In our one study, there were tens of thousands of students whom any statistician would call “false negatives.” That is, these students’ SAT scores suggest they could not do strong work in college, when in fact they can. Simply put, our country cannot afford to throw away up to 30 percent of its talent.
AFTERWORD
My wife and I have four children. Three have completed the SATs and the college application process, and each has done very well, so my disenchantment with this standardized test is not born of sour grapes, at least not on their behalf. In fact, one of our kids achieved a “superscored” perfect SAT: 2400 points. Clearly, his mother’s child. But not even that accomplishment has changed my view about the limitations of the SATs in judging college aptitude and future success. One of ours still needs to navigate this world, and I really feel for him. If he were able to redirect the time he will now spend on test prep to learning a musical instrument, he’d be proficient by the time he will sit for that exam.
WORTHY SUBJECT OF PROTEST
MAY TARGET WORKERS
Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday, May 18, 2014
TWO WEEKS AGO, I spent the weekend in Los Angeles. I was there to give a speech, attend a book signing, and deliver a radio show. The speech was at a Monday luncheon, and upon arrival back at my hotel I could see there was a commotion across the street, but I wasn’t initially sure of the cause.
Inside my room, I had a surreal experience watching the local news—there was the exterior of the hotel, complete with a shot that depicted my open door leading to a small balcony. It was then that I learned that Jay Leno was among a few dozen protesters complaining about the hotel’s ownership. The landmark where I was staying, best known for five-star service and an iconic roofline that adorned the album cover of the Eagles’ Hotel California, was the Beverly Hills Hotel.
Leno and company were calling attention to the fact that far up the hotel ownership chain sits the sultan of Brunei, who is in the process of instituting sharia law in his tiny, oil-rich nation. I had no idea of the ownership connection prior to my stay. The hotel website and my electronic key touted the “Dorchester Collection” of hotels and referenced several other well-known properties. I departed the night of the protest to catch a scheduled red-eye to Philadelphia, so I never had to confront the issue of whether I’d continue to stay at the hotel given my newfound knowledge.
The night after my departure, the Beverly Hills City Council passed a resolution (5–0) that “urges the government of Brunei to divest itself of the Beverly Hills Hotel and any other properties it may own in Beverly Hills.” The hotel pays $7 million in annual bed taxes and an additional $4 million in city taxes.
Soon thereafter, at a town hall meeting for employees, the hotel management announced that all jobs and wages of employees are secure despite the decline in business. I was happy to hear that. I have no sympathy for the sultan—the idea of sharia is abhorrent—but I do for those workers.
News accounts say that 600 people work at the hotel, and over the span of two nights, I had interactions with many of them. Like the guy who needed to take an iron to my suit because it looked like a truck ran over it when I unpacked. Or the valet who helped retrieve my rental car. The housekeeping supervisor who saw a half-dozen of my books in my room and felt obliged to put a bookmark in each. And the concierge who gave me driving directions. They aren’t members of Hollywood’s rich and famous. I doubt any of them live in Beverly Hills. They’re American workers, hustling to earn a living, who are now probably a bit fearful about their jobs in a tough economy. Despite management’s assurance, one has to wonder whether a protracted protest will ultimately jeopardize their livelihood. The only certainty seems that the protest will have no impact on the intended target.
No protest of the Beverly Hills Hotel can impact the sultan’s wealth. His country is only the size of Delaware and yet it’s the fifth richest in the world. So wealthy that all of its citizens receive free education and health care.
A friend had joined me at the hotel. Only now am I remembering that, after he booked his room online, he kept tabs on the rate being charged and alerted me to two reductions enabling both of us to negotiate a savings. Perhaps that was attributable to cancellations spurred by the high-profile protest movement. Ellen DeGeneres is on board and so, too, is Sir Richard Branson. Project Care, the Motion Picture and Television Fund, and the Beverly Hills Bar Association have all canceled events. Steven Young, who is on the board of the association’s charitable arm, told me he was “shocked” to learn of the hotel’s ownership. Where his group “stands for the highest principles of justice,” he said,
the violations of human rights through the implementation of harsh criminal laws, including the chopping off of limbs, the stoning of homosexuals and adulterers, and the unconscionable treatment of women, all of which are an anathema to our American values, made it morally untenable to continue to patronize the hotel.
In making the decision not to further patronize the hotel, there was a full recognition that innocent management and staff members of the hotel may be adversely affected.
Perhaps a better way to protect those innocents would be a response from the White House. Last March, President Barack Obama met with the sultan in the Oval Office, where he opened a media availability by remarking:
Well, it is a great pleasure to welcome my good friend, his majesty the sultan of Brunei. . . . He is a key leader in the Southeast Asia region, but also widely respected around the world.
I can find no statement of condemnation by the White House or State Department on the implementation of sharia law in Brunei. Perhaps the Hollywood elite would be better served enlisting the support of a president whose ear they certainly have rather than putting American workers in the crosshairs.
