Firsthand Accounts of Effects of Hunger in Connecticut On Display at State Capitol

Hunger in Connecticut is described as a pervasive problem: one in seven Connecticut residents struggle with hunger; 14.3 percent of Connecticut families do not have adequate resources to purchase enough food; 68 percent of Connecticut food pantry and soup kitchen clients at one point had to choose between food and medical care. Those stark statistics come alive through the firsthand accounts of individuals in Witnesses to Hunger CT, a photovoice exhibit showcasing firsthand accounts of hunger in Connecticut, which has opened in the lower level concourse of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford and will run through Thursday, February 11.

“Connecticut is one of the wealthiest states in the nation but there are many who struggle every day to put food on the table,” Lucy Nolan, Executive Director, End Hunger Connecticut!, said. “The Witnesses recruited to participate in this project have been faced with choices that are hard to fathom – whether to eat low cost foods that could be harmful to their medical conditions or not eat at all, whether to pay for prescriptions or put food on the table, and whether to feed themselves or give extra food to their children. We hope this exhibit can serve as a reminder that many among us, often hidden, need the state’s support.”

The 15 Witnesses to Hunger CT come from Connecticut’s cities, suburbs and rural communities. Kimberly’s picture told the story of her teenage son who while grateful to have something to eat wished there was meat on the plate. Randy from Westport had a good job until struck by cancer and now gets many meals from the soup kitchen and pantry. In his photo he holds a grocery bag in his hands and says while he is grateful for that safety net he wishes there were more fresh foods available. The photos tell a story of everyday choices that must be made to survive.

The project is a collaboration of Connecticut nonprofit organizations, anti-hunger and anti-poverty advocates, and state agencies inspired by Witnesses to Hunger, a project of the Center for Hunger Free Communities at the Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health.  Advocates point out that limited access to food leads to poor health outcomes, including stress, obesity, and inability to succeed in work or school.

“There are four main themes that emerged from this project and tell me a compelling story,” said State Senator Marilyn Moore, Bridgeport. “The Witnesses to Hunger CT show everyday struggles with health and wellness, food and nutrition, transportation and adequate shelter. If we want people to succeed we need to make sure we support them. I appreciate their bravery in shining a light on these themes.”

Connecticut is the last in the nation for the number of schools with a school breakfast program, according to End Hunger Connecticut! officials. They point out that 64.6 percent of schools participate, and 45 percent students participate in free and reduced price breakfast for every 100 in lunch.  Connecticut would receive an additional $9.6 million federal dollars if the participation rate of school breakfast reached 70 percent.

Connecticut’s SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) participation rate is 72 percent and 53 percent of the eligible working poor participate in the SNAP program. Many go to food pantries instead for food, organization officials said. They indicated that for every $1 spent on WIC funding, Connecticut saves $1.77-$3.13 on future medical costs.

“The members of Witnesses to Hunger are the real experts on hunger and poverty,” said Dr. Mariana Chilton, an associate professor at Drexel University’s Dornsife School of Public Health and founder of Witnesses to Hunger. “Too many decisions today are made without consulting with the people that are affected most by policies made in Washington. We are thrilled to have families from Connecticut join in the national movement of families speaking from first hand experiences to inform policy makers and the public about the true realities of America’s struggles and how to solve them.”

They noted that 11.9 percent of Connecticut residents are food insecure and 4.7 percent are very food insecure — a slight increase from 2008.

“Data shows the food insecurity rate among those living with a severe mental illness is 475 percent higher than those who are not battling mental illness,” said Billy Bromage, MSW, Director of Community Organizing, Yale Program for Recovery and Community Health. “We know that good nutrition plays a key role in mental health and that’s why the mental health community is here today to support the Witnesses.”

Witnesses to Hunger CT is the second exhibit of its kind in the state. The first took place in New Haven in 2014 and was championed by Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro.  Witnesses to Hunger CT is a collaboration of:  Advocacy Unlimited, Connecticut Association for Basic Human Needs (CABHN), Center for Hunger Free Communities at the Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Connecticut State Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), Connecticut Food Bank, End Hunger Connecticut!, Foodshare, Immanuel Congregational Church/UCC, Hispanic Health Council, New Haven Food Policy Council, and the Yale Program for Recovery and Community Health.

