OCR Text |
Show Tuesday, July 12, Opinions 1983 THE HERALD, Provo, Utah, iiic uciaiu, lis icauciS) - syndicated columnists and cartoonists discuss vital issues - Page 17 w V 'Mil The Herald Comments What Prke hit Our Ethks? President Reagan was perfectly right, of course, when, at his press conference, he responded to Godfrey Sperling's question about the Car- strong stomach to watch one or more of the President's top aides walk the plank at the behest of virtuous liberals in the media for doing precisely what those selfsame journalists do every day: i.e., accept and use his eyebrows and saying in mock surprise, "Godfrey, how could you think there is anything political in this?" But Mr. Reagan is much too smart a politician himself to think that the whole issue will go away on that account. It is, in fact, a purely political attempt though not so much by the Democrats as by their faithful allies in the liberal media to capture some moral high ground from which to pour boiling oil all over the Reagan forces. And, as Sam Don- from anonymous sources in the government. If that's so d "unethical," how come political reporters are ter campaign documents ("Do you see this merely as a highly political effort by the Democrats?") by arching aldson's questions to the Feedback U.S. Right in Internment who Editor, Herald: Japanese-America- gov- Were you around and cognizant of the situation back then? Who furnishes the money for the government. Isn't it you and me? The government doesn't earn any money, it spends ours. It has spent until we are more than a thousand billion worse off than broke. The lawmakers have done little to control inflation, yet are hypocritical enough to use their failure as a reason to boost their own salaries. Now you who think we ought to start digging up for all past wrongs, real or fancied, I suggest that you show your real concern and magnanimousness by starting and promoting a fund for your cause and leave the bureaucrats out of it. ns necessity. We also knew that a large percentage of them in our area How did we were know? Many openly declared it and others were on the fence watching the tides of battle. As happens in all such emergencies, some were victims of circumstances beyond their control, but there was no time to mount a painstaking investigation into the matter and the risks too great to be lenient. We were on the ropes reeling from the effects of the devastation at Pearl Harbor and our officials did the only sensible and prudent thing. A couple of questions for you J are clamoring for our ernment to pay retribution: Following a given line of thought during the passage of the years often produces a tendency to forget many vital details and to magnify others that are connected with past events. Those of us who were working with at the time of Pearl Harbor and for years before, knew for a surety that the segregating and policing of these people was an absolute your time and money you wilsave their cut and will be more efficient and more aware of what is going on. George A. Ricks 2090 N. 600 W. Lehi By donating mm . Performer Calls Usher Rude Editor, Herald: This year's "Panorama" held in the BYU stadium for the Provo Freedom Festival was a very spectacular event ... or so I understand. I was one of the performers in the show, being a member of a high school band. However, due to what I feel was a lack of consideration on the part of some of the festival officials, I saw about as much of the show as I would have if I had been in Orem. After our performance, which came at the first of the show, we were forced to stand in the portals where no one could see any part of the show. We were later given seats on the field against the north wall, where we all got to sit on the nice, comfortable ground, which incidentally slopes downwards past the endzone so the only people able to see anything were those lucky enough to sit on the front row. As if this wasn't bad enough, one of the ushers kept changing his mind as to how far back against the wall we had to sit and finally some of the band members found himself actually up in the audience. Worst of all, he kept using a very harsh tone of voice and yelling, "Don't just sit there, move back!" This continued even after a lot of us were in the stands. Now I realize that we all got in free, and we all really enjoy being invited, but after spending our entire day rehearsing and many of the bands had to travel quite away to get here, I felt we should have received a little better treatment. If not better seats, at least a kind request from the usher instead of what was said. He might have received a little more cooperation from us that way. Most teenage kids are more apt to offer respect to those who give them some re- spect too. I ought to know, I'm one myself. Mark Eastmond E. Orem 1453 S. 680 Parade Leader Voices Views ' Editor, Herald: Monday, July 4th, I was given the opportunity to serve' with some other volunteers as a parade marshal with Art Morris. My specific responsibility was to regulate the parade as it approached 100 East Center St. and converged into one lane from each side of the median strip. The parade route was worked out weeks in advance by Art and his committee and based on past history, this was the best way to route the parade. By 6 a.m. parade watchers had already began to form on each side of Center Street leaving the median strip clear. But, at 8:50 