OCR Text |
Show As Modw AIfoTjrjtt Hit? VncBWTUXDnDiiil; Now that you've skied Deer Valley, what do you think of Park City's newest resort? Gary M. Acord It's great! t t Page A2 Thursday, January 7, 1982 IEdlfittd&irnall MM r Don't throw the baby out with the bath water It has been hashed over in committee, scrutinized in numerous public meetings, amended by the County Commission. Com-mission. Now it's time for the voters to decide if they want it. "It" is the proposal to change Summit County's form of government, and it's due to go to the voters March 23. It's not the same plan that was discussed in a public meeting in Park City in early December. A vital part of the proposal, calling for the appointment of four public officials who are now elected, was dropped on a 2-1 vote by the members of the present County Commission. That vote was a great disappointment to many of the people from the Park City area who worked on the original charter committee last summer. They believed that the appointment ap-pointment of the clerk, recorder, treasurer and assessor was essential if county government was to be made more efficient. Having followed the progress of the charter proposal since last June, we shared that sense of disappointment. We saw the appointment of those four officials as a way to attract the most qualified personnel available, and to make the county manager's job a lot easier. But Commissioners Carl Ovard and Gerald Young, who voted to delete that part of the plan, had a point. They argued that there was so much opposition to the appointment appoint-ment of the four officials in the Kamas and Coalville areas that it would cause the defeat of the whole proposal. Although this pragmatic approach offended many people who wanted the whole package, it undoubtedly increased the odds that the rest of the plan would get past the voters. The question now becomes: Is there enough left in the proposal to make it worth our while voting on March 23? The key issue left in the plan concerns the reorganization of the County Commission itself. It calls for the present three-man commission to be expanded to five members. and for each commissioner to be elected by a separate district. Park City's lack of representation at the county level over the years has been well documented. The charter change, if approved, would guarantee that two, possibly three, of the five commissioners would be residents of the Park City-Snyderville City-Snyderville area. One of the members of the charter committee is now calling for the defeat of the plan. He foresees the day when the Park City-Snyderville area will have the majority of the population in the county, will be able to use that clout to elect sympathetic commissioners who in turn will be able to encourage the passage of a more comprehensive charter revision. Although we sympathize with his feelings, we can't agree with his "we'll show those guys" approach. In the first place, it perpetuates the power struggle that has been going on for years between Park City and the Kamas-Coalville area. It views government as domination rather than cooperation. In the second place, it could be years before Park City and Snyderville come up with enough interested voters to swing the pendulum back in the other direction. Although this end of the county may have almost half the total population, our record in showing up on election day has been dismal. To base our hopes on our growing population (which isn't really all that impressive, anyway) seems like putting ail our money on one horse. In the meantime, issues affecting Park City are being discussed in Coalville every day. To date, no county in Utah has a government with representatives elected by district. Summit County has a chance to cut the mold for the rest of the state. In our eyes, representation by district is an important tool in bringing county government closer to home. We urge you to support it at the ballot box. D.H. 1HAT5 OPfc PROFESSOR,,, 100K..JERE5 SOME 50RT OF BRIGHT STAR OP IN THE EAST,., Tn .TlTlr r-3A..S.If by Jack Anderson W tCQglI&.ll.y C9 UlHgUJMattJH & Joe Spear General Dozier was perfect target for Red Brigades Washington The terrorist group that kidnapped U.S. Army Gen. James Dozier in Italy is no stranger to American counterintelligence agencies. agen-cies. In fact, U.S. anti-terrorist experts have been concerned for some time that the Red Brigades would make an assassination or kidnap attempt against a high-ranking American. A report compiled by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations explains ex-plains that Americans are a favorite target of groups like the Red Brigades. American military personnel are particularly tempting, and officials of NATO are also a prime target of the Red Brigades terrorists.. These preferences made Gen. Dozier a bull's-eye on the Red Brigades' target. He was an American, a military officer, and the highest ranking NATO general in Southern Europe. There is more in the Air Force anti-terrorist report, and it bodes no good for Gen. Dozier. The Red Brigades terrorists are utterly ruthless in their choice of targets, according to the experts. "The terrorists see no victim as innocent and no potential operation unthinkable," the document states. The Air Force report was written more than three years ago, but