OCR Text |
Show Sunday, March 8. 1?87 THE HERALD, Provo. Utah. Tho IIpralH ite roariprc Op inions - Page 7 rT-Jr- tT syndicated columnists and cartoonists discuss the issues. v- .- ? J The Herald comments PRESIDENTIAL UtWlU HOIS'spa r f FFrsnrs nsMittuefsiyjia The governor doesn't have much choice, he is going to have to veto the 65 mile an hour speed limit bill the state Legislature passed last week. There is no doubt that 55 is too slow for Utah roads and that 65 is a much more sensible limit. The problem is the Legislature doesn't have the right to tell us how fast we can drive on a federal freeway, only Congress does. If the governor does not veto the bill, a gaggle of federal officials will be here with an order to cut off Utah's federal highway finds immediately. That would cost the state as much as $150 million. We can't afford that. Congress will reconsider its opposition to the 65 mph speed limit as it adopts the federal highway bill in the next couple of weeks so there is some hope that the pesky 55 mph limit will be eased. The problem is that the state can't do it on its own. It would be too costly and only an irresponsible governor would let the measure become law. A number of states have passed protest laws raising their limits, knowing that the consequences would be devastating and all but one were stopped at the governor's desk. Arizona went as far as to replace its freeway signs to 70 and set a time to raise the limit. Federal lawyers were on hand for the switchover and as soon as it occured they cut off funds. A provision in the Arizona law automatically cancelled the new speed limit as soon as that happened. Arizona lost 60 seconds of funding. Utah can't even afford to lose that much even as a token protest. The governor whill have to grab his pen and scratch this one off the books, no matter how badly we all want to be able to drive at 65 on freeways. We're forced to play by the judge's rules Bv JACK ANDERSON .... and JOSEPH SPEAR .m-,. WASHINGTON Everyone remembers the kid who insisted that the sandlot game bebe played according to his rules cause he owned the baseball. Well, Chief Justice William Rehnquist has worked a version of this childish hustle: a learned legal opinion exempting himself Irom a law he was violating. And who can challenge an opinion of the nation s top jurist? Here's the story of this latter-da- y Judge Roy Bean: Last November, we reported that Rehnquist appeared to violate a new congressional restriction on the use of government limousines. Congress passed a the limousine set to a small, and select list of top federal officials Supreme Court justices were conspicuously absent from the list ol eligible MPs. Yet Rehnquist continued to have a government chauffeur drive him to and from work each day, ignoring the congressional ban. As we reported at the time. Congress had provided one loophole tor officials who felt the need of limo service- on grounds of security, an official could get an exemption. Someone who had received a death threat, for example, could quality for a limousine. However, the law required that anyone seeking to avail himself of the limousine grown-u- p He has written loophole must certify in writing that '"highly unusual circumstances present a clear and present danger'" to the official, and must giv e Congress explicit details. But Rehnquist hasn't done that. In fact, he barely made a stab at justifying his continued use of a limousine on grounds of security. As chief justice, he simply interpreted the law to suit himself. Sources who have seen the legal opinion filed by Rehnquist told us. it makes these two points: First, it avers that Rehnquist limo so he can needs a chaulfeur-driveread the newspaper, converse on his car telephone and catch up on his homework while commuting between the Supreme Court and his home. Second, the opinion simply asserts that Rehnquist needs the limo service for security reasons, claiming that the chief justice has received death threats in the past. But.it does not provide any spa'if ics. as the law requires. So the chief justice of the United States still appears to be violating the law, and there doesn't seem to be much anyone can do about it. The question now is: If g another official, inspired by Rehnquist's example, challenges the law, is prosecuted and fights it all the way to the Suprciv.p Court, will Rehnquist excuse himself from the decision? Maybe he'll in decide to write the opinion himself the back seat, on the wav to work. BIG BANKERS' BLUES: American banking has fallen on hard times since the good old days of J P. Morgan. Or Jesse and Frank James, for that matter. Confidential banking documents we've seen chronicle the humiliating slide of n linio-lovin- wAimMi. ii 111 - - Jack Anderson American banks from their world preeminence only a relatively tew years ago. Consider this: In 1957, nine of the world's biggest and most powerful banks were American. The three biggest were headquartered in New York City. Today, only two American banks rank among the world's top 15. Citibank is No. 8 and Bank of America is No. 12. One guess which country has