The exhibit will be in the lower concourse of the Legislative Office Building (LOB) through February 11th. A booklet prepared for the exhibit can be found at http://www.endhungerct.org. The LOB is located at 300 Capitol Avenue, Hartford and is open weekdays 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.  Free parking is available (first come first served) at the LOB Garage, which is located directly behind the LOB.

https://youtu.be/e-9M4byq90w

Safety Gap: Parents Impose Rules on Teen Drivers, Teens Don’t Think So

Teen drivers are at the highest risk for crashes and crash-related fatalities, and are particularly vulnerable to distractions while driving.  The results of a new nationwide survey of teens and their parents suggest a considerable disconnect between the limitations parents believe they are imposing on driving and the use of cell phones, and their teens’ view of limitations imposed by their parents. The gap in numerous instances is wide, and has raised concerns about the resulting risks to teen drivers.

In families where parents reported limitations on their teen drivers – such as restricting cell phone use, number of teen passengers and driving times and locations – teens themselves sometimes said they did not have those limitations, according to the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health, which indicated that parents play a key role in promoting the safety of their teens by setting expectations for driving.

“We found that the great majority of parents do have rules for their teen drivers; however, teens consistently perceive fewer limits on their driving than what their parents report. This signals an opportunity for parents and teens to have more conversations about safe driving habits,” says lead author Michelle L. Macy, M.D., M.S., an emergency medicine physician at the University of Michigan’s C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital.

Parents of teens 13-18 years old and teens themselves were asked about limits placed on driving circumstances that can increase a teen driver’s risk of a crash. About nine in 10 parents report they place at least one limit on their teen drivers while eight out of 10 teens report having at least one driving limit placed on them by their parents.

Among parents and teens who both responded, teens consistently say they have fewer limits on their driving than were reported by their parents.  Overall, 81 percent of teens report having at least one driving limit placed on them by their parents. In families where parents report limits on cell phone use, 13 percent of teens say they have no limits. In families where parents report limits on passengers or driving times/locations, 20 percent of teens say they have no such limits.

Limits on cell phone use and texting while driving are most commonly reported by parents and their teens. Fewer limits are set on passengers and driving times/locations. As many as one-quarter of parents report placing no limits on teen passengers or nighttime or highway driving, suggesting opportunities to increase teen driver safety by encouraging parents to place limits on these high-risk driving conditions, officials indicated.  Among the key limitations parents impose, according to the survey:

Limits on cell phone use include:

• requiring teens to park to use their cell phones (86%)
• forbidding texting while driving (73%)
• having cell phone turned off or put away (62%)

Limits on passengers include:

• allowing only 1-2 friends in the car (59%)
• allowing only certain friends (54%)
• no teen passengers allowed (40%)

Limits on driving times/locations include:

• no driving after 10 p.m. (61%)
• driving only to/from school, work, or activities (57%)
• no highway driving (36%)

Parents who judge their teens’ driving ability as “above average” (32% of all parents) are less likely to place limits on passengers and driving times/locations. Sixty-seven percent of parents set limits on passengers for their “above-average” teen drivers, compared with 81percent of parents who perceive their teen drivers as “below average.” Similarly, 69 percent of parents set limits on driving times/locations for their above-average teen drivers, compared with 85 parents of parents who perceive their teen as below average. In contrast, parents do not adjust their restrictions on cell phone use in relation to their teens’ driving ability.

There was greater agreement between parents and teens on limits placed on cell phones than on passengers or driving times/locations, according to the national survey, conducted in September 2015 and released earlier this year.

“This may indicate that parents communicate to their teens more clearly their expectations around cell phone use while driving than for other driving situations. It is also possible that parents and teens have greater awareness of the risks of using cell phones while driving, due to media attention on cell phone distractions as a common cause of crashes,” the survey analysis points out.

The analysis also indicated that the higher degree of disagreement between teens and parents in relation to the limits set for passengers and driving times/locations suggests the need for more dialogue in families to ensure rules and expectations around driving are understood. Written parent-teen driving agreements are one way for parents to clearly communicate rules and expectations, officials indicated.

