It’s Not Easy Being Green

Kermit the Frog had a different “green” in mind when he sang the blues about the perils of his amphibian color on Sesame Street. But for many of us, “being Green” in an altogether different way isn’t all that easy either.

These days, what exactly does “Green” mean?

Basically, it means leading more environmentally friendly and ecologically responsible lives, so we protect natural resources, ourselves and the planet. I’m sure by now, most of us have seen, heard, or read about the many ways this can be accomplished: by recycling, using solar energy, electric or hybrid cars, picking up trash, collecting plastics in our waterways, using alternate energy sources instead of fossil fuels, etc.

The long list of “easy” fixes quickly becomes not-so-easy when it comes to details. For example, in building and development, there is a system called LEED, which stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. It’s the most widely used green-building rating system in the world. It’s also used for virtually all building projects, whether commercial, community, or home.

But is it worth it? And does it really work, or matter? As I have found out, most things in life have no clear-cut, black-and-white, yes-or-no answers, and that is true here as well. To get a building or project LEED-certified, there are courses to study, exams to take and proposals to be shown and accepted. If all of that is completed, a building or project will receive a plaque stating it is LEED-certified. The buildings must show certain levels of efficiency in resource usage such as water and electric, and none of this is cheap. The initial cost is $600 just to register and certification fees can range from $2,250 to $22,500 based on the project size. On top of that, complying with all the requirements necessary can add millions of dollars and hours of paperwork to the projects. On the plus side, LEED certification can mean tax breaks, grants, and the ability to charge higher rents.

Being LEED-certified sounds great on paper, but the bottom line is this: as in many things, reality doesn’t always live up to theory’s expectations. While some LEED buildings have shown lower resource usage rates, others have shown rate increases. LEED certification, after all, is based on proposals of anticipated resource use and not actual usage once a building project is completed. Therefore, is it worth it to have your building or project LEED-certified? A definitive answer remains elusive.

As another, more familiar example: Do hybrid cars produce lower emissions than gas-only vehicles? Obviously. Do they get better gas mileage? Sometimes. But it’s not always a significant difference when compared to the price differential of similar models. Total electric cars use no fossil fuels and produce no emissions, which are great assets. However, since there are not enough of them on the road, there isn’t an accurate way to determine the difference in electric consumption a nation of them might make. The same can be said of solar panels. As for recyclables, there is absolutely no argument of any sort that doing this is a bad thing.

Cleaning up our oceans, lakes, and waterways, plus keeping our landfills limited to those items that decompose and can/will/might be used to produce products that will go back into our soil is great. But what portion of these post-consumer materials will be reused in manufacturing? Again, theory is rosier than reality in answering this question. We have been recycling so much and have shipped so much of it to foreign countries, China being the main importer, that we now find ourselves without places to send these materials. China has stopped importing “foreign garbage,” which includes many types of plastics and paper. We also have run out of recycling plants and are now depositing what is and might be recyclable back in landfills. Recycling, however smart and necessary, remains shot through with problems, beginning with the fact that a lot of us don’t understand whether what we throw in the recycling bin is really recyclable.

So where are we in this quagmire? Does “being green” mean there’s reason for hope and change? Or is it all hopey-changey bunk? What you decide depends on your environmental outlook and what you want and expect of and for future generations. It also depends on your pocketbook. The difference in cost between hybrid cars and their gaseous counterparts can take years of driving to recoup, let alone seem significant. The same with LEED-certified buildings, electric cars and solar panels. No, being Green isn’t easy. But here’s my take in black and white: any steps forward in making this planet more sustainable, keeping our precious natural resources for generations to come, is worth whatever it takes.

Moving in the Right Direction

It has been one year since the MSD shooting. We all know the toll it took on everyone and the damage left behind. We have also seen and heard the countless debates and protests both for and against gun control. A multitude of articles have been written for both sides, as well as methods of coping with the trauma from these horrific events. But what are some of the organizations that have emerged since then that give people a way to cope, to fight, and to carry on the message of NEVER AGAIN!

I’ve written articles on FAMSVARPAC (The Journey of a Thousand Miles, Nov. 2018) and a documentary video about Parkland (Bridging the Great Divide, Dec. 2018). But besides these two, who and/or what groups have come forward to help those in need, or to fight against these shootings in the future? While the list isn’t complete, it is a step in the right direction. In no particular order, we have:

PU4P Professionals United 4 Parkland. This is a group of highly qualified mental health professionals who provide many different forms of treatment for traumas such as those experienced by the shooting at MSD. Here is a link for the website: www.pu4p.org

CTR Change the Ref is an organization whose primary goal is to educate the newer generation of young people on how to best use what’s available to them to have their voices heard on the issues at hand. Manuel and Patricia Oliver whose son Joaquin, was one of the victims of the MSD shooting formed this group. The link to the website is www.changetheref.org.

