22 percent of Utah roads are in poor condition which costs an annual $694 per driver to maintain, according to QuoteWizard’s latest report. We analyzed Federal Highway Administration data and ranked states based on percentage of poor road conditions, annual cost per motorist from roads in need of repair, and percentage of structurally deficient bridges. Associated with the ranking factors is the percentage of state highway spending on road repairs.
Key Findings:
Without further investment, we found that Taxpayer funded highway capital delegated for states to maintain roads isn’t enough to cover necessary repairs. Many states are spending the majority of their highway capital on expansion instead of maintenance of roads. You can find the full report here: https://quotewizard.com/news/posts/states-with-worst-infrastructure
=======================
It's a fact that people with ADHD do better with external structure — from morning through after school & bedtime. Here's how to develop routines >
How to streamline your family's schedule
Forward to a friend »
View this email in your browser
PART 1: SANER FAMILY SCHEDULES
Behold the Magic of a Consistent Routine
Children (and adults) with ADHD do best when they know what to expect as their day unfolds. This external structure helps them feel safe and achieve success. Learn 11 ways to establish routine when your life tends toward chaos →
HOT SPOT: MORNINGS
Rise and Shine – for Real
When your child has ADHD, mornings (especially school days) are stressful. 6 tips for creating calm, intentional A.M routines.
Happier mornings ahead →
ADVERTISEMENT
HOT SPOT: AFTER SCHOOL
HW for the Modern Family
How to manage homework when your child has tutoring, soccer, and piano after school, and you don't get home from work until dinner time?
With this flexible plan →
HOT SPOTS: AFTERNOON TO BED
9 Secrets to Stress-Free Evenings
Rush-hour traffic + hungry kids + mountains of homework + ADHD can make weeknights downright hellish. Make it to bedtime with these
tried-and-true strategies →
2 Daily Routines for YOU
Adding these two simple routines (one before bed and one for the morning) will help everyone make it through another school year.
Parents, learn the routines →
---------------------------------------------
EDCUtah Conducting In-Depth Business Climate Survey Statewide
Limited spots still available for interested businesses
SALT LAKE CITY (October 3, 2019)—The Economic Development Corporation of Utah (EDCUtah) recently conducted its 30th “Know the Customer” interview and is seeking another 30 companies to participate in the initiative by year-end. The program is a statewide research study comprised of in-depth interviews with business executives. Its goal is to better understand the factors that drive economic growth in Utah’s key industry sectors.
Conducted via in-person interviews, the survey consists of 100 questions that revolve around companies’ Utah and out-of-state operations, workforce issues, and overall Utah business climate.
“We’re looking for a select group of companies that want to lend their voice,” said Theresa A. Foxley, president and CEO of EDCUtah. “The business community is the driving force of our economy and we need to understand what we’re doing well as a state and where we’re falling short. The Know the Customer program seeks to demonstrate a commitment to continually improve business policies and workforce development.”
Responses are not shared publicly but are reviewed internally by EDCUtah and other public-sector economic development executives. Aggregate data will be used to report on industry trends and inform policy decisions in Utah.
EDCUtah has a goal of completing 60 interviews by December 2019, spanning a wide range of industries.
“With 30 responses to date, we’re starting to see some emerging trends,” said Matt Hilburn, EDCUtah vice president of marketing and research. “When we top 60 responses, we’ll be able to speak to those trends with a much higher degree of confidence.”
Interested companies or city/county economic development staff should contact Michael O’Malley, EDCUtah marketing director, at momalley@edcutah.org for more information. Companies participating will receive a copy of the study results upon release in 2020.
###
A private, non-profit organization founded in 1987, the Economic Development Corporation of Utah (EDCUtah) is a catalyst for quality job growth and increased capital investment in the state. EDCUtah is a statewide economic development organization (EDO) specializing in corporate recruitment, economic research, site selector marketing, and community development. A partner of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development for corporate recruitment, EDCUtah is supported by state government, local governments, and organizations from the private sector. For more information, visit www.edcutah.com.
EDCUtah, 201 S. Main St. #2150, Salt Lake City, UT 84111
========================
New Coalition to Protect Public Lands from Trump Administration’s Giveaways to Industry
After 150 million acres lose protections under Trump, more than a dozen groups join forces to pressure companies that conduct or fund extraction to stay out of previously protected areas
WASHINGTON, DC – In response to recent efforts by the Trump administration to roll back federal public lands protections and weaken bedrock environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act, the Antiquities Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act to allow expanded industrial activity, more than a dozen organizations have joined together to urge companies involved in mining or other extractive activities, and the banks that fund them, not to conduct or finance any new or expanded commercial activity on any public lands and waters that were formerly or are currently under legal or administrative protections, or that would impact these lands and waters, and to adopt a no-go policy clarifying this position.