Connecticut’s Tim Hollister, author of two books about parenting and safe teen driving and the website From Reid’s Dad, recently developed a video for parents, with financial support from the Travelers, which underscores the influence of parents in teen driving.  Hollister will be speaking on the subject at the Easton Public Library on February 10 and the Newington Public Library on February 24.  Hollister, whose son Reid died as a result of a car accident at age 17, will share information parents should know regarding teen driving and discuss his most recent book, His Father Still.

https://youtu.be/QmCJKvyXhEQ

https://youtu.be/wccN8aqOWA4

Eight CT Companies Among the Fastest Growing Tech Companies in North America

The Technology Fast 500 is a closely watched annual listing of the fast-growing tech companies, businesses that are releasing new, emerging technologies from the U.S. and Canada worldwide.  The latest ranking includes eight Connecticut companies, including one, operating in Stamford, that reached the top 100. Combining technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and rapid growth, Fast 500 companies—large and small, public and private—are located in cities all across North America and are “disrupting the technology industry,” according to consulting firm Deloitte, which has compiled the annual list for two decades.

Fast 500 award winners on the current list were selected based on percentage fiscal year revenue growth during the period from 2011 to 2014.  Companies must own proprietary intellectual property or technology that is sold to customers in products that contribute to a majority of the company’s operating revenues in order to be considered for inclusion on the list, according to Deloitte.

The lone Connecticut company to crack the top 100 was Milford medical device manufacturer SurgiQuest, which was number 100.  The company’s growth was pegged at 877 percent.  It was incorporated in 2006, with a focus on laproscopy technology.

Not far behind, at number 119, was Revolution Lighting Technologies, a manufacturer based in Stamford.  The analysis placed the company’s growth at 755 percent.  Revolution Lighting Technologies Inc. engages in the design, manufacture, marketing, and sale of light emitting diode (LED) lighting solutions in the United States, Canada, and internationally.  The company’s customers include the U.S. military.

Madison-based Clarity Software Solutions, Inc., with 298 percent growth, placed at number 247 on the top 500 fastest growing technology companies in North America.  Clarity Software Solutions, Inc. helps health insurance clients optimize customer relationships-and save time and money-by enhancing flexibility and control over document management and communications delivery, according to the company’s website.

Also making the list were Evariant of Farmington, a software developer, at number 272, and HP One, a software company in Trumbull at number 307.  Biopharmaceutical company Alexion, in the midst of moving its headquarters from Cheshire to New Haven, was ranked at number 349, and etouches, a Norwalk software company ranked at number 357.  Rounding out the Connecticut companies on the list is Wallingford oil extraction technology company APS Tecnhology, at number 466.

“Amid a fierce business climate, there seems to be no shortage of new and established companies that are unlocking a seemingly unlimited potential for growth and advancement through technology’s continued disruption and proliferation across industries,” said Sandra Shirai, principal, Deloitte Consulting LLP and US technology, media, and telecommunications leader.

“It is inspiring to witness the innovative ways companies are incorporating emerging technologies for business gains, be it cognitive computing, or the Internet of Things. We congratulate all those ranked on the Fast 500 and look forward to seeing their continued growth into 2016.”

Revolution Lighting Technologies ranked eighth among energy tech companies, and SurgiQuest Inc. ranked sixth among medical device companies.

Overall, 283 of the 500 companies were in the software sector, and 67 percent of the 500 companies have received venture capital funding at some point in their company’s history.  Topping the list was StartApp, with a growth rate of 21,984 percent from 2011 to 2014. Based in New York and founded in 2010, StartApp provides a free monetization and distribution platform that integrates with applications on mobile devices.

Two-thirds of the companies are private, and 33 percent are public.  The average growth rate of the top 500 companies was 850 percent, with individual company growth on the list ranging from 21,984 percent to 109 percent.  Broken down by region, 20 percent of the companies are based in the San Francisco Bay Area, 14 percent in the New York Metro Area, 7 percent in New England, and 6 percent in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

Connecticut Leads the Nation in Preventative Health Care

Among the nation’s 34 most populous states, the rate of preventive health care visits was higher in Connecticut than any state in the nation.  Data released this month from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics also found that the rate of preventive care visits to primary care physicians, among the 34 most populous states, exceeded the national rate in Connecticut more than elsewhere. Preventive care visits such as general medical examinations, prenatal visits, and well-baby visits give physicians and other health professionals the opportunity to screen for diseases or conditions, as well as to promote healthy behaviors that may delay or prevent these conditions and reduce subsequent use of emergency or inpatient care.

