Potter's Weal

[Good overview of current research in a fast changing theme, but neglects the importance of rigorously enforced MPAs as “seed stock” in post disaster recovery after massive events such as mega hurricanes — this effect is being observed in some of the Eastern Caribbean areas affected by the hurricanes of 2017.]

The Conversation < https://theconversation.com/no-take-marine-areas-help-fishers-and-fish-far-more-than-we-thought-119659 >
Academic rigor, journalistic flair (check URL above for pretty pictures)

No-take marine areas help fishers (and fish) far more than we thought

July 3, 2019 3.58pm EDT

Authors

Dustin Marshall, Professor, Marine Evolutionary Ecology, Monash University

Liz Morris, Administration Manager, Monash University

Disclosure statement:

Dustin Marshall receives funding from Australian Research Council.

Liz Morris does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Partners

Monash University

Monash University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU.

One hectare of ocean in which fishing is not allowed (a marine protected area) produces at least five times the amount of fish as an equivalent unprotected hectare, according to new research published today.

This outsized effect means marine protected areas, or MPAs, are more valuable than we previously thought for conservation and increasing fishing catches in nearby areas.

Previous research has found the number of offspring from a fish increases exponentially as they grow larger, a disparity that had not been taken into account in earlier modelling of fish populations. By revising this basic assumption, the true value of MPAs is clearer.

Read more: Protecting not-so-wild places helps biodiversity
Marine Protected Areas

Marine protected areas are ocean areas where human activity is restricted and at their best are “no take” zones, where removing animals and plants is banned. Fish populations within these areas can grow with limited human interference and potentially “spill-over” to replenish fished populations outside.

Obviously MPAs are designed to protect ecological communities, but scientists have long hoped they can play another role: contributing to the replenishment and maintenance of species that are targeted by fisheries.

Wild fisheries globally are under intense pressure and the size fish catches have levelled off or declined despite an ever-increasing fishing effort.

Yet fishers remain sceptical that any spillover will offset the loss of fishing grounds, and the role of MPAs in fisheries remains contentious. A key issue is the number of offspring that fish inside MPAs produce. If their fecundity is similar to that of fish outside the MPA, then obviously there will be no benefit and only costs to fishers.

Big fish have far more babies

Traditional models assume that fish reproductive output is proportional to mass, that is, doubling the mass of a fish doubles its reproductive output. Thus, the size of fish within a population is assumed to be less important than the total biomass when calculating population growth.

But a paper recently published in Science demonstrated this assumption is incorrect for 95% of fish species: larger fish actually have disproportionately higher reproductive outputs. That means doubling a fish’s mass more than doubles its reproductive output.

When we feed this newly revised assumption into models of fish reproduction, predictions about the value of MPAs change dramatically.
Author provided

Fish are, on average, 25% longer inside protected areas than outside. This doesn’t sound like much, but it translates into a big difference in reproductive output – an MPA fish produces almost 3 times more offspring on average. This, coupled with higher fish populations because of the no-take rule means MPAs produce between 5 and 200 times (depending on the species) more offspring per unit area than unprotected areas.

Put another way, one hectare of MPA is worth at least 5 hectares of unprotected area in terms of the number of offspring produced.

We have to remember though, just because MPAs produce disproportionately more offspring it doesn’t necessarily mean they enhance fisheries yields.

For protected areas to increase catch sizes, offspring need to move to fished areas. To calculate fisheries yields, we need to model – among other things – larval dispersal between protected and unprotected areas. This information is only available for a few species.

We explored the consequences of disproportionate reproduction for fisheries yields with and without MPAs for one iconic fish, the coral trout on the Great Barrier Reef. This is one of the few species for which we had data for most of the key parameters, including decent estimates of larval dispersal and how connected different populations are.

No-take protected areas increased the amount of common coral trout caught in nearby areas by 12%. Paul Asman and Jill Lenoble/Flickr, CC BY

We found MPAs do in fact enhance yields to fisheries when disproportionate reproduction is included in relatively realistic models of fish populations. For the coral trout, we saw a roughly 12% increase in tonnes of caught fish.