The coalition’s statement of principles can be found here.
“The Trump administration has thrown open the doors to its friends and allies in the fossil fuel and mining industries,” said Amanda Hurowitz, a spokesperson for the coalition. “But today we are standing up on behalf of the large majority of people in this country who support protections for our public lands.”
Federal protections for public lands have enjoyed bipartisan support for decades, and available polling shows that attacks on public lands are highly controversial. A 2016 Hart Research Associates Poll showed that 91 percent of voters across political parties ranked the protection and maintenance of national parks, public lands, and natural places as an important goal for the federal government.
Public lands are managed in trust by the federal government for current and future generations. Since taking office, the Trump administration has taken the unprecedented action of removing protections from more than 150 million acres of public lands, and trying to remove protections for more than 119 million acres of public waters, areas that have been put into protection for their cultural, ecological, or recreational value. The administration has also offered up nearly 500 million acres of public land and water for oil and gas development.
“The last thing people want is more public lands privatized, strip-mined, or destroyed,” said Hurowitz. “These are beautiful places that we want our children and grandchildren to enjoy. Handing them over to dirty industry just as we need to be addressing the climate crisis is both irresponsible and unpopular.”
The Trump administration has already eliminated protections for public lands across the country, targeting varied ecosystems, treasured lands, and fragile habitat. These rollbacks include dramatically cutting down the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante National Monuments, opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and previously protected areas of the Arctic Ocean to oil and gas exploration, and reducing protections put in place to safeguard sage-grouse habitat spanning seven western states.
In the weeks ahead, the coalition plans to mobilize both their grassroots members and a wide array of investors to urge companies to adopt no-go policies for developing in protected or previously protected public lands and waters, or in areas that could impact protected or previously protected areas.
Members of the coalition include:
Quotes from Coalition Members:
Marty Irby, Executive Director, Animal Wellness Action:
“President Trump’s Department of Interior has been a catastrophe for our iconic American wildlife since day one. Pillaging our nation’s public lands to line the pockets of oil barons, and ranchers beholden to industrial agriculture will have disastrous consequences for generations to come.”
Davis Filfred (Diné), Chairman, Utah Diné Bikéyah Board:
“As Indigenous People of America, we are stewards of ancestral landscapes like Bears Ears and other cultural landscapes currently under threat from corporate hands. We ask the broader American public to stand with us to protect public lands - which starts with the recognition that Indigenous Peoples have always protected and will continue to protect their homelands.”
Athan Manuel, Director of Public Lands Protection, Sierra Club:
“People value public lands and they support companies that do too. There’s an opportunity now for corporations and financial institutions to speak for public lands with their actions—to make clear they won’t pursue dirty fuel development in special natural places.”
Tom Landwehr, Executive Director, Save the Boundary Waters:
"No bank should want to be known as the financier of the project that destroyed the Boundary Waters Wilderness. People love the Boundary Waters, and as they increasingly vote with their pocketbooks are watching closely what companies stand for. We're excited to join this effort to help financial institutions understand the many risks associated with participating in the destruction of America's special places."
Kristen Miller, Conservation Director, Alaska Wilderness League:
“For the past year, the Trump administration has been barreling forward with an aggressive plan to lease the fragile coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This process has ridden roughshod over science, silenced expert dissent, shut out indigenous communities, and ignored the law. The end product will turn the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge into the latest casualty of Trump’s plan to sell out our public lands and waters to the highest bidder, giving Big Oil everything it wants in its continued quest to do Trump’s bidding.
Those oil companies now considering exploiting this national treasure should think twice. With the support of two-thirds of the American public, $2.5 trillion worth of investors, and major banks like Barclays, the House of Representatives has already taken decisive action against the rush to drill. As the impacts of our warming climate continue to become more and more real, this opposition will only grow. Companies should simply say no to the uneconomical, dubious proposal to develop the unparalleled Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.”
Kate Van Waes, Executive Director, American Hiking Society:
“The most pressing threats to public lands are the removal of protections resulting in increased energy development. In the last three years, over 150 million acres of public lands have lost protections making them vulnerable to energy extraction. Such erosions, rather than expanding access, deprive hikers, anglers, hunters, campers, and all other permitted users the opportunity to enjoy their desired form of recreation.”
Alex Taurel, Conservation Program Director, League of Conservation Voters:
“The Trump administration’s removal of protections for public lands and waters and indigenous sacred lands is shameful and unpopular. We call on companies to publicly disavow these rollbacks and pledge not to exploit these majestic places. With the United States losing a football field of natural area to development every 30 seconds and the world facing the extinction of 1 million plant and animal species, responsible companies must step up and say no to the Trump administration’s efforts to turn our wildest areas over to big polluters.”
