To Be or To Do, Which Way Will You Go? End Joint Membership Now!

By Rich Kozlovich 

As most of you know I left the OPMA because I couldn't resign from NPMA due to joint membership.  I can tell you from conversations, that discontent isn't isolated.  While others have expressed the same discontent with NPMA as I, they've chosen to remain within OPMA,  always hoping for the best, and trying to see the benefits offered, and I can understand that.

Of course the question everyone should be asking is: Would I act differently if I was still active, in the leadership and not retired?  No, I wouldn't, and those who know me best don't doubt that!   While I intended to do a piece on this later this year, this article has been inspired by a post by Peter D'Abrosca, Ohio Attorney General Silent After Texas, Others Leave NAAG, appearing in the Ohio Star discussing a letter addressed to Iowa Attorney General Thomas Miller (D), the president of NAAG.

After the top attorneys in Texas, Montana and Missouri announced that they would be leaving the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), Ohio appears poised to remain part of the group.  “The attorneys general of Texas, Missouri and Montana have decided to withdraw our states’ membership from NAAG,” said a letter penned by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R)..........

The article goes on to show how they've approached the leadership about "the Association’s leftward shift over the past half-decade has been intolerable. Indeed, this liberal bent has fundamentally undermined NAAG’s role as a ‘nonpartisan national forum’ that ‘provides a community … to collaboratively address’ important issues,” the letter said. “We can no longer spend our taxpayers’ money to sustain our membership with NAAG under these circumstances.” 

All of which accomplished nothing.  What conclusion did they arrive at?  It was never going to be fixed and they ended their relationship with their national association. 

The article goes on to note Ohio and 18 other states almost immediately ended their relationship with the National School Boards Association because of their position that parents who were exercising their Constitutional rights protesting what their school boards were up to were domestic terrorists, and wanted to sic the FBI on them.   

Both associations hold values antithetical to the values of many of their members, and quite frankly, to the nation's values. 

So, what's this have to do with NPMA?  Below is information I've published in the past. It's nothing new and shocking, but it is the truth, and it needs to be taken seriously.

In my years I have seen our industry go from being ardent defenders of pesticides universally, to a substantial number who are almost as anti-pesticide in their approach as anyone from the Sierra Club or the NRDC, especially with their embrace of "green" pest control, and IPM.  I find this especially true with those holding advanced degrees in our industry, any or all of whom I'm still willing to publicly debate, irrespective of position or education. 

Over they years the NPMA did some excellent work for our industry, and they should be commended for it, but having done something right doesn't give anyone a pass on the rest of life.   Over the years I've yet to see them take a truly heroic stand against leftist green positions.  School Environmental Protection Act?  They supported it.  Our members went to Legislative day and told our representatives Ohio did not. If Ohio could stand up against this, why couldn't NPMA? 

The EPA spent untold millions promoting a structural pest control system that doesn’t exist.  IPM!  In point of fact there is no such thing as IPM in structural pest control. (Please see The Pillars of IPM.)  NPMA embraced it. 

When the EPA instituted regulations to impose restrictions on the use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids based on dubious conclusions, industry played into this.    

Perhaps I missed it, but as far as I can tell they've been silent on repealing the Food Quality Protection Act, and some even claimed it was a good law.  But time is the great leveler of truth.

This law was originally intended to be a pro-pesticide bill fixing the Delaney Clause, the foolishness 1958 Amendment of the of the 1937 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.  An amendment that unscientifically declared if something tested carcinogenic at any level, it was carcinogenic at every level.  But the EPA turned this into one of the most corrupt anti-pesiticde laws since the EPA banned DDT.   As a result, we lost Ficam and Dursban, (carmabates and organophosphates) because of EPA's irrational and radical changes regarding risk and unending testing.   

Neither were banned in spite of what you may read. The manufacturers pulled their registration for structural applications.  There was very little argument, and when Dow decided not to fight it the other companies manufacturing chlorpyrifos gave up. Chlorpyrifos: A Hostage of the Secret Science Rule?   Then there was the EPA's unscientific demands regarding endocrine distuptors. 

It has seemed to me that over the decades the NPMA has far too willingly embraced a philosophy of appeasement with the neo-pagan secular psuedo-religous movements of the left.

Then there was the Butterfield Bill, as I outlined in my article, The Butterfield Bill: Activity as a Substitute for Accomplishment, Part II, which NPMA wanted us all to support.  Why?  I read it, and outlined to the leadership what was wrong with it.  I was told I needed to see the positive aspects of that bill.  I asked - what were they?  I didn't get an answer.

Well, it didn't pass, and if it had, it wouldn't have done anything to relieve the plague of bed bugs in America.  If passed it would have been an expensive waste, and an ineffectual imposition on our industry and the public.  In short, more government, less results.  And we were supporting this why? 

Why? That’s the question I kept asking over the years, and I've never  gotten a satisfactory answers.  I've gotten a lot of logical fallacies and obfuscation, none of which was satisfactory. 

Over the years the rates of cancer have consistently dropped, and yet we still hear the irrational – and unscientific – mantra that pesticides cause cancer. If you were to take a plastic overlay of our modern demographic and put it over the demographics of those living in 1914 and those living in 2014 you would notice two very distinct differences. Very few people smoked and very few people lived past 65, the two major areas of cancer related deaths. The decrease I spoke of would be even more dramatic if we reduced the demographic of smokers and the aged from our modern demographic chart.

Now that whole narrative has been shown to be blatantly false, so what did they do?  Now the big ones are endocrine disruption (and here), Colony Collapse Disorder, and the junk science surrounding the Sixth Mass Extinction.   All of which have been proven false by time and real science.   None of which, as far as I can tell, the NPMA stands up against, and in point of fact, collaborates on. 

When the federal government banned DDT industry rose up as one to defend it, and it was the same for chlordane. Then came the Food Quality Protection Act and which brought about the irrational elimination of Ficam and Dursban (chlorpyrifos), [Neither were banned in spite of what you may read. The manufacturers pulled their registration for structural applications.  There was very little argument, and when Dow decided not to fight it the other companies manufacturing chlorpyrifos gave up.

Was it a business decision? You bet!