a.m., one hour before the parade was scheduled to begin, Lt. Larry Baum appeared. Ignoring the protests of the parade officials, he ordered that the parade would only go down the south lane of Center Street and posted his officers to enforce his orders and to inform those spectators who had lined up on the north side of the street that the route had been changed to the south side only. With dispatch, the crowd picked up their gear and set up camp on the median strip. At which time, Baum disappeared for coffee. At 9:30 a.m. the savior, Capt. Max Littlefield appeared. Being informed, he quickly evaluated the situation and instructed the posted officers to relax their vigilance, and to follow the original directions of the parade com- mittee. Trouble is, that by the time things were back to normal, the north side of the street had already filled with spectators and it was impossible to clear the median; therefore parade watchers on the south had prob- lems seeing north and visa versa. Wouldn't it be nice if a few individuals who have a proclivity to give orders knew when it was their turn to follow? Bill Youns deputy parade marshal 655 S. 400 W. Orem President make clear, they are not going to be put off by his attempt to focus attention on the question of technical legality ("I want the Justice Department to find out if anybody did anything that broke the law"). Suppose whatever happened was not technically illegal but was nonetheless arguably "unethical"? It would take a pretty confidential information all-fire- forever hanging Pulitzer Prizes all over each other for doing it? But life is not fair, as President Kennedy observed, and we would be well advised to keep our eye on the ball as this drama unfolds. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether they were actually used; all that matters is how the Reagan camp got them, and whether the circumstances can be said to raise a serious issue of propriety (not necessarily just "legality"). If they do, Mr. Reagan may well have to consign at g least one of his aides to the flames to save himself from serious damage. high-rankin- We are in, then, for a series of televised hearings the longer and more dramatic the better, from the standpoint of the Democrats and the media in which Bill Casey (who was Reagan's campaign manager), as fidential it may be, provided it isn't officially classified; and that is probably what happened here. But as that great moralist Sam Donald-- , son said to Mr. Reagan: "What do you think about the ethics? Your press spokesman has said that this is well as Baker, Gergen, Stockman and perhaps others are dragged up Capitol Hill and grilled by House members under oath about what they knew and when they knew it. At the moment, Casey's memory, or rather lack of it, is acting as a sort of fire-bra- nothing new in politics. Would you condone ke against revelations concerning the original source misfeasance (if any) that was involved; and he can adopt at that point any position that seems comfortably congruent with the mood of public opinion at the time. Maybe it will be enough to (or sources) of the documents, but it is unlikely that he can maintain thi? posture indefinitely, or that President Reagan can save him if he does. We will quite probabiy find out sooner or later, therefore, just who was the "disgruntled aide" in the Carter White House who passed the stuff along to the Reagan as Bin campaign, and Safire has pointed out the was it that piquant possibility a Kennedy loyalist may account for Tip O'Neill's declared reluctance to look into the matter very aggressively. But the media will try to keep the kliegs zeroed in on the Reagan staff. Unfortunately for the media, it isn't illegal to accept volunteered material, no matter how this?" Mr. Reagan needn't answer that question until we know the precise dimensions of the "admonish" or "reprimand" whoever proved responsible; on the other hand, maybe nothing short of a public sacking will do. Perhaps, as The New York Times has suggested, an apology to Mr. Carter would be a handsome gesture. But those who care for the preservation of the President's own personal not to mention reputation his will agree that whatever is necessary to assure these must be done, and that the departure of Dave Gergen or even James Baker would be a small price to pay. con- - How They Voted Vote tor Abortion Bill Utahns - WASHINGTON Here's how area members of Congress voted on key issues during the week of June 27-Ju- ly 1: and that a fetus has a right to life. Opponents said the amendment violates a woman's right to g make decision and that by banning the procedure women will return to "illegal, unsanitary and lethal backstreet abortions." The amendment res quired a majority for per return, which propoof the cap said would reduce the federal budget deficit and that it in its present form represents a "giveaway" to the wealthy. Opponents, primarily Republicans, said a cap would be unfair to families, small businessmen and farmers and would stall economic recov- $720 nents child-bearin- SENATE 9 ABORTION: Rejected a constitutional amendment that would have returned to Congrss and the states the power to regulate abortions and voided a 50-4- Supreme Court decision granting women the right to abortion. Proponents argued that 97 percent of abortions are for social and economic reasons rather than for rape, incest or to protect the health of the mother 1973 two-inco- two-third- passage. ery. Both Utah Senators, Jake Garn and Orrin Hatch, voted for the constitutional amendment. 