In this report, the rate of preventive care visits to office-based physicians is examined by state, patient demographics, and physician specialty. Estimates are based on data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), a nationally representative survey of visits to office-based physicians.

Overall, preventive care visit rates were higher for children under age 18 years (73.2 per 100 persons) and for those aged 65 and over (81.1 per 100 persons) than for adults aged 18–44 (53.2 per 100 persons) and 45–64 (51.8 per 100 persons).  The preventive care visit rates for women aged 18–44 (87.1 per 100 women) and 45–64 (60.5 per 100 women) exceeded the rates for men in those age groups (18.5 and 42.5 per 100 men, respectively).

The rate of preventive care visits in the 34 most populous states ranged from 33.1 visits per 100 persons in Arkansas to 120 visits per 100 persons in Connecticut.  Among those 34 states, the rate of preventive care visits was lower than the national rate in 11 states (Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington).  The national average was 61.4 visits per 100 persons.  The data is from 2012, the most recent year available from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

In 2012, 35.7 preventive care visits were made to primary care physicians for every 100 persons across the United States.  In Connecticut, primary care physician preventative care visits were made 59.3 times per 100 people, the highest percentage in the nation.  In Massachusetts, the rate was 53.1, in Colorado 51.7, in Florida 48.7 in Georgia 43.3, in Texas 42.8 and in Maryland 42.2.  Overall, 58.2 percent of preventive care visits were made to primary care physicians, according to the CDC data.  Primary care physicians include office-based physicians in the specialties of family or general medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics.

The female rate (76.6 visits per 100 females) of preventative care visits exceeded the male rate (45.4 visits per 100 males) by 69 percent. The percentage of preventive care visits to primary care physicians, however, made by males (76.3%) exceeded those made by females (48.0%). The data suggests that women tend to make their preventative care visits to physicians other than their primary care physician, with the report’s summary suggestion. this “may be related to gynecological or obstetric care for women.”

In 2012, the NAMCS survey sample size was increased fivefold to allow for state-level estimates in the 34 most populous states for the first time.

Editorial Cartoon by Bob Englehart

PERSPECTIVE: Is Mama Drama Impacting a Woman’s Ability to Give Her Daughter the Chance to Be Her Best?

by Heather Freeman Mothers are powerful role models. They leave an indelible imprint on a girl’s self-identity starting from before birth. When her imprint is that which supports a healthy dose of self-love and confidence, her daughter can develop her own sense of self, separate from her mother’s. She will grow up to be confident about her strengths and talents, and capable of taking the lead in her health and wellbeing.

However, this is a rare occurrence. More often than not mothers unconsciously carry an imprint which keeps them from giving their daughters the chance to be their best. This imprint then gets passed on, leaving the next generation of girls carrying on a legacy of self-doubt and low self-esteem. Our point of power as women is to know that we do not need to repeat our mother’s unconscious legacies – that our past does not script our future. And the moment we decide to break the cycle we can then truly awaken to our potential.

According to board-certified ob-gyn and New York Times best-selling author Dr. Christiane Northrup, a mother’s belief system about health and life in general becomes the daughter’s way of being. “If your mother was happy, healthy, vibrant, and loved her menstrual cycle, her breasts, and her body in general, then your health legacy will in general be optimal. If your mother was a smoker, anorexic, depressed, self-absorbed, or anxious, this may adversely affect your confidence and overall wellbeing.”

Jaqueline Lapa Sussman, MS, LPC, a practitioner of Eidetic Imagery Psychology (a fast moving methodology which allows one to go beyond their rational surface mind and uncover stored images of their potential and wholeness) says “Image Psychology research in the last half century has shown that our mother’s influence is wired into our brains and color our automatic knee jerk reactions to life.” Throughout a girls childhood a mother’s emotional wellbeing is communicated through her tone, body language, and actions, which programs her daughter with attitudes that affect her for the rest of her life. A girl grows up and takes that image from her mother (good or bad) with her to her adult life, and if she decides to become a mother, she then imprints that image with her own children.

The journey into motherhood provides women with a unique opportunity to break the cycle, to lead their lives and their daughters from a conscious, empowered space. When they boldly step into this power they are able to create a safe relationship with their daughter. The type of relationship that girls have voiced they need in order to communicate about and navigate their lives.