Chlorpyrifos was out of patent and it represented a very small percentage of their annual intake, at least from structural pest control, and the lawsuits kept coming. It is interesting that the last time I looked it’s still used as an agriculture product under the brand name Lorsban. But since then we've now learned just how deceitful the EPA has been with it's Secret Science on Dursban. Why aren't we demanding Dursban's return?

The makers of Ficam W (bendiocarb), which I understand is still used in Australia and New Zealand and I’m told still works on bed bugs, gave up also. Why? We lost two whole categories of pesticides [organophosphates and carbamates] from our arsenal with that terrible piece of legislation called the Food Quality Protection Act, which wasn’t about food or protection. It was about making it too expensive to keep pesticide registrations active, thereby banning pesticides without having to go through all those nasty and potentially messy legal and scientific steps - where they would have lost.

Now we come to those new restrictions on pyrethroids, and there was hardly a peep, except from Ohio’s pest controllers. People at the national level may not like it, but if the Ohio pest controllers – who are responsible for the very existence of NPMA – can stand up to be counted, and fight the good fight, why can't the NPMA?

A fight the entire industry should have been fighting and should still be fighting. But nothing happened. Quietly as church mice, passive as sheep and as rational as lemmings, NPMA did nothing useful to maintain our ability to use pyrethroids as we've been doing for decades.  Oh, I can hear the screams now about how much NPMA did, but the proof is in the pudding.  We have unreasonable restrictions.  

What’s worse it appears the manufactures of pyrethroids, known as the “Pyrethroid Working Group (PWG), an industry task force whose members are AMVAC, Bayer, Cheminova, DuPont, FMC Corporation, Syngenta and Valent", were part and parcel of this pesticide reduction scheme. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the Pyrethroid Working Group was formed. 

I wonder, does this whole thing sound conspiratorial to anyone besides me?  I know…I know…. there’s no such thing as a conspiracy.   I often wonder why the people who have never read a history book are so ardent in that view. Just a thought!  

And why were these restrictions to structural pest control and not to lawn care or agriculture?  We have substantial restrictions against where and how we make pyrethroid applications to structures, while the lawns, fields and shrubs can be covered with pyrethroids by the lawn care and agricultural industries.

Does that sound irrational to anyone besides me?

All this to protect an almost microscopic shrimplike creature known as Hyalella azteca, a creature that is capable of living in extremely adverse conditions, and is one of the most prolific creatures in North America and South America. Pyrethroids are used extensively everywhere. How can that be?  If these products are so deadly to Hyalella here in the United States, or more specifically California, why aren't they in the rest of the world?

I have spent some time going over the information available and there are a number of things I would like to see answered. Since this “shrimp” is so impacted by small amounts of pyrethroid materials; with one study claiming the appearance of chlorpyrifos created a more toxic impact, which I found truly interesting since we are no longer using chlorpyrifos in structural pest control, so where did that come from?  Agriculture!  Until recently there was no real effort to eliminate it for agricultural purposes, but Scott Pruitt, President Trump's first EPA director put a stop to that saying they were going to follow the science. While that's still being litigated, the important fact is this: The chemical companies fought to keep it for agriculture. Why not structural pest control? 

Why hasn't NPMA been more strident on these matters?   But the real questions that need answering are these:

• NPMA seems to have a penchant for embracing leftist narratives on pesticides and junk science. Why?
• Now our national association is deciding if it's going to get involved in "diversity" issues. Why?

  The structural pest control industry has nothing to be ashamed of.  We've accepted people from every walk of life in our industry, regardless of race, religion, sex and even sexual orientation.  In Ohio, in the 1960's one of the founders and first President of what's now the Greater Cleveland Pest Control Association was Bob Caldwell, and is a past President of the Ohio Pest Management Association.  He's black.  In the 1960's Ohio was either the first or among the first to choose a woman for it's state association President, Betty Portwood.  One of our recent Presidents was Molly Patton Marsh.  John Patton's daughter.  

  Betty has now passed and was in her 90's, and Bob is still running his company,  and both were respected and treated accordingly by our industry forever.

• What are NPMA's priorities?  
• Why has the NPMA decided to get involved in social engineering?  
• Is that their job?  
• Where in the NPMA constitution does it outline that as a duty?
• If that became their job, when was that decided, and by whom?   
• Does that mean we can start posting about social issues on the NPMA Open Forum, if it still exists?
  

  In the past anyone doing so would have their posts deleted, and even then, we were subject to unpublished and unknown standards for acceptance, even if the posts or comments met the posted criteria for acceptable posts.  

  I've been there, done that, so I know it's true.  Just like EPA had secret science, it would appear, the NPMA had, secret standards for posting on the Open Forum regarding topic, and who was posting.  But either way, we still have to come back to the main questions. 

• Why is the NPMA getting publicly involved with Social Justice issues?  
• What is their agenda, and why?
• If the NPMA can be so public about social issues that have no bearing on pest control, how can they restrict anyone else from doing so?
• Is that blatant hypocrisy!

I think those are important questions because they've clearly gone in directions that are not part of the real reason they came into existence, which used to be to fight for the structural pest control industry against all adversaries and enemies, in and out of government.

• What is their agenda now?   
• What are their priorities?
• Who articulated such an agenda and priorities and why?
• Do we need to redefine and rewrite the NPMA constitution and bylaws? 

Make no mistake about this, as Thomas Sowell stated: If there is ever a contest for words that substitute for thought, “diversity” should be recognized as the undisputed world champion. You don’t need a speck of evidence, or a single step of logic, when you rhapsodize about the supposed benefits of diversity. The very idea of testing this wonderful, magical word against something as ugly as reality seems almost sordid.

Ohio pest controllers and New York City pest controllers created the NPMA, back in the 1930's, and it's time Ohio walks away.  The fact of the matter is, NPMA Rang the Bell long ago and it's time for Ohio to decide to once again take the lead!  To Be or To Do: Which Way Will You Go?

Industry is a Bottomless Pit of Bad Logic and Self-Serving Arguments.

