The World Cup, Brazil and School Meals

The eyes of the sports world are on Brazil as the World Cup Soccer championship unfolds. Brazil has gotten more attention than it bargained for. The extreme heat, giant bugs and even a virus U.S. officials are worried travelers will bring back from the country.

Brazil’s spending as the host of the World Cup also drew a lot of rage. Many wondered why those dollars were not spent on fixing poorly built infrastructure, including hospitals.

Let’s also shine the light on a very successful program operating in Brazil, one that is a model for other nations. Brazil’s school feeding program is part of a series of initiatives that have dramatically reduced hunger and malnutrition.

If you go back in time Brazil was a country deeply mired in hunger and even famine. The U.S. Food for Peace program, developed during the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations, was a big provider of aid to Brazil. This included millions of school meals.

Now today Brazil stands on its own with a nationwide school feeding program. Free meals are provided in all the public schools. According to the Centre of Excellence Against Hunger, there were 44 million students fed in 160,000 schools during 2012.

The school feeding also includes fresh fruits and vegetable in order to have the highest nutrition standards. When children are out of school, other programs such as direct transfer of cash provide needy families a safety net.

Last week I asked Daniel Balaban, director of the Centre of Excellence Against Hunger, what has been the impact of the school feeding in Brazil. Has it reduced malnutrition while improving class attendance? The answer is a clear yes, with numbers to back it up.

The number of undernourished children has decreased by 77 percent since 1990. All levels of school attendance have increased since 2001.

In addition, the school feeding makes it a priority to obtain the food from local farms. This helps the entire community.

Isadora Ferreira, the Centre’s communications officer, states:

Although it has positive impacts on fighting poverty, increasing food security, and even strengthening smallholder farmers, it is a tool for improving students’ performance, and increasing enrollment and attendance rates.

The Centre of Excellence Against Hunger tries to spread knowledge about Brazil’s school feeding around the globe. For there are many nations that are not even close to what some might take for granted: meals for all school children.

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) sponsors the Centre. WFP is the largest agency in the world fighting hunger and school meals is a major aspect of their operations. At one point, WFP provided school feeding in Brazil. Now Brazil can stand on its own for feeding its children.

Brazil is a success story on this front. In fact, Brazil has also been able to support school feeding in other countries where there is great need, including Haiti.

The World Cup has brought to light many social issues alongside the soccer matches. Let’s hopes it spurs action on the hunger front, to help all nations fight hunger with school meals for all their children.

Exclusive: North Dakota Oil-By-Rail Routes Published for First Time

Cross-Posted from DeSmogBlog

For the first time, DeSmogBlog has published dozens of documents obtained from the North Dakota government revealing routes and chemical composition data for oil-by-rail trains in the state carrying oil obtained via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in the Bakken Shale.

 Photo Credit: Kyle Potter | Forum of Fargo-Moorhead

The information was initially submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) under the legal dictates of a May 7 Emergency Order, which both the federal government and the rail industry initially argued should only be released to those with a “need-to-know” and not the public at-large.

North Dakota’s Department of Emergency Services, working in consultation with the North Dakota Office of the Attorney General, made the documents public a couple weeks after DeSmogBlog filed a June 13 North Dakota Public Records Statute request.

“There is no legal basis to protect what they have provided us at this point,” North Dakota assistant attorney general Mary Kae Kelsch said during the June 25 Department of Emergency Service’s quarterly meeting, which DeSmogBlog attended via phone. “It doesn’t meet any criteria for our state law to protect this.” 

Initially, oil-by-rail giant Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and other rail companies sent boilerplate letters — one copy of which has been obtained by DeSmogBlog from the Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security through the state’s Public Records Act — to several State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs), arguing train routes should be kept confidential.

BNSF also sent several SERCs a boilerplate contract proposal, requesting that they exempt the information rail companies were compelled to submit to the SERCs under the DOT Emergency Order from release under Freedom of Information Act. A snippet of the proposed contract can be seen below: 

Dan Wilz, homeland security division director and state security advisor of the Department of Emergency Services, said the claims did not hold legal water. 

“Joe can stand on a street corner and figure that out within a week’s period,” Wilz said at the quarterly meeting. “They watch the trains go through their community each and every day.”

