| OCR Text |
Show VBA Friday, July 26, 1996 Standard-Examiner Our View DCFEFSsituation looks like a tired repeat om the looks of it, there’s a new dust-up at the state’s child welfare office. Three years ago, the National Center for Youth Law sued the state over what it called Utah’s failure to protect its children. Eventually, there was a settlement of the matter, with the state agreeing to 93 specific points that needed attention; a three-person panel was created to oversee the State’s progress. Since that time, there have been three evaluations of the Division of Child and Family Services. The first two were critical, but the third was scathing, essentially leaving the impression that the state has retreated back to square onein its deficiencies. Worse, two of the oversight panel’s three members - Larry to this latest report, the state is complying in only about a quarter of the 93 areas of concern. The state has filed a challenge to the panel's report, however, claiming, among other things, that the panel expects DCFS to submit to standards not required by the original settlement, that experts hired by the panel have suitable educational backgrounds but lack on-the-job experience, and that the panel does not take into account a broad enough sample when assessing the division’s conformity. The San Francisco-based NCYL,in the face of the state's challenge, also has vowed to file a motion: to force the DCFS into : receivership. It's a pity that everyone in- that were preventable. volved feels the need to engage in a legal hissyfit, but pride and politics have becomea part of the debate. We hope the matter is resolved sooner rather than later, because the welfare of Utah's children is at stake. As that allegation suggests, this is serious business. The DCFSis charged with ensuring the welfare of children in Utah, and should be striving to do just that. According The DCFS, its oversight panel and the NCYL need to reach agreementin a hurry. If the courts can hurry things along, so much the better. Lunt, the state’s representative on the panel, disagrees with the report’s findings - said there have been recent child-abuse deaths Pennies from heaven but not Uncle Sam et’s face it: A congressional subcommittee wouldn't be holding earings on the “Future of the Penny”if it had one. The day will eventually come when the U.S. government quits minting pennies. But the American people regard with the deepest suspicion any monkeying with their currency and with good rea- son, too, given debacles like the Susan B. Anthonydollar coin. Credit cards and electronic banking have made pennies largely unnecessary. They're not used in vending machines. And many stores don’t like hassling with them, a dish of pennies beside the cash register with a sign “Take One, Leave One” a commonsight now. What's more, Americans don’t spend pennies. Of the 288 billion pennies minted in the last 30 years, an astonishing 156 billion are stashed awayin jars and desk drawers. Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del., who innocently but unconvincingly professes no plans to abolish the penny, will have his hands full. Coinage battles are fought with genteel ferocity by an oddball assortment of combatants, from the coin collectors to the mining companiesthat supplythe metal to militia-types alert for signs the U.S. government might be repudiating its currency. However, simply as a safety measure, the mint may have to stop making pennies before attics across the land begin collapsing from their accumulated weight. ~ Scripps Howard News Service A thankless search t would have been blessedly commendable if no more than a few days had been required to recover human bodies from the Atlantic Ocean following the crash of TWA Flight 800. It would also have required some unknown magic. The task is enormouslydifficult and complicated, nature has not fully cooperated, and there's an uncomfortable issue that critics must face. The issue is that recovering the bodies as a first priority could jeopardize chances offinding out what caused the crash. Everything cannot be done at once, and the longer pieces of the wreckage stay in the ocean, the morelikelyitis that evidence will be rubbed away by the water. Moving bodies first might also erase crucial information in some cases, even though agencies on the scene have maintained they bring bodies to the surface as soon as they are located. Friends and families are naturally focused on the remainsof their lost loved ones. More than any- thing, they appear to want federal and state agencies to find the bodies and transport them to land quickly. Others in this country and elsewhere surely sympathize with their agony. But reconstructing what happened could prove vital to saving lives in the future, and that effort must not be hampered. The families certainly have a right to complain about the conflicting reports they have sometimes received, and the Clinton administration has correctly moved to establish better communications and also to give the families more assistance. But nothing now known suggests anything but the utmost dedication to an arduous and sometimes dangerous task by highly competent officials and agents. Even if the emotions of the moment might make some people demand greater speed and smoother operations, the reality is that only so much is physically possible. ~ Scripps Howard News Service How can onecivilize the barbarians? MONA CHAREN Creators Syndicate Jonathan (4) and David (2) are still a twosome. They acknowledge little Ben (almost 5 months) with a word or a caress here and there (particularly Jonathan) - or sometimes with an impertinent request, like, “Put Ben down, and help me find myflashlight.” But, for the most part, two active preschoolers have little use for a baby, even as charming a baby as Benjamin. When either of his brothers approaches (OK, when anyone approaches), Ben erupts into dimpled smiles, pumping his arms and legs in delight. Happyis Ben's default setting. Still, Jonathan and David usually zoom right past him on their way, at full tilt, to see the bird's nest on our front porch, or to watch transfixed as a bulldozer makes its way up the street, or to thrill at the arrival of “THE LAWN-MOWER MEN!” Shaquille O’Neal will have to wait. Men who ride on lawn-mowers and operate leaf blowers are just the living end at our house. The boys are at their cutest when they are joined in delight over something. Sometimes, they even spontaneously hold hands while passing a construction site or choosing a flavor at Baskin-Robbins. I do my best to get into the spirit. Each and everytrip to the grocery store or pediatrician is a safari. We hunt for any number of things. Construction equipment, including bulldozers (which David used to call “dullbozers”), backhoes, graders, cranes, excavators and steamrollers, are Jonathan’s favorites. He can spot them hundreds of yards away, even tucked behind trees. Weare also always on the lookout for fire engines, ambulances (the kids are blessedly ignorant of what they're really for), motorcycles (David's favorite), convertibles and, recently, jeeps. Each sighting is then followed by back-seat “Crossfire.” “I sawit,” Jonathan announces. “I saw it, too,” says David. “No, you didn’t,” Jonathan taunts. “Yes, I did,” insists David, immediately indignant. If I don’t intervene at this point, there are usually two or three more exchanges, at steeply rising decibel levels, leading to an anguished David crying, “Mommy, Jonathan said I didn't see it!” I've tried a number ofstrategies to handle this. It doesn't work to tell David to ignore Jonathan. What his big brother says is important to David, however silly or insignificant it may seem to an adult. Once, when the boys were playing with magic wands, “changing” one another into frogs, David suddenly started to cry, saying, “I don’t want him to change me into a frog.’ My reminder that he was not a frog was unsatisfying. Lately, we've been attempting to show David that Jonathan is teasing him, while at the same time reproving Jonathan for doing so. Mental cruelty can send you to divorce court. But unchecked, it can become a wayoflife for siblings. And so, the work of civilizing the barbarians continues. One recent morning, David woke up crying. By the time I was able to get to his room, he had stopped. Jonathan was standing next to his crib, talking with him. “I took care of him because he was crying,” he explained. David seems to understand the goals we're shooting for. The other day, the two were playing on the floor. Jonathan pushed David. David pushed him back. And then David asked, “What's happening to us, Jon?” David also uses his considerable diplomatic skills to handle his big brother. When Jonathan handed David a coveted toy, David was fulsome in his praise: “Thank you, Jonathan. That was so nice of you to give it to mew The technique seems to work pretty well. But older brothers cannot be trusted. Jonathan, who knows that we do not want David to scream, has perfected the technique of saying inflammatory things to David under his breath. David screams. Mom or Dad rebukes David, and Jonathan slinks away from the scene with a self-satisfied smile. There is no greater pleasure in Jon’s life than seeing David scolded. I've tried reproving Jonathan for this. It hasn't worked. I may have to escalate - let the grass grow and deprive him of lawn mower men. Mona Charen writes a twice-weekly column for Creators Syndicate. More privileges for Washington's elites PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | Scripps Howard NewsService The GOP, which cannot get a presidential campaign under way against the scandal-ridden Clintons, is resorting to pandering. In deference to gender quota advocates, the Stupid Party has backed off its support of the popular California Civil Rights Initiative and abandoned its own legislative bills that would terminate quota privileges. It has backpedaled from its antiabortion stance. And, in the dumbest move ofall, GOP leaders (with the exception of House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer) are advocating special federal income tax breaks for residents of Washington, D.C. For millions of Americans, Washington has become a symbol of arrogant government pursuing its own selfish interests. Only the GOP could choose the time when movie audiences across the land are cheering the destruction of the White House in the film “Independence Day,” to advocate a 15 percent maximum federal tax rate for D.C. residents. The bill, known to critics as the “lobbyist and lawyer enrichment act,” would drop the top tax rate on Washington's six- and seven-figure incomes from 40 percent to 15 percent. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R- half the tax rate applied to America’s middle class. Little wonder Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole is falling further behind Bill Clinton. No matter howabjectly the Republicans pander, quota beneficiaries, abortionists and Washington, D.C., residents are not going to vote Republican. By pandering to its opponents, the GOPis turning off its own constituencies. The District of Columbia has been losing residents for years because ofits high crime rate and the plundering of city finances byits politicians. However, a 15 percent top federal tax rate would cause every upper-income person in the country to claim Washington as a legal residence whether or not they spent much time there. The price of real estate would skyrocket as money flowed in to establish residence. At the same time, a low federal tax rate is worth comparatively little to poor inner-city residents, who would be pushed out as Washington became a city of multimillionaires. Yet GOP backers of this inane proposal describe it as “a good ‘proposal to help the city.” What aboutall the other cities, and towns and rural areas? Why should a city gain tax privileges by running its affairs into the ground with incompetence and theft? Nothing shows more clearly that Republicans have become part of the problem than their effort to enact such a proposal. They are inured to Washington's practice of responding to Ga., Senate Majority Leader Trent the public's loss of confidence and affection by walling itself off, like the Russian czar, from the . Lott, R-Miss., and even Sen. Connie Mack, R-Fla., have joined the push to tax Washington's multimillionaires at off, and now 400 parking places are to be erased from the city streets in order First Pennsylvania Avenue is closed to protect federal buildings from car bombs. From here, it is only a short step to privileged income tax status. After all, Washington is the seat of sovereignty. It controls the power. Why should it forego the privileges that rulers bestow upon themselves? One reason is the Constitution’s requirement that laws be equally applied. Our Founding Fathers were particularly worried that states or regions would gang up and place the tax burden on outvoted interests. The Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, clause 1) explicit- ly requires that all taxes “shall be uniform throughout the United States.” But a privileged, walled-off elite has nothing to fear from a mere Constitution. Even the justices sworn to enforce it might be tempted by the low tax rate on their six-figure incomes. Seldom have the rich had such prospects of a windfall in the name of helping the poor. Americans have reason to be thor- oughly alarmed. Their cherished equali- ty before the lawis being jettisoned by leaders of both parties. First it was legal privileges based on race, gender and handicapped status, and nowit is tax privileges based on residence in the capital city. To abandon the equal applicability of lawis an extremelyserious step. No amount of rhetoric about civil rights, economic enterprise zones and compassion for poor blacks can justify privi- lege before the law. Paul Craig Roberts is chairman of the Institute for Political Economy, a distin- guished fellow of the Cato Institute and author of “The New Color Lines How Quotas and Privilege Destroy Democracy.” Ellen Goodman is on vacation; her column will return Aug. 9 |