By Rich Kozlovich

In my seventy five years of life and forty years in the pest control industry I’ve seen a lot of changes.  Some positive, and unfortunately, many very negative.  Changes that were very subtle and very slow, but as destructive as a glacier in the thrust of our thinking, and our views of reality. I find myself the only openly heterodoxical writer in our industry nationwide. Although based on e-mails, and even phone calls from all over the country, I believe there may be a ‘silent majority’ out there. Let’s face it, heterodoxy isn’t for the faint of heart.

Timothy P. Carney [writer for the Washington Examiner] said:

Washington is a debate club for the logically impaired, with its share of fallacies, sophistries, oversimplifications and utter absurdities.

I find this pattern repeats in more areas than just Washington. Through legislative power and massive amounts of grant money federal bureaucrats have had a great deal to do with undermining any natural sense of logic in the minds of everyone in the nation, including industry, and I think it's fair to ask if the pest control industry is any different?

In my years I have seen our industry go from being ardent defenders of pesticides universally, to a substantial number who are almost as anti-pesticide in their approach as anyone from the Sierra Club or the NRDC, especially with their embrace of "green" pest control, and IPM.  I find this especially true with those holding advanced degrees in our industry. 

The NPMA supported School Environmental Protection Act.  Ohio refused, and at Legislative Day told our Senators and Representatives we were not in harmony with NPMA on this.  John Boehner was one of them.

Perhaps I missed it, but as far as I can tell they've been silent on repealing the Food Quality Protection Act, and some even claimed it was a good law.   However, when looking at the history of the FQPA, that was understandable at the start.  But time is the great leveler of truth.

This originally was a law that was intended to be a pro-pesticide bill, and stop the foolishness over the 1958 Amendment of the of the 1937 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act known as the Delaney Clause.  An amendment that unscientifically declared if something tested carcinogenic at any level, it was carcinogenic at every level.  But the EPA turned this into one of the most corrupt anti-pesiticde law since the EPA banned DDT.   As a result, we lost Ficam and Dursban, (carmabates and organophosphates) because of EPA's irrational and radical changes regarding risk and unending testing.  More here.  Then there was the demands regarding endocrine distuptors.

Neither were banned in spite of what you may read. The manufacturers pulled their registration for structural applications.  There was very little argument, and when Dow decided not to fight it the other companies manufacturing chlorpyrifos gave up.

It has seemed to me that over the decades the NPMA has far too willingly embraced a philosophy of appeasement with the neo-pagan secular psuedo-religous movements of the left.

Then there was the Butterfield Bill, as I outlined in my aritlcle, The Butterfield Bill: Activity as a Substitute for Accomplishment, Part II, which NPMA wanted us all to support.  Why?  I read it, and was outlined what was wrong with it.  I was told I needed to see the positive aspects of that bill.  I asked - what were they?  I didn't get an answer.

Well, it didn't pass, and if it had, it wouldn't have done anything to relieve the plague of bed bugs in America.  If passed it would have been an expensive waste, and an ineffectual imposition on our industry and the public.  In short, more government, less results.  And we were supporting this why? 

Why? That’s the question I keep asking, and I don't get satisfactory answers.   

In the early years of the modern green movement - started largely with the 1962 publication of Rachel Carson’s science fiction book, Silent Spring - the green movement insisted pesticides were a major cause of cancer. I remember those days, and I also remember the conversations by the older members of my family talking about this. People believed modern living was responsible.

They were right, but for the wrong reasons.

Industry [and cities and towns in America] were responsible for many sins against the environment, so it was easy to point the finger, but mostly it was pointed at industry. The real finger of blame should have been pointed at the personal habits of people themselves. That was where the rise in cancer rates appeared.

Over the years the rates of cancer have consistently dropped, and yet we still hear the irrational – and unscientific – mantra that pesticides cause cancer. If you were to take a plastic overlay of our modern demographic and put it over the demographics of those living in 1914 and those living in 2014 you would notice two very distinct differences. Very few people smoked and very few people lived past 65, the two major areas of cancer related deaths. The decrease I spoke of would be even more dramatic if we reduced the demographic of smokers and the aged from our modern demographic chart.

Now that whole narrative has been shown to be blatantly false, so what did they do?  Now the big ones are endocrine disruption (and here), Colony Collapse Disorder, and the junk science surrounding the Sixth Mass Extinction.   All of which have been proven false by time and real science.  

When the federal government banned DDT industry rose up as one to defend it, and it was the same for chlordane. Then came the Food Quality Protection Act and which brought about the irrational elimination of Ficam and Dursban (chlorpyrifos), [Neither were banned in spite of what you may read. The manufacturers pulled their registration for structural applications.  There was very little argument, and when Dow decided not to fight it the other companies manufacturing chlorpyrifos gave up.

Was it a business decision? You bet!

Chlorpyrifos was out of patent and it represented a very small percentage of their annual intake, at least from structural pest control, and the lawsuits kept coming. It is interesting that the last time I looked it’s still used as an agriculture product under the brand name Lorsban. But since we now know how deceitful the EPA has been with it's Secret Science on Dursban. Why aren't we demanding Dursban's return?

The makers of Ficam W (bendiocarb), which I understand is still used in Australia and New Zealand and I’m told still works on bed bugs, gave up also. Why? We lost two whole categories of pesticides [organophosphates and carbamates] from our arsenal with that terrible piece of legislation called the Food Quality Protection Act, which wasn’t about food or protection. It was about making it too expensive to keep pesticide registrations active, thereby banning pesticides without having to go through all those nasty and potentially messy legal and scientific steps - where they would have lost.

Now we come to the new restrictions on pyrethroids, and there is hardly a peep, except from Ohio’s pest controllers. People at the national level may not like it, but if the Ohio pest controllers – who are responsible for the very existence of NPMA – CAN stand up to be counted, and fight the good fight. why CAN'T the NPMA?

A fight the entire industry should have been fighting and should still be fighting. But nothing happened. Quietly as church mice, passive as sheep and as rational as lemmings, NPMA did nothing useful to maintain our ability to use pyrethroids as we've been doing for decades.  Oh, I can hear the screams now about how much NPMA did, but the proof is in the pudding.  We have unreasonable restrictions.  