The Girls Scout Research Institute Report (2003) revealed emotional safety is as important as physical safety for girls. The relational model, developed by Jean Baker Miller, M.D., author of the groundbreaking book Towards a New Psychology of Women, offers a paradigm shift in our understanding of human development and of society as a whole.  Dr. Miller's relational model proposes that growth-fostering relationships are a central human necessity and that disconnections are the source of psychological problems.

The path to providing this safe space is better communications and a deeper understanding of the role interpersonal communication plays in creating a safe space. Interpersonal communication is a mutual relational, co-constructed process which John Stewart, Ph.D. Professor of Speech Communication at the University of Washington, identifies as a process, as opposed to something that one person does "to" someone else. The relational aspect of the process -- the fact that communication takes place between people and influences every aspect of their relationship -- is central to understanding why certain communications succeed while others falter.

Every time people communicate, they offer definitions of themselves and respond to their perceived definitions of the other(s). However, since these perceptions are always subjective, and therefore inherently judgmental, communication often leads to misunderstandings and bad feelings -- causing people to shut down.

A mother’s job is complex. There is no doubt she tackles it with the best intentions - and not everything a woman has learned from her mother is considered bad or damaging. There are certainly parts of the imprint that a women will want to take with her into her adult life and there are always gifts in the shortcomings one has received.

However, our point of power as women is to know that we do not need to repeat our mother’s unconscious legacies – that our past does not script our future. And the moment we decide to see the legacy that has been passed on to us and to reflect, honor, and pay tribute to that legacy, is the transformational moment when we can move forward with a new life enriching story.  We can then set our mind, body, and souls free and empower the next generations to come.

__________________________________________

Heather Freeman, founder of the Gutsy Girl Club, is a resident of Colorado via Connecticut. As a transformational empowerment coach, she works with a spirited community of women who deeply support one another, build each other up, and provide a safe, supportive space to promote mothering from a place of authentic self-identity and a strong connection to one another.  The free report Survival Tips for Raising a Gutsy Girl  is available online. Learn more at www.gutsygirlclub.com

PERSPECTIVE commentaries by contributing writers appear each Sunday on Connecticut by the Numbers.

New Casey Foundation Initiative Aims to Improve Job Prospects for Young Adults in Hartford

A total of up to $900,000 will be awarded over the next four years to a Hartford collaborative initiative to strengthen the next generation of workers and meet employer demand.  The Annie E. Casey Foundation has announced plans to award $6 million in grants to increase job opportunities for young adults from low income families in Hartford and four other communities - Cleveland, Indianapolis, Philadelphia, and Seattle. Hartford expects to receive up to $900,000 over the grant period for planning and implementation.

Through Generation Work, the Foundation aims to combine building relationships with businesses, factoring in their needs in the local economy, with youth development strategies to prepare young people for work, such as mentoring and on-the-job learning opportunities. Ultimately, the Casey Foundation hopes to help establish local networks of workforce development organizations that serve young job seekers and have strong connections with businesses.

The Hartford Generation Work initiative is led by United Way of Central and Northeastern Connecticut, working with five other community partners:

• Capital Workforce Partners,
• Hartford Foundation for Public Giving,
• Hartford Opportunity Youth Collaborative,
• Our Piece of the Pie, and
• Workforce Solutions Collaborative of Metro Hartford.

Hartford’s initiative will connect young adults, including those out-of-school or work or underemployed, with education, training and employment for careers in manufacturing and healthcare, officials said. The initiative also intends to improve coordination and collaboration among partners and youth initiatives.

“The strength of our future workforce is one of our nation’s greatest assets and is critical to our ability to compete globally,” said Allison Gerber, a senior associate who oversees the Casey Foundation’s investments in improving job opportunities for low-income individuals and families. “The next generation is eager to work, but we must create more avenues for young adults to develop the knowledge and experience they need to succeed in the job market.”

While the Great Recession hit many hard, teens and young adults have experienced the most drastic drop in employment, data show. Millions of young people — particularly young people of color, justice-system involved, or aging out of foster care and from low-income families — face obstacles to employment or education, and the percentage of young people ages 18 to 29 in the job market nationwide has steadily declined in recent years. At the same time, employers often struggle to find workers with the right set of skills for available positions, Foundation officials point out.

