* * The airlines are making us miserable

Undeniably, one of the most awesome aspects of life in the modern era is that if you can afford it, tomorrow you can be anywhere in the world. In 1492, it took Columbus two months to cross the Atlantic and discover (How can you discover a continent that already had 7,000,000 people on it? That’s a topic for another day.) America, but now you can fly from Spain to Hispaniola in eight hours. Sadly, it’s a far less comfortable experience than it could be, and the airlines are making it so on purpose.

At no time in my life am I happier that I’m small in stature than when flying. I stand a mere 5-feet 5-inches and have a short 27-inch inseam, yet I’m still cramped in an airline passenger seat. This was painfully obvious on a recent trip to Italy, where the return transatlantic flight from Frankfurt, Germany, to Dulles Airport in Northern Virginia left me sore and angry. I’ve learned since that the airlines want customers sore and angry. Because it makes them more money.

Like many aspects of the past, when in public life, people were more formal. Look at any photo of people attending a baseball game or boarding a train 100 years ago, and you’ll see men wearing ties and top-hats, and women wearing dresses, hats, and make-up. Train travel, even into the 1950s, was an elegant affair, with uniformed conductors and dining car waiters who polished fine silverware and china between meals. Manners and civility were practiced in every interaction, and the RR companies and emerging airlines treated customers with the utmost respect. That’s all gone now. There was a point in time that must have slipped by me when profits overwhelmed humanity.

Today’s airlines have discovered that they can make more money and increase their profits by tacking on additional fees for things they routinely provided every customer in the price of their ticket. You want to take luggage with you? That’ll cost more. You want to eat something? That’ll cost more. You want legroom or a seat large enough for a standard human being? Still more.

The airlines are totally conscious of this abuse. They even have a name for it: calculated misery. They’re purposefully making us miserable because making us miserable makes them more profitable. Sure, it’s antagonistic, baleful. But if you want to get somewhere distant in a reasonable period of time, you have few choices. Basically what they’re doing is making their baseline service, air travel, so wretched that you’ll pay more to avail yourself a happier experience.

Of all the sinister things the airline does, making their jets more crowded is tops. With each generation of new planes, they order seats that are marginally smaller and closer together than before and cram more seats inside. Poor you if the person sitting next to you is, shall we charitably say, large, as his or her pulpy arms spill over onto your shared armrest. Pity you even more if YOU are that large person, because you’re miserable all around. Not only are you fighting for side-by-side space, but your legs are jammed into the seat in front of you and whenever that passenger moves, it jars you. Movement up and down the hallways – god forbid you need to tinkle on an eight-hour flight – is similarly fraught with unpleasant interactions with other passengers.

Airlines do this because they can. You’d never return to a restaurant that seated you at a different table from your date, charged you for water, kicked you out if someone arrived willing to pay more, or forced you to pay to use the toilet. Restaurants typically have competitors, and they know they’d lose your business if they treat you like vermin.

Conversely, with few exceptions, the airlines face little competition in their various routes. After decades of mergers, almost the entirety of the domestic market is comprised of only four airlines: Delta, American, United, and Southwest. So even if one of these airlines treats you and your traveling family like cockroaches, there’s little you can do about it. They know, and their computer models show, that one bad experience is enough to get many customers to fork over more money to avoid the next one. The skies are now distinctly unfriendly.

Maybe this is our fault. We’ve all bought into the Walmartization of consumerism, where the lowest price is everything. Shame on us; you get what you pay for. Still, it’s maddening.

You might be reading this, smugly thinking that you never (or seldom) fly, and are thus unaffected. Consider that Congress is now evaluating scrapping laws on Net Neutrality, meaning the Internet service providers will be able to monitor your usage and charge for services and upgrades accordingly. Prepare yourself for that calculated misery.

Next time I travel, I’m going to take a train.

* * A big change in the House

Did you feel the ground shake on Election Day?