What’s worse it appears the manufactures of pyrethroids, known as the “Pyrethroid Working Group (PWG), an industry task force whose members are AMVAC, Bayer, Cheminova, DuPont, FMC Corporation, Syngenta and Valent’, were part and parcel of this pesticide reduction scheme. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the Pyrethroid Working Group was formed. I wonder, does this whole thing sound conspiratorial to anyone besides me?

I know…I know….there’s no such thing as a conspiracy. I often wonder why the people who have never read a history book are so ardent in that view. Just a thought!  And why were these restrictions to structural pest control and not to lawn care or agriculture?  We have substantial restrictions against where and how we make pyrethroid applications to structures, while the lawns, fields and shrubs can be covered with pyrethroids by the lawn care and agricultural industries.

Does that sound irrational to anyone besides me?

All this to protect an almost microscopic shrimplike creature known as Hyalella azteca, a creature that is capable of living in extremely adverse conditions, and is one of the most prolific creatures in North America and South America. Pyrethroids are used extensively everywhere. How can that be if these products are so deadly to Hyalella here in the United States? Or more specifically California.

I have spent some time going over the information available and there are a number of things I would like to see answered. Since this “shrimp” is so impacted by small amounts of pyrethroid materials; with one study claiming the appearance of chlorpyrifos created a more toxic impact, which I found truly interesting since we are no longer using chlorpyrifos in structural pest control, so where did that come from?  Agriculture!  Until recently there was no real effort to eliminate it for agricultural purposes, but the Scott Pruitt, President Trump's first director put a stop to that saying they were going to follow the science. While that's still being litigated, the important fact is this: The chemical companies fought to keep it for agriculture. Why not structural pest control? Why hasn't NPMA been more strident on these matters? 

But the real questions that need answering are these:

• NPMA seems to have a penchant for embracing leftist narratives on pesticides and junk science. Why?
• Now our national association is deciding if it's going to get involved in "diversity" issues. Why?

  The structural pest control industry has nothing to be ashamed of.  We've accepted people from every walk of life in our industry, regardless of race, religion, sex and even sexual orientation.  In Ohio, in the 1960's one of the founders and first President of what's now the Greater Cleveland Pest Control Association was Bob Caldwell, and is a past President of the Ohio Pest Management Association.  He's black.  In the 1960's Ohio was either the first or among the first to choose a woman for it's state association President, Betty Portwood, and our current President is Molly Patton Marsh.  John Patton's daughter.  

  Betty has now passed and was in her 90's, and Bob is still running his company,  and both were respected and treated accordingly by our industry forever.

• What are NPMA's priorities?  
• Why has the NPMA decided to get involved in social engineering?  
• Is that their job?  
• Where in the NPMA constitution does it outline that as a duty?
• If that became their job, when was that decided, and by whom?   
• Does that mean we can start posting about social issues on the NPMA Open Forum now? 

  In the past anyone doing so would have their posts deleted, and even then, we were subject to unpublished and unknown standards for acceptance, even if the posts or comments met the posted criteria for acceptable posts.  I've been there, so I know it's true.  Just like EPA had secret science, it would appear, the NPMA had, and possibly still has, secret standards for posting on the Open Forum regarding topic, and who was posting.  But either way, we still have to come back to the main questions. 

• Why is the NPMA getting publicly involved with Social Justice issues?  
• What is their agenda, and why?
• If the NPMA can be so public about social issues that have no bearing on pest control, how can they restrict anyone else from doing so?
• Is that blatant hypocrisy!

I think those are important questions because they've clearly gone in directions that are not part of the real reason they came into existence, which used to be to fight for the structural pest control industry against all adversaries and enemies, in and out of government. 

• What is their agenda now?   
• What are their priorities?
• Who articulated such an agenda and priorities and why?
• Do we need to redefine and rewrite the NPMA constitution and bylaws? 

Make no mistake about this:

"If there is ever a contest for words that substitute for thought, “diversity” should be recognized as the undisputed world champion. You don’t need a speck of evidence, or a single step of logic, when you rhapsodize about the supposed benefits of diversity. The very idea of testing this wonderful, magical word against something as ugly as reality seems almost sordid." Thomas Sowell

If Diversity is the Answer, What's the Question?

"If there is ever a contest for words that substitute for thought, “diversity” should be recognized as the undisputed world champion. You don’t need a speck of evidence, or a single step of logic, when you rhapsodize about the supposed benefits of diversity. The very idea of testing this wonderful, magical word against something as ugly as reality seems almost sordid." Thomas Sowell

By Rich Kozlovich

One of the major problems with understanding what activists are up to is how they've high jacked language.  They take words that are easily understood, twist them and misapply them.   Words such as diversity.  For most Americans of my generation we understood that American diversity meant we had a large variety of people living in America from all over the world.  All contributing to the American culture, the American identity and the American economy.  All working to have the American dream and become a united people with the added benefits of what different cultures contributed.

That's not what leftists mean when they use the word diversity.  Their goal is to destroy any concept of an American culture, an American identity, the American economy, overturn the Constitution, and destroy any idea of American unity unless it's being unified under a socialist dictatorial regime.  Once that happens....Oh there will be unity all right, but as in all the failed leftist regimes of history that have infested the world, they will insist in unity of thought, and those thoughts will be disastrous.

That's history and that history is incontestable, and now government, society, corporations and trade associations are falling into their trap. Embracing unending failure is insanity!

I've been outraged ever since I received this e-mail from our my industry's national trade association saying:

We’ve all been struck silent for the past ten days struggling with the scenes playing out over television and computer screens everywhere. But, it’s clear that now is not the time for silence. It’s the time to find our voices and join them together to honor those who have been wronged and to forge a better, united future standing against racism and injustice.

To our Black members, the Black community, your families and those of you who have experienced inherent racism, NPMA stands with you. We recognize that your experiences are unique and we all have much to learn. Please know that we are committed to doing just that. We are here to listen, to learn, to improve and to contribute where it makes sense.

Given the critical need to focus on this important issue, we will be diligent in our commitment to shine a renewed spotlight on diversity, inclusion and equality during our upcoming meetings as part of every agenda. In addition, we are planning for a Diversity Forum at Pestworld, and we hope you will join us in the discussion there. Every voice must be heard.

