OCR Text |
Show Sun Advocate GB Tuesday, May 16, 16B9 An incomplete attack on sleaze Americans properly resist trusting public servants who exploit their jobs for personal gain. But cashing in on government ties has become commonplace. Some officials rake in thousands of dollars for giving speeches or serving on private boards; others jump straight from public posts into jobs lobbying old colleagues. And some lawmakers pour leftover campaign funds into their own pockets. A new bill offered by President Bush would mop up some of that sleaze, but it overlooks some of Washingtons muddiest ethical swamps. To restore faith in government, Congress should expand on the presidents promising start. Much of Bushs ethics package mimicks the one that his predecessor vetoed just before leaving office. It would oblige lawmakers and top government aides to wait a year after leaving office before offlobbying former colleagues. Executive-branc- h icials would be already subject to such a ban barred from lobbying not just their old agencies, but any executive-branc- h department. Bush also favors tougher financial-disclosur- e rules and sharper limits on outside income for many federal officials. And his plan urges an array of changes that could foster quality in government service: an overdue 25 percent pay raise for judges; a ban on using surplus campaign funds for personal use; a tax benefit for appointees who must sell off assets to avoid conflicts of interest. Praiseworthy as it is, Bushs plan fails to unsnarl some of Washingtons knottiest ethical tangles. Though his own ethics commission urged a ban on speaking honorariums for members of Congress, the president insisted a ban should only be discussed in the context of a congressional pay raise. But without a presidential nudge, lawmakers may never muster the political will to forgo special-interecash. Nor are they likely to resist the influence of political-actio- n committees, which pump millions of dollars into congressional campaigns every election. But though Bush wisely favors a ban on direct PAC campaign contributions, he rejects out of hand a substitute that Congress should consider: public financing of congressional campaigns. The presidents ethics plan may indeed keep many public servants from milking their jobs for personal profit. But the milking can be further reduced by severing other lucrative links between policymakers and special interests. If Bush and Congovernment, gress are serious about the scheme. should cleanup improve they Life & other trivialities Some kind of adventure st de-sleazi- ng Reprinted from The Minneapolis Star Tribune. punches at the public eye Throwing What happens when a publicity stunt goes awry? Well, you still get plenty of attention just not the kind By STEVE CHRISTENSEN Sun Advocate editor made him realize he was in the domain of the wolf, like the wolf would feel in New York City. His feeling for animals of all all forms types is also a sort of religion of life should be respected and humans should not expect or attempt to dominate every creature on earth. Along the river are large lakes. Perkins became lost for days when he couldnt find the outlet. Other times he was stymied by constant rains that kept him in the tent for days at a time. The experiences took away his security, During the eight weeks of solitude just Perkins and nature, he had a lot of which he says comes from knowing who time to think. He recorded his thoughts of you are, where you are and what youre the day with a small movie camera. He doing. At times he knew none of these. would set it up at some beautiful spot, in Although the experience is a little strehis canoe or tent. He would then move to a nuous for me, I admire Perkins for his spot in front of the camera and share his willingness to undertake such an advenfeelings feelings of wonder, of pain, of ture. But it is more than just the nine-wee- k adventure. It is what such an experbeing scared and of being part of nature. At times his feelings were almost reliience gives to life itself. I leave you with one ofhis gious. At one point a wolf came to see what parting statePerkins was doing. The animial scared ments : They (his experiences) have given him, and intriqued him. The experience me so much more than I set out to find. took a job with an insurance company in New York City. After being there two weeks, Perkins said his wife told him she was going home to get some things. What she didnt tell him was that she wasnt coming back. That changed his life. He became a poet, a naturalist and an adventurer. Facts, according to Perkins, are things like getting up, going to work, existing. But, life is what happens between the facts. At times of my life I have considered myself a pretty adventurous person. I have been on numerous backcountry trips, run many of the white water rivers in the intermountain area and I even once tried escargot. But, in comparison to Robert Perkins, I have lived a rather reserved life. I watched a segment on public television the other night in the Adventure series k which portrayed Perkins trip along the Back River in northern Canada. This is one of the real remote places on earth. With the exception of a few days at the beginning of the trip and a few days at the end, Perkins was all alone, hundreds of miles from the nearest civilization and thousands of miles from his home in the United States. Perkins is now a poet and naturalist, but hasnt always been. At college he fell in love with a woman, and to please her, he completed a degree in business and nine-wee- you expected. For proof of this thesis, one need only look at the recent doings of mega-mout- h Morton Downey, the talk show host, and William Sokolin, a New York wine merchant similarly big on showmanship. Downey recently stumbled out of a San Francisco public restroom