it accurately predicted the problems Italian police would encounter trying to get solid leads on Gen. Dozier's kidnapping or even accurately identifying identi-fying his kidnappers. The reason for this is that the Red Brigades have grown street-smart over the years. They learned that terrorist groups with famous individual individu-al leaders were vulnerable to destruction destruc-tion by police. So the Red Brigades decentralized their organization. They are now a coalition of loosely united, virtually autonomous strike forces. No member of one group knows very much about any other group. There are no key leaders whose elimination would destroy the whole organization. That's what happened in the Dozier kidnapping. Three suspected members of the Red Brigades were captured shortly after the crime. But under interrogation, they revealed no knowledge know-ledge of the group that carried out the Dozier kidnapping. Italian police are about ready to concede that the three suspects really may not know anything about any Red Brigades group outside their own. WHAT'S NEXT? Here are some of the events we foresee occurring in 1982: Informal, unofficial messages have been passed between President Reagan and Soviet President Brezhnev. Brezh-nev. We predict these will lead to a summit meeting. The two leaders, we believe, will reach at least one dramatic agreement. The Russians will concede to a withdrawal of their troops from Afghanistan. The United States, in turn, will accept Afghanistan as part of the Soviet sphere. Thus, the Kremlin will get out of an awkward predicament, and the White House will be relieved that Soviet troops are no longer in dangerous proximity to the Persian Gulf. In the Middle East, we predict, the public will be hearing a lot about a little village in the northeast corner of the Sinai called Yamit. It was settled by Israeli colonists after the 1967 war. Israel is scheduled to give back the entire Sinai to Egypt in April, but the settlers at Yamit insist they're going to remain where they are. Watch for a serious flare-up at Yamit. In the end, we predict, the Israeli army will be forced to move the settlers out of the Sinai. We see a rocky road ahead for President Reagan. The economy will remain shaky and unemployment will continue to rise. The Democrats will start referring to Reagan as the Herbert Hoover of this generation. All this should bring Democratic gains in the November elections. But the Senate, we predict, will remain under Republican control. Scandals will continue to plague the administration. The inspectors general are supposed to uncover waste and fraud; instead, some of them have been covering it up. We foresee scandals inside the National Aeronautics Aeronau-tics and Space Administration, the Housing and Urban Development Department and the Interior Department. Depart-ment. We predict that Labor Secretary Ray Donovan and Interior Secretary James Watt will depart the government, govern-ment, that self-suspended national security adviser Richard Allen won't come back, and that budget boss David Stockman will quietly resign. HEADLINES & FOOTNOTES: Gen. David C. Jones, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spent his Christmas n the Far East. And the Pentagon allowed Jones to take along his with and son at the taxpayers' expense. Jones and his family visited Japan, Hong Kong, the Philippines, South Korea and Hawaii. Saudi Arabia's royal family is afraid that trouble in the Persian Gul could endanger their oil supply, so tha country is quietly preparing to establish its own oil reserve. The Saudis plan to construct secret reservoirs some in caves and abandoned aban-doned wells to hold a 150-day supply of oil. That's about 1.5 billion barrels worth $45 billion. The General Services Administration, Administra-tion, the government housekeeping agency, could use a little house cleaning itself. During one recent year, according to federal auditors, the GSA paid out nearly $10 million for office and warehouse space" that no one was using. Copyright, 1982. United Feature Syndicate, Inc. Bob Hittner The best in the country! h ISJs the finest ski resort in North America. It's the coun-try coun-try club of skiing. Rick Lanman I thought it was great. There were no crowds and the powder was fantastic. However, the nice little amenities were more hassle than they were worm. Greg Coburn I think it's excellent. by Stanley Karnow (BfldDlball View Protectionist trend could prompt new international trade war . Washington The danger of nuclear conflagration may grab the headlines, but a, Jess dramatic conflict also threatens the world. As the recession deepens, the prospects for a nasty international trade war are growing at an alarming pace. And while arms control negotiators can at least perceive the outlines of accords that might avert an atomic holocaust, the experts seem to be unable to devise fresh formulas to head off a commercial crisis. Nations almost everywhere, their economies in trouble, are seeking instead to erect barriers of one sort or another to defend themselves. The impact of the protectionist trend could be devastating. For one thing, it penalizes consumers consu-mers by compelling them to forego cheaper and often higher-quality imports in favor of protected homemade home-made merchandise. By dampening