OCR Text |
Show Opinions Wednesday, July 15, 1981, THE HERALD, Provo, Utah—Page 33 The Herald, its readers, syndicated columnists and cartoonists discuss vital issues The Herald Comments M. Stanton Evans Forget MX Plan; Motorists Need to ‘Buckle Up’ A lot of American motorists have a tendency to gamble with their own lives, judging by poor response to campaigns for voluntary use of seatbelts. Nationally, safety officials estimate auto restraint systems could prevent a minimum of 9,000 more deaths annually, says Clarence Johnson, director of special programs at the Denver regional office of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation. But the averageseatbelt usage ranges only 8 to 12 percent ... and as low as 5 percent in some surveys, Johnson said. Lamentably, motorists generally are apathetic to appeals for seat belt use. The Insurance Institute for HighwaySafety said in recent news dispatches it has reviewed more than a dozen voluntary campaigns worldwide since 1968 ... and found in all but two eases there was no discerned effect on belt usage. In the remaining cases — Sweden and Ontario, Canada — belt usage increased 10 percent and 2 percent, respectively. The national traffic fatality rate, after reaching a low of 3.22 per million vehicle miles traveled in 1976, has been rising steadily. One of every 60 people born today will be killed in a motor vehicle crashif projections cometrue. Utah study of fatal crashes in 1980 showed that of the drivers and passengerskilled, only 6 percent wore seat belts. Ninety-four percent of those fatally injured were not wearing the belts. The fatal crashes involved 761 persons and 715 of these were notusing restraints. Besides reducing fatalities, seat belts and shoulder harnesses cut the severity of injuries by at least 40 percent, say safety officials. The useofchild restraint Build Good Defense seats also improve markedly the chances for survival or lessened injuries in a crasn. One type seat is designed for infants up to a year old; another for toddlers up to 4 years. When correctly installed, these are anchored in the car, usually by a seat belt. In California, child restraint usage runs about 16-18 percent, according to a recent survey — higher than for seat belts. But the percentages vary y state. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is mounting a $5 million campaign to urge use of safety belts. Wise motorists will heed the message. Washington Window How Perfect’s the Nomination? By STEVE GERSTEL WASHINGTON (UPI) — In naming Sandra O’Connorto the Supreme And malesenators, no matter how dedicated to equality among the sexes,just are not capableat a hear- ‘Whoa -1 SAy- GUyosAA,” ’ Court, President Reagan displayed a remarkablepolitical adroitness. fect wastheselection, that, literally within hours of the appoint- ing of roughing up a woman as they are a man. The second major ingredient is that Reagan managed to so badly isolate the fringe right that the Moral Majority and its fellow travelers became nonfactors in the confirmation proceedings. There was the usual weeping and wailing, the outraged cries of double-cross and the threats of political revenge. To the fringe right, Mrs. O’Connor just was not letter-perfect on abortion and the ment, Mrs. O'Connor was assured confirmation by the Senate. Thepossibility of a hitch exists, as it always does in the nomination of a person to lifetime seat on the nation's highest court. The routine FBI check is not com.peleted. The American Bar Associa- tionstill has to readyits recommendations, And the Senate Judiciary Committee must conduct hearings. But unless something totally unforeseen develops, Mrs. O'Connor will moveinto thatall-male bastion when the Supreme Court convenes on the first Mondayin October,fortified by an overwhelming vote of approval by the Senate. More than a week after Reagan announced his choice, no voice in the Senate has been raised against Mrs. O'Connor and many have strongly endorsed her. Howdid Reaganhit on a nominee so politically perfect as his first nomination for the court — a “‘hardline” conservative that had some liberal Democrats in rhapsody? One ingredient, undoubtedly, is that Reagan finally broke the barrier that has denied a woman a seat on the Supreme Courtsince its inception. In doing so, Reagan redeemed a major campaign promise in which said that “one of the first’ nominations to the court would be a woman. He named one thefirst opportunity he had. To those voters sensitive to sex discrimination, the appointment must be a milestone. Manypresidents have been active in support of Equal. Rights Amendment. OnEEE equal opportunity for women — only Reagan has named one to the