We all need to be committed to learning more about how we can end racism.

What exactly does that mean? What exactly does all this entail?  Why exactly is this so critical, and if this is so critical, why didn't they notice it before insane misfits started destroying the nation?

And as for "every voice must be heard":  Really?  I guess we'll see about that!

As I read this I wondered who is the leftist ideologue who wrote this?   A writer who gives the impression they never read a history book, only watch TV news, and only read the New York Times and other corrupt rags of similar ilk.  

Also I wonder if they ever read a dictionary.  "Inherent" racism.  Really?  Did anyone look up the word inherent before sending out this piece of clabber, especially to an industry that has been the most exemplary and accepting industry in the world.  Our industry has accepted all people's regardless of race, gender or sexual preference, which I will be covering in this continuing series of articles dealing with the cancer of leftism and their definition of diversity and it's goals.  

Well, at 74, I'm soon to be gone, but in the meanwhile, I'm not going quietly into the night.  I love the strucurtral pest control industry, which has given me and a host of others wonderful opportunities to start and grow their own businesses.  And to more people from more varied walks of life than any other I know of.  I will not allow anyone, including bureaucrats, activists, or fellow travelers within the industry to degrade who and what my industry is, and what we've been.

It would appear the our national representative have decided to descend into the labyrinth world of leftist social engineering, and I don't like it.  So, I will be publishing a series of articles dealing with this issue, and I've stored source articles for my commentaries on this issue, and here they are:

• The 'Diversity' Fraud 
• Diversity and Inclusion Insanity
• Cult Programming in Seattle 
• The American Soviet Mentality - Collective demonization invades our culture 
• How a Twitter Mob Derailed an Immigrant Female Author’s Budding Career
• What ‘Systemic Liberalism’ Has Wrought 
• The Problem with Abstract Concepts
• Jews fight back against de Blasio's continued persecution 
• Whom are you going to call?
• The Floyd Riots Mark a Century of Communist Agitation
• Anti-police madness metastasizes as SF mayor plans to send in social workers in their place
•  Seattle’s cowardly capitulation contrasts with 4 other cities putting down attempts to establish ’autonomous zones’
•  Business departs the inner cities
• Serial kneeling of America 
• The plight of blacks who believe in America’s promise - 
• We Didn’t Fight for a Marxist America  
• There was a dumpster fire in the autonomous zone so citizens of the CHAZ called the Seattle fire department What a perfect metaphor
• CHAZ offers useful insights into the practical realities of revolutionary communes - 
• Nashville autonomous zone 'will not be tolerated,' Tennessee governor warns amid threat
• Entire Florida city's SWAT team resigns after police chief kneels with protesters 
• Scott Adams has had a brilliant insight about the demand for reparations 
• The futility of reparations
• It's not just policing that Black Lives Matter wants to change
• The irony of kneeling during the National Anthem
• Defund the police: Wrong target, right idea
• Three Species of Protesters
• Devolution to Revolution: An Already Demoralized U.S. is Now Being Destabilized
• The Problem with George Will
• America’s New Caste System?
• Where Black Lives Don't Matter
• Race Isn’t Going Away 
• What If Police Officers Go on Strike?
• Why Don’t These #BlackLivesMatter?
• The Wound to Our Social Order Is Deep and Pervasive
• Democrat Cities: Fourth-World Scourges
• White America's Alleged Inner Racist
• Glenn Loury: 'We're Being Swept Along by Hysteria' About Racism in America
• TheMob’s Support For Rayshard Brooks Exposes Them For The Race-Baiting Hypocrites They Are

Okay, so you're all in for diversity, right?  Tell me, when was the last time you had dinner with a street bum at your home.  How many?  And how often?

 

NPMA Rang the Bell

Diversity without accomplishment is philosophy without form and incompetence without consequence - Rich Kozlovich

If Diversity is the Answer, What's the Question? Part I

"If there is ever a contest for words that substitute for thought, “diversity” should be recognized as the undisputed world champion. You don’t need a speck of evidence, or a single step of logic, when you rhapsodize about the supposed benefits of diversity. The very idea of testing this wonderful, magical word against something as ugly as reality seems almost sordid." Thomas Sowell

By Rich Kozlovich

One of the major problems with understanding what activists are up to is how they've high jacked language.  They take words that are easily understood, twist them and misapply them.   Words such as diversity.  For most Americans of my generation we understood that American diversity meant we had a large variety of people living in America from all over the world.  All contributing to the American culture, the American identity and the American economy.  All working to have the American dream and become a united people with the added benefits of what different cultures contributed.

That's not what leftists mean when they use the word diversity.  Their goal is to destroy any concept of an American culture, an American identity, the American economy, overturn the Constitution, and destroy any idea of American unity unless it's being unified under a socialist dictatorial regime.  Once that happens....Oh there will be unity all right, but as in all the failed leftist regimes of history that have infested the world, they will insist in unity of thought, and those thoughts will be disastrous.

That's history and that history is incontestable, and now government, society, corporations and trade associations are falling into their trap. Embracing unending failure is insanity!

I've been outraged ever since I received this e-mail from NPMA saying:

We’ve all been struck silent for the past ten days struggling with the scenes playing out over television and computer screens everywhere. But, it’s clear that now is not the time for silence. It’s the time to find our voices and join them together to honor those who have been wronged and to forge a better, united future standing against racism and injustice.

To our Black members, the Black community, your families and those of you who have experienced inherent racism, NPMA stands with you. We recognize that your experiences are unique and we all have much to learn. Please know that we are committed to doing just that. We are here to listen, to learn, to improve and to contribute where it makes sense.

Given the critical need to focus on this important issue, we will be diligent in our commitment to shine a renewed spotlight on diversity, inclusion and equality during our upcoming meetings as part of every agenda. In addition, we are planning for a Diversity Forum at Pestworld, and we hope you will join us in the discussion there. Every voice must be heard.

We all need to be committed to learning more about how we can end racism.

What exactly does that mean? What exactly does all this entail?  Why exactly is this so critical, and if this is so critical, why didn't NPMA notice it before insane misfits started destroying the nation?