competition, it also keeps alive marginal and inefficient industries that, mercifully, deserve to die. Above all, it triggers a cycle of reprisals. Countries whose exports abroad are blocked will naturally retaliate by closing their doors to imports with everyone suffering as a consequence. That is what happened with a vengeance during the Great Depression Depres-sion of the 1930s, when nations built tariff walls to defend their internal industries. The result was a worsening of the depression as the worldwide exchange of goods ground to a halt. In the wake of World War II, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) came into force, its purpose to promote the international movement of products with as few restrictions as possible. But the GATT was designed during the days when the United States, its most powerful member, was committed commit-ted to unalloyed free trade. Now, under . the pressure of rising unemployment and sluggish growth, that American commitment is eroding. The American steel industry, for example, may file unfair-trading complaints against its European rivals for dumping. The Japanese have been persuaded to accept "voluntary" limitations on automobile exports to the United States. Western Europe has moved to curb imports from Japan as well as from countries like South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, which have been escalating into the field of technology. The Japanese have a baffling network of obstacles aimed at keeping foreign goods out of Japan. Altogether, according to a Harvard research team, various U.S. trade barriers cost American consumers about $15 billion per year in higher prices. A tariff of nearly 30 percent on imported clothing, for instance, puts an additional burden of $2.7 billion per year on the U.S. public. Of course, the barriers protect American workers, whose jobs would be menaced if unrestricted foreign imports flooded the country. But the cost of protecting each job in the antiquated U.S. textile industry is $81,000 per year. So American consumers, in effect, are subsidizing U.S. industries that are unable to compete a practice that scarcely conforms with America's rhetorical dedication to the principles of free enterprise. The GATT signatories have held seven major meetings since 1947 in an effort to overcome international trade problems, and the time may be at hand for another "round," as the lengthy sessions are called. But governments must weigh the options open to them before they embark on new-talks-.- They can insist on observing -the" agreements strictly by supRa,iis;feK and competitive trade, an alternative that many might reject under present conditions. Or they can lean on the GATT provision that permits temporary tempor-ary tariffs when their domestic industries are in jeopardy. Yet another possibility is the one adopted by the French, which was simply to ignore the accords, as they did not long ago when they decreed that Japanese car imports into France would not exceed 3 percent of the market. The fourth option is to resort to ambiguity by leaning on exporting nations to concede to "voluntary'' restraint. This has been the device used by the United States to curtail Japanese automobile exports to America. Amer-ica. But the United States and other industrial nations cannot deny their markets to rivals, either through voluntary or mandatory means, without with-out courting the risk of having foreign markets denied thern in return. This dilemma is becoming increasingly increas-ingly complicated as more and mora countries, like South Korea, Taiv.an and Singapore, climb into the ranks of sophisticated industrial producers. It is hard to imagine that Japan w;is classified as a "developing" nation when it joined GATT nearly 30 years ago. A recent opinion poll shows that 72 percent of the American public favors measures to protect U.S. industry against foreign competition. It could be, though, that the public, in its concern for jobs, is neglecting the bigger dangers of a trade war in which there will be no winners. c) 1981 The Register and Tribune Syndicate Inc. n Subscriplioa Riles, $6 a year in Summit County, $12 a year outside Summit County Published by Ink, Inc. USPS 378-730 Publisher ..... Jan W ilking Kdilor . ... , David Hampshire Advertising Sales , ,, D . Jan Wilking, Bill Dkkson Business Minager , .. . . Kick 1 anman raP ' : Bwk VVidenhnuse, l i Heinrns eporers.. Bellina Moemh. Rkk Brough Pholo Kdilor . ... . : Phsllis Kiibcnsirin l.vpeseu.nn. Sabjna R(mff) sharm Subscription & Classifieds .. . . ........ Marion ( oont Distribution Bob (,riee mi. L'nt.n.J uuul J. mall.. W. 1 ( ton -1 ,k- . . n 1 ... .... .. uMu-i.ra ........ ..., ,,,,, ,n, oiiir in rim uiy, utan (MUMI, under (he Act of March 3 Published every Thursday at Park City, Utah. Second-class postage paid al Park City, Utah. Unsolicited manuscripts and photographs arc welcome and will be considered for publication, however, The Newmntr will assume no responsibility for the remw of such material. All news, advertising and photos must be received prior to the Tuesday noon deadline at our office, 419 Main Street in Park Clly, by mail P.O. Box 738, Park City, tt. 84060, or by calling our office (801 ) 649-9014 Publication material musl be received by Tuesday noon for Thursday publication. |