SupremeCourt. That,in itself. was certain to help still opposition and. actually, drew high praise from liberal Democrats such as Edward Kennedy and Howard Metzenbaum. Yet, despite the vauntedpolitical power of Moral Majority and the others, the outrage has not seeped into the Senate chamber. No one senator — not Helms. not Denton, not East, not Hatch — has joined in the refrain. Some are holding back, waiting for the hearings to decide. but none have yet said they would vote against the Arizona judge. And others, good solid conservativeslike Alan Sirepson of Wyoming, have goneoutof their wayto attack the conceptof the “‘one issue” litmus test. There is some speculation that Reagan,realizing that Mrs. O’Connor would come underfire for her public abortion stands. orchestrated the muted response from elected conservatives. Andif he did enlist help. he found an able and eager volunteerin salty old Barry Goldwater of Arizona. Goldwater conducted a news conference and made two speeches extolling Mrs. O'Connor and, in the process, said, ‘‘Every good Christian should kick Falwellright in the ass.”” WASHINGTON — Today weoffer, conceptual error made at the very free of charge, an instantsolution to one of the weightier problems confronting the Reagan administration and the country — the problemof the MX missile The MX is a transportable missile beginning In this case, the seminal confusion is the assumption the United States should not have any defenses against in-coming Soviet missiles. that, mament lobby theories about a “balance of terror’’ between ve United States and the US.S.R., which each possess the power o obliterate the other and neither has an effective defense against the onslaught. To achievethisstate, it is considered desirable the U.S. civilian population be deprived of defenses against potential nuclear devastation, which reassures the Soviets of our good intentions and encourages them to follow suit. While it may seem improbable that anything so palpably stupid could be thebasis of official policy, rest assured this has been the major according to different scenarios, could be moved around by truckortrain or even affixed to somekind of rail system of its own. It would be designed to travel rapid ly and secretly from place to place, so a potential adversary could never be quite sure of its location. Under a plan approved by President Carter, approximately 200 of these missiles would be shuttled around among 4,600 shelters in sparsely settled regions of Utah and Nevada, connected by 9,000 miles of newly constructed highways. The cost of the arrangement has been variously estimated at $33 billion to $68 billion — making it, as U.S. Newsavers, ‘the single most expensive weapons program in the nation’s history.” The point of this rigmarole is to hide the missiles from an enemy — meaning the Soviet Union — which might be tempted to knock out our deterrent with a single pre-emptive strike. The elaborate shell gameis said to be necessary because our existing 1,052 Titan and Minuteman missiles are thought to be increasingly vulnerable to Soviet multiple-warhead rockets. As might. be expected of a program that is at once novel, exensive, and defense-oriented, the IX idea has come undersevereattack, and the Reagan administration, while favoring the concept, is reviewing the ‘busing mode” approved by Carter. Such reconsideration is strongly encouraged by residents of Utah and Nevada, who don’t want the MX onthe premises, and who are represented by Senators Jake Garn and Paul Laxalt, both close to Reagan. All of whichis a prime exampleof the confusions that inevitably arise whenever a major strategy.is grounded on a mistaken premise. When the assumptions behind a policy are in error, twists and turns that aim to correctfor the original difficulty frequently serve to make the problem worse. Often the difficulty can be solved, if atall, only by going back and correcting the This assumption derives from disar. governing principle of American strategy for upwardsof a decade.It has been in obedience to such notions that we have engaged in SALT negotiations with the Soviets, renounced development of antimissile defenses (ABMs) which could seek out and knock downincoming projectiles, and let our air defenses lapse into virtual nonexistence. It has been our refusal to develop an ABM which — combined with trade policies that provide the advanced technology necessary for modern missile guidance to the Soviets — has served to make our land-based weapons increasingly vulnerable to enemy attack. Having deprived ourcivil pulation of effective defenses in order to gamble everything on our deterrent, we suddenly find we haveleft the deterrent open to