OCR Text |
Show DAILY HERALD 2 Sunday, March 26, 2006 EDITORIALS EDITORIAL BOARD Albert J. Manzi, President & Publisher Randy Wright, Executive Editor Donald W. Meyers, Editorial page editor Nancy Hale, Public adviser OUR IN VIEW THERE ARE TOO MANY OF THEM TO COUNT... Water plentiful but won’tlast t appears that northern Utah is looking at another year eerny from a severe Reports show that snow- pack is above average — not as highas in previous years, an improvement during the late clean off driveways whena push broom could do the job. But attempts to get Utahns to start paying morefor their water have failed. When then-Gov. Mike Leavitt contemplated taking away the state subsidyon water, rural water users complained it would hurt their efforts to build new wa- 1990s when Utah was in the grip of a drought that drained local reservoirs tocritical levels. The general picture for this year is that ter projects, even though Leavitt proposed funding to cover those our watersupply looks as though MostUtahnsare accustomed to paying less-than-market-value it will be above average, allowing Utah to regain what it lost during the drought. Full recovery isstill a wayoff, but we're getting better. During the drought, Utahns were spurred to think seriously about water conservation. We all S, prices for their water, even though they pay anyway through prop- ertytaxes. Until the Legislature gets the political courage to remove most, rememberthe “Slow the Flow” if notall, the subsidies from water, there will be little real incentive to campaigns and channel marker conserve. * buoyssitting high and dryin Deer Creek Reservoir. We should not forget those images and messages now that we've got water again. Droughts comein cycles and we Part ofthe solutionis simple edu- cation, We'd like to see waterutili- much the wateruser's bill would be if he had to paythefull cost. conservation has ‘never been employed: Utahns haveyet to pay the actualprice for the water they use. jolt ofreality, especially when they The typical waterbill reflects only 49 percentofthe cost of actually bringing that water to the home. The restis hiddenin sales tax and property tax subsidies, as well as federal grants. Such discounts don't encourage conservation. They do the opposite by mak_ ing water seem cheap. Anyone whohadto pay actual cost for water would be morecare- ful. Waste would be seen as money downthe drain, and some may think twice aboutusing a hose to Another wayutilities might encourage waterconservationis to establish a sliding scale in which \ water wastersgethit with higher conserve. Waterislife in the Great Basin. Weneed to conserveit, especially when we're going throe atime of aquatic prosperity becauseit is onlya matteroftime before the lean, dry years return. voted on,or even properly written March 24, 2006 down.It doesn’t get to the issue of what to do about temporary Inits essence, the compromise — patterned ona proposal by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. — allows un- documented workersliving here to apply for residency permits, on the condition that they prove they are employed andpay a hefty fine for breaking the law. They would then workers who want to come here in the future, andit doesn't solve the border controlissues either. Amazingly, somein the Senate and the Housearestill pushing to build a wall along the 2,000-mile US-Mexico border, a project that — aside fromits unpleasants bolism — wouldcost billions lars (a 14-mile wall near San Diego cost $70 million alone), would deal with onlypart of the problem (40 percent of the undocumented are Even more worrying are the complicated politics of making any immigration deal stick. Already, the immigration debate has be- comea forum for 2008 campaign jockeying, as possible presidential contender Sen.Bill Frist. R-Tenn., tries to distance himself from pos- enforcementeither. that bodes ill for anyone who wantsa realistic solution to the problemof the undocumented.Still, a breakthrough is a breakthrough, howeverfragile, andthe senatorson the Judiciary Committee,led by Arlen Specter, R-Pa., are to be commended for reachingit. MEDIA VOICES ReachofIslamic Law: Afghans should protect non-Muslims sibility of a death sentence for Might Whatrl should ls Tammie law playiin beet government? ‘The Afghan constitution, which was approved ii n 2004 under U.S. auspices, gr ~. In modern times, most Muslim nations have kept their legal codes apostasy, might slip the hangman’s noose ona technicality. A state prosecutor in Afghanistan saysthat the 41-year-old Christian convert may be mentally unfit to stand trial. That would be a welcome endto an awful situation — but it would not solve is underroblem fa ‘aliban’ ited freedom of religion to non-Muslims andstates that “no law can be contrary to the beliefs and proves of the sacred religion ofIslam. Tout recreation, work ethic What'sthe best slogan for Utah? “Great Basin playground.” “The get-itdonestate.” during peacetime(1857-1861) and was denied statehood from 1847 until 1896; our