Tomorrow will be the 74th anniversary of the 1938 Hurricane, the horrific standard by which Long Island and New England storms are still measured. A show of amateur photographs taken in and around East Hampton Village in the days following Sept. 21, 1938, give a sense of the devastation — but they tell only a small part of the story and cannot be considered a prediction of what this place would look like if and when a hurricane of equal strength strikes. Hundreds of people were killed as the 1938 Hurricane raged ashore on Long Island and in coastal Connecticut and Rhode Island. Thousands of houses were destroyed. Flooding devastated parts of New Hampshire,Vermont, and Massachusetts.

    If a storm of comparable power arrived here tomorrow, the damage would be orders of magnitude greater because of the sharp, if ill-considered, increase in shoreline construction since the 1930s. Though the loss of life would be far less, thanks to improved weather forecasts, the cost to insurers, utility companies, and governments responsible for cleaning up and repairing infrastructure would be astronomical. 

    Disruption of everyday life would drag on for weeks. Then would come the debate about whether to allow property owners to return to harm’s way, rebuilding (or not) billions of dollars in lost waterfront real estate.

    Sometimes we at this newspaper feel a bit like Chicken Little, warning again and again that calamity is nigh — only in this case, the sky is actually falling; it’s just impossible to say exactly when.

   Building on the success this summer of the checkpoints aimed at motorists who may have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol, local police would do well to take on another high-risk factor on the roads — distracted drivers.

    Backed up by additional funding and officers from the Suffolk force, several South Fork police departments joined efforts during the high season, netting dozens of suspected drunken drivers. As with a past initiative to check compliance with the state seatbelt law, the surprise checkpoints helped spread the word that even a few drinks could land a driver in a heap of trouble. Now the departments should take on cellphone users and others who daily put the rest of us at risk.

    Nearly everyone has a story about distracted drivers. It is a rare day that a commute to work or trip to school with the kids isn’t marred by some jerk’s texting, reading e-mail, or even Web surfing, putting others, and themselves, at risk. An increasing body of research shows that talking on a cellphone while behind the wheel can reduce the time it takes for drivers to react to hazards to a degree comparable to that caused by a few alcoholic drinks.

    According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, 3,092 people were killed in the United States in accidents involving a distracted driver in 2010 — about 10 percent of all highway deaths — an increased number presumably related to the use of handheld electronic devices. By comparison, the transportation administration reported, there were roughly 10,200 deaths linked to the consumption of alcohol in 2010.

    New York State has banned texting while driving along with talking on handheld phones, but it is up to local jurisdictions to get the message out. Visible and aggressive enforcement is in order; lives depend on it.

    Suffolk has not entirely ignored the problem, particularly of texting and driving. Legislator William Spencer of Huntington has been pushing a partnership with AT&T called “It Can Wait,” designed to teach young people about the risks. According to a press release this week issued by Mr. Spencer’s office, the county police is “committed” to increasing enforcement — something there needs to be much more of, if the widespread disregard for the law on East Hampton’s roads is any indication.

   Mitt Romney seems like a nice-enough guy, which is why the secretly recorded statement in which he insulted and belittled nearly half of American voters while speaking to a group of big-dollar donors in Florida in May is shocking. At the same time, his full-throated embrace of the worst of class and ethnicity-baiting ideas — and wrong ones, to boot — could be seen as a predictable outcome of an election cycle that favors attacks rather than matters of substance.

    Mother Jones reported that the comments were made at a May 17 $50,000-a-plate fund-raiser in Boca Raton, Fla., hosted by Marc Leder, a wealthy financier. To recap them briefly, Mr. Romney said 47 percent of United States voters “pay no income tax,” are “dependent upon government,” and believe themselves “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.” These Americans, Mr. Romney said, were going to vote for the Obama-Biden ticket “no matter what” and, presumably, not worth his attention. He went on to say that had his father “been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot at winning this.” (The comments were heard in the recording of the event provided to the magazine.)

    The path seems direct between the Republican-controlled House of Representatives’ declaring war on the Barack Obama presidency, through the bitter primary months, to Mr. Romney’s expressing the view that almost half of Americans do not deserve his attention while some other portion vote mindlessly along ethnic lines.