attack as well. Hence the need for an “‘MX"’ expedient to hide from missiles that we can’t knock down. This is piling one absurdity on another. The obvious answerto this mass of confusions is to undo the original error which says we shouldn't have any defenses against a missile onslaught. The Reagan administration should spend the MX money to develop a workable system of anti-missile defenses instead. (c) 1981, Los Angeles Times Syndicate AboutLetters “Feedback” is intended to provide Daily Herald readers with an open forum in which they can discuss issues of broad community interest and importance In that spirit. The Daily Herald welcomes letters to “Feedback” on any subject of broad community interest Letters should be typewritten. double spaced and not exceed 400 words — about 4 pageand a half of typewritten. double spaced copy. The length limit will be en forced strictly Without exception, every letter must be signed in ink with the writer's full name, home address and phone number Phone numbers won't be published Names can be withheld for good reason. but only after personal consultation with the editor. The Herald will not accept or publish letters which are duplicated photocopied. or which otherwise give the appearanceof being a mass mailing: let ters which argue a specific religious doctrine, which attempt a_ personal debate with a previous contributor rather than addressing issues, which repeat positions previously expressed by other contributors, or letters which are addressed to individuals or institutions other than the Herald The editor reserves the right to edit any letter to remove potentially libelous inaterial, material in poor taste and to make letters conform to the length limit. As nearly as possible, all letters which meet the above requirements will be published in the order they are received although handwritten letters may be delayed for typing. and letters which ex. ceed the length limit or otherwise violate the stated policy may be returned to the writers for correction or revision Feedback Profits Need No Apologies Editor, Herald: What an irony! The people of Provo, Orem, and other areas in Utah County participated in a patriotic fete of enormous proportions and named it a Freedom Festival. Then, in the next breath, complaints were registered against the Osmonds for makinga profitin the matter.If that was not hypocritical enough, complaints were abundant that the Provo City had bungled in not charging the Osmonds for the privilege of saving Provo City many thousands of dollars. Provo would have spent i least $50,000 had the city put on the fireworks display. So on the right hand, the Osmonds were bada 8 for supposedly making a pe it, = on the left hand were bad guys for helping Provo City not go into further debt. Touy’h Tuck, Osmonds. They seem to have iot in several directions. But the biggest bungleof them all was Ron Clark’s statement about the whole matter. Asthe public relations director for the Osmonds Entertainment, he should have known better. In the July 6 Daily Herald, he expressed his displeasureat those who were criticizing the Osmonds for “ripping-off" the citizenry. His exlinkin wasthe criticism was unia since the Osmonds would in fact money. “Thai implied we were staging a rip-off. We simply didn’t makeany moneyon the event.”’ This seems to say if they had made a profit, Clark would have conceded the osmonds had ripped off the public. Since when was losing moneya virtue and making money a vice? What Mr. Clark should have boldly proclaimed, is the Osmonds and Tommy Walker provided the paying crowds in the stadium with the cheapest priced tickets for one of the greatest shows ever produced — in this valley or any other. A mediocre Play. in Broadway or London’s West Endcosts twicethat, and the superb shows cost much more. For those of the valley who sat around the stadium and watched the show for free, they saw a fireworks andlaser show that rivals the best of Washington, D.C. Werail against government subsidies for welfare “patients,” but somehow feel it is permissible and correct for the Osmondsto pick up part of the tab for our “‘Freedom”’ entertainment. Next time, Osmond Entertainment should charge a substantial enough price to ensure a reasonable profit. The city could then collect their sales tax. Butif the Osmonds do it again, they should get a re who will declare in a mt voice that they were smart trae to ra ™ feconeriee to KSLing it (what did KSLecwith anie money they made on the commercials?). They should also chargea fair priceto the L.A. market, show how they really did make a poofit with heads held high, and finally state how they are going to market the video package to