BNSF, Canadian Pacific Railway (CP Rail) and Northern Plains Railroad all submitted information to the Department of Emergency Services.

CP Rail: 7 Trains/Week, “Highly Flammable”

In its submission to the North Dakota Department of Emergency Services, CP Rail revealed it sent seven oil-by-rail trains through 13 counties in North Dakota the week of June 9-15. CP Rail also estimated it generally sends 2-5 trains through those same counties during an average week.

Some oil-by-rail trains, dubbed “bomb trains” by some due to their propensity to explode, carry over 2,677,500 gallons of fracked oil. The trains are often over a mile in length and contain over 100 cars

The company also released information on the chemical composition of the Bakken oil it sends on its rail cars, conceding that Bakken oil is “highly flammable” and “easily ignited by heat, sparks or flames.”

Further, CP Rail admitted that Bakken oil has “a very low flash point” and that “water spray when fighting [its] fire may be inefficient.”

BNSF: Bakken Oil-By-Rail King 

BNSF, owned by Warren Buffett — a major campaign contributor to President Barack Obama both in 2008 and 2012 and one of the richest men on the planet — is widely considered the king of oil-by-rail in the U.S. The documents BNSF released to the Department of Emergency Services back up the notion.

One document shows BNSF sent 31 oil-by-rail trains through Cass County, North Dakota during the week of May 29 – June 4, also saying it sends between 30-45 trains per week on average through the County. That same week, 30 BNSF trains zoomed through Barnes County, North Dakota.

A document filed the next week, covering June 5 – June 11, shows 45 trains passed through Cass County that week. Another 37 passed through Ward County, North Dakota and another 33 through McHenry, Pierce and Mountrail counties.

Northern Plains: Chemical Composition Revealed

In its DOT submission, Northern Plains included an expansive Bakken crude oil sample chemical composition test submitted by Musket Corporation, which has a terminal and transload site in North Dakota.

Northern Plains also submitted a Bakken Crude Safety Data Sheet, created by Musket, as well. The Sheet echos CP Rail in stating that Bakken oil is a “highly flammable liquid and vapor.”

Further, the Sheet explains that Bakken oil contains Benzene, a carcinogen.

A record amount of Bakken oil spilled into waterways that are a drinking source for many as a result explosions of oil-by-rail trains in 2013. Most recently, the exploding oil-by-rail train in Lynchburg, Virginia spilled into the James River.


Photo Credit: Erin Ferrell – ABC 13 News | Twitter

Compared to CP Rail and BNSF, Northern Plains is a minor player in terms of the amount of oil it carries by rail in North Dakota. It submitted that it carries 12 trains per year and all within Walsh County, North Dakota, also including a map of its route.

“Right to Know” vs. “Need to Know”

Despite the fact dozens of oil-by-rail trains pass through North Dakota counties on a daily basis, carrying a substance that contains a known carcinogen and is “highly flammable,” Big Rail and Big Oil used its legal might to claim only a select few “need to know” where these cars travel. 

“For some reason this entire rail oil industry, they just fill these rail cars and send them without really knowing what’s in them,” Scott Smith, chief scientist for Water Defense said in an article appearing in the summer edition of the Earth Island Journal. “And it’s the only industry I’m aware of that gets away with that.”

But this time around, due to the North Dakota Public Records Statute, Big Rail and Big Oil didn’t get away with it. 

This Is How You Can Get People To Make Better Decisions For Future Generations

Albert Einstein once said: “Nothing truly valuable can be achieved except by the unselfish cooperation of many individuals.” Alas, when it comes to joining together to conserve Earth’s resources and protect our planet for future generations, we humans have proven to be a decidedly uncooperative lot.

“There has been a great deal of work on how people cooperate with those they see every day –- their colleagues or friends,” Dr. Martin Nowak, professor of mathematics and biology at Harvard University, said in a written statement. “But an open question is how people cooperate with future generations. How do you make altruistic decisions today that benefit people tomorrow?”

For those who worry that we’ll never come together to protect our planet, a provocative new study involving game theory, conducted by Nowak and a colleague at Yale University, offers a glimmer of hope.