There are two lessons here. First, a fivefold increase in the production of eggs inside MPAs results in only modest increases in yield. This is because limited dispersal and higher death rates in the protected areas dampen the benefits.

However the exciting second lesson is these results suggest MPAs are not in conflict with the interests of fishers, as is often argued.

While MPAs restrict access to an entire population of fish, fishers still benefit from from their disproportionate affect on fish numbers. MPAs are a rare win-win strategy.

It’s unclear whether our results will hold for all species. What’s more, these effects rely on strict no-take rules being well-enforced, otherwise the essential differences in the sizes of fish will never be established.

We think that the value of MPAs as a fisheries management tool has been systematically underestimated. Including disproportionate reproduction in our assessments of MPAs should correct this view and partly resolve the debate about their value. Well-designed networks of MPAs could increase much-needed yields from wild-caught fish.

Before you go…

The Conversation aims to rebuild trust in experts and promote more informed public debate. Our independent fact-based journalism is essential for a healthy democracy. Your support enables us to keep our content free and accessible.

Beth Daley

Editor and General Manager
You might also like

Lionfish: the Mediterranean invasion of an untouchable and enigmatic predator

Catch me if you can! How anglers are changing the catchability of fish

Microplastic pollution and wet wipe ‘reefs’ are changing the River Thames ecosystem

Robben Island joins list of 20 new protected marine sites in South Africa

Copyright © 2010–2019, The Conversation US, Inc.

>

[Washington Post, page A15, July 25, 2019, < https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/07/24/private-equitys-role-retail-has-decimated-million-jobs-study-says/?utm_term=.6bc7148b27ac > Graphics at the website.]

Private equity’s role in retail has killed 1.3 million jobs, study says

Women and people of color have been disproportionately affected by closures at debt-saddled stores

[Photo caption: More than 33,000 Toys R Us workers lost their jobs when the company filed for bankruptcy and liquidated its stores. All told, more than 1.3 million U.S. workers have lost their jobs in the past decade because of private equity ownership in retail, data show. (Julio Cortez/AP)]

By Abha Bhattarai

She’s been looking for more than a year, but Giovanna De La Rosa has yet to find a job.

After 20 years with Toys R Us in San Diego, she was one of 33,000 workers laid off last summer when the company filed for bankruptcy and liquidated its stores. The retailer, which in 2017 had $11.5 billion in annual sales, had struggled to pay down billions of dollars in debt stemming from a 2005 leveraged buyout.

“It’s been really, really tough,” said De La Rosa, 39, who has a son with autism. “Losing my health insurance has been a big deal.”

More than 1.3 million Americans have lost their jobs in the past decade as a result of private equity ownership in retail, according to a report released Wednesday. That includes 600,000 retail workers, as well as 728,000 employees in related industries. Overall, the sector added more than 1 million jobs during that period.

[Read the report here < https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/report-on-private-equity-s-role-in-retail/3ca628da-aeb8-4509-898f-af46e6d0a196/?utm_term=.646fcac7decb >]

Women and people of color have been disproportionately affected by the layoffs as debt-ridden retailers closed thousands of stores, according to the report by six progressive nonprofit organizations and workers’ advocacy groups, including Americans for Financial Reform and the Center for Popular Democracy.

“Wall Street has become the new boss for an ever-growing number of workers across the country,” said Charles Khan, organizing director of the Strong Economy for All Coalition, a group of labor unions and community groups in New York that was involved in the study. “That’s meant layoffs, shrinking paychecks and benefits cuts for millions of people.”

Ten of the 14 largest retail bankruptcies since 2012 have been at private-equity-owned companies, such as Payless ShoeSource and Claire’s, according to the study.

More than 1 million of the nation’s 15.8 million retail workers continue to work for private-equity-backed companies, including Michael’s, J. Crew and Neiman Marcus, according to the study.

[Elizabeth Warren, in detailed attack on private equity, unveils plan to stop ‘looting’ of U.S. companies]

Private equity firms and hedge funds have been aggressively buying up retailers since the mid-2000s, when a booming economy and low interest rates made leveraged buyouts particularly attractive. The firms pooled money — often from pension funds, wealthy investors and financial firms — and relied on large swaths of debt to acquire companies like Mervyn’s and Linens ‘n Things, with the goal of turning them around.