And as for "every voice must be heard":  Really?  I guess we'll see about that!

As I read this I wondered who is the leftist ideologue at NPMA who wrote this?   A writer who gives the impression they never read a history book, only watch TV news, and only read the New York Times and other corrupt rags of similar ilk.  

Also I wonder if they ever read a dictionary.  "Inherent" racism.  Really?  Did anyone look up the word inherent before sending out this piece of clabber, especially to an industry that has been the most exemplary and accepting industry in the world.  Our industry has accepted all people's regardless of race, gender or sexual preference, which I will be covering in this continuing series of articles dealing with the cancer of leftism and their definition of diversity and it's goals.  

Well, at 74, I'm soon to be gone, but in the meanwhile, I'm not going quietly into the night.  I love this industry and I will not allow anyone, including bureaucrats, activists, or fellow travelers within the industry to degrade who and what we are, and what we have been.

It would appear the NPMA has decided to descend into the labyrinth world of leftist social engineering, which is really rich, since once upon a time there was an attempt to  restrict me from posting on the Open Forum because of my views, which only involved issues of business, economics, pesticide issues, regulations, and our needs as an industry.  I did not involve social engineering issues.  Well, it would appear the NPMA is now shredding their own rules - I will follow that lead. 

If we're going to do social issues, domestic and international, I have massive files, and between 700 and 800 of my own commentaries on social issues, domestic politics, history and geopolitics.  Articles that explain things like why N. Korea won't start WWIII,  Why is a paper tiger socially, economically, demographically and militarily.   Why the will be gone before the end of this decade.  Why Trump's are a good move for America economically and geopolitically at this point in time because we've come to the end of the

I have files on every social issue humanity has faced for thousands of years.  I have files on, the civil war, Johnson's Great Society programs, FDR's new deal, the Great Depression, and the infiltration of communist spies in his administration, Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt's progressive view that the Constitution is an impediment to human progress, and in my computer I have saved massive files on Global Warming, along with 's, and I will happily share all of that on a daily basis with our membership on the Open Forum.

If there are no rules, then there are no rules!

Friends don't always see reality the same light, as an example, at Legislative Day one year a friend once said to me, (with a more than small hint of accusatory disdain I might add), "you thrive on confrontation".  Snarkily, I said, "Yes I do!"   What I didn't explain, because I felt I didn't have to is, I don't do confrontation for confrontation's sake.  I believe in confrontation when there's something worth confronting.  I believe there are times that someone needs to stand up and say what needs to be said, and then be prepared to take the heat.  I am prepared!
  

 I've stored source articles for my commentaries on this issue, and here they are to share with you:

• The 'Diversity' Fraud 
• Diversity and Inclusion Insanity
• Cult Programming in Seattle 
• The American Soviet Mentality - Collective demonization invades our culture 
• How a Twitter Mob Derailed an Immigrant Female Author’s Budding Career
• What ‘Systemic Liberalism’ Has Wrought 
• The Problem with Abstract Concepts
• Jews fight back against de Blasio's continued persecution 
• Whom are you going to call?
• The Floyd Riots Mark a Century of Communist Agitation
• Anti-police madness metastasizes as SF mayor plans to send in social workers in their place
•  Seattle’s cowardly capitulation contrasts with 4 other cities putting down attempts to establish ’autonomous zones’
•  Business departs the inner cities
• Serial kneeling of America 
• The plight of blacks who believe in America’s promise - 
• We Didn’t Fight for a Marxist America  
• There was a dumpster fire in the autonomous zone so citizens of the CHAZ called the Seattle fire department What a perfect metaphor
• CHAZ offers useful insights into the practical realities of revolutionary communes - 
• Nashville autonomous zone 'will not be tolerated,' Tennessee governor warns amid threat
• Entire Florida city's SWAT team resigns after police chief kneels with protesters 
• Scott Adams has had a brilliant insight about the demand for reparations 
• The futility of reparations
• It's not just policing that Black Lives Matter wants to change
• The irony of kneeling during the National Anthem
• Defund the police: Wrong target, right idea
• Three Species of Protesters
• Devolution to Revolution: An Already Demoralized U.S. is Now Being Destabilized
• The Problem with George Will
• America’s New Caste System?
• Where Black Lives Don't Matter
• Race Isn’t Going Away 
• What If Police Officers Go on Strike?
• Why Don’t These #BlackLivesMatter?
• The Wound to Our Social Order Is Deep and Pervasive
• Democrat Cities: Fourth-World Scourges
• White America's Alleged Inner Racist
• Glenn Loury: 'We're Being Swept Along by Hysteria' About Racism in America
• TheMob’s Support For Rayshard Brooks Exposes Them For The Race-Baiting Hypocrites They Are

Okay, so you're all in for diversity, right?  Tell me, when was the last time you had dinner with a street bum at your home.  How many?  And how often?

NPMA: To Win We Must First Define Our Enemies and Our Allies, Part II

By Rich Kozlovich

In 1998 David S. Landis published “The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, Why Some Nations are so Rich and Some Nations are so Poor”. I recommend it highly. There-in  he notes that at one-point China was 500 years ahead of the rest of the world technologically. What happened? It’s not an easy answer since hundreds of years passed before they were completely overtaken by western technology, but there were some fundamental paradigms that caused it.

One, the government was foundationally tyrannical. Whether the leader is called a dictator or an emperor is immaterial. Tyranny is tyranny. They eschewed they idea of a “free market and institutionalized property rights. The Chinese state was always interfering with private enterprise - taking over lucrative activities, prohibiting others, manipulation of prices, exacting bribes, curtailing private enrichment.” (1)

He went on to say: “Bad government strangled initiative, increased the cost of transactions, diverted talent from commence and industry.” Quoting who he calls the “Great Hungarian-German-French sinologist, Etienne Balazs”, he says:

“ ……..if one understands by totalitarianism the complete hold of the State and its executive organs and functionaries over all the activists of social life, initiative, no expression of public life that can escape official control……No private initiative, no expression of public life that can escape official control. There is to begin the with a whole array of state monopolies, which comprise the great consumption stables: salt, iron, tea, alcohol, foreign trade. There is a monopoly of education, jealously guarded. There is practically a monopoly of letters (I was about to say, or the press): anything written unofficially, that escapes the censorship, has little hope of reaching he public. But the reach of the Molock-State, the omnipotence of the bureaucracy, goes much farther. There are clothing regulations, a regulation of public and private construction (dimensions of houses); the colors one wears, the music one hears, the festivals – all are regulated. There are rules for birth and rules for death; the providential State watches minutely over every step of its subjects, from cradle to grave. It is a regime of paper work and harassment, endless paper work and endless harassment.” (2)

The point he makes later on is the danger of this creating an “atmosphere of routine, of traditionalism and of immobility, which makes any innovation suspect, any initiative that is not commanded and sanctioned in advance, is unfavorable to the spirit of inquiry.“ In short, people give up and give in to consensus. Admittedly all the points he mentions aren’t applicable, but that’s not the issue. The issue is the societal acceptance of tyranny by bureaucracy, and their abuses.