For the study, 480 men and women took turns playing a“public goods” game, in which five players at a time divided a pool of resources among themselves. (For a delightful, candy-illustrated explanation of how the game worked, check out the video above.)

Each player was allowed to collect a maximum of 20 “units” of the resource, out of 100 units total. The players were told that if they collected all of the resources, none would be left for future people who played the game. They could only “harvest” up to half of the resources if they wanted to preserve the resources for future players.

How did the games play out? Players exhausted the resources in almost every game. In most cases, four of the players would cooperate and make decisions to preserve the resources, while one rogue player took a big share.

The researchers said this suggests that most people actually are cooperative, but they only want to cooperate if they are certain other people will do the same — essentially, no one wants to be the sucker.

“In some sense, this illustrates why the free market fails to solve problems like climate change,” Nowak said in the statement. “Even if you want to cooperate with the future, you may not do so because you are afraid of being exploited by the present.”

Then the researchers had 370 players play the game, but this time, vote on how much of the resource should be given to each player. They took the median of the votes and distributed that amount — and what they found next was pretty surprising.

“When we implemented this system, virtually every resource was saved,” Nowak said in the statement. “The surprising observation is that while there is a minority of people who don’t want to cooperate, the majority of people vote altruistically. They are not voting to maximize their own benefit, and that’s what allows for cooperation with the future.”

This version of the game also reassured cooperators that they would not become “the sucker,” and it allowed cooperative players to keep the rogue player in check.

So, how can policymakers take the study’s findings and apply it to the real world?

“Allowing people to vote for consumption/extraction limits may be an effective way to create… regulations,” Dr. David Rand, Nowak’s collaborator and professor of psychology and economics at Yale University, told The Huffington Post in an email.

In fact, democratic countries do have more sustainable energy policies, the researchers noted in a paper describing their study, which was published online on June 25 in the journal Nature.

“A substantial majority of people are willing to bare costs to benefit future generations,” Rand said in the email. “Among other things, this suggests that a lot of the division regarding sustainable practices involves differences of opinion about what is actually best for the future, rather than some people caring about the future and many others not.”

World Cup Blues: Brazilians Are in a Funk

From Project Syndicate

A few years ago, a substantial majority of Brazilians supported holding the World Cup in their country. By last May, the share had declined to half – astoundingly low for some of the world’s most enthusiastic soccer fans – with small but strident protests persisting across the country. Rousseff’s opponents want the protests to disrupt the games, damaging Brazil’s international image; some are even hoping for Brazil’s team to lose.

Such an outcome would not be good for the country. Whatever frustration lower-middle-class Brazilians are feeling, a successful World Cup is their best option. Likewise, contrary to the perceptions of Uribe’s supporters, Santos’s reelection and continued pursuit of peace is exactly what Colombia needs right now. The more citizens understand and support this effort, the better its chances of success.

Read more here.

5 Things We Took for Granted as a Child

2014-06-23-ScreenShot20140622at11.16.22am.png

Moving out of home as we transition into adulthood is a wonderful thing. We gain independence, become self-reliant, and have the freedom to really discover who we are and what we want in life.

Sometimes we enjoy the independence of adulthood so much that we forget the things that make up who we are.

Being back in my hometown for a couple of months, I realize that there are things most of us took for granted as a child

2014-06-23-mom.jpg

1. Mother’s Love

Ain’t nothing like the love of a mother. She cares you like no one else does. She loves you like no one else ever will. No matter how good or bad you are, for most of us, she will always forgive you and welcome you home.

A mother’s love is love of extreme sacrifices  –  when someone else’s well-being is above her own; when someone else’s pain stabs her heart with the knife; when someone else’s wrong doing causes her heartbreak and disappointment.

Sometimes we take for granted the love of our mothers  –  which is probably the only love that lasts until the day she dies. We used to yell. We used to argue. We used to lie. We used to rebel. We used to date the wrong boys and do stupid things just to give her headaches and painful adrenaline rushes. All of these did nothing but hurt her.

A mother shows her love through her actions, not her words. She proves to us that actions are the only things that truly count.