Elder Abuse Prevention Recommendations Sent to State Legislature

Though precise definitions of elder abuse vary widely across jurisdictions, conceptually, elder abuse is any form of mistreatment that results in harm or loss to an older person. That, according to a report issued by Connecticut’s Legislative Commission on Aging, is at the core of a series of 15 recommendations being made to the state legislature and executive branch to respond to increasing concerns about the growing prevalence of elder abuse. The report explains that “it can be physical, financial, psychological, or include neglect or abandonment and it may take place in a home or institutional setting. Though often a hidden phenomenon, elder abuse is a significant human rights, public health and social justice issue that transcends race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, income and education levels.”

Earlier this year, the legislature directed the Commission to conduct a study” concerning best practices for reporting and identification of the abuse, neglect, exploitation and abandonment of older adults.”  The report was submitted to the legislature, which convenes this week.

The Commission has also launched a new website focused on Financial Abuse & Exploitation, which includes a series video training videos and a range of resources.

Organized around the three areas of inquiry framed in Public Act 15-236, the report recommendations are:

To emulate national models for reporting abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment:

1. Establish parameters for reasonable caseload standards for the Connecticut Department of Social Services Protective Services for the Elderly program (PSE);
2. Establish an elder abuse resource prosecutor in the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney;
3. Conduct a Connecticut-specific cost assessment to better understand the personal and state costs of financial exploitation; and
4. Evaluate moving to an adult protective services model, for adults ages 18 and older, rather than a model only for adults ages 60 and older, balancing the import of retaining choice and control with ensuring that access to protective services is not restricted by age.

To advance standardization and uniformity in definitions, measurements and reporting mechanisms:

5. Conduct a definitional crosswalk among and between state agencies and national guidelines and assess where legal, policy and practice changes can enhance alignment;
6. Have Connecticut PSE develop a strategic plan to develop national voluntary consensus guidelines that have been developed nationally;
7. Have Connecticut PSE modify its data collection process and explore predictive analytics modeling to improve outcomes and quality, to align with the dataset to be collected nationally, and to develop more targeted interventions; and in the interim, have PSE submit a more detailed report to the Connecticut General Assembly;
8. Require Connecticut PSE to develop an online training module for mandated reports on the role of PSE, elder abuse red flags and reporting procedures to PSE; and
9. Develop training and resources for law enforcement.

To promote and coordinate reporting communication among local and state government entities:

10. Have Connecticut PSE formalize a system for consistent and uniform follow-up with all reporters of elder abuse;
11. Enhance training for Connecticut PSE social workers and utilize consultants with specific subject matter expertise to provide guidance on investigation in certain highly specialized areas;
12. Explore promising evidenced-based assessment tools and service models to make informed policy and practice decisions about how to direct and utilize limited resources on behalf of adults who need them most;
13. Pursue federal funding for enhanced training and services to end abuse later in life program.
14. Empower and support multidisciplinary teams (groups of regularly-meeting professionals to handle complex cases of elder abuse), as well as specialized teams such as financial abuse specialist teams, elder fatality review teams, and an elder abuse forensic center; and
15. Support continued development of Connecticut’s criminal justice information system.

Connecticut’s Legislative Commission on Aging is a nonpartisan public policy and research office of the Connecticut General Assembly.  The report indicated that according to a study sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, 12.4 percent of adults age 60 and older reported at least one form of emotional, physical or sexual abuse or potential neglect and 11.7 percent reported financial exploitation by a family member or stranger.

Connecticut is the 7th oldest state in the nation, based on median age. It also has the third longest-lived constituency, with an average life expectancy of 80.8 years for residents born in Connecticut today. The report indicated that the “vast scope of elder abuse is especially concerning in light of the significant adverse health consequences for victims.”