In practice, though, they routinely sold off real estate holdings, cut workers’ pay and benefits, and jettisoned jobs to turn a quick profit for investors, according to Heather Slavkin Corzo, a senior fellow at Americans for Financial Reform and the director of capital markets policy for the AFL-CIO, a federation of labor unions.

“When a private equity firm steps in, it’s a classic case of ‘Heads I win, tails you lose,’” Corzo said. “They have a real short-term focus on extracting as much cash as possible, as quickly as possible.”

That often means selling off a company’s most valuable asset, its real estate, she said. Retail is a notoriously difficult industry, with intense competition and razor-thin profit margins. Owning their own buildings is one way for companies to shield themselves from economic uncertainty. For private equity firms, such holdings can translate into quick profits. But selling them forces retailers to rent out buildings they used to own.

The study comes a week after Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced legislation that would stop private equity firms from gutting companies and loading them with debt. Her plan would require such firms to shoulder those liabilities themselves instead of foisting them onto their acquisitions.

“For far too long, Washington has looked the other way while private equity firms take over companies, load them with debt, strip them of their wealth, and walk away scot-free — leaving workers, consumers, and whole communities to pick up the pieces,” Warren said in a statement last week.

The industry, she and others contend, faces few regulations that others, including mutual funds and investments banks, do. When a private-equity-backed company files for bankruptcy, executives are typically rewarded over workers, pension funds and other creditors. As a result, 100,000 workers and retirees have missed out on $128 million in pensions because of bankruptcies from 2001 to 2014, according to data from the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

Industry groups say private equity firms make significant investments to help businesses grow, and that their returns help support pension funds for teachers, first responders and other government workers. They say such factors as increased competition and the shift to online shopping also have contributed to retail bankruptcies.

“This report is biased and is focused on a sector that experienced tremendous disruption over the past decade,” said Drew Maloney, president of the American Investment Council, which lobbies on behalf of the industry. “Private equity has a clear record of supporting millions of jobs across all sectors and investing in communities across America.”

But critics say large debt loads from leveraged buyouts make it difficult for otherwise profitable retailers to adapt to industry changes. When Toys R Us filed for bankruptcy in 2017, court documents showed that it had been paying $400 million a year toward its debt, often at the expense of profitability. The retailer’s three companies — Bain Capital, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Vornado Realty Trust — did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

[Analysts: Toys R Us might have survived if it did not have to deal with so much debt]

In November, Bain Capital and KKR set up a $20 million fund for laid-off Toys R Us employees. The retailer’s bankruptcy, the firms said, was caused by “an extraordinary set of circumstances,” including changes in the retail landscape and a push by creditors to liquidate operations. Although workers groups say the amount is less than the $75 million they were owed under the retailer’s severance policy, they say it could set a new precedent for future bankruptcies.

Private equity firms and hedge funds have made major investments in at least 80 retailers in the past decade, including household names such as Brookstone, David’s Bridal and Gymboree. All three companies have filed for bankruptcy in the past year.

When the hedge fund ESL Investments took over Sears in 2005, employees like Terry Leiker said the impact was nearly immediate: The company did away with workers’ 401(k) benefits and shifted to commission-based salaries. Leiker’s pay dropped from $13 an hour to nearly half of that, and there were repercussions if she didn’t get at least three customers to sign up for Sears credit cards each week. Full-time workers were replaced with part-timers, and there were changes in merchandise.

“Power tools weren’t made in the United States anymore,” said Leiker, who worked in Sears’s tools department for 18 years. “Clothing quality wasn’t what it used to be.”

Leiker, 65, was laid off in October, days before Sears filed for bankruptcy. She has applied for multiple retail jobs since — at Macy’s, JC Penney, Family Dollar — but has yet to find work.

In all, more than 260,000 Sears and Kmart workers have lost their jobs since ESL took over, according to Wednesday’s report, which is co-authored by Hedge Clippers, the Private Equity Stakeholder Project and United for Respect. Representatives for ESL Investments and Sears did not respond to requests for comment.

