NCUA FOM feedback from Dollar Associates’ Dennis Dollar…

first_img 3SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr NCUA completed its most recent meeting and one of the major issues covered was the much-anticipated FOM proposal — now up for commenting from the industry. To get some expert perspective on the meeting’s results, we invited former NCUA Chairman and Principal Partner of Dollar Associates Dennis Dollar.Dennis shared with us his take on what transpired during the FOM portion of the meeting, along with a couple key items that stood out, hits and misses, and where we go from here after the comment period expires. Many thanks to Dennis for coming on the show and providing his feedback.And don’t forget to watch our other posted interviews: Callahan’s Sam Taft on Iowa CUs lending success, Maps Credit Union/ Western Oregon University’s financial literacy program, Bruce Barcott on where CUs line up with the growing cannabis business, and more. Enjoy your weekend! continue reading »last_img read more

Mike Trout, Clayton Kershaw battle in historic first meeting

first_img“Just from a fan’s standpoint it would be something that (Trout and Kershaw) both get, at this point, a lot of attention,” Mattingly said. “I look at it a different way, from the point of getting guys out.”“I don’t think … we feel we’re going to win or lose with what Mike does against Clayton,” Angels manager Mike Scioscia said, “but obviously there’s a lot of attention when you have two young players of that magnitude going head to head.”The statistics certainly pointed to a meeting of two of baseball’s best.Kershaw began the day with the second-lowest career earned-run average of any pitcher who’s thrown at least 1,000 innings since 1920; Mariano Rivera ranks first. Last year, Kershaw broke Sandy Koufax’s 47-year-old club record for ERA-plus in a single season. This year, Kershaw is on pace to surpass his own record.Trout’s 25.9 WAR through age 22 ranks first all-time, ahead of Ty Cobb (25.5) and Ted Williams (23.6). By hitting a home run Friday, Trout became one of four players all-time with three seasons of at least 25 home runs by age 22. Mel Ott (1929-31), Eddie Mathews (1952-54) and Frank Robinson (1956-58) are the others.In the third inning, Trout lined a double to the left-field corner on the first pitch he saw from Kershaw.In the fifth inning, Kershaw struck out Trout on three straight fastballs, the first over the inside corner, the second and third over the outside corner.The fun was just beginning.Box score from first-ever meeting between Kershaw and Trout.Staff writer Robert Morales contributed to this report Newsroom GuidelinesNews TipsContact UsReport an Error The winner of Mike Trout’s first career at-bat against Clayton Kershaw was determined in 76 seconds Tuesday.It was just like any video review. A long pause after the initial call, Don Mattingly trotting slowly out of his dugout, the replay looping on giant screens before a sold-out Dodger Stadium. Like a debate over whether Batman or Superman would win an epic duel between comic-book superheroes, this was the only appropriate answer to the question of who was the better baseball player: Too close to call.One angle appeared to show Trout was safe. Another showed that Dodgers third baseman Juan Uribe threw him out. In the end, first-base umpire Jim Reynolds’ initial call was upheld. Trout’s first career at-bat against Kershaw ended with an infield single.Trout-Kershaw gallery | Mike Trout gallery | Clayton Kershaw galleriescenter_img That’s a trivia answer to hold on to until Trout and Kershaw’s mega-contracts expire in 2020.The duel wasn’t actually the first between Kershaw and Trout. In the 2013 All-Star Game, Trout flew out to end a three-pitch at-bat.That at-bat didn’t count toward either player’s official statistics. It certainly didn’t diminish the hype Tuesday afternoon. The idea of the 26-year-old left-hander throwing to the 22-year-old outfielder was the hottest topic of conversation before the Dodgers hosted the Angels.“It’s always, when you face an ace of a rotation on anybody’s team, it’s always going to be something to talk about,” Trout said. “So it’s going to be fun. I’m looking forward to it. He’s got dominant stuff, and it’s going to be fun.”Mattingly struggled to be objective.last_img read more