5 limTAX CAP: Rejected iting President Reagan's July 1 income tax cut to a maximum of 55-4- Both Utahns voted against limiting the tax cut. HOUSE INTERIOR MONEY: Passed 4 an Interior appropriations bill of $8 billion that critics w - WASHINGTON President Reagan is a firm believer in "private sector initiative"; the generosity of wealthy Americans theoretically will ease the taxpayers' burdens for needed programs. But Reagan's man at the General Services Administrat- ion, Administrator Gerald Car- men, doesn't think private initiative should start with his boss. The point at issue is, the ballooning cost of maintaining the seven presidential libraries. Though the money to build the libraries was raised by private donations (tax deductible), the bill to the taxpayers for upkeep and staff salaries now comes to almost $15 million a year. This is far more than Congress envisioned when it passed the Presidential Libraries Act in 1955. Proponents estimated that each library would cost about $150,000 a year to operate instead of the $1.5 million-plu- s apiece the seven existing libraries cost. Oddly enough, supporters of the legislation also counted on a total of only 15 presidential libraries over a period. This could have worked out if every president served two full terms, but the only one to have achieved that distinction since the law was enacted was the 1955 incumbent Dwight Eisenhower. One proposal that would cut down on the expense to the public would authorize the govGSA to ernment landlord solicit funds from private donors to cover maintenance and salary costs. This could be accomplished by setting up endow100-ye- ar ments for the individual libraries. While the wealthy donors would be able to write off their gifts as tax deductions, it would still save the taxpayers at least $4 million per year. But Carmen is reluctant to go at least not if the this route proposal would apply to Reagan. In an internal study of the plan, the GSA argues that endowments to help pay for operating costs of the libraries should not apply to past or present dents. "Any endowment requirement should be applied to Presidents taking office for the first time on or after January 20, 1985," the study states. It explains that "a change of rules in the midst of a difficult planning would not be process" "appropriate." Congressional sources told my associate Donald Goldberg, however, that they suspect Carmen just doesn't want to ask Reagan's friends to chip in for his library. Reluctance to apply a rules change to one's own administration is nothing new, of course. President Carter's people fought like tigers to exempt their boss from the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which made official presidential papers public property. They lost that fight, as well as the election. we All three Utah representatives Howard Nielson, James Hansen and Dan Marriott voted against the $8 billion Interior appropriations. 272-14- GSA Asks No Library Changes - In an apparent attempt to delay the endowment proposal, Carmen admits he has the authority but wants a law passed that would force him to do it. But if Congress has to draft, debate and enact authorization legislation, Reagan might already be out of office before the lengthy process is completed. Footnote: USA officials deny that Carmen is trying to exempt Reagan from the endowment proposal. They say he hasn't taken a position on the plan yet. HINCKLEY HINT: President Reagan's would-b- e assassin, John Hinckley Jr., doesn't think much of the press in general, but he did appreciate the "interview-by-mail" that appeared in Penthouse magazine. From St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C., Hinckley handwritten thank-yo- u note hint and dropped a that he would like a free subscription to the magazine. le 0FfiC vew soon, Be FZNPH TO START V Jack Anderson sent the author of the Penthouse piece, Allan Sonnenschein, a we kom IN NW claimed "busts the budget" by exceeding the president's recommendation and deprives the federal government of revenue by limiting oil and mineral leasing in offshore areas. Proponents said the bill reduces the money appropriated to Interior in 1983, while protecting the environment, natural resources and national forests. 1 I WATT LINE: Ever hopeful of improving their boss's image, public relations specialists at the Interior Department sent out new color slides of Secretary James Watt to the television networks and a few local stations. The idea, as one flack explained it, was "to replace the rather unflattering ones that are normally used." Unfortunately, lacking a technical TV expert, Watt's people had the slides mounted wrong. If used as received, the secretary would have appeared on the screen lying sideways. Even so, the department received a few expressions of thanks for the slides. A housewife-entreprenein Anaheim, Calif., Patricia Dougherty, thinks the controversial Interior secretary, who wants to exploit the nation's public resources, is himself ripe for exploitation. So she has designed "No Watts" bumper stickers - J . (83tv NEA loc m and bearing a cartoon likeness of Watt, and is peddling them out of her home. "You can do only so much PTA," explained Dougherty, who has 10 children. "I wanted to do something different " |