        The conservative columnist David Brooks ably refuted Mr. Romney’s statement this week, writing in The New York Times that the “people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high-school degrees.” So much for, as he wrote, Mr. Romney’s imaginary division of the nation into “makers” and “moochers.”

This is not the only intemperate statement made by Mr. Romney in recent weeks. His rapid and, to many, distasteful, response to the killing of a U.S. ambassador in Libya underscores the say-anything nature of contemporary politics. In the vacuum that stands in for reasonable discourse, what Mr. Romney utters is, sadly, par for the course.

    If recent weeks indicate anything, this is not a high point for politics in this country.

   Rarely does a federal policy have as direct a potentially positive impact on the South Fork as does one put in place earlier this year by President Obama to allow some children of undocumented migrants a way to avoid deportation and work here legally. Called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, it allows immigrants 30 and younger who have lived in the United States for five or more years to apply for a Social Security number and a two-year, renewable work permit.

    So far, the number of people signing up has been less than expected; at least 1.2 million people could benefit, according to low estimates. Part of the less-than-expected enthusiasm has to do with the presidential election. Mitt Romney has said that he would “supersede” the program with one of his own. Other speculation is that some younger immigrants fear that sharing their personal information with authorities could lead to trouble for family members also here illegally. The government has gone to some lengths to dissuade that notion, insisting that personal details will remain private.

    Critics have said that the executive order to create the Deferred Action program was a political stunt to shore up the president’s support among Latino voters. This may be true to a degree, but the program is still something that some South Fork residents should seriously consider taking advantage of. Law-abiding business owners could gain as well from the program, which would broaden the pool of available workers while reducing the headaches and legal risks of using illegal labor. Tomorrow at 7 p.m. at the Bridgehampton National Bank in Bridgehampton, Congressman Tim Bishop is to host an informational meeting for those interested in applying.

    In the end, deferred action is an inadequate substitute for a comprehensive and sensible national immigration reform, something President George W. Bush backed but for which he was vilified from the right. It is, however, a reasonable initial step.

   Hard numbers are difficult to come by, but our hunch is that the police checkpoints intended to curb drunken driving this summer were a success. Word filtered out that even a couple of drinks could land someone behind bars for the night and result in fines or the loss of driving privileges for months, even on a first offense. This is good news for those who prefer safer roads, and it merits a tip of the hat for the many local officers, as well those from other departments, who put in long nights here to make this happen.

    Over Labor Day weekend, for example, Suffolk County officers helped log eight arrests on Saturday night alone in Southampton Village. East Hampton Town police had 19 D.W.I. arrests during the weekend. In mid-July, Operation Nitecap, in which state, county, town, and Sag Harbor and East Hampton Village police staffed two checkpoints, resulted in 20 arrests in an eight-hour period. Police were helped by money from a county Stop-D.W.I. fund, which helps pay for the overtime required when additional officers are called in during the long processing of most drunken driving cases.

    Unlike the usual handful of late-night stops in which an officer will spot a swerving car or broken taillight on a vehicle driven by one of the usual suspects, the checkpoints produced a wide cross-section of allegedly drunken drivers. Outrage from some, however, greeted the police effort. One person in high dudgeon even wrote to several South Fork newspapers protesting that a psychiatrist who found himself in handcuffs in July had been subjected to something “right out of Nazi Germany.” This was nonsense, of course, but it spoke to a certain sense of entitlement among some of our summer visitors.

    Having read in these pages about far too many motor vehicle accidents over the years, we know that the view that a couple of drinks can’t hurt you when you are behind the wheel is far from accurate. We applaud the law-enforcement initiative and think there should be more of them. There are still far too many drunken drivers on the roads. Efforts like these help get the message out that sometimes it is better to hand the car keys to someone else or call a cab.

   “No comment” was more or less how a top official responded this week when asked why the Town of East Hampton had not lodged a single charge against a man facing 160 counts in Southampton Town, where he is alleged to have run illegal, for-profit party houses similar to those he is said to have organized here.

    Lee Hnetinka was accused this summer of subleasing as many as 10 houses in East Hampton and Southampton Towns in the spring for after-prom parties and other events for which he charged guests hundreds of dollars and allegedly encouraged underage drinking. As many as 98 young revelers were said to have been holed up in one rented Amagansett house before they were discovered and sent home by its owners.