first_imgA CLARE hurling fan has sent a big ‘thank you’ to a  mystery Donegal family who stopped to rescue her after her own car broke down.Sarah Ferrigan left the lights on in her car as she rushed into see her beloved Clare take on Tipp in Thurles in the National League fixtures yesterday.As the rain poured down Sarah drew a picture of a battery on a piece of paper and held it up….hoping someone would stop. “A lovely Donegal family pulled over and got me back on the road,” said Sarah.“It was a lovely act of kindness – and I just wanted to give them a public thank you via Donegal Daily.”Added Sarah: “Good luck to Donegal in the football this year – I hope you go all the way.”  CLARE HURLING FAN THANKS MYSTERY SOS DONEGAL FAMILY was last modified: March 10th, 2014 by John2Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:ClareHURLINGSarah FerriganThurlesTipperarylast_img read more

A US biochemistry professor takes his political shot—and misses by a lot

first_img Sam DeLuca By Jeffrey MervisNov. 16, 2018 , 4:15 PM Email Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Randy Wadkins on election night Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwecenter_img “On the Sunday before the election, my campaign staff was angry at me because I wasn’t out canvassing or phone banking. Instead, I was home preparing for my next lecture,” Wadkins says a few days after the 6 November elections. “I was like, ‘This is what I’m paid to do. It has to take priority.’” Carrying out his regular academic duties—teaching, doing research, and attending faculty meetings—“helped keep me sane and grounded,” he says. But it was also stressful. “My attention was always divided,” he admits, “worrying about getting a paper published at the same time I should be out canvassing in Horn Lake.”A big dollar deficitWhy wasn’t able to raise more money? Wadkins thinks it was a combination of geography, party affiliation, and occupation.“First of all, it’s Mississippi, which is the poorest state in the nation,” he says about the place where he grew up and earned his doctoral degree, and then returned a dozen years later after establishing his academic career as an independent investigator. “And right off the bat, there is no money for a Democrat here.”His campaign brought in about $160,000. That’s less than half of the $400,000 he estimates he would have needed to run TV and radio ads and hire enough staff to have a visible presence in the district, which spans 22 counties. In contrast, Kelly raised and spent nearly $900,000.Wadkins confesses that he didn’t devote as much time to fundraising as campaign professionals, including elected officials with scientific backgrounds, told him was necessary to run a viable campaign. “Representative Bill Foster [D–IL] called us early on and said, ‘The part that you’re going to hate is the fundraising,’” Wadkins recalls about a conversation with the only research physicist in Congress. “He told me everybody hates that, but he said that’s part of the job, and you have to do it whether you like it or not.”Wadkins also learned that raising money attracts more money. Groups otherwise sympathetic to a candidate tend to withhold their financial support unless that candidate has already proved to be a successful fundraiser. “So, we weren’t able to attract any [political action committee] or national attention, financially,” he says.His campaign had an arms-length relationship with 314 Action, a group formed to help STEM professionals run for office. “They said, ‘Go get ‘em,’” he says about a conversation with the group before his June primary, “but that they had limited resources and were looking at races that they expected to be more competitive.”(The Philadelphia, Pennsylvania–based organization endorsed 16 House candidates—all Democrats—during the primary season, six of whom won their party’s nomination. 314 Action had a better record in the general election, with seven of its 11 endorsed House candidates winning seats.)The national Democratic party took a similarly hard-headed approach, declining to offer any help. Wadkins says he understands its reasons, but thinks it further penalized long shots like him. “Those of us who were running in red seats were left out in the cold, crying in the wilderness.”Some candidates who can’t tap into outside contributions can self-fund their campaign. But that was never an option for Wadkins. “I’m a college professor, and we’re not exactly rolling in the dough,” he says. His economic situation was also the reason he retained his tenured position. “If I had taken a leave, it would have been without pay,” he says. “And I couldn’t afford that.”An indifferent audienceApart from being starved for money, Wadkins says his campaign was hindered by the lack of voter interest in the race. “There were never any debates,” he says with frustration. “Town hall meetings were filled with Democrats who were already going to vote for me. It was preaching to the choir.”