2014-06-23-fatherkids.png

2. Father’s Wisdom

Everyone grows up with different types of parents  –  some have cool, hipster parents; some have strict, conservative parents; some have free-spirited parents; and some have parents as protective as a dog.

Regardless of what our parents are like in terms of personality traits and lifestyles, they always pass on something they learned to us.

From always reading documents before signing, to how to live life, how to do house chores, how to pick fruits, how to play sports, how to ride a bike, how to be patient and accept that we can’t always get the toys we want, how to laugh at ourselves when we trip over, and how to cry when it hurts and get back up again…

Without them as our mentors when we were young, we would have stumbled upon so many more errors in life. The preaches might seem like they’ve gone into one ear and right out through the other. But as we get older, those things they preached us start to turn into life’s golden wisdom. The skills they taught become valuable for a lifetime.

The mindset they planted into us is probably the most powerful thing one could inherit from parents.

2014-06-23-meal.jpg

3. Basic Needs Made Simple

Society turns things we don’t actually need in life into something we think we do. Society imposes on us the material-based definition of success and happiness. Over and over along with everything and everyone else feeling and doing the same thing, we try so hard to attain happiness and raise the bar of what we believe are our basic needs.

A simple home-cooked meal. A comfortable bed. A cosy living room. A hug.

We had only these when we were kids, and we were happy. We were full. We were satisfied. We felt safe. It felt like home.

2014-06-23-kids.jpg

4. Being in the “Now” and Enjoying the Moment

Moving into adulthood, we are bombarded with so many responsibilities and tasks we have to prioritize. We took for granted the times when being in moment was easy; when mindfulness was unintentionally practiced; when we were in the present at all time.

When we were kids, all it took to make us happy was simply just to have the time to play (of course, toys were additional bonuses).

What truly made us happy was being allowed to run free, to talk, to laugh, to interact with another kid, to role play, to create, to draw, paint, write, to kick balls, and to let our imagination run wild.

Being in the “now” hasn’t been easy for adults. In fact, it is so hard that mindfulness has become such a new life concept that many people are trying to learn and practice every day.

Sometimes it’s good to stop everything else in the world for a few days, a week, or a month, and start embracing your inner child. Let your mind run free. Engage in this on a regular basis.

2014-06-23-cuteboys.jpg

5. Being Free  —  Physically, Emotionally, and Mentally

We took for granted the times when we were completely free.

Free to try different things and change. Free to fail. Free to imagine and create. Free to run. Free of baggages and walls. Free of fear.

2014-06-23-kidcreative1.jpg

Shall we go back and embrace the things in life we took for granted again?

I think it’s time.

And actually… the most valuable things in life are free.

Pandora's Supreme Court

The Roberts court is a shining example of the Koch-esque Libertarian interpretation of the Constitution, and unintended consequences that the conservative cohort unleash with their Pandoraish pandering to that deconstructionist slice of right-wing politics.

Installed with much GOP fanfare to allegedly end “judicial activism” the conservative members of the Supreme Court of the United States have been exceedingly activist and partisan and, unlike all other federal justices, have no ethics other than their own good judgment, or lack thereof, binding them.

Ethics

In an article in 2011, I noted that, amazingly, the Supremes are not subject to the same ethical canons which govern the ethics of other Federal justices. Canon 4C reads:

A judge may attend fund-raising events of law-related and other organizations although the judge may not be a speaker, a guest of honor, or featured on the program of such an event.

In particular, Justices Scalia and Thomas have been the subject of numerous complaints in their exercise of ethics. The devious duo exercised the bad judgment of attending a Federalist Society dinner advertised in their honor that was hosted by the law firm that had just argued against the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) before the SCOTUS days before.

Thomas trounced 4C again in 2013 for the Federalist Society, prompting Common Cause, amongst others, to petition Roberts to put the Justices under federal ethics canons as they were not clearly living up to ethical self-policing.

Scalia and Thomas also attended at least one of the Koch Brothers secret retreats of the richest people in the world, so hush-hush that even the hotel isn’t allowed access to the guest list. Outed by an attendee who broke ranks, their foray into extreme Libertarianism would have gone otherwise unreported.