Mobilizing MSD Alumni This is a national organization with more than 11,000 members, founded to help those involved in the MSD shooting. They have Outreach, Advocacy, and Community programs designed to cover all aspects of those in need. Their website is www.msdstrongalum.com.

These are a few local groups that have been formed not only to carry on the fight for better gun control and school safety but also to help those in need mentally, physically and spiritually. There are several national groups, such as DC Local Ambassadors (www.dcambs.org) founded by D.C. lawyer Elizabeth Andrews, Move On (www.front.moveon) and Everytown for Gun Safety (www.everytown.org) in case you feel the need to do more on a national level. But, as I have stated before, one of the best things we can all do, is be aware of those that surround our families, our friends, and us. Don’t be afraid to speak up or ask questions if you feel there is something not quite right. Encourage others to freely express themselves about their issues concerning these tragedies, regardless if they were directly involved. Last, but not least… don’t just depend on these and other organizations to get the job done concerning the political aspects of gun control and school safety. Write letters, make phone calls to your local, state, and federal officials and let them know your concerns and feelings. One voice, one vote alone may not make a difference but all of them together are a force not to be denied.

Slipping Through the Cracks

The issue of mental health care is one of the most ongoing, divisive, troubling topics in our country today. Included in that issue is the question of how it relates to gun control. But let’s start with the basics.

In several articles regarding studies done on mental health issues in this country in 2016, this startling fact comes to light: One in five people in this country suffer from some sort of mental illness. That means in 2016, there were 44.7 million people with some sort of affliction. Here are some of those mental health issues that are recognized: Autism, Major Depression, PTSD, Bipolar, OCD, Schizophrenia, Suicide, Eating Disorders, ADHD, and Personality Disorders. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services states that out of that number, 9.3 million have serious issues and that most of them start at the age of 18 and move upward. Also, states that didn’t expand Medicaid under Obamacare, refused service to about 4 million people due to lack of insurance.

So, what is contributing to this problem? In corresponding with Dr. Julio Busciolano, PsyD he and his associates at the Partial Hospitalization Mental Health Program feel that the stigma or attitude towards mental health is a major roadblock. Cultural, religious, and family perceptions are at the forefront because of a lack of compassion and understanding. Of course, there is also the fact that those afflicted with mental health issues often feel that they don’t need help and are “strong enough” to combat this on their own. It’s what society has taught people over the years … that one must be “strong,” “no talking of such feelings,” or “forget it and move on,” that anything less is an admission of failure as a person when the opposite is the reality.

One of the major setbacks in correcting this is money, or more to the point, the lack thereof. Without proper financing, there are far too few professionals, causing burnout because of the hours worked, and paperwork required as some of the reasons. Also, the lack of resources and access to mental health professionals is worse than those for other types of doctors. Limited resources mean fewer outpatient programs, with our youth being primarily affected. It’s a Catch-22 with cost leading to financial distress, leading to more mental distress, leading to more financial stress … money spent, debt acquired, followed by financial hardships.

There is the option of Involuntary Commitment. In Florida, a state representative, Maxine Baker (1963-1972) sponsored a bill enabling involuntary admittance for mental health issues. This was titled the Florida Mental Health Act of 1971 but is commonly referred to as the Baker Act. To Baker Act, a judge, law enforcement official, doctor, or mental health professional must deem the individual to have a “substantial likelihood that without care or treatment, the person will cause severe bodily harm to themselves or others, in the near future.” One cannot be committed because of past behavior or actions and alcohol or drug abuse may not be considered but only a mental instability. However, after 72 hours (or before, depending on the circumstances) the patient will be released.

How does all this relate to gun control? It seems the sound byte of the day is that with better mental health background checks, gun control via the ability to buy a gun, will limit the sales of firearms. However, after doing research, it seems almost all our states have some sort of provision in their laws that say (and I’m paraphrasing) “if anyone is found to have had mental health issues of any sort, they will be prohibited from purchasing a firearm.” However, anyone that has had a problem will not list it on the application and health records aren’t allowed to be entered into national databases due to doctor/patient confidentiality, so there is no reliable way to detect such issues. Also, were we to be able to have mental health professionals doing exams, how would we know where they stand on gun control?