“We never had any public forums in which you might be able to sway voters,” he continues. “When people heard the message, they were convinced. But we weren’t able to get enough people to hear the message.”Voters showed Kelly a similar indifference, Wadkins says. But that didn’t pose a problem for the incumbent, who was defending a seat he first won in a special election in 2015, after the death of Republican Alan Nunnelee.“[Kelly] had no yard signs, no rallies, nothing,” Wadkins says. “His assumption was that he would win, and he was right.“I’d bet that if you asked voters, 90% wouldn’t know who their member of Congress is,” he asserts. “But in this part of the world, the default mode is Republican. So, when folks in rural districts show up at the polls, they just vote Republican.”Although young voters were a mainstay for many insurgent Democratic candidates, and Wadkins teaches at a school with 20,000 students, he says he had to tread carefully because he is a state employee. He made sure his academic duties didn’t overlap in any way with his political activities, to the point that he turned down a request from a major newspaper doing a story on his candidacy to send a photographer to his lab. “I didn’t want to violate a policy that, essentially, says the university can’t be a resource for my campaign.”Keeping a barrier between himself and his students turned out to be surprisingly easy. The morning after his election defeat, nobody in his upper-level chemistry class asked him about the results, he says. “To be honest, it wouldn’t surprise me if they were all oblivious to the election.”Their disregard could be tied to federal rules on student aid that might penalize them if they registered to vote in Oxford, he says. In addition, he says, roughly half the students hail from outside of Mississippi and thus, have only tenuous ties to local politics.A dream deferredWadkins spent the 2015–16 academic year in Washington. D.C., as a science policy fellow for Representative Steve Cohen (D–TN), and in idle moments during the campaign he saw himself returning to the nation’s capital along with David Baria, a Democratic state senator who was challenging incumbent Senator Roger Wicker (R).“I had this vision of, man, if David would win the Senate seat and I could win the House, we could do so much for the state. But ‘twas not to be.” Baria lost by margin of 59% to 39%. “We both knew that this would be a Don Quixote thing, in which you just shut out that part of your brain that’s saying you’re going to lose and try to win.”Despite his resounding defeat, Wadkins says people have urged him to run again. Although he has not ruled out the possibility, he sees a formidable hurdle in his path.“We need to solve the [campaign financing] problem first,” he says. “And I don’t see it fixing itself. So, for me—and for any readers of Science thinking of running for Congress—the question is: ‘Can you raise at least $1 million, and probably a lot more?’ If the answer is no, it’s going to be very hard to be elected.”In the meantime, Wadkins has already reallocated the time he spent on the campaign trail. It was a smooth transition because he never stopped being an academic scientist.“After lunch, I’m going to review a [Journal of the American Chemical Society] paper that I got at the end of the campaign and that is almost overdue,” he said. “The only reason I agreed to review it is because it’s actually a very interesting paper in my field. It’s pretty good, although there are some things that need to be fixed.” A U.S. biochemistry professor takes his political shot—and misses by a lot Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) His bid for a seat in the U.S. Congress had just gone down in flames. But instead of rehashing his election night defeat, Randy Wadkins says he spent the next morning describing “oxidative phosphorylation electron transport in mitochondria” to a class of chemistry majors at The University of Mississippi in Oxford.Wadkins’s lecture on the molecular cycle creating adenosine triphosphate highlighted his unique status among the 49 candidates with training in a science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) or medical field who ran this year for the U.S. House of Representatives. Not only was Wadkins the only academic researcher in the bunch, but he also kept working as a tenured professor of biochemistry during his 18-month campaign.Wadkins, a progressive Democrat, lost to the conservative Republican incumbent, Representative Trent Kelly, by more than a two-to-one margin. (Only seven of the STEM candidates won seats.) A heavy underdog from the start, Wadkins couldn’t raise nearly enough money to get his message out to the conservative voters that dominate his rural district in northeastern Mississippi. But having to wear two hats certainly didn’t help.last_img read more