What are two U.S. Supreme Court Justices doing at a meeting of the people who control the Tea Party and hundreds of think tanks, astroturf groups and Super PACs that are highly partisan and may have interests that come before the court?

Both justices, based on their outside forays into activist politics, should have recused themselves on a wide variety of cases inside the court, including the decisions on the ACA and Citizens United.

Judicial Activism Inside the SCOTUS

What they do outside of the Supreme Court, though, pales by comparison to their activism inside the court, and the unintended consequences of their rulings.

The Citizens United decision to give corporations “personhood” in the realm of political speech unleashed a tidal wave of unlimited money, largely from a handful of John Birchesque-Libertarian right billionaires like the Kochs, the Coors, the DeVos, Mellon-Scaifes, Friess and their junior league of multi-millionaires and a TV personality, the Club for Growth.

What did it buy?

  • Tea Party routs of so-called RINO (Republican in Name Only) moderates in low-voter turnout mid-term GOP primaries;
  • Extremism and gridlock, where compromise is considered capitulation, not good governance as it has throughout U.S. history;
  • Damage to the U.S. credit rating, the Fed being a target of Libertarian wrath;
  • The wasteful government shut down, a $24B political stunt;
  • Hundreds of bills restricting women’s reproductive choice or craftily legislating clinics out of business
  • 92 bills restricting voting rights for alleged “voter fraud” whose reality is so small it isn’t even a statistical percentage point, to help the Tea Party limit minority turnout.

All began at the door of the Roberts Court. The ripples continue though…

Other Intended/Unintended Consequences

  • It used to be the mob’s province, but now Monsanto and other corporates have used their “personhood” to plead the Fifth Amendment to prevent the government from protecting the American public from potentially harmful substances in our food supply.
  • Scientists tell us, to avert a global catastrophe, that 80 percent of the remaining world’s oil supply needs to stay in the ground. Corporate personhood gives Big Oil the ability to spend and lobby at epic levels to suppress alternative energy.
  • Political lobbying has soared on both sides of the aisle protecting corporate and large organized interests, often at the expense or personal peril for health and welfare reasons, of the average American.
  • The number of independent voters, often cut out of primaries, has soared to 46 percent as Americans have become disaffected with all politics, allowing the 1 percent to dominate the 24 percent of Americans still registered as Republicans.
  • Foreign corporations can spend millions buying influence on Capitol Hill for financial and trade policy now, but presumably for any other purpose down road as well, without restriction.

Many of the Roberts SCOTUS other decisions are equally troubling.

Unintended Precedents

Take yesterday’s unanimous decision in McCullen v Coakley, in which the court struck down a Massachusetts law that put safe zones around health clinics that provide abortion services to keep their doors clear of protestors.

Roberts, wrote for the majority:

Petitioners wish to converse with their fellow citizens about an important subject on the public streets and sidewalks — sites that have hosted discussions about the issues of the day throughout history.

Justice Scalia sided with the majority, but mocked the decision as “this Court’s practice of giving abortion-rights advocates a pass when it comes to suppressing the free-speech rights of their opponents.”

“Is it harassment, one wonders,” he wrote in his comment on the decision, “for Eleanor McCullen to ask a woman, quietly and politely, two times, whether she will take literature or whether she has any questions? Three times? Four times? It seems to me far from certain that First Amendment rights can be imperiled by threatening jail time (only at “reproductive health care facilit[ies],” of course) for so vague an offense as “follow[ing] and har­ass[ing].”

Those quiet and polite “conversations,” according to the National Abortion Federation have included:

  • 33839 arrests for clinic blockades;
  • 6849 violent acts including:

    • 8 murders
    • 17 attempted murders
    • 428 death threats
    • 100 cases of acid thrown on workers or those entering clinics
    • 42 bombings
    • 181 arson incidents
    • 1495 acts of vandalism
    • 663 anthrax/bioterrorism threats
    • 4 kidnappings
    • 399 invasions of buildings
    • 495 acts of trespassing.

In its narrow view of “limited interpretation” the Libertarian-leaning Court put free speech over public safety, which, historically, has been why the court has seen fit to restrict protestors of all stripes to designated areas of a public space.