Especially in the Virginia House of Delegates, the results couldn’t have been more surprising. Democrats won in a “wave” election, sweeping lots of new Delegates into office, many in districts not previously thought to be competitive, and potentially yielding a Democratic majority, something nobody thought was possible. AND Democrat Ralph Northam defeated Ed Gillespie for Governor by a margin not seen in a generation.

So what happened?

Four years ago, I ran for the House in District 7, encompassing some of Blacksburg, some of Christiansburg, all of south Montgomery County, all of Floyd County, and most of Pulaski County. My joke goes that I ran a successful campaign, but not as successful as my opponent. At the time, Delegate Nick Rush was a one-term incumbent Republican in a heavily Republican district. I understood that my chances were slim, but wanted to give him a challenge.

Two years ago he ran unchallenged. I saw him shopping at a hardware store on the Saturday before the election. No need to campaign if you don’t have an opponent! This year he easily defeated newcomer Flo Ketner.

After my loss, I spoke with former congressman Rick Boucher. He said the political winds shift over time, and a similar wave that swept him from office in 2010 could sweep many Democrats back into competitiveness. That’s apparently what happened this year.

When I ran, if I remember correctly, there were 88 incumbents (with 12 open seats due to retirement) who faced 44 challengers and only 2 lost. Two years ago, there were a similar number of incumbents and none of them lost. I concluded it was extremely difficult to unseat an incumbent, largely because of the gerrymandering of the districts.

Gerrymandering, as you recall from high school government class (You loved government, didn’t you?), is packing large majorities of voters for party “A” into a small number of districts to obtain smaller majorities for party “B” in many districts, thus ensuring more wins for party “B.”

Currently we’re operating under Republican-defined districts, to their benefit. (To be fair, in the past Democrats did much the same thing.) Consistently, we’ve had more votes cast state-wide for Democrats and more Republican winners, evidenced by the House of Delegates that prior to this election had 66 Republicans and 34 Democrats and the federal House of Representatives that has 7 Republicans and 4 Democrats.

Nevertheless, this time, the Democrats, most of them women, astoundingly picked up at least 15 House seats, with another 3 too close to call, potentially shifting the entire balance. Many of these districts were considered so heavily gerrymandered to the Republicans that in prior elections, Democrats didn’t even try.

The most enticing race was in Prince William County. It pitted 13 term Republican Bob Marshall against Danica Roem, a journalist, rock musician, political newcomer, and the first openly transgender person to ever run. Marshall described himself as Virginia’s “chief homophobe,” who authored Virginia’s version of the “bathroom bill,” that was so

pilloried in North Carolina. Roem won by almost 3000 votes! I’m not making this up; a transgender woman beat a conservative homophobic man.

Apparently culture war issues don’t win elections any more. We’re a Newer Dominion now.

How were Democrats able to overcome this structural handicap? The Monday morning quarterbacks are still busily analyzing the contests, but I think it can be mostly attributed to the retribution of women and people of color against the ascension of Donald Trump. David Toscano, the leader of House Democrats said, “The day after the Trump election, it began raining candidates in Virginia.”

Since the Republicans won complete control of the Congress and the White House, they’ve sputtered. No repeal of the Affordable Care Act. No new immigration policy. No border wall. Zero major legislation. The tax reform bill they’re working on doesn’t even have total support from their own party. To me, what happened that Tuesday was buoyed by anti-Trump, anti-Republican sentiment and may be a model of things to come in 2018.

Beyond the partisan brinksmanship, what can we expect legislatively? I suspect we’ll join the 32 other states so far that have passed the Medicaid Expansion that will benefit hard-working people in low-wage jobs that are now uninsured, something outgoing Governor Terry McAuliffe worked tirelessly but unsuccessfully to accomplish. With most of the new winners being women, I suspect we’ll see no more efforts to diminish rights of women to control their own bodies. And I suspect we’ve seen the last effort to pass legislation dictating where someone must pee.

Election tallies show that the Democratic areas became more Democratic and the Republican areas became more Republican, underscoring the continuing polarization of politics. And, for better or worse, our sparsely populated area of SWVA is increasingly dominated by Northern Virginia.