“It’s been horrible, absolutely horrible,” said Leiker, who is working with the advocacy group United for Respect. “We’re struggling. Most weeks we can either buy food or we can pay our bills. That shouldn’t be a choice anybody has to make.”

Retail jobs tend to be among the country’s lowest-paying and most volatile. Roughly 1 in 4 retail workers lives below or near the federal poverty line, which is $25,750 for a family of four.

[Toys R Us workers are training Sears workers to fight for severance]

Ann Marie Reinhart had been with Toys R Us for 29 years when its bankruptcy and liquidation left her without a job.

She said she’d applied for more than 100 positions before she finally found work at Belk, a Charlotte-based department store chain that had been acquired four years ago by the private equity firm Sycamore Partners.

On Monday, Reinhart, who had just returned from a family vacation to Ocean City, learned that her job fulfilling online orders at a Durham, N.C., store was being eliminated as part of a broader effort to cut costs. She isn’t sure what she’ll do next.

“It’s been a nightmare, honestly,” said Reinhart, 60. “It’s like private-equity deja vu.”

From the Washington Post, 10 July 2019 < https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/energy-environment/washington-state-sues-navy-over-expanded-flights-on-island/2019/07/09/bfcc156a-a289-11e9-a767-d7ab84aef3e9_story.html?utm_term=.5acbcebc8fbf >

How many admirals were busted back to midshipman for this stupid plan?
Oh, about zero.
How many admirals should have been busted back to midshipman for planning 100,000 takeoffs and landings per year for 30 years in an area with obvious impacts on human and natural ecosystems?
Each and every one.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Energy & Environment

Washington state sues Navy over expanded flights on island

[FILE PHOTO CAPTION – In this June 3, 2008, file photo, the Navy’s EA-18G Growler plane is seen in Oak Harbor, Wash., after it was unveiled in a ceremony at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. Washington state sued the Navy on Tuesday, July 9, 2019, over its expansion of jet operations on Whidbey Island, saying officials failed to adequately consider the effect that additional noisy flights would have on people or wildlife. (Michael O’Leary/The Herald via AP, File) (Associated Press)]

By Gene Johnson | AP
July 9 at 6:06 PM

SEATTLE — Washington state sued the Navy on Tuesday over its expansion of jet operations on an island north of Seattle, saying officials failed to adequately consider the effect that additional noisy flights would have on people or wildlife.

“The Navy has an important job, and it’s critical that their pilots and crews have the opportunity to train,” Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a news release announcing the lawsuit. “That does not relieve the federal government of its obligation to follow the law and avoid unnecessary harm to our health and natural resources.”

The Navy’s public affairs office said it does not comment on litigation.

The Navy in March authorized the expansion of its Growler program by up to three dozen jets, adding to the 82 already based on Whidbey Island, north of Seattle.

The low-flying jets conduct electronic warfare to jam enemy communications and launch systems, and under the expansion plans crews would perform around 100,000 takeoffs and landings a year for the next three decades.

That, Ferguson said, could have serious effects on nearby residents. The state Health Department has outlined how exposure to noise levels similar to those at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island could disrupt children’s learning and cause sleep disturbance, cognitive impairment and cardiovascular disease.

It could also disrupt the feeding and breeding of eagles and marbled murrelets, a type of seabird.

In the news release, Quinault Indian Nation President Fawn Sharp called on the federal government to strike a balance between national security and environmental preservation.

“Unregulated, unrestrained noise pollution from increased military training operations presents a clear threat to the health and solitude of our state’s fragile ecosystems, treaty protected resources and endangered species,” she said.

In its decision to approve the expansion plan, the Navy said the number of flights on the island would be comparable to those that occurred from the 1970s through the 1990s. It also said it would continue to invest in technologies to reduce engine and aircraft noise.

The state’s lawsuit alleges violations of the National Environmental Protection Act and the federal Administrative Procedure Act. Ferguson said he intended to add claims under the Endangered Species Act.

The National Parks Conservation Association said it supports the lawsuit, noting that the flights could also affect Ebey’s Landing, a historical preserve on Whidbey Island, and Olympic National Park. The association recently filed a lawsuit accusing the Navy of withholding information about noise pollution from the jets over Olympic National Park.