More than one-third of Connecticut’s population is over the age of 50, and that proportion continues to rise. Between 2010 and 2040, Connecticut’s population of people age 65 and older is projected to grow by 57%, with less than 2% growth for people age 20 to 64 during the same period, according to the report.

https://youtu.be/b3Dr_sqJOYE

Patent Trolls Target Nearly 50 Connecticut Businesses, Filing Suits in Friendly Texas Court

“I know firsthand how detrimental patent trolls can be to small businesses, as my Connecticut small business was recently the victim of abusive patent litigation in which bad patents were used as weapons of financial intimidation against my small business. $100,000 in legal fees and ten months of litigation later, we successfully defended against these frivolous lawsuits, explained Michael Skelps, General Manager of Middlefield-based Capstone Photography recently in a published report. The New York Times has described patent trolls as “people who sue companies for infringement, often using patents of dubious value or questionable relevance, and then hold on like a terrier until they get license fees. In recent years, patent trolls — they prefer “patent assertion entities,” or P.A.E.’s — have gone from low-profile corporate migraine to mainstream scourge.”

Skelps said that “a year later, my small company is still recovering from exorbitant legal fees, none of which we were able to recoup from the legal system.  As a result of the lawsuit, my mom-and-pop photography shop had to downsize from five full-time employees to three part-time. We spent the equivalent of a year’s worth of profit to defend ourselves, with no budget allocated before to legal defense.”

While action to combat the rapidly escalating challenge to businesses of every size has been unable to navigate through a divided Congress, the problem is growing.  One jurisdiction in particular is a hospitable home for the legal attacks.  Federal court in the Eastern District of Texas is the epicenter of patent troll litigation, and nearly 50 Connecticut companies are among those hauled into court there under dubious circumstances.

The Dallas Business Journal printed what read very much like a warning to American businesses, when a commentary noted that “the Eastern District of Texas’ misguided judicial system makes the towns of Tyler, Marshall, Beaumont and Texarkana the biggest patent-troll nest in the United States, filling the coffers of these tiny towns with money legally extorted from innovators that could otherwise be used to support business growth and create new jobs.”

The Connecticut businesses range from well-known names such as Xerox, UTC, Pitney Bowes, Aetna, Starwood, Priceline, WWE, Frontier Communications and Stanley Black & Decker to dozens of lesser known names lacking the deep pockets to fight what are usually unfounded allegations.  Small and medium-sized businesses – many in the tech fields - are frequently sued in East Texas even if they operate outside the state.  The goal appears to be either to force them to travel to the Lone Star State to defend their business practices, or to extract exorbitant settlements as the only way to avoid the travel and legal costs.

It is those out-of-court settlements that the trolls depend on, and which are bleeding some unsuspecting businesses virtually dry. The median compensatory-damage award by East Texas judges and juries in patent cases was $8.25 million, according to the article, written by the president and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association, a U.S. trade association representing more than 2,000 consumer electronics companies.

Six months ago, in an effort to put an end to such activities, the Judiciary Committee in Congress approved legislation that would overhaul the nation’s patent laws.  That effort, however, has slowed, and ultimate passage in Congress is in doubt, according to published reports.

In Connecticut, associations and organizations including The Credit Union League of Connecticut, Connecticut Food Association and the Connecticut Retail Merchant Association have called for federal action to end patent trolling.  The National Retail Federation has said that the cost of defending companies against the claims is so high — the average case costs $2 million and can take 18 months — that many victims settle out of court. The cases cost legitimate businesses close to $30 billion a year in direct costs and $80 billion indirectly, amounting to $943 a year for the average household when passed on to consumers.”

Small businesses bear the brunt of the litigation, but larger businesses are not immune.  About a year ago, it was reported that “Apple must pay a shell company $532.9 million because iTunes infringes upon three patents related to online patents, a jury in East Texas ruled.  The company in question … is also based in Texas and doesn’t make or do anything besides file patent lawsuits, as an Apple spokesperson pointed out, noting that the company “makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no U.S. presence, and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology Apple invented.”

By mid-2015, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas was headed to a record year. An astonishing 1,387 patent cases were filed there in the first half of the year, according to published reports. This was 44.4 percent of all patent cases nationwide, and almost all of the growth is being “fueled by patent trolls.”  Reports indicate that in 1999, only fourteen patent cases were filed there. By 2003, the number of filings had grown to fifty-five. Ten years later, in 2013, it was 1,495.

Overall, patent disputes hit an all-time high of about 7,500 cases in 2015, largely driven by patent trolls who filed two-thirds of the lawsuits, according to a report from Unified Patents. The number of lawsuits filed by non-practicing entities (NPEs), known as “patent trolls,” increased by 25 percent.  Last year, patent troll filings made up 95 percent of the cases in the Eastern District of Texas.