AFTERWORD
Not long after I wrote this column and repeated my sentiments in a commentary on CNN, I was invited to return to Los Angeles to appear on Real Time with Bill Maher. For a show like Maher’s, airfare and accommodations are usually comped. When I told the show’s booker that I wanted to stay at the Beverly Hills Hotel, she replied, “Well, do you know there is a protest under way?” “Yes,” I said, “that’s why I want to stay there.” To Real Time’s credit, they satisfied my request.
Upon arrival at the Beverly Hills Hotel, I was struck by how empty the place felt. While checking in, I was greeted at the front desk by the director of guest relations, Steven Boggs. He escorted me to my fabulous room and said that the general manager hoped I’d join him for coffee the following day in the Polo Lounge. After I agreed, Boggs confirmed the 11 A.M. appointment with a handwritten note (classic BHH!). So, the following morning, I sat with Edward Mady, the regional director of West Coast USA for the Dorchester Collection, in the outdoor patio section of the legendary Polo Lounge. He was the top management official for both the Beverly Hills Hotel and Hotel Bel-Air, and a terrific guy. To meet him is to immediately appreciate his orientation toward detail. Nothing escapes his attention. Mady said he was very grateful for my support and explained to me some of the backstory of the dispute—how at its core this was not a dispute about sharia law but about labor. Neither the BHH nor Bel-Air was a union hotel, and advocates for their unionization had seized the sharia issue to bring pressure to bear, a point lost on the Hollywood protestors. Anyway, after about a half hour of tea and pleasantries, Mady excused himself from the table. I didn’t think much of his brief absence, and when he returned, he asked me to join him. So I stood and followed as he exited through a gate that I hadn’t noticed.
Within seconds, in a small grassy area adjacent to the hotel’s famed bungalows, I found myself surrounded by every employee of the BHH then on duty, and they were applauding me for my support. It was a totally unexpected and overwhelming experience. Then, Mady presented me with a framed photograph of the exterior of the pink hotel, with all the employees standing in front. On the matting they had all signed their names and many had added a personal message. “WE ARE the Beve
rly Hills Hotel! Thank you for telling our story!” one of them read. Mady kindly shipped the framed photograph to my home and enclosed a note saying, “You have 647 fans at this hotel and 351 at the Hotel Bel-Air.” Five stars indeed.
I have since returned to the hotel on several occasions and can report that to my untrained eye, it appears that business has been completely restored.
MYSTERY TIP THAT
BROKE SANDUSKY CASE
Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday, June 29, 2014
NEARLY TWO YEARS AFTER a 15-year-old boy first reported being abused by Jerry Sandusky, the attorney general’s investigation was moribund. Very little progress had been made since the office took over the probe. The victim’s mother was understandably frustrated, and the prosecutor assigned to the case considered it “stalled.”
It could have easily ended there, and Sandusky might be a free man today—if not for a concerned citizen whose name does not appear on any of the 339 pages of independent investigator H. Geoffrey Moulton Jr.’s recently released report to the attorney general.
The report of Victim No. 1, a ninth grader known as “A.F.,” was made by his mother to school administrators in November 2008. County officials eventually referred it to the Attorney General’s Office in March 2009. At the time, the report notes, the office was “heavily invested in . . . Bonusgate,” a political-corruption prosecution. Also that month, then–attorney general Tom Corbett announced that he was exploring a run for governor.
Given that prosecutors deemed the first victim credible, Sandusky could have been arrested immediately. Instead, they decided to use the secret grand jury process to search for more victims and bolster the case.
In June 2009, A.F. appeared before the grand jury and testified that he had engaged in oral sex with Sandusky. He returned to the grand jury in November 2009, a year after his initial report, because prosecutors wanted to gauge his ability to describe the crime on his own rather than in response to a prosecutor’s leading questions. He was able to do so.
As 2009 ended, Senior Deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach believed she had sufficient evidence to have Sandusky arrested, but her supervisors disagreed. At least one grand juror wanted to know when there would be progress, according to Moulton’s report, asking Eshbach, “When do you see this moving forward?”
In March 2010—16 months after the first report of abuse—Eshbach delivered a draft presentment recommending charges against Sandusky to Glenn Parno, who had temporarily assumed the responsibilities of Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina, who was involved in an extended trial.
Months passed without a reply or significant progress in the case. In May 2010, the report says, Eshbach wrote to an investigator: “Despite asking, begging, pleading, I have heard nothing.”
Still more time elapsed. In July 2010, Eshbach wrote to several colleagues:
The grand jury asked me again, as they have for the last four months, why we don’t have that particular presentment for them. They are very anxious to approve it. Likewise, I continue to get calls and mail from the victim’s mother and therapist. Can someone please tell me what the holdup is?
It had been 20 months since the first report that a 15-year-old boy had been abused by Jerry Sandusky.
The following month, A.F.’s mother wrote in an e-mail to Eshbach:
It’s been a long time on this case, and another school year is coming up. Why has this not been dealt with already? This is causing my family a lot of stress and anxiety. Please let me know what’s going on.
Eshbach forwarded that e-mail to colleagues with another request:
Does anyone want to answer my questions about why we are stalled since winter?
Fina replied:
We are still working on the case, looking for better corroboration of our single victim. We need to do everything possible to find other victims.