So, what are the answers? The bottom line, as I see it, is that some help is better than none. If, by getting someone in to counseling, getting them some sort of medication to balance them, giving them some time sort out emotions, showing them there are people who care and want to help, we may give them the chance to restore their lives to some semblance of normalcy, which is far better than what they had been living. Dr. Renae Lapin, a local psychologist, said: “stress is a major contributor to mental health problems and that our youth are being affected in far greater numbers these days.” Lapin said that research based on studies has shown there are several other ways that may help besides counseling. Some of these ways are nutrition, exercise, good sleep habits, and focusing on the positives in our lives.

One place that offers this type of program is the 9 Muses Art Center of The Mental Health Association of Southeast Florida. Dr. Julie Bruno, PsyD, feels there is a need for more long-term facilities for those with chronic mental illnesses. Insurance needs to be revamped to allow the ability to get into those facilities, state or private, and receive the proper medication. With all of that, many of those falling through the cracks might not.

The truth is, they aren’t cracks they are gaping chasms. Mental health isn’t considered a priority at the same level as general health. The money isn’t there to allow for proper help, the law doesn’t allow an indefinite commitment. Those who are committed (short term), may not really want help or recognize their need for such. What to do? First, we need to address this issue with our government officials. If enough people speak out, maybe a change can take place. Second, we all need to be more aware of those around us and pay attention to changes in personality or habits, no matter how small. If you see changes that alarm you, act on them by talking to the person. Hopefully, you can convince the person to seek help voluntarily. If not, then with the right circumstances, you can do it yourself. Just know that it is likely going to be a short-term solution, but any step forward is better than one going back.

The Journey of a Thousand Miles

While this title may seem incongruous to the subject matter, I feel it fits perfectly into the goals and objectives of FAMSVARPAC and other organizations of similar ilk. What is FAMSVARPAC? The acronym stands for Families Versus Assault Rifles Political Action Committee. This organization was founded after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (MSD) to fight for better and stronger gun control from our legislators at all levels of government; local, state, and federal. Their ultimate goal is the elimination of semi-automatic rifle sales to the general populace, stronger background checks focusing on mental health, and the elimination of the NRA as a major force in the political arena as well as in our American way of life. How do they propose to move forward with their ideas?

I met with and interviewed three of the men on the board of this organization: Jeffrey A. Kasky, president; Sergio Rozenblat, national financial chairman; and Steve Wind, treasurer. All three come from diverse backgrounds and occupations. Despite their differences, they have something in common – all three men had children who not only attended MSD at the time of the mass shooting, but who also survived the horror. Their fathers’ united belief that there must be a stop to this type of violence led them, along with many others, to form this group. To say they are passionate and determined in their goals would be an understatement. While I sat there listening (and interacting) with these men, I found it interesting that even though they have the same common goals, they have different opinions on how to achieve them. As an apolitical organization, they hold no set stance against either party, and they do not advocate against any one politician or group of politicians. What they want to achieve is to elect politicians who have the same objectives toward gun safety as they do, and replace those who don’t. What they also believe is that weapons, such as the AR-15 and similar weapons of military grade, should not be sold to and do not belong in the hands of the American public; they simply serve no purpose. Yet, in most of the mass shootings we have seen in recent years, these are the weapons of choice; and sadly, purchasing one of these “weapons of mass destruction” is easier than buying a car.

Let me be even clearer about their feelings: None of the three are against the Second Amendment. None of them want to take guns out of the hands of gun owners. In fact, there are gun owners in this group, along with those who have proudly served in military and law enforcement agencies, and they believe in the right to defend self and property, if necessary. The revocation of the Second Amendment is not their calling. What they are doing is putting their money where their mouths are… they are tired of hearing “sound bytes,” empty words, promises, condolences, and seeing very little being done by our leaders and politicians. They are tired of hearing all the rhetoric after every shooting… until the next shooting. They want politicians who listen for a change… to listen and then effect change. “Never Again” should be more than a slogan.

Will their goals be met? They aren’t sure, but they are determined to keep on trying, now and into the foreseeable future. While the reality of the difficulties they face isn’t lost on them, it is also not deterring them. I think that is what ultimately counts. Nothing great, or of major importance, has ever been accomplished without strife and struggle.

If you feel the same way and want to help this organization, visit www.Donate17.org. You can also go to www.FAMSVARPAC.ORG and see how you can offer your support.


Remember, “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” – Lao Tzu