other television markets for further profits. Let them set the example — no hand-outs. Those with the talent they have, ought to be paid what oy are worth.If we are not willing my what we get, then they a ve to go elsewhere,and that would be the valley's loss. At least we would be off the dole. By the way, inside sources say Tommy Walker did not go back to Los Angeles with just a warm feeling in his heart, nor did the Osmondsshuffle off to Orem countingtheir losses. Wehope that is true — moreprotit to them, and no apologies needed. lark J. Stoddard 379 N. 100 E. Orem that the Lord has doneforusin this great country. Donny’s entrance, well, was just - the most. We are sending a copyofthis letter to the editor of The Daily Herald to let them know wetoo were‘hurtandoffended’ by the comments printed regarding your involvement in the festival. Please know that we cannot acceptthatattitude. Welook forward to more Osmond entertainment in the valley in the future. The Kent Miner Family ‘727 E. 2680 N. Osmonds Give Editor, Herald: What an inspiring, exciting, magnificent, awesome celebration the Freedom Festival turned out to be this year. I'd certainly like to thank Duane Hiatt and the vast numberof people whocarriedit out and madeit so outstanding. I was so proud .and happy to attend the various events and thoroughly enjoyed everything. ‘rom the stirring speech by Eldredge Cleaver in the Marriott Center on Sunday night to the incomparable “Echoes of Freedom’’ produced by the Osmond Family and Tommy Walker on Saturday night everything was so exciting, motivating, and beautifully done. I was just thrilled with the Excellent Show Editor, Herald: I wish it were ou possibly to express the feeling of gratitude our family has for the Osmondsandall that you contribute to our community, church and nation in the way you emulate your tremendous talents and wonderful spirit. We were some of the fortunate and blessed people that hadtickets for the Fourth of July Freedom Festival Show - It was the greatest family home evening we have ever had. We appreciated bein reminded of our heritage and al Provo OurFestival's Like No Other Osmond-Walker show! Tothink that there are people right here in our own valley who can produce such an amazingspectacle, and not only can do it but are willing to doit, is certainly something for which to be grateful. It seems to me that they went out of their way to makeit financially within the reach of most people so that we could attend such a “once- in - a - lifetime - production’’ and view it in person. That in itself is something to be gratefulfor as well. I, for one, was so proud to be able to take members of my family who camefrom all over the western U.S. to spend the Fourth of July here. They wereall thrilled. The parade, dances, picnics, and other events are always outstanding and a greattradition, but it was the “Echoes of Freedom’’ that truly madeourfestival like no others, absolutely great! We just love Provo, our valley, and the people hereandfeelso blessed to live here. When we see such high-quality, professional, high standard type of entertainment presented as was done with the Osmond - Walker - Spectacular it makes us realize even more how lucky we are to live here amongst you, That show broughtout the best in people and I for one am grateful to all who had anything to do with producing and presentingit. Thanks Osmonds! We really appreciate what you and Mr. Walker did. Hats offto the Freedom Festival! The whole thing was fantastic! Janie Thompson BYU Entertainment Division Provo Where Are OurPriorities? Editor, Herald Tt has come to myattention that the garbagecollectors’ in Orem City average Salary for 191-82 will be $22,500 per year with a costof living tncreate every three months, alpine School District's average teacher salary is somewherein the neighborhood of $16,500. These teachers have been offered a 6 percent increase for the entire year withnocostofliving increment. The cost of living, as of October, was 12.7 percent. Thedistrict, in effect, is asking the people who educate your ates to take a decrease in ay. Coal minersreceived a 30 percent increase over three years. Air controllers rejected a $4,000-a-year in- crease. I am seriously wondering what the priority of society is. There is something wrong with the idea that by cutting teachers’ payyou can demand and attract better teachers and better education. I think it is timeto straighten our priorities and put the money whereit will do the children the most good. I am not begrudging anyone being paid what thev are worth, but I am questioning the perspective with sin which teachers are being considered. Darryl Roberson 164 S. 240 E. Orem, |