    In Southampton, Mr. Hnetinka was charged with multiple violations of the town’s tough and clearly worded rental regulations. If nothing else, the events in East Hampton might have been considered illegal commercial uses of private residences and in violation of the mass-gathering law, not to mention the allegation that minors imbibed. But nothing whatsoever happened here.

    To remind the reader, the standings are 160 to 0, with Southampton in the lead. What is behind this staggering deficit for the Town of East Hampton is difficult to fathom. As we noted, explanations have not been forthcoming. Inquiries were distinctly unwelcome as well.

     The affair highlights lackluster performance of the East Hampton Town Ordinance Enforcement Department and the town attorney. It also suggests that the members of the town board have been oblivious; they too have let the matter pass without response. Regardless of the reasons, whether indifference or lethargy, the message is that East Hampton Town cannot or will not enforce its laws.

    The Town of Southampton deserves credit for leading the way. It is a pity no one on this side of Town Line Road seems eager to follow.

“No comment” was more or less how a top official responded this week when asked why the Town of East Hampton had not lodged a single charge against a man facing 160 counts in Southampton Town, where he is alleged to have run illegal, for-profit party houses similar to those he is said to have organized here.

    Lee Hnetinka was accused this summer of subleasing as many as 10 houses in East Hampton and Southampton Towns in the spring for after-prom parties and other events for which he charged guests hundreds of dollars and allegedly encouraged underage drinking. As many as 98 young revelers were said to have been holed up in one rented Amagansett house before they were discovered and sent home by its owners.

    In Southampton, Mr. Hnetinka was charged with multiple violations of the town’s tough and clearly worded rental regulations. If nothing else, the events in East Hampton might have been considered illegal commercial uses of private residences and in violation of the mass-gathering law, not to mention the allegation that minors imbibed. But nothing whatsoever happened here.

    To remind the reader, the standings are 160 to 0, with Southampton in the lead. What is behind this staggering deficit for the Town of East Hampton is difficult to fathom. As we noted, explanations have not been forthcoming. Inquiries were distinctly unwelcome as well.

     The affair highlights lackluster performance of the East Hampton Town Ordinance Enforcement Department and the town attorney. It also suggests that the members of the town board have been oblivious; they too have let the matter pass without response. Regardless of the reasons, whether indifference or lethargy, the message is that East Hampton Town cannot or will not enforce its laws.

    The Town of Southampton deserves credit for leading the way. It is a pity no one on this side of Town Line Road seems eager to follow.

   Peering out of an office window that overlooks Main Street and the East Hampton Library late on Labor Day, idly contemplating the relentless line of traffic headed west, we noticed a car trying to get out of the library’s driveway that looked as if might be stuck there forever.

    Several people were walking on the sidewalk. When he could, the young man at the wheel edged the car forward, first across the pedestrian walkway and then a few inches into the road, until he could go no farther without someone hitting him. For all the drivers passing by cared, his car might as well have been invisible.

    Minutes later, when we looked again, the young man’s car was still sitting there. And then, surprise, a Mercedes — not, perhaps, what  you might expect — slowed down and stopped, letting the trapped driver, with a big thank-you wave of his hand, escape.

   State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and other top Albany officials are benefiting from salacious allegations about Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez, a Brooklyn Democrat, who is accused of sexually harassing subordinates. But the charges are a distraction from what should be the main event — that Mr. Silver, with the apparent involvement of the state attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, and the comptroller, Thomas DiNapoli, authorized $103,000 in hush money for Mr. Lopez’s accusers — from an unregulated taxpayer-funded account — and another $35,000 from Mr. Lopez himself. Mr. Lopez is accused of inappropriate physical contact with two women who worked in his office, as well as off-color comments about their appearance and clothing. A Downstate district attorney has taken up the matter and opened a special-prosecutor’s investigation into whether Mr. Lopez broke any laws. Separately, the state’s Joint Commission on Public Ethics has begun an initial review. Mr. Lopez has said he did nothing wrong and has rejected calls for him to retire.

     New York State government has been a model of corruption and dysfunction going back decades, despite repeated commissions and efforts to turn it around. If ever there were a scandal primed to take down the sad status quo, and offer a chance of meaningful correction, this was it — which is why Mr. Silver and many others with vested interests in keeping things the way they are would like to see attention focused on the line Mr. Lopez may have crossed. The distraction reaches even beyond Albany, with United States Senator Charles Schumer, like Mr. Silver a Democrat, having joined mounting calls for Mr. Lopez to resign. Not to make light of the allegations, which are troubling, but Mr. Schumer, Mr. Silver, and the others are obscuring something more important.

