OCR Text |
Show 2 The Magna Times, Thursday, March 12, 1992 Orton withdraws Guest Editorial cosponsorship Presidential election campaign fund checkoff: Make an informed choice of H.R. 1662 Rep. Bill Orton withdrew his cosponsorship of the National Advertising Coordination Act of 1992 (H.R. Orton 27. February 1662) co- sponsored the bill in September 1991 before the Food and Drug Administration proposed strict regulations to implement the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 ( NLEA) . Orton said the combination of H.R. 1662 and the NLEA regulations could give the FDA the authorithe health market ty to and cause serious harm to the industry. H.R. Orton said, I 1662, because I believed consumers over-regula- te would be less confused by a consistent set of regulations to be applied to food labeling and advertising. When consumers see advertisements or read labels on food products they should be able to understand what is in it. I have found that deceptive claims cost citizens millions of dollars each year. In November 1991, the FDA proposed the NLEAs regulations to which apply strict scientific standard to While I welcome consistent and reasonable standards for review of products, I am afraid that a standard that demands a scientific consensus on the health benefits of vitamins, minerals, and herbs may restrict access for consumers and impede medical research. Orton said he is still dedicated to the goal of protecting consumers against fraud and deception but is wary of governmental overprotection and the subsequent loss of freedom for the consumer. The base of scientific knowledge on the health benefits of vitamins and herbs is changing rapidly due to tremendous strides in biomedical research. The accessibility and cost of these products are likely to be adversely affected by unreasonably restrictive review standards. I, for one, would much rather see the FDA budget used to facilitate the advance of useful products rather than to bring progress to a halt with unnecessary red tape. Orton has received numerous phone calls and letters from constituents regarding H.R. 1662 and H.R. 3642 (the Food, Drug, Cosmetic, and Device Enforcement Act of 1991). Orton never did support H.R. 3642 and of has withdrawn his FDA 1662 the until H.R. proposes a of standards. set reasonable more dietary supplements. by Joan Aikens Chairman, Federal Election Commission 1992 Tax Filing Season Do you know what the first question is on your federal income tax form? Do you If not, you are in good company. Even if you know the question want $1 to go to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund? chances are you are not sure what it means, how the fund works, where the money comes from, or where it goes. Largely due to growing voter apathy and discontent, compounded by declining public knowledge about the presidential campaign fund, millions of taxpayers today either leave the question blank or check a box without knowing precisely why. g With both the and presidential primary season in full swing, it is whether they check yes or no make an important that taxpayers informed choice on the $1 checkoff question. Most taxpayers today do not know why the Congress established the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. Created in the early 1970s, the fund was set up to reduce presidential candidates dependence on contributions from individuals and political groups, to place the canlarge on financial didates footing in the general election campaign, and to equal election candidates from the constant chore of fund raising, thus free general to more time debate the issues. them giving believe that checking yes or no will change Many taxpayers mistakenly their tax or reduce their refund. It does not. Checking yes designates $1 from the general treasury for the public funding of presidential elections, and checking no means the dollar will be available for other budgetary purposes. Every dollar checked off goes to the presidential campaign fund. No other treasury funds are permitted for this purpose. The tax checkoff is the one opportunity for citizens to tell the government exactly how they want $1 of their taxes to be spent. Yet, most taxpayers are not aware of how the checkoff dollars are used. This year, nearly of the fund will pay for the general election candidates campaigns, will go to the primary election campaigns, and the remainder will finance the nominating conventions. In the 1992 general election, the party nominees will receive $55 million each to finance the November race. During the primaries, candidates who raise $5,000 in contributions from individuals of $250 or less in at least 20 states are eligible for matching funds. An estimated $40 million will be used for this purpose. The taxpaying public should know that presidential campaigns and party conventions must meet strict eligibility rules in order to receive any public funds. To qualify for checkoff dollars, candidates must limit their spending, and under no circumstances can they use checkoff funds for personal expenses. Candidates file regular monthly reports that are placed on the public record for anyone to see. In addition, during the general election, candidates agree not to accept private contributions from individuals or political groups. After the election, the Federal Election Commission audits every campaign, and any surplus or improperly used federal funds must be repaid to the tax-filin- ed two-thir- one-quart- er J39ST FACTS Changes in Federal Excise Taxes as a Percentage of Income 1980 1990 -- VOLUNTEER! Make a difference! MAGNA TIMES US PS 325-58- 0 8980 West 2700 South Magna, Utah 84044 J. HOWARD STAHLE U.S. Population Publisher BONNIE STAHLE Advertising Manager - Office Manager NECIA PALMER Editor KENT GOBLE Sports Editor Feature Writer DEANNA JONES Arts & ' Entertainment Editor Typesetter SHARON LINSCHOTEN Staff Writer STACEY T. CASE ' BEN CLARK Sports Photographer Make a difference in your community: Write a letter to the editor! TOWN Staff Writer DALE SIMONS Sports