newless-boring flag should feature a clenchedfist (with raised middle fin- ger) centered over a newstate slogan of “Up Yours!” On second thought, maybe we should just keep the currentflag. I really don't think it's any more boring than anyone else's. . » Neil Mitchell, Provo David 0. Clark, Provo How to comment More important problems thanslogans,flag design Why-are we-concerning ourselves oversuch a triviality as this slogan business? And howmany of mytax dollars are going to be sunkinto this? I don't think that changing oursloganorflag will really have that muchaffect on the economyandis a waste of good energy E-mailletters to dhletters@heraldextra.com Total votes: 236 Current poll: “Should daylight-saving time be made permanent?” Pelling Is open at cur Web site until Thursday at 11:45 p.m. andtimeon the part of the government. Aren't there some moreimportant crime issues weshould be dealing with? I think if we madeourcities safer and more pleasantto be in, that would draw lot morepeopleto this state than a slogan change. » Laura C. Wald, rove Use flag to rememberIndian contribution to Utah history I think the slogans fine, but the flag definitely needs to be redesigned. I think SAP ew it should be simple andeasily recogniz- able, and I would like it if it reflected our Native Americanheritage. So I think our flag should be an Indian petroglyph. Jake Marino,' Park City Utah flag, slogan should . reflect attitude toward feds Fax to 344-2985 Mail to P.O. Box 717 Provo, UT 84603. » Letters must include the author's full name, address and daytime phone number, » Weprefer shorterletters, 100 and 200 words. Letters maybe edited for length. » Writers are encouraged to include their occupation and other personalinformation. » Becauseof the volumeofletters, wecannot acknowledge unpublishedletters. » Letters become the property of the Daily Herald. Since Utah has been the only state ways), and would not prevent peo- mood to talk about anything but t looks as if Abdul Rahman,the Afghan man facing the pos- “Should the state flag be redesigned?” PAUL K. MCMASTERS to get across, as they do now. it doesn’tlook like an “amnesty” March 23, 2006 waheraldextra com ple from using tunnels and ladders sible presidential contender McCain,largely by sounding a much harderline on enforcement. Since the House doesn’t seem to be in a From the Dallas Morning News, - ments wereceived: invaded and occupied byfederal troops Heraldpoll Recenth: we asked the following question at the Daily Herald Web site. thoughtto havearrived in other goto the back of the green card line — behind thoseapplying legally — and waitforcitizenship. President Bush has alwayssaid he would endorse sucha solution as long as that rewards lawbreakers. During anewsconference this week, he seemed to say that the Senate solu- tion might be precisely that: “People whohave beenhere need toget in . line, like everybody else,” he confirmed. This is, of course,a very fragile sort of agreement.It hasn’t been Editor's note: The Daily Herald recently asked readersif Utah's state flag should be changed and what should be the state slogan. Here are the com- rates than people who take steps to From The Washington Post, reakthrough”is a word that should always be used with extremecare,at least whendiscussing immigration reform, Nevertheless,it may be warranted; The Senate Judiciary Committee, which had been bogged downfor several weekstrying to produce an immigration bill, appearsto have reached a consensus. ‘The deal doesn'tsolveall of the problems,but it does atleast try to solve the most difficult: the fate of the estimated 12 million people who. . live in this country illegally. HERALD POLL This might give some people a realize that part of their property tax actually goestopayfor water used by themselves and bytheir neighbors, MEDIA VOICES - Compromiseplan better solution than building wall i ae waterbill explaining the subsidies, where they come fromand how could find ourselvesin troubleif wearenot careful. Onetool that would encourage See ties put out a statement with each separate from Islamic law,but as the experience of drafting newconstitutions for democratic Afghanistan and Iraq shows,popular sentiment favors amore integrated approach. Whichbringsus to the Poel Rahman case.Evenif Rahman is free by reason of mental nines the principle ofreligiousfreedom under the new constitution remains unsettled. ... President Bush said Wednesdaythathe was “deeply troubled” by the Rahman situation, adding that it was not an example of the kind ofvalues he talks about bringing to that part of the world. Bushis right to worry, and his administration should pressure the Afghans to reform their legal system to protect future Abdul Rahmans. Morethan one man’slife is. onthe line. Secrecy push bad newsforgoodjournalism hat if the practice of journalism becamea crime? Imaginethe possibilities. Computerscreenscarrying news and commentary would blink and go blank. Wireservice bureaus would close up shop. TV newsstudio lights would sputter and go