Navy Secretary Richard Spencer wrote a letter in March to the federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, rebuffing its call for additional noise monitoring and tracking of the effect on tourism. He said the Navy had already performed noise monitoring and noted it was spending $876,000 to refurbish a home at Ebey Landing built in 1860.

Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

From the <http://newsofstjohn.com/2019/06/03/caneel-bay-leaseholder-wants-70-million-to-walk-away/>

Go to the website to see the pretty sensible 46 comments. . . .

Great island story. Maybe they can get Jeffrey Eptstein to take over the lease and set up a (wink, wink) summer camp, ya think?

Caneel Bay Leaseholder Wants $70 Million to Walk Away
June 3, 2019 • 46 Comments
Caneel Bay, June 2, 2019 Caneel Bay, June 2, 2019

It’s been a bit since we updated you on the situation over at Caneel Bay. Here is the latest…

As you know, Caneel Bay suffered tremendous damage during the 2017 hurricanes. Virtually no cleanup happened for 18 months, and the property and front entrance remained an eyesore for those passing by. This past March, cleanup efforts began although they haven’t been extensive. Small sales have been happening on property in recent weeks where everything from Kid’s Club items to expensive wine glasses to potentially corked wine is up for grabs.

Gary Engle, of CBI Acquisitions, is the current leaseholder of Caneel Bay. His agreement with the National Park Service expires in 2023. In May 2018, he told a group of residents at a town meeting that he was only interested in operating Caneel Bay if he could get a 60-year extension on the Retained Use Agreement that he is currently operating under. (His current Retained Use Agreement allows Caneel to operate virtually tax-free. They also do not pay rent for the 170 acres it sits on.) In late 2017, USVI Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett introduced a Bill into Congress asking for a 60-year RUE extension, and it failed last year.

Fast forward to this past weekend. The Virgin Islands Daily News reported that Engle and CBI Acquisitions want out. And this little blogger could not be happier, and I’m pretty confident that several other St. John residents feel the same. But Engle’s demands are ridiculous.

According to the Virgin Islands Daily News, Engel is “demanding $70 million to prematurely ditch the resort’s stewardship agreement with the National Park Service, and protection from any environmental liability.” The newspaper cited Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett as the source of that information.

Engle received a substantial insurance payout after the hurricanes, and now he wants an additional $70 million to walk away. And what does St. John get? A destroyed resort? Please tell me where the logic is here.

I say we take that $70 million and require Engle to divvy it up between the hundreds of locals who are no longer working at Caneel because he refuses to rebuild.

Now let’s talk about the “environment liability” Engel referenced in his letter referenced above. This little blogger reported on that very thing back in October 2018 when writing about why lease negotiations have failed. Check it out:
News of St. John, October 7, 2018 News of St. John, October 7, 2018

I ditched my real reporter hat more than a decade ago, but this little blogger only prints facts. 🙂

The Virgin Islands Daily News could not obtain a copy of Engle’s letter. They did, however, print a statement from Engle himself:
Statement from Engel to the VI Daily News, June 2019 Statement from Engle to the VI Daily News, June 2019

Now please go back and reread that statement…

Engel attempted to get a 60-year RUE extension through Congress and failed. Now he is attempting to circumvent Congress and get a 60-year extension using the Department of the Interior. Not cool Engle, not cool.

And now Caneel is an “eco resort” as indicated in his statement? Well that’s the first I’ve ever heard that. Funny, there’s not one mention of it being an eco resort on its website either… A new tactic perhaps?

Regarding the comments about us “suffering” – we’re not. This island has been bustling. Restaurants are full. Vacation rentals are full. Our charter boats are full. Our beaches are full. We’re fine Engle. We don’t need you personally. We’d rather wait to have someone who actually cares about this island to renovate and operate Caneel Bay.

From the Washington Post, 14 May 2019, page A17, or <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/my-district-was-gerrymandered-the-damage-is-easy-to-measure/2019/05/13/199c61e8-75b8-11e9-b7ae-390de4259661_story.html?utm_term=.3379840b9614 > — also copied at Pottersweal.com – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Opinions

My district was gerrymandered.
The damage is easy to measure.