It’ll be fascinating to see how these trends play out moving forward. Hold on tight!

* * Bethany Mott cares about your child

“The New River Valley is an official child care desert, as designated by the Center for American Progress,” Bethany Mott told me. Bethany is the Executive Director of a new organization here in Montgomery County called, ABCs, the Alliance for Better Childcare Strategies, and she’s trying to fix that.

I met with her in my office to talk about how well, or in this case, NOT well, we’re taking care of our youngest citizens, those from infancy until they enter kindergarten.

“ABCs is a new non-profit that is the result of a two-year working group, a committee out of (Virginia) Tech and other concerned members of the community who realize there is a crisis in child care.” She said our situation is common, but worse here than many places. “There is only one child care space for every five children under the age of five. There are about 5000 children and only 1100 spaces. The other children are being shunted between relatives or informal situations, or being taken care of by a parent who isn’t working.

“So it’s an economic development problem because those parents might want to be working. And it’s an educational readiness problem because the children aren’t ready for kindergarten. Children who aren’t ready for kindergarten when they start may not be reading by the third grade. Statistics are grim about whether they’ll graduate from high school and have a successful, prosperous life.

“With our current system, funding (for child-care) only comes from one place: tuition.” In other words, parents are paying for child-care. There is no societal contribution, for example from the state or federal governments. “It typically costs anywhere from $700 to $1200 per month. Given the median income of Montgomery County residents, many simply cannot afford that. Thirty-six percent of local families live under 200% of the Federal Poverty Limit. So they would have to spend 40% of their gross income on quality child care for a preschooler and one year-old. Nobody can do that. So there’s an industry conundrum.

“It’s a highly regulated industry to provide our children with safety and education. ABCs has a three-fold mission. First, we will create more capacity. We want to keep our young adults here. So we need more capacity. Second, we want to improve quality, both in childcare facilities and in in-home providers. We are working with Virginia Quality to support education of the childcare workforce and the Chamber of Commerce on recognition, granting an ‘Early Childhood Educator of the Year’ award. And third, we’re working on affordability. We’re launching a scholarship program to help working families that are above the poverty limit and don’t qualify for assistance but are still unable to afford quality child care.”

But this is a private market, we agreed. Like other businesses, childcare centers need to be successful financially. Running a facility has many expenses, mainly the staff.

The state provides funding for some poor families for child-care through a state grant program. But the family may still struggle to find a provider or may be put on a state waiting due to lack of funding.

“We want our children to grow into successful adults, contributing to society and paying taxes back into the system,” Bethany said. “Our community has a vested interest in preparing these children. We also have a vested interest in helping families climb the income ladder.”

“Is there anybody who doesn’t understand this readily,” I asked innocently.

“Yes,” she shrugged. “But it shouldn’t be a political issue. It’s a rational economic issue.”

I said, “We’re moving into a high-paced, global, highly competitive, technologically based economy. If our kids can’t compete, we have no future.”

“Exactly,” she agreed.

I listed a bunch of traditional industries that once fueled the economies of our region. Textiles. Furniture. Coal. People want these things to come back. But they won’t. Communities that don’t recognize the terminal demise of these industries are destined for failure. Communities that accept these realities have a chance for success. ABCs is promoting adequate quality childcare as a necessary foundation for future success.

We talked at length about other models worldwide, where the government took a more active role. Here, the government funds education K-12, but before, in child-care and afterwards in college, you’re generally on your own. Those become personal economic investments rather than societal. Bethany ended our conversation with “ABCs is established to help working parents have choices and access quality childcare. ABCs is strengthening our local childcare infrastructure to enable families to work and children to be prepared for kindergarten. It’s about economics, quality of life, and our future.”

* * David Schmale tracks what's in the air

Run outside for a moment and take a huge breath of air. You’ve just inhaled thousands of microorganisms: fungi, bacteria, and viruses. Virginia Tech plant pathology professor David Schmale wants to know where they come from.