Let me tell you about the Sacketts.

The Sackett’s bought a lot in a residential area near Priest Lake, Idaho with the intention of building a home. They conscientiously acquired the necessary permits and not one person said anything to them about that property being a “wetlands”.

After they started excavation the EPA came in and issued “a "compliance order" that required them to undo the excavation and restore the "wetlands." What were their options? “After three years they could seek a "permit" that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Or they could wait for the EPA to prosecute the alleged Clean Water Act violations, which could result in penalties of $32,500-plus per day.” Worse yet, according to the EPA they weren’t even allowed to challenge their order in court until EPA started enforcement actions. In short – EPA bureaucrats can steal your land, make you pay for it and you’ll like it or else.

Two federal courts agreed with the EPA sending this to the Supreme Court, who unanimously agreed that it was unconstitutional for the government to believe there could be no judicial review of an EPA compliance order.  This clearly repudiated the idea that "efficiency of regulation conquers all’.

However, the Sacketts still don’t have a home because the issue didn’t resolve whether or not this was a wetland, and the EPA apparently has other means at their disposal, and unless something has changed, the EPA isn’t backing away. And this is by no means an isolated case, or with just one abusive agency that believe environmental regulations and the capricious interpretation of those regulations by out of control unaccountable bureaucrats can trump the Constitution and your rights.

No matter what happens now we have to ask this one over-riding question: Who makes whole those who’ve been abused by the EPA and other tyrannical government agencies?

Given the nature of the EPA, why would the NPMA ask the membership to support increasing the EPA’s budget tens of millions of dollars over the last two years when there finally is an Administrator who wants to cut their budget?  An administrator who is unjustifiably under attack by the left, even threatening his life.

Are we making an attempt to let Congress know our industry supports Pruitt? Do we support Pruitt? Do we believe ending Sue and Settle was a good thing?  Do we believe ending the EPA's scheme of creating new regulations and rules via Secret Science was a good thing? I certainly do, but I have no idea what our national leaders think, other than being concerned whether or not the EPA trusts us. And that really matters why? Our character as an industry doesn't make us the issue over trust. Can we really say that about the EPA?

As far as I can tell there are around 15,000 pest control companies in the nation, although I'm sure there's more, and perhaps there's less, but no matter the number, the principles are the same.

It's been noted that over ninty percent of the companies have ten or employees or less. I'm probably way underestimating, but let's make some broad assumptions here. Let's speculate there's approximately 150,000 applicators out there, making at least 100 applications a month. That's 15,000,000 (fifteen million) applications a month, and let's say they work 264 days a year. That means they've made 3,960,000,000 (Almost four billion)applications a year.

How many people have been sickended or died? Over the last 35 years I've been in pest control that number has been miniscule compared to the number of applications made. Some of those cases have been tragic, but assuming my figures are accurate, that means in 35 years there's been 138,600,000,000 applications made in structural pest control alone, and very, very few tragedies.

That's a remarkable safety record. Yet, the EPA is directly responsible for possibly as many as 100 million unnecessary deaths and billions of unnecessary cases of malaria as a result of the ban on DDT. Who needs to earn trust?

If we're so concerned about attaining trust, perhaps we should be more concerned about attaining the trust of Administrator Scott Pruitt and the man who appointed him - and is in complete harmony with his views - President Trump. At least we know they're on our side. Do we know what our side is?

But I do have one idea I really like and I'm sure the Administrator likes it also.

If we and our manufacturer "friends and allies" are so worried the EPA has insufficient funds to carry out one of their legitimate core responsibilities, let’s work at making sure the EPA has adequate funds by going up to the Hill next year and asking Congress to eliminate every one of the regional offices, which could be done via a budget initiative. I would imagine that would be an amazing savings and that would be a grand start!

Bureaucrats with nothing really important to do can always find new interpertations of law to create rules for "a regime of paper work and harassment, endless paper work and endless harassment.” Fire them and watch that problem go away. After that - watch that almost 2 trillion dollars it costs the American public to meet federal regulatory standards start to melt away into something worthwhile.

One more thing. We might think it's a good idea to ask them to insist something be done about the potentially treasonous and illegal activity of the environmental movement by finding out where their money's coming from and what they're doing with it.

NPMA: To Win We Must First Define Our Enemies and Our Allies, Part I

1. Wealth and Poverty of Nations, Page 56
2. Wealth and Poverty of Nations, Page 57

Part III will be deal more with the EPA and why it should be either abolished or seriously deminished, along with other agencies, and Part IV with our “friends" in science.

NPMA: To Win We Must First Define Our Enemies and Our Allies, Part I

Definition leads to clarity.  Clarity leads to understanding.  Understanding leads to good decision making.  Good decision making leads to harmony! 

Rich Kozlovich

Over the last two years our industry has been asked by the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) to go to Congress on Legislative Day and ask our Representatives and Senators to bump up the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) budget by tens of millions of dollars.  I have some questions:

• Who at NPMA makes such irresponsible decisions?
• Who initiates such an irresponsible idea?
• Did anyone vote on this?
• If so, who were they and what would possibly possess their minds to think this was a “good thing”?