David Niven, a professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati, holds a map displaying the wide disparity of Ohio congressional district office locations, with orange locations representing areas whose offices are found outside their own district’s bounds. A federal court ruled May 3 that Ohio’s congressional map is unconstitutional and ordered a new one be drawn for the 2020 elections. (John Minchillo/AP)

By Marcy Kaptur
May 13 at 5:47 PM

[Marcy Kaptur, a Democrat, represents Ohio’s 9th Congressional District in the House.]

When I was first elected to Congress in 1982, women weren’t allowed in the House gym, American Motors was still producing cars such as the Gremlin and the Pacer in my hometown of Toledo, and Ohio had just elected 10 Democrats to Congress.

That last number might not sound like a big deal, but the chance of that happening today borders on impossible.

In 1982, Ohio sent 21 representatives — 10 Democrats and 11 Republicans — to Congress from districts that were drawn to be competitive and compact. Voting patterns haven’t changed much since: In 2018, 2,245,403 Ohioans voted to send a Republican to Congress and 2,019,120 Ohioans voted to send a Democrat. That’s 52 percent to 47 percent. Yet only four Democrats were elected last fall, compared with 12 Republicans.

We all know the culprit: radical, partisan gerrymandering.

From January 1983 to December 2012, my district stayed largely the same — always centered around Toledo. But after the Republican victory in 2010, Republicans redrew the lines in their favor, to appalling effect. When GOP operatives emerged from a closed-door hotel conference room in 2011, they delivered one of the most politically gerrymandered congressional maps the country had ever seen. Democrats were packed into as few districts as possible, suppressing the value of hundreds of thousands of votes.

Cleveland’s Democratic representative, Dennis Kucinich, and I were gerrymandered into the same district — now known as the “Snake on the Lake” — and forced to run against each another. This long, skinny district stretches nearly 100 miles from Toledo to Cleveland, is less than a mile wide in some places and is contiguous only by Lake Erie.

And though Ohio lost two seats to reapportionment in that year, Republican representation increased from eight to 12, while our party’s share fell from 10 to four. It’s stayed there ever since.

The damage done by gerrymandering isn’t difficult to measure. It breeds partisan legislators, who in turn breed a partisan Congress. Gerrymandering has made virtually all House seats safer — including mine — and the members who hold those safe seats are often less responsive to communities and unwilling to compromise in Washington.

The bipartisan camaraderie that once existed in the House is now all but gone. Because members come from safer seats, they have less incentive to build meaningful relationships with those outside their own party, and so they make fewer friends and rarely have constructive debates.

The result is both the decay of our national discourse and the failure of our institutions to fulfill their most basic functions.

More fundamentally, the gerrymander dilutes the popular vote to protect incumbents. Instead of the voters picking their leaders, the leaders pick their voters.

But there is hope.

Two weeks ago, a panel of federal judges for the Southern District of Ohio struck down Ohio’s congressional district map as an unconstitutional, partisan gerrymander — echoing similar rulings in four other states.

Judge Karen Nelson Moore of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit wrote in her opinion that Ohio’s map is “so skewed toward one party that the electoral outcome is predetermined, ” and concluded “the map unconstitutionally burdens associational rights by making it more difficult for voters and certain organizations to advance their aims.”

Ohio was ordered to submit new legislative maps to the court by June 14. If it fails to enact a remedial plan, or enacts a plan that the court finds illegal, the court will appoint a special master to redraw the lines.

Ohio’s Republican attorney general has said he will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. This presents the court with an opportunity to consider the will of the voters, to uphold fairness and to restore democracy in Ohio. And it is clear the public wants change: In 2018, Ohio voters approved bipartisan map-drawing by an overwhelming majority — 75 percent to 25 percent.

Given how close our elections have been over the past 30 years, my state should probably have eight Republicans and eight Democrats representing it in Washington.

In the meantime, gerrymandering contorts communities and makes too many lawmakers politically untouchable. Everyone, in Ohio and the nation, suffers when outcomes are preordained and engineered to the extremes. Restoring representative delegations to Congress must be the first step in restoring the public’s confidence in our government. Liberty and justice must be restored.