Nicole Ghio, Senior Fossil Fuels Program Manager, Friends of the Earth
“Any corporation or investor looking to profit from Trump’s rollbacks of land and water protections should think again. These actions by the Administration are often illegal and regularly overturned by the courts. Meanwhile, there is massive support for protecting our public lands and waters. Companies looking to make a quick buck will likely find their corporate image ruined for nothing.”
Leda Huta, Executive Director, Endangered Species Coalition
“Our public lands provide millions of acres of vital habitat for wildlife and imperiled species. The Administration’s industry free-for-all on our public lands jeopardizes America’s legacy of protecting fish, plants and wildlife for our children and our grandchildren.”
Nada Culver, Vice President of Public Lands, National Audubon Society
“Birds from every state depend on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and others like the Greater Sage-Grouse in the West are already in crisis. This administration’s actions undermining public lands’ protections is contrary to what the majority of Americans want. With three billion birds already gone, corporations and banks have an opportunity to lead and protect these special places by declining to invest in commercial development of crucial public lands before it’s too late while the courts and Congress address this unprecedented assault.”
Matt Keller, Senior Campaign Director, The Wilderness Society
"Americans expect the government to protect our public lands, not sell them off to the highest bidder. But after opening up 150 million acres of our land and water to their friends in the extractive industry, it's clear that the Trump administration and Secretary Bernhardt simply can't be trusted. We're turning our attention to companies to make it clear that just because the Trump administration has given them permission to exploit America’s public lands doesn't mean there won't be a massive public outcry if they do."
Randi Spivak, Public Lands Director, The Center for Biological Diversity:
"The Trump administration is running roughshod over our public lands, allowing the destruction of spectacular places that should be held in trust for generations to come. Corporations intending to profit from the administration’s illegal slashing of public lands protections should reconsider. Investing in the destruction of public lands, waters and wildlife habitat is both despicable and a PR disaster."
============================
CONTACT
Aaron Weiss, Deputy Director
Center for Western Priorities
aaron@westernpriorities.org
720-279-0019
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 3, 2019
DENVER—A new Winning the West 2020 poll released today by the Center for Western Priorities shows an “Outdoor Voting Bloc” in the Rocky Mountain West has cemented itself as an influential factor in election outcomes. The Winning the West poll and accompanying presentation—conducted for the third consecutive election cycle in Colorado, Montana, and Nevada, and for the second time in Arizona and New Mexico—reveal how issues involving public lands, parks, and wildlife play an outsized role in moving Western voters to the polls and influence how voters choose candidates.
Overwhelming majorities of voters in the Mountain West can be considered committed outdoor enthusiasts. 93 percent agree the mountains and outdoors are what makes living in their state special. They not only use public lands but care about how they are protected, with 51 percent of Western voters labeling themselves as “conservationists” and 61 percent who believe the U.S. needs to protect new deserving public lands. When it comes to voting priorities, 78 percent of voters in the West consider issues involving public lands, waters, and wildlife to be important when deciding whether to support a candidate for public office, outpacing climate change as a top concern.
“We continue to see the rise of public lands and the outdoors as an important issue in competitive races in the Mountain West,” said Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities. “Westerners care deeply about our public lands and we vote on them. Against the backdrop of the current administration’s unpopular agenda on public lands, it will be worth watching to see if more candidates highlight an agenda of protecting the West’s outdoor way of life in their strategies to win.”
The poll found recent administration proposals on public lands are unpopular in every state surveyed. Overall, the administration’s approval rating among Western voters on public lands issues sits at 32 percent. The views on the administration’s public lands agenda were consistent across all five states surveyed and reflected in the responses of independent voters.
Western voters oppose numerous administration policy proposals:
Opening up new public lands to oil and gas development (55 percent)
Rolling back environmental and safety regulations on oil and gas development (59 percent)
Curbing regulations designed to reduce natural gas leaks from public lands development (59 percent)
Reducing the size of national monuments, specifically significantly shrinking the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments (69 percent, including a majority of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents)
Asked about a series of proposals on public lands, strong majorities supported ideas like:
Reinvesting oil, gas, mining, and renewable energy royalties collected from public lands back into the public lands themselves (80 percent)
Increasing spending on public lands to ensure necessary access and maintenance (81 percent)
Investing in forest management to protect public lands, restore Western forests, and protect communities from wildfire (86 percent)
Increase funding to build new public trails, campgrounds, and access points on public lands (70 percent)
Providing full funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund to ensure people have access to recreation on public lands, and that public land is purchased and protected for the benefit of the public (78 percent)
Similarly strong majority support for the proposals was seen in a subset of dependable Primary Election voters.