The EPA was born in corruption with President Richard Nixon.  His goal was to ban DDT.  He appointed William Ruckelshaus as the first director, an underground activist who made the decision to ban DDT irrespective of the fact none of his science advisors agreed, nor did Judge Sweeney, the federal magistrate who ruled none of the claims against DDT stood the test of scientific validity.  Ruckelshaus admitted years later his decision was a political decision, not a scientific one. 

As a result, Nixon, Ruckelshaus, Rachel Carson and the EPA are responsible for the blood of up to 100 million innocent victims, who’ve died unnecessarily from malaria, and hundreds of millions who‘ve been unnecessarily sickened every year since.  And that’s only malaria, that doesn’t count all the other insect borne diseases DDT could have prevented.  Because Rachel lied millions died, and the EPA knew it!

Has anything changed at the EPA?  Absolutely not! The radical agenda of EPA’s activists outranks science, economics or the human disasters they’ve created.  EPA was born in corruption and has remained corrupt ever since, with a virtual lava flow of scientifically dubious and destructive regulations.  The fact they've done some good things doesn't give them a pass on who and what they really are. 

Then we have what’s called “sue and settle” regulations, which Pruitt has ended.  An illegal conspiracy to force regulations on the nation they don’t have the power or authority to impose.  A corrupt scheme between corrupt EPA officials and green activists via court decisions.   The greenies sue and the EPA either puts up a halfhearted effort to defend against that suit or they settle giving the greenies all they desire with the imprimatur of the federal judiciary. 

 

I've been told we don't want to do anything that offends EPA because we want them to trust us.  Our real concern should be is whether or not we can trust them.  And history has shown the answer to that concern - from the beginning of EPA until right now this very moment - is we can't, and we need to stop bending over the barrel for them and the chemical companies. 

Can someone explain to me why that isn’t the definition of a criminal conspiracy that could be prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as RICO?

The current Director, Pruitt, has ended that practice, but what about all the damage that’s been done by those who participated in these corrupt actions?  Who will make those who’ve suffered from this illegal conspiracy whole again?  Who has even been fired for this?

But their “conspiracies” are even broader, more mendacious and more insidious.  Tell you what – we’ll come back to that!

They've spent untold millions promoting a pest control system that doesn’t exist.  IPM!  In point of fact there is no such thing as IPM in structural pest control. (Please see The Pillars of IPM.)

 

In 1996 the Congress in an effort to fix something called the Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938 passed something called the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The Food Quality Protection Act was supposed to be a pro-pesticide law, but with EPA tinkering it’s become one of the most anti-pesticide laws passed since Nixon.  We lost carbamates and organophosphates and now we have bed bugs.  For more information on this please go to my article, We Don’t Need No Stinking Badges. As a result, whole categories of safe effective chemistry was lost to the structural pest control industry, and to the general public.

 

They’ve instituted regulations to impose restrictions on the use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids based on dubious conclusions and industry played into this.   

And I’ll call it for what I absolutely believe what it is – a conspiracy between big corporations and the EPA that screws the structural pest control industry and the public, raising costs and reducing the effectiveness of our treatments. 

And this is the agency we want to have an increased budget?  Really?  Have we lost our minds?

The truth of the matter is this effort to increase the EPA’s budget is in effect blatant Corporatism.  This effort is all about chemical companies desire to get their products registered as quickly as possible, and I don’t fault them for that.  That’s good business.  But why are we being a party to this?   Is this increase in budget good for the pest control industry?

Do we really believe the EPA doesn’t have the money to perform one of their core responsibilities? 

Recently it was reported one of the EPA’s core responsibilities is to clean up Super Fund Projects. How’s that been working? 

"With little media attention EPA under Pruitt has stepped up its efforts to clean the nation’s most toxic Superfund sites, putting the properties back into productive use. In 2016, Obama’s EPA remediated and removed only two sites from Superfund’s national priorities list (NPL). By comparison, in Pruitt’s first year, EPA cleaned up and removed seven sites from the NPL. It’s amazing what the agency can do when it focuses its efforts on core functions. "

We now have an EPA administrator who recognizes just how bad the EPA is for this nation, who before he was the administrator, “successfully sued the EPA numerous times, including convincing the courts to place stays on the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule and the Clean Power Plan (CPP).”

Here’s an administration that wants to cut a twenty three percent from the EPA budget and eliminate “dozens of programs”.  But now the NPMA wants our industry to go to Congress to plead with them to add tens of millions back to that budget.  Is it possible Pruitt knows better than the NPMA as to what the EPA needs to perform its core functions?

If the EPA is in such dire economic straits, I have a suggestion that can go a very long way in finding those millions the chemical companies think EPA needs.  Eliminate that core responsibility of registering chemistry from the EPA and return that responsibility to the Department of Agriculture.   Then eliminate all…..and I mean all…. The EPA regional offices.  Every state now has an EPA of their own, why does the EPA need regional offices?

But we have to come back to the core question.  Why are we adopting this stance to increase EPA's budget? 

Because that’s what “our allies”, the chemical companies, want us to do, and please don't insult my intelligence claiming otherwise.

The chemical companies are at best leaky vessels as allies.  They treat us as allies of convenience, and we need to recognize that and treat them in exactly the same manner.  When it suits our needs, we defend them.  When it doesn’t – we don’t! If those in leadership can’t understand that, or do but don’t have the courage to act accordingly – we need to take a real hard look at that leadership.

I've talked to a number of the members of the Ohio Pest Management Association who will be attending Legislative Day and none of those I talked to will support this scheme.  One told me he will present NPMA's information and then specifically tell his Representative and Senator he absolutely does not support this budget increase for EPA. 

 

I encourage every member of every state association attending to take that stance. 

 

Let’s try and get this once and for all – There’s no good government or bad government.  There’s only limited or unlimited government, and EPA is now and always has been out of control.  They need to become far more limited, or better yet - eliminated, which I will address later.    

 

We have a window of opportunity with the Trump administration to fix many things.  But when that window closes, and it will at some point - it may close forever.   Leadership needs to get that!  It's now a matter of win or go home!

 

One more point.  I'm an autodidact who's willing to publicly debate anyone involved with our industry who disagrees with me on any of these points or issues, irrespective of their position or education.  I encourage NPMA to set up such a debate.