; surrounding states’ top rates are 6 (Kentucky and Missouri), 6.61 (Indiana), 7.65 (Wisconsin) and 8.98 (Iowa).

The new tax is bearable. The median (midpoint) income in Illinois is $60,413, according to Census figures. Households earning $60,413 that used to pay 3.75 percent ($2,265.48) will now pay 4.95 percent ($2,990.44) – a difference of $724.96 (and exemptions would reduce that).

In other words, the difference for an individual taxpayer would be less than $2 a day.

The prolonged deadlock was never a give-and-take debate and compromise, but Rauner holding the state hostage for his “turnaround agenda” of unrelated issues built on the backs of regular people: weakening workers compensation, busting unions, betraying pension promises, setting term limits, freezing local property taxes for four years, eliminating some levels of local government, and reforming school funding.

Plus, lawmakers seeking compromise approved some workers comp reform, pension reform and possible consolidation of local governments, but not precisely what Rauner sought. A new school-funding formula passed, too, but Rauner’s pledged to veto it, so it’s languishing as he now holds kids hostage.

None of Rauner’s demands were more important to him than weakening unions like Republican Gov. Scott Walker did in Wisconsin, whether through making unreasonable contract ultimatums or taking union resources by limiting fair-share fees from workers who benefit from union representation but decline to become union members.

The billionaire hedge-fund manager’s first campaign stop in running for governor was in Decatur, where he proposed Right To Work legislation and praised Kentucky’s attempt to enact RTW schemes at local levels in an obvious partisan scheme to dilute Democratic-leaning support. His obsession with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees or other unions that mostly back Democrats neglects two points: Unions cannot donate funds to political campaigns from resources meant for bargaining and enforcing contracts, and corporations and the rich mostly back Republicans. So campaign-finance reform should therefore be the goal, not hamstringing one political party.

Further, Rauner’s long campaign to personalize the dispute as House Speaker Mike Madigan’s fault is just silly. Even former Gov. Jim Edgar, a Republican, has said Madigan “is not the big problem. Even a somewhat incompetent governor has more power than Mike Madigan.”

Meanwhile, however, there’s no funding for schools just weeks before classes are supposed to start, despite an innovative Senate Bill 1 that passed both houses by providing “evidence-based” funding to districts. It’s as close as Illinois has gotten to repairing an unfair approach that short-changes areas with low property values. If Rauner doesn’t sign it (he’s conceded he agrees with 90 percent of the measure) – or if the legislature doesn’t again override his veto – schools face an unfunded future that surely within months will drain reserves that conscientious local school boards have built up over decades.

That’s not tolerable.

That’s just crazy.

[PICTURED: Chris Britt cartoon from Progress Illinois.]

‘Pet Sounds’ was – and is – an inspiration

Bill Knight column for Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, 7-17, 18 or 19

The Beatles’”Sgt. Pepper” all summer has received justifiable attention on its 50th anniversary, but the wonderful album didn’t spring full-blown from Lennon and McCartney’s heads. It owes a lot to Capitol Records labelmates the Beach Boys, especially their ground-breaking 1966 release, “Pet Sounds” – scheduled to be performed live by Brian Wilson in Illinois and Indiana this fall.

Also, a Beach Boys boxed set just came out: “1967 – Sunshine Tomorrow” with rarities from recording sessions that produced “Smiley Smile” and “Wild Honey” plus concerts featuring “Pet Sound” tunes such as “God Only Knows.”

Speaking of live Beach Boys, the group in various lineups has frequently played Illinois, from Chicago, Rosemont, Tinley Park, Hoffman Estates and Aurora to Rockford, Moline, Springfield, Macomb and Peoria. Wilson and his current band, including Al Jardine and Blondie Chaplin, are scheduled to perform “Pet Sounds” in South Bend and Florence, Ind., and Rosemont and Peoria, Ill.

“Pet Sounds” benefited immensely in 1964-65 after Brian Wilson was replaced on tour by Glen Campbell, then Bruce Johnston, letting Wilson stay in the studio to refine his creative process, which he mastered as a consummate composer/arranger. The album became a bold and original production, experimental and moody, yet uplifting and visionary.

Author and journalist David Wild, in the hour-long documentary directed by Martin R.Smith currently being cablecast on Showtime, ”The Beach Boys: The Making of ‘Pet Sounds’,” says the record was “where rock ‘n’ roll became a religious experience.”

Songs such as “Wouldn’t It Be Nice,” “Sloop John B,” “Caroline No” and particularly “God Only Knows” bookend a superb collection of 13 tracks.

“Pet Sounds” inspired John Lennon and especially Paul McCartney and was a catalyst for “Sgt. Pepper.

Johnston in the film says after the LP was finished “I took two copies of ‘Pet Sounds’ with me [to England]. Our publicist set up about 25 interviews for me.” Then Lennon and McCartney went to his hotel to hear the record.

“I played them the album and they heard it two times and they were just delightful,” he added.

Wilson and the Beach Boys had started to move away from their successful formula of songs about surfing, hot rods and young love starting in 1965 with “Beach Boys Today,” followed that year by “Summer Days (and Summer Nights!)” – featuring the popular “Help Me Rhonda” and “California Girls” – and then the acoustic “Beach Boys Party!” with mostly cover songs. “Pet Sounds” came next, taking six months to finish and released a year before “Sgt. Pepper.”

The Beatles were evolving, too, releasing the more-challenging “Rubber Soul” (1965), “Yesterday and Today” (1966), and “Revolver” (also 1966) immediately before “Sgt. Pepper.”