Columnist Source: Congressional Budget Office - Writer DANA JONES Layout Published each Thursday Subscription $15 per year $18 per year out of state Second class postage paid at Magna, Utah 84044 TOPICS THERE ARB TWO PERIODS IN A f MAN'S LIFE WHEN HE DON'T UNDERSTAND WOMEN 1977, these repayments have totaled over $6 million. Questions have been raised concerning the solvency of the Presidential campaign fund. It now appears that enough funds will be available to finance the 1992 election. However, it is clear that the fund is in danger of a major shortfall in 1996. The problem is due in large part to a structural flaw in the checkoff program. Payments to candidates are indexed to inflation, but the dollar amount each taxpayer can check off is not. Spending limits are increased each election cycle to reflect the change in the index. In 1974, the general election campaign spending limit was established at $20 million per candidate. This year, the $55 million each party nominee will receive represents a 280 percent increase over the 1974 limit. Yet, the 1974 check-of- f dollar is the same. Without a legislative remedy, the shortfall in 1996 will be a serious problem. While Congress considers several possible solutions, the Federal Election Commission hopes each taxpayer will answer the first question on the 1040 tax form. And, to help taxpayers make an informed choice, the Federal Election Commission will send detailed information about the Presidential Election Campaign Fund to taxpayers who call The tax check-of- f question on your tax form provides the American public with a unique opportunity. Just as taxpayers exercise their rights when they vote, so too do they exercise rights when completing the question. Whether you check yes or no, make an informed choice. treasury. Since cost-of-livi- toll-fre- e, Straight Talk by Albert D. Hattis Some months ago, while watching my television set, like you, I saw the vicious beating of a civilian by some Los Angeles policemen. A fellow with a new videocam photographed the beating. Police were taped watching the beating. The police chase that preceded the beating was recorded. I was sickened by what I saw. To better understand what had happened, I did some checking and found that Los Angeles gang wars produced 387 killings in 1987, 450 in 1988, 522 in 1989, and 553 in 1990. The gangs are getting tougher and more vicious. As one senior police officer said, Its rough out there. Over 60,000 law enforcement officers were assaulted and about 160 were killed, all in the line of duty, throughout the United States last year. California Crime statistics are frightening. Violent crimes, including murder, rape, robbery, and assault, are 30 higher than the average for western states, and 46 higher than the average for the rest of the U.S. California has the largest prison population of any state, over 75,000. Its car theft rate, the highest in the country, is 62 greater than the national average. It leads the nation in the number of police who are attacked and killed in the line of duty.: There is no excuse for police administering punishment instead of allowing the justice system to work. Being a California policeman is a hazardous job, particularly in Los Angeles. The L. A. police place their lives at risk every day. The pressure on the police is terrible. Protecting and serving the people of Los Angeles is not easy. None of us have ever heard the police side of any event. We see and hear a reporters version of what has occurred, with all of the reporters biases built in. This Los Angeles police event, the beating, has never been explained. Why was the young man chased and attacked? You may say that the videotape shows us everything. Theres no need to hear the police version of the story. I dont believe thats true! What we observed was wrong. No effort has been made to obtain, for the public, the reasons for the police reaction. There must be something more. Looking at the national crime picture, based on FBI data, is frightening, assuming that the figures are correct and not the result of improved reporting and recordkeeping. 1990 saw crime continue to grow. We now have about 20 million reported crimes each year and 14 million arrests. As I travel, the evening local TV news in most big cities features the bloody word, murder, and then details the days events. Attending a conference in a downtown hotel, I found that few of the participants left the hotel after dark. I have always liked walking in Manhattan after hours of sitting in a plane, car, or in meetings. There were times when, in the evening, I would walk back from dinner in a Central Park restaurant to my hotel. Today that isnt recommended. President Bush has proposed a crime program to Congress this session. The emphasis is on law enforcement, with tougher sentences and more prism time. The number of law enforcement officers presently averages 2.1 for every 1,000 citizens. That rises to 2.8 if you include all civilian police employees. The presidents program provides for more training and better record keeping to increase police productivity. I dont see the Presidents crime proposals as doing much to solve the crime problem. I dont see Congress producing a meaningful crime proposal, either. Certainly the handgun control law, which consumed a week or two of Congressional time, wont save one life or do anything to reduce crime because guns are readily available to criminals. We need a more positive crime program. We must treat crime causes and not just crime effects. Pain relievers like aspirin dont solve problems that require medicine or surgery. Much of our violent crime results from people who cant get a job, earn a living, or have any hope. A crime program that creates jobs for anyone who needs a job, gives people an opportunity for a piece of the action, and creates hope for a better tomorrow will do more than tougher sentences, more police, more prisons, more judges, and more computers for better crime records. Thats Straight Talk! REALLY WHEN ARE THEY JOE? |