taken over the American banking lead that seemed impregnable in the 1950s: Japan. The top and seven of four banks in the world the top 10 are based in Japan. The documents we've seen make painfully clear why U.S. banks have lost out to their Japanese rivals: American banks simply are no longer competitive. In one vital "particular, Japanese banks otter significantly better terms to their borrowers. Another reason is that American banks are heavily regulated, and the lederal government is regarded as an adversary. In Japan, the government is a partner of the banks. A further handicap tor American banks: The pay out 40 times the amount in legal fees as their Japanese competitors do. Which brings us to the James boys. One reason for strict regulation, adversarial legal lees is that government and bank robberies in this country today are pulled off mainly by insiders in Guccis and Brooks Brothers suits, not outsiders sporting guns and black masks. In one recent year, for example, eight times more money was stolen by bank officers and directors than by holdup artists and burglars. sky-hig- h REMEMBERED: CHALLENGER the artifacts retrieved from the ocean floor with the wreckage of the Among Challenger space shuttle was a laser videodisc bearing an international pledge of peace and the signatures of thousands of children from all over the world. It was to have been taken into orbit by the shuttle crew at the request of No Greater Love, a humanitarian organization that collected the signatures. At a recent memorial ceremony to the fallen astronauts in the U.S. Capitol, the recovmvl videodisc was returned to No GreiUr Love chairman Carmella LaSpada 'in rms next event; coming our of chute seven, is. . .well, practically everyopv"' viets have unimpressive tram record in negotiations During the six years of the Reagan administration, the Soviet Union has withdrawn from arms control negotiations, then returned to them, has negotiated for intermediate-rang- e However, Gorbachev's new proposal for missiles withdrawing intermediate-rang- e is not new at all. What we are celebrating today is the Soviet position of a year ago, a position which Gorbachev unexpectedly linked to an SD1 agreement in Iceland and now has again Before Reykjavik, the Soviets believed missiles withdrawing intermediate-rang- e from Europe was a worthy goal. Now. as Icememory of those scary, land negotiations fades, the Soviet leadership again announces its interest in removing these missiles from Europe. And they want action now. "The medium range issue was the most solvable." Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister A. - . , missile reductions, then refused to consider them separately from SD1. and now is again ready to work on such an INF agreement. If Ronald Reagan shifted American negotiating positions as suddenly as Mikhail have strenGorbachev. Congress wo-'-d uously condemned him as not "serious" about arms control and might well have established a national commission to report on his psychological stability. Gorbachev, on the other hand, is appreciated as a man who has added razzle-dazzl- e and human interest to a process that had grown dull with time and technicality. '"We need a breakthrough." Gorbachev told a group of us recently in Moscow. He called for a departure from the routine, business-as-usua- l discussions on arms control symbolized, in his view, by the apparently endless Vienna MBFR (Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction) talks. Aleksandr siles deployed Bessmertnykh observed. "We cannot live with a deadlock, particularly at the present time." "We stand for real, genuine verilication, inspection by one side on including the territorv of the other," the Soviet on-sit- e I . J Jeane Kirkpatrick Chief of Staff, Marshal Sergei F. Akhro-meye- v affirmed. "At some point," he added, "Britain and France will have to join the process.' But no demand has been made to include British and French missiles in the current negotiations. Now, the Soviets are not in a demanding mode. They have not repeated their demand for a freeze on short-rang- e missiles, which would give them a permanent advantage. Instead, they have suggested postponing the issue. They have not repeated their demand that the United States station none of its intermediate-rang- e missiles in Alaska. Soviet leaders are once again giving Western friends an opportunity to be impressed with their flexibility. And Western leaders especially opposition leaders like Labor's Neil Kinnock of Great Britain and Egon Bahr of the German Social Democrats are being impressed. The governments of America's principal allies are more ambivalent. The German government of Chancellor Helmut Kohl is particularly worried about its country's mis vulnerability to Soviet short-rang- e in East Germany and Czechoslovakia. But Kohl s government is nonetheless on record in support of removing all U.S. and Soviet missiles from zero option. Europe, the West Germany is not alone in this concern. Most of our allies probably feel safer with American Pershing and cruise missiles deployed in Europe as a tangible symbol of