On energy issues, voters reject the prioritization of energy development over other public lands uses. 50 percent say the U.S. should stop issuing new oil and gas leases on public lands until the lands currently being leased, but without a well in use, are developed, against 15 percent who support issuing leases at the same levels. Similarly, 58 percent of voters say protecting our outdoor spaces should be given priority even at the risk of closing some land to future development, compared to 10 percent who take the opposite view.
Most voters seek balance on energy development. 53 percent say oil and gas production should be allowed with strict limitations and regulations to ensure that land, wildlife, water, and public safety are protected first and foremost. More extreme positions were far less popular. 18 percent say oil and gas should be kept in the ground on public lands and companies should be prohibited from drilling on public lands. 11 percent say oil and gas development should be expanded on public lands to help the U.S. become energy independent as soon as possible.
Voters favored a variety of proposals to limit the impacts of energy development on public lands, such as:
Support requiring mining companies to pay taxpayers a royalty for extracting minerals on public lands (78 percent)
Support increasing the royalties for oil, gas, and coal extraction on public lands (74 percent)
Want to require oil and gas companies to detect and repair gas leaks in drilling equipment (88 percent)
Support increasing the investment in the development of renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and geothermal (78 percent)
Oppose reducing environmental regulations on oil and gas companies in order to help boost energy production (55 percent)
Survey responses offered candidates guidance on messaging around public lands issues. When presented with two options, voters preferred to “limit” rather than “prohibit” oil and gas extraction on public lands by a margin of 67 percent to 48 percent. The poll also found voters in the West are moved by messages about respecting and protecting public lands, not by messages around deregulation and increased energy development.
The Winning the West poll was conducted in August and September by Gottlieb Strategic Research. It included 2,800 online surveys of likely voters in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, and New Mexico. The margin of error is +/- 2 percent for all voters and +/- 4.4 percent per state.
The complete Winning the West poll results for each of the five states surveyed are available at westernpriorities.org/winning-the-west-2020/. To speak with the pollster Brian Gottlieb or Jennifer Rokala from the Center for Western Priorities, contact Aaron Weiss at 720-279-0019 or aaron@westernpriorities.org.
=======================
WEEK 3: BEHAVIOR & DISCIPLINE
The No-Shout Discipline Strategy That Works
If your child is melting down, your yelling will only escalate the situation. So take a deep breath and try this stay-cool discipline strategy designed specifically for children with ADHD. Positive parenting starts here »
How to Unlock Better Behavior
Your child's outbursts aren't a sign of insubordination or disrespect. They are signals that he is struggling to meet your expectations. Get to the root of challenging behaviors »
Meltdowns Happen: 7 Healthy Ways to Respond
When your child dissolves into tears or an angry fit, use these strategies to stop the tantrum in its tracks and remind your child that she can regain control.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Truth About ADD & Lying
Everyone tells a fib now and then. But children with ADHD are actually predisposed to tell lies. Learn why, and, more importantly — what you can do to stop this behavior pattern.
Better-Behavior Reward Ideas
External motivation can help children with ADHD toe the line or stick with a task they might otherwise abandon. Ready to replace nagging? Try these parent-approved incentives.
DISCIPLINE & BEHAVIOR Q&A
Q: "Our son wants to spend all his time on a screen and has even sneaked devices we've confiscated." See the answer »
Q: "Can you give me some examples of effective reward systems for children with ADHD that aren’t just bribery?" See the answer »
More on behavior & discipline for parents...
+ Answers to the Discipline Questions You Were Too Exhausted to Ask
+ Webinar Replay: "How Behavioral Parent Training Can Transform Your Home Life"
+ You’re Going to Need Bigger Carrots: Middle-School Discipline Truths
+ Never Punish a Child for Bad Behavior Outside Their Control
+ The Sad Truth About Tantrum Triggers
+ Must-Have eBook: The Parent’s Guide to ADHD Discipline
Introducing MoreToADHD.com—a new resource for parents and caregivers of children and adolescents living with ADHD. What is surprising to many families living with this disorder is that ADHD is often just the “tip of the iceberg.” Learn more at MoreToADHD.com.
Previous installments of ADDitude's 8-Week Parenting Class:
> Week 1: Organization & Time Management
> Week 2: Self-Esteem & Friendships
======================
Dictatorship
I recently saw a post on social media asking why conservatives are so concerned with socialism when what they should be concerned about is dictatorship in their own party. Historically speaking, accusing presidents of dictatorship is nothing new. In fact, it’s as old as the nation itself. I am not going to write about if President Trump is a dictator or not, but I do want to show that it can be said that being accused of dictatorship actually puts him in good company.