Dr. Schmale did a presentation I attended a couple of months ago, and I was fascinated by his work. The sexy part of what he does is the specialized equipment he uses to collect his samples, things like unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) – what we call drones – and other unmanned systems such as boats and underwater vehicles. But what I found fascinating is the science itself and how the invisible, ancient source of energy, the wind, is an endless conduit for all manner of infinitesimally little things. So I invited myself to visit with him in his office in Latham Hall to learn more.

He was hired as a plant pathologist (“Pathology” means disease.), but now, “I really am an aerobiologist. Aerobiology is the study of the flow of life in the atmosphere.”

David is a big, strong man who looks more like an NFL linebacker than a science professor (He likes to lift heavy things and can bench press 365 pounds.). “Some of the microorganisms are dead; some are living. ‘Micro’ means it’s microscopic. ‘Organism’ implies that it is a living agent, or was. These microorganisms fly along what we like to call ‘highways in the sky.’”

He said that plants of all sizes can serve as sources of microorganisms and microscopic propagules. For example, flowers and trees can produce pollen. Pollen is an agent whereby a plant is able to relocate elsewhere and reproduce. And bacteria and fungal spores can hitch a ride on the pollen grains.

“We are interested in the transport of microorganisms from one place to the next. We think about plant diseases and causal agents of plant diseases that can move through the atmosphere over some distance from infected plants. Much of our foundational work is understanding this transport.

“Consider a grower of some agricultural crop. You may be worried about a disease that you know has infected neighboring fields. Perhaps your neighboring farmer has incurred a loss due to a devastating pathogen or an infection of his crop. You want to plan for its arrival. By understanding when and how the pathogen might be traveling to your crop, you can make informed decisions about how to manage the disease, such as the appropriate timing of chemical treatments such as fungicides.”

He said the movement of stuff in the air is partly controlled by weather and wind. Major atmospheric phenomena like hurricanes shuffle things in the air over long distances. The higher things are lifted, typically the farther they will be transported. On the other hand, microorganisms that get transported at higher altitudes often don’t survive due to UV radiation and dessication (drying out).

During storms, dust particles, fine sand and similar inert particulates, are entrained into winds and taken aloft. “During the hurricane season, dust from Africa can even make it to Virginia.”

I asked how he came to develop his interest in science. He said his parents were both teachers, and he gravitated towards academics and learning. The kind of guy who seems like he’s good at almost anything he tried, he was a singer and dancer as child and considered going to college to on a vocal scholarship. He ultimately enrolled at the University of California in Davis to study pre-med, thinking he’d become a medical doctor. He took a course in what then was called botany. “I was so intrigued that plants could get sick.”

He got his doctorate at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York and was hired at Tech where his wife was also hired as a mathematics professor. He teaches, does scientific studies, and obtains research funding. “I see my role here at Virginia Tech is to create opportunities for others. In doing so, we create opportunities together for really great science. My career has been in attracting talent and having the talent frame where the program should go: the tools, techniques, and questions we need to be addressing.”

Tech’s media office often focuses on high-impact, high-visibility research. He has enjoyed this press for many of his multimillion dollar federal grants. But he also maintains a focus on the smaller grants that can still produce significant scientific breakthroughs. “There are many smaller, less publicized, success stories. They deserve some press, too!”

He acknowledges the potential for terrible things to happen, either naturally or by bio-terrorism. But he remains optimistic about the future. “We are moving into a technologically savvy world where sensors are monitoring our daily lives, things like watches that will monitor our heart rate and remind us to take our medicines. It’s an exciting time when sensing modalities can improve our quality of life.”

* * Our corporations are killing us

Last week I went to Richmond to do three presentations about my books. I was hosted by my cousin Louis Adams, who attended the first presentation. Driving in, I passed the corporate headquarters of Altria, renamed from Philip Morris a dozen years ago. They make cigarettes, cigars, and other tobacco products, things that frequently prematurely kill their own customers. I said something to that effect in my presentation, wondering aloud about working for a company like that. Louis told me later that a man near him grumbled that he’d worked there for 35 years and wasn’t happy with my quip. Hey, it is what it is.