U.S. involvement in the nuclear defense of Western Europe. Quite reasonably, they worry about the Soviet Union's clear superiority in conventional forces and chemical weapons. And quite reasonably, they worry about an eventual decoupling of American and European defense, especially with the development of SDI. But most European governments, including those which supported missile deployment, have been reluctant to affirm publicly their conviction that American missiles are needed for Europe's defense. Indeed, most of these governments (except France) have been reluctant to say much at all about the need for an effective defense against possible Soviet aggression. and so It has been so much easier to treat such worries as a tempting purely American anxiety. Most of our European allies believed Ronald Reagan was kidding when he endorsed the zero option. He was not. He has been serious from the start about negotiating deep reductions in nuclear missiles. Long thwarted by the Soviet walkout on Geneva talks, a series of infirm Soviet leaders, and the unreasonable demands at Reykjavik, Reagan may finally get the chance to negotiate a major arms reduction, if two on verilication significant differences and short-rang- e missiles can be overcome. When it happens, his detractors probably will not even note that removal of Soviet s came as a direct consequence of the deployment of American Pershing and cruise missiles and the introduction of SDI onto the American delense agenda. Instead, they will credit the "new thinking" SS-20- in Moscow. Feedback Advances in education deserve recognition Editor. Herald: Media reports seem to indicate that we are in a period ol overwhelming pessimism and criticism of education and educators, particularly in our public schools. There are many, however, who do not share this view. Admittedly, the system needs radical redirection, but educators in general are not oblivious to the economic realites nor the educational short comings ot our system. They may be dismayed and discouraged by the lack of relationship between their performance and the constant barrage of criticism which appears in the media. Viewing public education trom the outside, it seems to me that some pertinent facts go entirely unnoticed by those who disparage educators and the quality of education in our state. Perhaps a few examples from the U.S. Education Department report (1987) will help to clarity the point 1 wish to make. Educators in Utah work with less dollars per pupil than in any other single state in the union, and, contrary to the opinion fostered by anti-tagroups, Utahns are tilth from the bottom (47th( in expenditures as a percent of income per capita. Educators in Utah have the highest number ol students in classrooms ol any stale in the union. In addition, they are x well below the average of the U.S. in salary and benefits, ranking 32nd in the nation. Un the other hand, the percentage ol Utah high school graduates taking the ACT is third highest of the Itlty-on- e states. Students in Utah are ranked I h in the nation in ATC scores (19.1). Since 1982. the ATC scores in Utah have risen seven points. Only three other states post higher gains in ATC scores than Utah. s Utah has only of one point (.6) to gain to meet the President's challenge for significant improvement which was issued to all the states. Even a casual examination of the national report would convince the reader, possessed of a fair and open mind, that the educators in Utah have an extraordinary commitment to the quality education of our children. And this splendid effort continues in the face of repeated budget cuts and reduction of state funds to reward superior teaching. Our educators have not demanded that their rewards be commensurate with national ranking in performance, although this request would be fair enough. What thev have asked is that we face the fact that we are dead last in the nation in many crucial support areas and that we rediicate ourselves in the solution of our-teent- major problems now confronting this major pillar of a democratic .society. Our educators are lust rate now, but they will not remain so if we continue to be distracted by the prolileration of licti-tiou- s del wis iii teachers and their work while we camoullage, with criticism, our lack of support lor lirst-iatprograms. At the very least, we should acknowledge the exceptional value we receive tor our investment in education To suggest that others in this country are receiving more lor their education dollar is a pure my lit Surely wc have learned that a formidable challenge, such as the economic crisis we presently lace in the state ol Utah, will not be resolved by looking for someone to receive the blame. Creative solutions require a cooperative, supportive spirit, a partnership of all concerned; e citizens, educators, parents, students, business, and government. Setting aside self interest may be painful, but it is an absolute requirement for progress. It is an historical fact that people will work hard, sacrifice and rise to heroic-actiofor a cause m which they truly believe. Del Wasdon Provo |