Why is a health clinic unique in its restrictions on such First Amendment “conversation?” An unintended casualty of the ruling may be challenges to the safe space in front of courthouses and government buildings across America, national political conventions, protests of groups like the Westboro Baptist Church encroaching on soldiers’ funerals, no fly zones around the rebuilt World Trade Center, and even at the Supreme Court itself.

The Value of the Far Right of the Bench

The physical makeup of the country is changing, and the 1 percent white male minority that has ruled this country for much of its history is fighting that change tooth-and-nail.

Bush I & II appointments have been very critical to the success of the 1 percent because they are gutting large sections of social justice and social safety net law without having to answer to a voter.

If voters turn back the Tea Party over the next few elections, the lifetime appointments of the SCOTUS still are a powerful tool to derail or dismantle everything from immigration reform to a living wage.

A Different SCOTUS

In its prior incarnations, the Supreme Court has taken its weeks and months to deliberate on the issues brought before it to consider the broad ramifications of its rulings. The court has leaned to the right and the left at times.

What the SCOTUS historically has not engaged in since the days of the Robber Barons, though, seems to be pattern and practice of the Roberts SCOTUS: Libertarian pro-corporate, anti-government, anti-citizen rulings that serve the most narrow and wealthy of interests.

Those with the check books, secret conclaves, and frequent fundraisers are securing the white male ‘little “c” christian power that these self-same billionaires’ fathers and grandfathers used to rule America from the dawn of the Industrial Age until their self-inflicted demise after the Great Depression and the New Deal.

My shiny two.

Winning: Even Harder Than It Looks

So the GOP had us vote in the U.S. House of Representatives today on yet another malevolent bill, whose primary purpose evidently is to reduce Planet Earth to a burnt cinder. If the GOP were right that humans weren’t causing climate disruption, that might prove to be something of a relief, because then we wouldn’t feel so stupid about the extinction of humanity. The title of the GOP’s bill was “Lowering Gasoline Prices to Fuel an America That Works Act,” also known as the LGPTFAATW Act. Paging Dr. Orwell, paging Dr. Orwell…

Five House Democrats stepped forward with amendments, seeking to make this putrid saddlebag of puss slightly less detestable. There are 233 Republicans in the House, and 199 Democrats. Here is how the Democrats voted:

(1) 178 to 8.

(2) 179 to 5.

(3) 183 to 3.

(4) 174 to 12.

(5) 185 to 2.

So the Democratic amendments drew the support of between 94 and 99 percent of all the Democrats. Sounds promising, right? No, not right. Here is how the Republicans voted on the same amendments:

(1) 1 to 224.

(2) 4 to 222.

(3) 5 to 220.

(4) 5 to 217.

(5) 4 to 221.

Not a single Democratic amendment drew more than 2 percent of the Republican votes.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the 113th Congress!

For a Democrat to win on any vote, that Democrat needs the support of all the Democrats, and at least 8 percent of the Republicans. Or somewhat fewer Democrats (I’m looking at you, Jim Matheson!), and even more of the Republicans.

That didn’t happen today. Not even close.

But hey, I’m a Democrat, and somehow or other, I won on 13 House amendment votes last year — more than any other member, Democratic or Republican. Plus 15 times this year — so far. And I won on good progressive stuff, too — protecting us from NSA sabotage of security standards, moving money from weapons to biomedical research, cutting off funding for contractors whose work is late or over budget, etc., etc.

So why have my amendments succeeded, when so many other Democratic amendments have failed? Here are a few reasons:

1) I give some thought as to what might make a progressive amendment appealing to 18 or more House Republicans. Sometimes I can make a regional pitch, as I did to coastal Republicans on an offshore drilling amendment. Sometimes I can make a Constitutional pitch, as I did on a shield law for reporters and their sources. Sometimes I can make a nationalist pitch, as I did for protecting the Buy American Act from being gutted in trade negotiations. And sometimes I can make a political pitch, as I did for increased funding for Spanish-language housing counseling. (“Do you really want Hispanics to hate the GOP forever and ever?”) With some thought, I can see each proposal the way that the other side sees it, and I can come up with a way to win enough of their votes without compromising our principles.