Tobacco’s cultivation and use have been major contributors to Virginia’s economy almost since white people arrived. It didn’t take long for its addictive properties to assert themselves, as 17^th Century physicians, unhesitatingly willing to do autopsies, found black, oleaginous goo coating the lung cavities of deceased smokers. And yet for another couple of centuries, the tobacco industry continued to downplay the risks. Only when public interest changed in the 1960s did legislatures insist on sweeping changes, including the ubiquitous warning labels on cigarette packs and removal of advertising from television and other media.

Nevertheless, Altria continues to be one of the country’s most active financiers of political lobbying, spending millions each year to affect public policy. Altria funds The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition which lobbied against the scientific consensus on climate change. Altria, it seems, is deeply involved in the denial of science.

Speaking of climate change, Altria is not the only corporation that doesn’t want the public to know or understand the risks. Energy giant Exxon Mobil has been studying this for decades. Recently released documents show that it has long deliberately misled the public about the state of climate science and its implications. Evidence shows a systematic, measurable discrepancy between what Exxon Mobil’s scientists and executives discussed in internal communications and what it presented to the public. Presumably Exxon reasoned if we knew the truth it would damage their business.

Blatant disregard for the health and safety of the public and even their own customers is not merely the realm of these two corporations. Chemical giant Monsanto has developed and or produced a laundry list of harmful products, including now banned PCBs, dioxin, and DDT, as well as questionable products like bovine growth hormone, Aspartame and Saccharin.

Perhaps worst of all, Monsanto has been able to fully dominate and control our seeds and food supply by developing and marketing GMO crops, which have been linked to obesity, infertility, and autism, and even cancer.

To be fair, my guess is that many of the people inventing these harmful products were unaware of the risks, at least at the beginning, and were just working to make their employers more successful. Consider the case of one Thomas Midgley Jr. (1889-1944), often credited with inventing more destructive and ultimately banned products than anyone who has ever lived.

Midgley’s first blockbuster was tetraethyl-lead, an additive to gasoline that made engines run smoother, released in 1921. Due to its irrefutably pernicious effects, the EPA finally banned lead in gasoline twenty years ago, but the legacy is so pervasive that we still buy “unleaded” gas. Next, genius Midgley invented the chlorofluorocarbon “Freon,” the refrigerant that coursed through air conditioners, freezers, and refrigerators for decades until it was banned for damaging the earth’s protective ozone layer.

Ultimately Midgley contracted polio and strangled to death, entangled by the ropes of a device he’d invented to help others lift him from his bed. Some things you can’t make up.

It’s sad but undeniable that many corporations place their profits over the well-being of humanity. Here’s the one that is particularly depressing to me.

Pharmaceutical companies, ostensibly in the business of alleviating human pain and suffering, are now killing massive numbers of our neighbors throughout Appalachia. Opiod drugs, extensively and deceptively marketed by the drug industry, kill 90 people every day. Manufacturers and distributors have aggressively worked to convince doctors to overprescribe prescription medications that turn users into zombified addicts.

Opioids are a drug class of painkillers based on opium. Heroin, introduced in 1898, was rigidly controlled and prescribed under only the direst circumstances. Nowadays, synthetic painkillers like fentanyl and oxycodone (brand name: Oxycontin) have flooded the market. These painkillers are among the most addictive substances known. Oxycontin is so addictive it can create physical dependency in weeks, leaving users miserable if they can’t get their fix.

OxyContin’s maker Purdue, in 2007, pleaded guilty in federal court here in Virginia to misleading doctors and patients about its risks. The $600 million fine was substantial, but a drop in the bucket compared with the $35 billion it made from Oxycontin sales between 1995 and 2015.

You’d think it would be a questionable business strategy for a corporation to kill its own customers. Clearly, many don’t care. Beware!