During the Nineteenth Century, the cry of dictator was not as prominent. For most of the century, presidents were fairly limited in their political power. The ones who did exercise real presidential authority always faced the accusation of dictator. Anyone who reads my columns knows the election of 1800 is my favorite. It is one of the most hostile in history and I have spoken on it many times. Suffice to say the principle accusation made by Thomas Jefferson and the Republicans was that John Adams wanted to make himself into a king or dictator. Jefferson, who believed in small government, feared that the Federalists wanted to enlarge the power of the federal government and strip away the rights of the people. It did not help that under Adam’s administration Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which in essence made it a crime to criticize the government. It turns out that Adams did not intend to enshrine himself into royalty but instead performed the most important political act in American history. He walked away from the presidency when he lost and set a precedent for the peaceful transfer of power between parties.
A few decades later, President Andrew Jackson had the same accusations made against him. The Whigs were the party that formed to resist who they called “King Andrew I. A name taken from the British party that opposed the King, the name was not a coincidence. It is not hard to see why the Whigs referred to Jackson as a dictator. First, he vetoed more bills than all his predecessors combined. Earlier presidents did not see the veto as a political weapon, but rather as a protection against unconstitutionality. Jackson, however, wielded the veto like a sword to defeat his enemies in Congress. Later, when the Supreme Court went against Jackson’s ideas of Indian removal, Jackson responded with, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” If any president had potential to be a dictator, it was Jackson. Yet after his eight years, he walked away and the nation moved on.
Jump ahead a couple more decades to the election of Abraham Lincoln. Like many readers, Lincoln is my favorite president, yet his entire presidency was plagued with accusations of dictatorship. As much as I love Lincoln, there are good reasons for the claims. Probably his greatest power move was the suspension of habeas corpus, a writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge to secure the arrestee’s release unless lawful grounds are shown for the person’s detention.
Basically, Lincoln imprisoned anyone who spoke out against him. Dozens of newspaper editors and political opponents were imprisoned during the war. Because of space restraints, I can mention just one. Lincoln had Ohio Congressman Clement Vallandigham arrested for declaring disloyal sentiments and opinions. Instead of imprisoning Vallandigham, Lincoln exiled him to live in the Confederacy. If any president had the potential to be a dictator, it was Lincoln. However, we will never know as he was assassinated by John Wilks Booth who claimed death to all tyrants.
In the Twentieth Century, one of the presidents who had the charge of dictator leveled at him was Woodrow Wilson. As a true progressive, he believed in a strong federal government and did everything in his power to strengthen and enlarge it. It was Wilson who pushed an Amendment to create an income tax to fund the federal government. Wilson also passed the Espionage and Sedition Acts. As under Adams, it became a criminal act to criticize the government, the president, or the war. It was Wilson who created the Committee on Public Information that turned into the nation’s first propaganda machine. If any president seemed prepared to become a dictator, it was Wilson. When he tried to push the League of Nations through Congress (even many Democrats opposed it), he spoke of running for a third term so he could force it through. We will never know if he would have followed through. He suffered a stroke making it difficult to even finish his second term.
Finally, there is the man who potentially was the greatest dictator but also one of the most beloved: Franklin D. Roosevelt. No one did more to expand the power of the federal government, or, more specifically, the Executive Branch. He wanted to reorganize the Executive Branch and take the regulatory agencies under his control. When the Supreme Court tried to check him, he attempted to increase the number of judges and fill the Court with his supporters. Finally, he told Americans that he was the only man who could possibly lead during the Great Depression and later WWII. He ran for and was elected to four terms. If any president seemed to set himself up as a dictator, it was FDR. We will never know, as he died in his fourth term.
I am not saying whether Trump is a dictator or not. You can decide. I am also not saying we should accept tyranny in any way, but calling him a dictator actually puts him into pretty good company. Not all the men on this list are people’s favorites, but there is no questioning they all make the list as some of the most important presidents in history. Historically speaking, maybe being called a dictator by your political enemies is a badge of honor. If nothing else, it’s a pretty impressive club to be in.
Dr. James Finck is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma and Chair of the Oklahoma Civil War Symposium. Follow Historically Speaking at www.Historicallyspeaking.blog or Facebook at @jamesWfinck.
Dr. James W. Finck
Associate Professor of History
Davis Hall, room 219-B
University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma
1727 West Alabama
Chickasha, OK 73018