And so, on the verge of the fall of 2010, which would mark two years since A.F.’s credible report of abuse, Sandusky was a free man, and the investigation was at a standstill.
Then came the lucky break that may have saved the case.
On November 3, 2010, the day after Corbett was elected governor, Centre County District Attorney Stacy Parks Miller received an e-mail. “Ms. Miller,” it said:
I am contacting you regarding the Jerry Sandusky investigation. If you have not yet done so, you need to contact and interview Penn State football assistant coach Mike McQueary. He may have witnessed something involving Jerry Sandusky and a child that would be pertinent to the investigation.
It was signed only “A Concerned Citizen.”
The only information about this citizen supplied in the report comes in a footnote on page 62:
According to the author of the e-mail, he had recently heard rumors that Sandusky was being investigated for child abuse and assumed that any such investigation would involve the Centre County District Attorney’s Office. In addition, he had recently heard from a member of Michael McQueary’s family that McQueary had firsthand information about Sandusky that would be relevant to such an investigation.
The tip broke the case wide open. A week later, investigators knocked on McQueary’s door, and he agreed to cooperate. New resources were committed to the case. Subpoenas were issued. Evidence was assembled. And Sandusky was finally charged on November 4, 2011—32 months after the investigation had been referred to the Attorney General’s Office.
Who was the mystery man who seems to have rescued the prosecution? A March ESPN magazine story identified him as Christopher Houser. The magazine reported that during a chat on a Penn State football fan website, McQueary’s older brother had told Houser that Sandusky, who had recently retired from his charity, would probably never coach again. And he revealed that his younger brother had caught Sandusky with a boy in a locker room shower.
Unlike so many who had reason to suspect Sandusky but didn’t act, Houser did—and thereby resurrected the prosecution of a serial pedophile.
And that deserves more than an anonymous footnote.
AFTERWORD
Too many adults in leadership roles dropped the ball in the Sandusky case when they should have been working to protect the young victims. At the time this column ran, three top Penn State officials—President Graham Spanier, Vice President Gary Schultz, and Athletic Director Tim Curley—had already lost their jobs and had been charged with various counts related to their alleged failure to report to police incriminating evidence about Sandusky that would have ended Sandusky’s crime spree much sooner. After five years of maintaining their innocence, Schultz and Curley pleaded guilty to misdemeanor child endangerment and agreed to cooperate in the case against Spanier. In 2017, Spanier was convicted by a jury of misdemeanor child endangerment.
Head football coach Joe Paterno had been fired shortly after the scandal went public in late 2011. He died in January 2012 before seeing his statue removed from Penn State’s campus several months later and before seeing the NCAA vacate all of his program’s wins from 1998 to 2011 (a decision that would be reversed in 2015 after Penn State successfully sued the NCAA for due process violations). His statue remains in storage.
Mike McQueary was fired from his coaching position in 2011, but in October 2016 he won a lawsuit against Penn State for wrongful termination and other charges, resulting in a total payout of over $7 million. (Penn State’s appeal is still pending.)
And in August 2016, a Pennsylvania jury convicted Pennsylvania attorney general Kathleen Kane of nine criminal charges, including perjury, finding that she had leaked grand jury information as a means of political retribution against the Sandusky prosecutor Frank Fina, and then lied about it. She resigned. By then she’d already lost her law license and was subsequently sentenced to 10 to 23 months in prison.
I have no update to report on the private citizen and Penn State fan Christopher Houser, the unsung hero of the Sandusky prosecution. But for him, Jerry Sandusky could still be preying on kids.
RECALLING GARY HART,
/>
DEBATING NEWS POLICY
Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday, October 12, 2014
GARY HART’S DOWNFALL in the run-up to the 1988 presidential election marked an important milestone on a journalistic arc that began with Watergate. Where, previously, the media fast track was greased by befriending politicians, now it was enhanced by bringing them down. Ever since, nothing has been out of bounds for media outlets large and small. Consider Kansas.
Paul Davis, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, has been locked in a tight race against Republican incumbent Sam Brownback. Three weeks ago, a twice-weekly local newspaper with no website called the Coffeyville Journal revealed that, in 1998, Davis, then 26 and unmarried, was in a strip club getting a lap dance when the place was raided as part of a drug sting. Davis wasn’t charged with a crime, but that won’t stop the story’s circulation through Election Day.
Matt Bai’s new book, All the Truth Is Out: The Week Politics Went Tabloid, asks whether the all-is-fair-game standard has been in the nation’s best interest. The focus is the Hart saga, about which Bai corrects what he regards as numerous myths. Bai writes:
Even when insiders and historians recall the Hart episode now they recall it the same way: Hart issued his infamous challenge to reporters, telling them to follow him around if they didn’t believe him, and then the [Miami] Herald took him up on it. Inexplicably, people believe Hart set his own trap and then allowed himself to become ensnared in it.
Bai says that’s not how it happened. The Herald was already staking out Hart by the time his so-called challenge was published by the journalist E. J. Dionne. And, Bai says, that’s not just a timeline clarification. The idea that Hart set the episode in motion made it seem as if he, not the press, had changed the boundaries.
Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right Page 31