dark. With a heavy shudder, printing presses would grind to a stop. Ah,blessedsilence. Ah,blissful ignorance. an Ah,shrugging off the shackles of freeSuch a flight of fancy is preposterous, of course. Yet we cannotdismiss the reality that for an increasing numberof journalists subpoenas, grandjury inquiries, court battles, hugelegal bills and possiblyjail cells could be the reward for doing well in their constitutional calling. Right now, morethan 30 journalists in half a dozen different cases, criminal andcivil, are confronted with subpoenas thatwill force them to either reveal their confidential sources or go to jail to protect them. These journalists didn’t commit a crime. They did commit themselvesto protecting the sources whohelped them to bringto the nation’s attention importantinformation about threats to our freedom orrisks to our safety: warrantless spying an American citizens, secret interrogation centers for terrorism suspectsin foreign countries, the mishandling of nuclear secrets and investigations of anthrax poisonings and California Muslims suspected ofties to terrorists. Manyprofessionals within federal law information before a Senate committee and madenosecretofhis stance:“It is my aim.andit is my hope that wewill witness a grandjury investigation with reporters present being asked to reveal whois leakingthis information.” Senator Pat Roberts, R-Kan., chairmanof the Senateintelligence committee, sayshe is interested in a law that bearsa painful resemblance to Great Britain’s Official Secrets Act, which allowsfor the prosecution and muzzling of journalists andcitizens whoreceive sensitive information. His counterpart in the House, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich.,is similarly predisposed toward such an exception to ourfree-speech freedoms, Officials of the U.S. Justice Departmentare not waiting forlegislative action. They apparently believe they can accomplish the samething in the courts. Remarkably,a federal judge has encouraged their constitutional adventurism with an extraordinary ruling. On Jan.20, JudgeT.S.Ellis II] sentenced Lawrence Franklin,a mid-level Pentagonanalyst,to 12 and one-half yearsin prison for providing classified information to two lobbyists. That was not so remarkable an outcome, except that JudgeEllis went further and endorsed the federal prosecutors’ assertions that the recipients of that information also could be prosecuted. “Persons who haveunauthorized possession, who come into unauthorized possessionofclassified information, must abide by the law. That applies to. academics,lawyers,journalists, profesenforcement agencies no doubt would sors, whatever,” JudgeEllis said from “prefer to devotetheir energies to fighthis sentencing stateing terrorism, crime and ‘ion than the bench ment. The law he refersto is the Espioto expend additional resources tracking downwhistleblowersand journalists. nage Act of 1917. Thus, what had been a somewhat Manypolitical leaders, on the other hand, have seemed morealarmed by leaks and - obscure case is now making waves newsstories than by the policies and acthroughout the nation’s capital and tions that have provoked them. elsewhere as the tworecipients of Last month, CIA Director Porter Franklin's information, Steve Rosen and Gossrailed against leaksofsensitive Keith Wei: , former emp) of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, headtotrial, scheduled to begin on April 25 before JudgeEllis. If the judge follows his initial state- mentand convicts them,the impact on Americansengaged in protectedFirst Amendmentactivities will be immediate and profound,given the pace, scope and natureof secret-making within the federal governmenttoday. As a defense motionto dismiss asserts: “The government's construction of [the Espionage Act] would allow for the punishmentof anyprivatecitizen whoobtains classified information — regardless of how or why — and thendiscloses it to another privatecitizen.” EvensomeJustice Department officials concedethat prosecution ofa journalist under the Espionage Act would raise “legitimate and ots issues.” Yet they press on. If the approachthat federal prosecutors and, thus far, one federal judge embraceis allowed to stand, Americans will movea long step towarda society in wuichcitizens are permitted to receive only that information which the coven authorizes or concocts. ‘That maybe a rational reading of the law, but it certainly. would be a woeful misapprehension of First Amendment principles and the traditions that hold a democracytogether. Welivein a timeof fear, of course: fear ofterrorism,fear offailure, fear that the stench of desperation or abuse will saturate the political air. It drives our leaders’ obsession with secrecy and our citizenry’s acceptanceofit. It becomes the job of journalists, therefore, to remindus from timeto timethat secrecy and security are not alwaysthe same thing. » Paul K. McMasters is the First Amendment ombudsmanat the Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center. He can be reached at f Org. |