    What is not in dispute is that Mr. Silver, with what seems to have been the collusion of other Albany leaders, was able to spend more than $100,000 in taxpayer money in an attempt to protect one of their own. It is little wonder that they would prefer to see the spotlight shined on Mr. Lopez.

     If Albany is to retain any credibility, it must separate the charges against Mr. Lopez from the greater issue of a government culture in which cover-up payments can be made with the full knowledge of top officials. Mr. Lopez should be censured and even jailed if the allegations are true, reserving the right, if possible, to give voters the final call on his political future. It is Mr. Silver and those involved in the cover up who must go.

   At a time when the East Hampton School Board has been cutting back on services outside of the classroom, notably scaling back adult continuing education and trying to eliminate the continued free use of facilities for non-school sports associations, it is unfortunate that it would find the money to fund a part-time public relations position.

    In a unanimous vote last month, the board agreed to hire a former East Hampton Star reporter to prepare the district newsletter and update its Web site. For this, the district will pay up to $40,000. This is likely more than the amount the district will save by asking outside groups to pay for custodians when school gyms or fields are used. There undoubtedly also are numerous in-school programs and services that were trimmed when the board went about necessary cost-cutting last spring that could benefit from such a sum. 

    Despite contrary statements from some board members, this is not the first time the district has sought help in putting its spin on the message. For several years about a decade ago, the district paid tens of thousands of dollars a year to an UpIsland public relations firm with no discernable benefit. Later, it hired a part-time staffer to write feel-good stories about the schools with an objective of getting them published in local newspapers. That effort was largely ignored as well.

    Looking at it from another side, however, the criticism heard from time to time that the news outlets ignore the good things going on in classrooms in favor of dry budget stories and varsity sports coverage is valid. With limited staff, local media outlets like The Star make decisions about what to cover and when, and we could all do a better job. But the answer is not hiring a P.R. person to spoon-feed us and the others stories. School administrators and department heads should keep in mind that newsrooms are always hungry for new ideas; story pitches are only a phone call or e-mail away.

    In a side note, the new P.R. hire came at the same time as Springs School parents were scrambling to come up with money to pay East Hampton to allow their middle school-age students to participate in extracurricular sports such as football and soccer. One wonders if the board could have instead reduced or pro-rated the Springs fee. Though the tendency among East Hampton School Board members is to think only of their own taxpayers, this is a close-knit group of hamlets and villages, with family ties frequently extending across district lines. Moreover, many of today’s Springs kids are going to be East Hampton High School’s standouts in years to come, both academically and in competitive sports. Doing right by them early on is a wise investment.

    It is shortsighted of the district to create ill will by its tight-fistedness among some of the same community members who it will turn to in May to approve its next budget. Massaging its message may not be enough if a close election looms.

   As the traditional end of the high season approaches, it is worth taking stock of how things went and whether the South Fork is on the right path.

    Think of Montauk with its jam-packed bars affecting nearby residences. Think of Indian Wells Beach that became so popular with 20-something beer bashers that some of its regulars no longer found it attractive. Think of the racket from the airport, the dread of a trip to the grocery store. Think of massive, illegal parties in rented houses whose hosts East Hampton Town officials failed to prosecute.

    Consider for a moment, if you will, that for many of us, the only tranquillity that can be found any longer between Memorial Day and Labor Day is on our own or friends’ properties — and in too many cases, not even there.

    If anything, what we have been hearing from friends and acquaintances is that this summer has been one for the books in terms of crowds, noise, traffic, and annoyances. Though we have said it before, it seems that East Hampton Town and Village and their surroundings need no more of anything in July and August — not one more bicycle, high-end shop, pricy restaurant, house, or weekend visitor.

    This might sound like anathema to those who think more is better, those whose bread is buttered by the real estate business or who own or work in businesses that are only seasonal. But there comes a time when more growth will only hurt the place. Have we hit that point? It sure seemed like it this summer.

    Money and the pursuit thereof has been ascendant this year. It need not be so, however, and a tilt back toward those who consider this place or want to make it home would be welcome.