crying that he had been assaulted g skinheads. The three said had Downey, hooligans, chopped his hair and smeared his face, shirt and pants with swastikas. Police, however, came to a different conclusion. A witness said there was no struggle, no skinheads. Downeys disfigurement, investigators concluded, He chose not to file a police was complaint. Sokolins travails admittedly were He stood before a gathering of wine lovers in a posh New York restaurant and, as he says did something terrible. Im very unhappy, he told The New York Times. committed murder. Actually, no humans were slain. But judging from the reaction of the dinner guests, their mouths agape, you might have thought so. What bit the bottle of wine worth, Sokodust was a lin hoped, a cool $500,000. Thinking a dose of publicity could only heighten the wines value, Sokolin brandished it for all to see. A bottle of wine said to have once belonged to Thomas Jefferson! The guests were delighted. But as the wine master lowered the bottle it and broke. Its prebumped against a metal tray cious contents dribbled onto the floor. The guests went gasped. As for Sokolin, "Bang, he says, self-inflicte- by Nazi-lovin- d. self-inflicte- d. I 202-year-o- mike royko ld I home. events made a splash recently. It was just the kind of mass exposure the publicity seekers wanted. Well, almost. Problem is, the camera nevBoth er blinks. NOTICE TO SUN ADVOCATE READERS Contents of sped nl written columns or letters publi shed in this newspaper do not in any way reflect the position, attitude or support of the Sun Advocate. a day A tickle I thought by now I had run across most known social injustices. But a letter that recently was printed in the Chicago Tribune brought a new one to my attention. It concerns the tickling of babies. The person who wrote the letter condemned babytickling as cruel and sadistic, and urged people to stop doing it. Thats a problem I had not thought about before. Like most people, I have seen babies tickled. But it never occurred to me that it might be harmful to them. I assumed that since they giggled, they were enjoying themselves. That was faulty reasoning, of course, since even adults giggle when there is no reason. TV newscasters do it often. But maybe they tickle each other during commercials. I knew that the popular practice of throwing babies in the air and yelling whoopie at them wasnt a good idea. Especially in houses that have low ceilings. It can cause a child who was tossed around that way to grow up with a fear of heights, as well as a flat head. An uncle of mine used to do that all the time. When he was around, there was always a shrieking baby in orbit. Sometimes hed get two or three of them going at the same time, and work in a couple of oranges or apples so it was a regular juggling act. He once tossed my cousin so high that the kid sailed right off the back porch and landed in the crook of a tree. We had to call the fire department to get him down. The firemen couldnt understand how a tot could have climbed that tree. And sure enough, when my cousin grew up, he had a terrible fear of heights. And also a fear of uncles, trees, porches, firemen and the word whoopie. Im certain that most people dont realize cruel and sadisare being they tic. Somebody points a baby at you, and your choice of responses is limited to chucking it under the chin, saying or giving it a tickle. Im a myself, although I occasionally say It depends on the circumstances. If the kid is drooling all over its chin, I prefer who tickle babies goo-go- o, chin-chuck- goo-go- o. goo-go- o. er As far as I know, there isnt anything harmful about so long as you dont wind up and chuck so hard chin-chuckin- I g, that the child gets punchy. On the other hand, if a baby is chucked under the chin by everyone it meets, it could develop a callused jaw. So maybe chin-chuckin- g is another abuse we ought to think about. little-know- n After reading the anti- tickling letter, I asked a child expert if tickling really was bad for babies. He said it sure was. For one thing, a child who is tickled can develop sexual inhibitions at a later age. I dont argue with experts, but I dont see how they could be sure of something like that, since most people wouldnt remember if they had been tickled as babies. For all we know, a man who blames early tickling by his old granny for his inhibitions might be inhibited simply because he has knobby knees and wears baggy shorts. The child expert also said that tickling is handed down from one generation to another, and becomes increasingly worse. For example, someone who was tickled as a baby is more likely to become a tickler of babies himself. And a person who was tickled on his ribs might later tickle babies on the ribs and the bottoms of their feet. And that baby, in turn, could grow up to be the kind of sadist who would tickle a baby on the ribs, feet, and under the neck maybe even with a feather. So in three or four generations, you could end up with someone who is sexually inhibited, but giggles all the time. It would be better to be tossed off a porch. Im not sure what can be done to prevent the tickling of babies. Its an issue that has not been taken up by any politicians that I know of. A law forbidding baby tickling could be passed, but it would be difficult to enforce. Most parents, uncles, aunts and grannies wouldnt turn each other in. Not unless there was a reward involved. City inspectors could probably be assigned to just walk around and listen for the telltale sound of a baby giggling. That might seem like strange work, but its not much different than what many of them are doing anyway. Or maybe newborn babies could be stamped with a harmless vegetable dye that says: Do Not Tickle. But that might be a bad precedent, Toss in Air, and someone else ( Continued on Inge 7B) IV |