2) I come up with things that are worth voting on. I’m not going to waste everyone’s time with an amendment to establish a commission, or order a report. That’s not my style. I swing for the fences. And in an institution scared by pervasive, perpetual boredom, that counts for something. I keep it real, and I keep it interesting.

3) I’m not afraid to talk to GOP leadership directly. I walk right up to them, I tell them what I want, and I explain why I want it. I don’t mince words. I don’t try to fool them. I don’t kiss up to them. Usually, they say no, but every once in a while, they say yes. And they love being asked.

4) I work it. I work it like no one else in the House. (Sorry, but it ain’t bragging if it’s true.) For every amendment that I care about, I personally write a letter to every other member of the House, explaining why I deserve their support. I hand the letter to most of them myself. I talk to dozens and dozens of GOP members about what my amendment is all about. My staff talks to their staff. And I enlist the help of other members to spread the word.

You may ask, why don’t other House Democrats do this, instead of sitting around and whining about how awful the GOP is? It’s like the old joke:

Q: Why is there so much ignorance and apathy? A: I don’t know and I don’t care.

I tell other members that if they’re unhappy with their job, then they should let someone else have it. No matter which side has the numbers, there are 50 different ways to win.

And it’s so important to win. There are 700,000 people in Central Florida, and 320 million people nationwide, who are counting on me to do something good for them. And that’s good enough for me.

Who Fixes What in Hollywood?

“HEDDA, I think it’s time you just shut the f**k up!”

That was Elizabeth Taylor at the premiere of The Sandpiper, back in 1965. Hedda was sitting a few seats behind Elizabeth and Richard Burton. Hopper, a rabid “red-baiter” and supporter of Sen. Joe McCarthy, was complaining loudly that formerly blacklisted Dalton Trumbo was the screenwriter of the latest Liz n’ Dick epic.

Miss Taylor, who had by then survived two major scandals and was no longer bound to a studio, spoke to the columnist in typical salty language. Miss Hopper shut up.

A year later, Hopper — still vital and bitchy and beautiful — suddenly died. La Liz did not wear black.

•SPEAKING OF gossip columnists, I love the news that the weirdly great Tilda Swinton will portray a Hedda/Louella type gossip columnist in a 1950s-era film titled, The Fixer.

It’s about a studio honcho (George Clooney) who “fixes” and covers for misbehaving stars. (Probably based on real-life smarties like Eddie Mannix and Howard Strickling.)

Channing Tatum is also set to play a “Gene Kelly” type of character. One assumes this character’s personal life needs “fixing.” (Those of us old enough to recall, heard plenty about various aspects of the wonderfully talented Gene’s life that needed “fixing.” Yeah, but we hear this about almost everyone in the business!)

These days, such people are referred to as “crisis managers.” Now, with almost all celebrities posting carelessly on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, there’s a crisis every few minutes to deal with and/or apologize for.

•BRAD PITT famously and funnily killed Nazis in Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds. You’d think that would have been enough. But now he is attached to another film about World War II with Shia LaBeouf. It’s titled Fury and Pitt is a soldier in a tank on a mission behind enemy lines.

I wish he and Dame Angelina would just hurry up with the Mr. and Mrs. Smith sequel. (I know we’re not supposed to call her “Dame.” But I want to!)

•THE “King-maker” is a Queen!

It was Diane Sawyer’s idea to groom the charming and energetic David Muir to replace her at ABC World News. These three — David Muir, George Stasinopoulos and Diane — add up to a powerful threesome at ABC News.

Time cannot diminish Diane’s sex-appeal and intellect plus there is the “hard work” factor she has put into her life and career. Long may she wave.

•I’VE HAD many inquiries about our friend Elaine Stritch since she “retired” to her home town of Birmingham, Michigan. Her longtime pal, Julie Keyes, is out there with the great actress now.

Since an operation for stomach cancer, doctors say she has every chance for recovery, but I haven’t been able to get Elaine on to come to the phone.

Word now is she recovered from the operation, but has problems with diabetes and not wanting to eat.

Elaine — please. Eat! Eat! Eat! You fans might want to send a card to 280 Harmon Street, # 172, Birmingham, Mich. 48009. We send our love to this unique and great star.