While Congress is mired in inaction, at least one state is stepping into the fray.  Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat who took office in 2014, announced last week a new initiative to support Virginia businesses by combating patent trolling through a newly formed Attorney General’s Patent Troll Unit.

Herring’s announcement explained that “in recent years high-tech businesses, Main Street businesses, and everything in between have become frequent targets of “patent trolls” who send bad faith demand letters, request unjustified licensing fees, and threaten baseless lawsuits. Unchecked, patent trolls and their bad faith practices stifle innovation in the Commonwealth, have a negative impact on our innovation-driven economy, and tie up the courts.” Businesses are forced to “choose between paying unjustified licensing fees and engaging in costly litigation,” the  announcement stressed.

The federal Government Accountability Office (GAO), according to a Washington Post report, found that a disproportionate share of patent litigation concerns software patents. The non-partisan government agency found that the number of defendants in patent lawsuits more than doubling from 2007 through 2011. Notably, this increase is specifically related to software patents — software patents account for 89% of the increase, according to the GAO's calculations.

Said Skelps: “our current patent system is ripe for exploitation. Like the abusive patent litigation we endured, malicious actors are abusing the system and using it as a weapon against legitimate businesses, harming innovation, driving small companies out of business, and overtaxing our already overburdened litigation system.”

CT Ranks 20th in Dependence on Gun Industry, But 3rd in Firearms Output, 2nd in Industry Wages

Connecticut’s place in the ongoing national debate about guns is reflected in a new analysis which ranks the state 20^th in the nation in overall dependence on the gun industry, but also ranks the state 3^rd in total firearms industry output per capita and 2^nd in highest average wages & benefits in the firearms industry. With the gun debate center-stage in the presidential primaries and in Washington, D.C., the website WalletHub analyzed which states depend most on the arms and ammunitions industry both directly for jobs and political contributions and indirectly through firearm ownership. WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia across three key dimensions: 1) Firearms Industry, 2) Gun Prevalence and 3) Gun Politics and eight metrics.

Connecticut also came in 41st in its "firearms prevalence rank" and 47th in "gun politics rank."

The states Most Dependent on the Gun Industry were Idaho, Alaska, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Kentucky and Alabama.

Officials point out that the gun industry plays an important role in the U.S. economy, and Connecticut is no exception. By one estimate, firearms and ammunitions contributed a total of nearly $43 billion to the national economy in 2014. That figure accounts for more than 263,000 jobs that paid $13.7 billion in total wages, according to the report from the Connecticut-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. In the same year, federal and state governments collected from the industry more than $5.79 billion in business taxes, plus an additional $863.7 million in federal excise duties, the WalletHub report indicated.

In the overall rankings, the states determined to be least dependent on the gun industry are Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Delaware.

The analysis also found:

• The number of firearms-industry jobs per capita is highest in New Hampshire, which is seven times greater than in the District of Columbia, where it is lowest.
• The average wages & benefits in the firearms industry is highest in the District of Columbia, which is three times greater than in New Mexico, where it is lowest.
• The total firearms industry output per capita is highest in New Hampshire, which is 18 times greater than in Hawaii, where it is lowest.
• The total taxes paid by the firearms industry per capita is highest in Montana, which is six times greater than in Delaware, where it is lowest.
• Gun ownership is highest in Alaska, which is 12 times greater than in Delaware, where it is lowest.

The eight relevant metrics utilized in the analysis and their corresponding weights were as follows:

Firearms Industry – Total Points: 35

• Number of Firearms-Industry Jobs per 10,000 Residents: (~14 Points)
• Average Wages & Benefits in the Firearms Industry: (~7 Points)
• Total Firearms Industry Output per Capita: (~7 Points)
• Total Taxes Paid by the Firearms Industry per Capita: (~7 Points)

Gun Prevalence – Total Points: 35

• Gun Ownership: (~17.5 Points)
• Gun Sales per 1,000 Residents (approximated by using National Instant Criminal Background Check System data): (~17.5 Points)

Gun Politics – Total Points: 30

• Gun-Control Contributions to Congressional Members per 100,000 Residents: (~15 Points)
• Gun-Rights Contributions to Congressional Members per 100,000 Residents: (~15 Points)

Data used to create these rankings were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the BMJ Publishing Group and the Center for Responsive Politics, according to WalletHub.