“Pet Sound’s” melodies and arrangements, structure and chords, harmonies and performances, instrumentation and lyrics (by Tony Asher on 8 of 11 tracks; 2 are instrumentals ) remain breathtaking.

“If you can pop all of those together in one album, I figure you’ve got it,” McCartney said in a 1990 interview with David Leaf. “It may be going overboard to say it’s the classic of this [20th] century, but to me, it certainly is a total, classic record that is unbeatable in many ways.”

McCartney conceded that “it was ‘Pet Sounds’ that blew me out of the water. I’ve often played ‘Pet Sounds’ and cried. It’s that kind of an album for me.

“ ‘God Only Knows’ lyrics are great,” McCartney continued. “Those do it to me every time. Very emotional. Always a bit of a choker for me. It’s a really, really great song. [In my] top 10 favorite songs [it’s] at the top of my list.

“If records had a director within a band, I sort of directed ‘Pepper’,” McCartney added. “And my influence was basically the ‘Pet Sounds’ album.”

Wild reminisced about “Pet Sound’s” impact.

“A half a century [later] – this is how good this can be,” he said.

[PICTURED: Paul McCartney and Brian Wilson in 2002 teamed up for a live duet of "God Only Knows" during a Los Angeles fund raiser for McCartney's Adopt-A-Minefield charity. Photo from "Beatlebomb," c/o geocities.ws.]

122 nations try to present ‘the gift of time’

Bill Knight column for Thursday, Friday or Saturday, July 13, 14 or 15

Talk turned inevitably to shared memories and current events when the high-school reunion started last Friday, the day the United Nations adopted a global treaty banning nuclear weapons. Old friends discussed how rain these days seemed to be either thunderstorms or severe thunderstorms, unlike the years of our youth. Conversation bounced between the state budget, baseball, corn crops and Japanese beetles – another invasive species our childhoods were spared.

Will our own children and grandchildren be spared the threat of nuclear holocaust, some innocent and angry questions asked. Have we explained our experiences practicing “duck and cover” drills to prepare to be annihilated in an orderly fashion? Or having fallout shelters sold like the new-model cars on lots? Or 1962’s Cuban Missile Crisis, when some high school freshmen thought, “Why study for Latin class when it’s a coin toss that we may not be here Monday?”

Last week, despite (or due to) dangers on the Korean peninsula, in the Mideast, and with Russia and various “proxy wars,” 122 nations voted to ban nuclear weapons. Only the Netherlands opposed it, and Singapore abstained. Together, they started the process to offer to the future “The Gift of Time,” as journalist/activist Jonathan Schell described the abolition of nuclear weapons in his 1998 book.

It’s the first time in history that a majority of countries approved such a pact, an unprecedented move, except perhaps for the Paris Accords on climate change.

Why? Nuclear weapons threaten all life, from people to animals to plants to Earth itself. And humanity needs a plan. As Gen. (ret.) Lee Butler, former head of the U.S. Strategic Command, has said, we can’t take much credit for our survival in the atomic age. Nuclear apocalypse has only been avoided, Butler’s said, by a combination of skill, luck and Divine intervention.

The last few weeks of negotiations followed meetings in Austria, Mexico and Norway, spurred by the International Red Cross and non-governmental organizations working for five years and building on grassroots concerns perhaps best exemplified by a million protestors gathering in New York City to demonstrate against nuclear arms during a 1982 UN session on disarmament.

Unfortunately, nine nuclear-armed nations didn’t participate: China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States (and China, France, Russia, the UK and the US are permanent members of the UN’s Security Council, and the United States and Russia have about 90 percent of all nuclear weapons.) Interestingly, earlier test votes on drafts had China, India and Pakistan abstaining (and North Korea agreeing!)

“The historic shift powering the negotiations is that states without nuclear weapons are taking leadership to achieve a global public good on the basis of international humanitarian, human rights and environmental law,” said Marie Dennis and Jonathan Frerichs of Pax Christi and the World Council of Churches. “The permanent members of the Security Council still cling to Cold War plans that require an unshakeable commitment to ‘mutually assured’ nuclear destruction and to a nuclear ‘balance of terror.’

“Instead of meeting their United Nations Charter obligations, instead of negotiating nuclear disarmament in good faith as required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, instead of outlawing the ultimate instrument of indiscriminate violence in an era of indiscriminate violence, the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council are boycotting the deliberations and even belittling their purpose.”

Still, the treaty may offer cover to reluctant policymakers, or leverage to pressure governments to plan to cooperate instead of to obliterate.

“By delegitimizing nuclear weapons and raising awareness of the terrifying dangers that come from continued reliance on them, the nuclear ban makes a valuable contribution to nonproliferation and disarmament efforts,” commented Meredith Horowski with the anti-nuclear weapons group Global Zero. “There are many more steps to come in order to secure a world without nuclear weapons, but the world took a step in the right direction.”

After all, global cooperation is possible, seen in pacts providing for no-questions-asked help for distressed vessels in international waters, and assistance for emergencies or disasters, whether tsunamis or orbiting spacecraft. Such common sense has even occurred in Congress, where this year bills were introduced by Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) prohibiting a first-use nuclear strike.

As the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has said, “Wise public officials should act immediately, guiding humanity away from the brink. If they do not, wise citizens must step forward and lead the way.”

That could lead to future reunions where talk drifts to how strange it was when nuclear weapons seemed as common as the pestilence of leaf-devouring beetles.

[PICTURED: Photo from The Nation magazine, Nov. 1, 2016.]