And thanks to Julie, her # 1 fan, for going out there to be with Elaine and her Michigan relatives.

• WE TOLD you a while back about the Showtime series Penny Dreadful and how it has grown on us. This weekend the spooky goings on end for the season. But it has been re-newed for a second season — with two more episodes added. Unfortunately, it won’t be eligible for Emmy contention (I don’t know why exactly.)

This is a pity, because Eva Green as the tormented, possessed Vanessa is giving an epic performance. But everybody in the cast is terrific, including Timothy Dalton, Reeve Carney Josh Hartnett (a revelation!) and Harry Treadaway, who plays Dr. Victor Frankenstein. He is an adorable, sexy monster-maker. Harry is not to be confused with his twin brother, Luke Treadaway, who is also an actor and model.

•WE GET Mail! “Dear Liz, when I read about your wonderful photo of Garland and Monroe embracing, the first thing that popped into my head was the famously over-medicated Oscar Levant’s quote about being hugged by Judy for the first time. It was, he said:

‘The greatest moment in pharmaceutical history.’

“Go to YouTube and see Judy on the ‘Tonight’ show not long before her death, singing a song called ‘It’s All for You,’ written by her friend Johnny Meyer. She could still amaze with her voice, personality, delivery and the way she gave herself to an audience.

“The same is true of the very last movie scene Marilyn ever filmed, with Dean Martin and Wally Cox, in “Something’s Got to Give.” Marilyn plays with such assurance, skill and charm, you fall in love with her all over again.

“We can kid ourselves, but we shall not see their like again. Best! Constant Reader David Cuthbert.”

•P.S. I have indeed seen Judy’s final Tonight Show appearance — she actually performed two songs, the other being Home for the Holidays. Both kept Garland well within her by-then limited range, but her voice was still warm, resonant, instantly recognizable. And that night at least, she was in total control.

As for Something’s Got to Give, I pride myself on nudging Barry Diller, then the head of 20th Century Fox to look for all the hours of footage of MM’s unfinished movie. (I had been told repeatedly she filmed much more than was rumored.) When I finally saw the scenes, it was like discovering the Holy Grail. I wrote of it, and in a short time, the legend of Marilyn being “un-filmable” and performing poorly were forever vanquished.

Unfortunately, it didn’t do much for director George Cukor’s reputation. His demands for retake after retake, when Monroe had been perfect, looked more like sabotage than directing. (Every time he said, “One more!” she did it slightly different, trying to give him wanted he wanted. And she never lost her temper.)

But my friend George Cukor taught me a valuable lesson. He said: “When writing about me, Liz, don’t call me ‘venerable’ — that’s just another way to say I’m old!”

Spiritual Lessons from Life's Travels: Being Mindful

A great lesson in mindfulness from Italy, well, it looks like Italy! Check it out!

There Is A Groupon To Hang Out With Neil Patrick Harris, Possibly The Best Bargain On The Internet

If you’re anything like us, you spend too many nights dreaming of a chance to see Neil Patrick Harris all dolled up in daisy dukes and stiletto heels, belting out “Sugar Daddy” on the big stage.

Well, Groupon is actually offering a chance to see Broadway’s hot item and recent Tony-winning musical, “Hedwig and the Angry Inch” — in the form of a sweepstakes. The coupon (read: entry into a contest) includes a trip to New York, a spot at his packed show and a drink with NPH himself, all for the basement price of $10.

Yup, $10. That has to be the best bargain on the internet.

groupon

All proceeds from the sweepstakes go toward Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, which supports people across America living with HIV/AIDS. “I can’t think of greater motivation for giving my best performance than knowing that tickets to ‘Hedwig and the Angry Inch’ are contributing to the cause,” Harris commented. “And that we get to share a stiff cocktail after the show.”

We always knew we liked him.

The endeavor runs until July 3 (the winner will be drawn on Thursday, July 10). Make a donation here and, come August 8, you may find yourself singing along to the cult rock opera with your new BFF Neil. At the very least, you’ll have supported a worthy cause. See the many perks of the prize here and get your hopes up with Harris’ epic Tony performance below.