A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
The Aurora Sentinel, May 17, on why Elena Kagan’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court is likely a sure thing:
It appears that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is a shoo-in for her seat on the high court.
That’s the conclusion just about anyone would come to after hearing Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell complain about Kagan’s comments about a recent Supreme Court decision to change a decades-old precedent and empower unions and corporations to meddle in federal elections.
Kagan, as President Barack Obama’s solicitor general, unsuccessfully argued the administration’s case that Congress had the right to limit money that corporations and labor unions could spend in political campaigns. In a narrow decision led by court conservatives, the Supreme Court said that restricting the ability for businesses and labor unions to spend whatever they want on elections is that same thing as restricting free speech.
The unpopular ruling has been sniffed at by a wide range of critics, liberal and conservative alike. If this is all the ammunition McConnell has to lob at a Kagan candidacy, clearly the battle has already been won. To say that Kagan’s arguing the case raises questions about her allegiance to free speed is ludicrous. The law narrowly restricted the ability of corporations and unions to unduly elevate their “free” speech to the ears of voters and unfairly influence the outcome of elections.
The high court in January ended a decades-old ban on unions and corporations spending freely on trying to influence voters. Instead, corporations and unions have for generations funneled regulated amounts of money into political action committees, which state legislatures and even Congress have had their sights on as well.
But in that rank 5-4 decision earlier this year, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations have the same free-speech rights as people.
The ruling bodes ill for an already sloppy attempt to clear special interests away from the election process. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote clearly what the court had done.
“The conceit that corporations must be treated identically to natural persons in the political sphere is not only inaccurate but also inadequate to justify the Court’s disposition of this case,” he wrote.
Drug companies, teacher unions and “Big Oil” are not people. And the billions of dollars they wield, the public’s dollars, will be used to benefit special interests in future elections, not the public.
Since McConnell is clearly grasping at straws this early in the confirmation process, it’s safe to assume Kagan has every reason to expect that she can start getting measured for black robes.
Editorial:
———
Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald, May 17, on need for federal regulation of toxic metals in jewelry:
The shiny allure of silvery jewelry has been part of the human experience for millennia—archaeological evidence points to people wearing jewelry more than 50,000 years ago.
So it comes as no surprise that metallic bling is being marketed to teens and preteens to help them make their own fashion statements.
But some of that jewelry is being made on the very cheap, with manufacturers, especially in China, substituting metals such as cadmium for others that would be more expensive. In some cases, the cadmium appears in very high levels.
Why is that a problem?
According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, cadmium is toxic if ingested by a child. It is a known carcinogen and can cause damage to bones and kidneys. Regulators realize that young children especially might put the jewelry into their mouths.
The federal government reported recently that it will expand recall efforts after an unsafe level of cadmium was found in $12 charm bracelets sold at chain stores across the country.
In addition, federal regulators reported they intercepted a shipment of bracelets with high cadmium levels that had arrived from China and sent them back to that country under a generic provision that allows them to refuse “toxic” products into the country.
Right now, there is no federal regulation on the amount of cadmium that can be contained in children’s toys; however, several states have passed legislation or are considering doing so.
This is an instance where a hodgepodge of local regulations could be a detriment to the American business owners who want to be able to sell safe products across the country.
Federal officials have done their jobs regarding keeping a toxic substance out of the hands of children; specific standards to set the boundaries should follow soon.
Editorial:
———
STATE:
The Denver Post, May 15, on an amendment that would let sex offenders choose treatment providers:
We’re troubled that a last-minute amendment allowing sex offenders to choose their treatment providers passed through the legislature without a full public exploration of the issue and the implications of such a change.
Sen. Joyce Foster, D-Denver, offered the amendment based on calls she said she received on the matter, including those from sex offenders.
It’s astonishing to us that legislators would support such a controversial change based on such a narrow sampling without seeking the broad range of opinions they would get with a public hearing.
It’s the kind of maneuver that not only undercuts public confidence in the legislative process, but also could easily result in bad public policy.
Foster defended the maneuver to us, saying that amendments are added to bills all the time without public hearings, and she is right on that count.
But we believe this particular issue is important enough and controversial enough to merit a public hearing in order to solicit a full range of opinions.
Perhaps legislators did their research individually, seeking out many and varied opinions before making the change. But we would have liked to have seen them publicly open up the floor to anyone who has an interest in the topic, particularly those who supervise sex offenders, victims or those who advocate on behalf of victims.
It seems that some offenders have taken issue with a program called Teaching Humane Existence (THE), which treats about 120 sex offenders.
We don’t know whether their complaints are justified, and we’re not convinced that legislators knew, either. Greig Veeder, executive director of THE, said Foster never spoke to him about complaints.
“When you work with manipulative people and you hold them accountable, they’re going to hate your guts,” he told The Post’s Kirk Mitchell.
Tempering the move a bit is the proviso that probation officers will give to offenders a list of three treatment providers to choose from, unless there are not that many qualified providers in their area.
We’re glad to see that guardrail was added to the measure and we hope probation officers are able to maintain public safety while complying with the legislation.
The vehicle for this amendment was House Bill 1364, a measure that extends the repeal date for the state’s sex offender management board.
It was a must-do bill in order to keep the board in business. The bill contained another controversial tenet, which garnered a lot of attention in the legislature and was the subject of public hearings.
The controversy centered on whether to remove wording from state law saying there was “no known cure” for sex offenders and instead research the matter.
We surely hope that letting offenders choose their treatment providers and allowing for the possibility they can be cured does not endanger public safety. Sex offenders are a special class of criminals who need careful supervision.
Editorial:
———
The (Greeley) Tribune, May 18, on lawmakers’ performance during this legislative session:
It feels a bit like the 2010 Colorado legislative session was more about putting out fires than real forward-thinking lawmaking.
Unfortunately, circumstances dictated that a bulk of our lawmakers’ time be spent dealing with a huge budget shortfall and hot-button issues such as medical marijuana.
Still, under the circumstances, we think our lawmakers did a good job tackling the most critical needs of the state while addressing a few long-term problems and issues that will impact certain entities and residents for many years to come.
In 120 days, lawmakers considered 649 bills; 268 made it to the governor’s desk and 179 are still on the way. A handful were left languishing in the process.
But overall, some important work was accomplished.
The Legislature passed regulations for medical marijuana, although the bill will probably face a legal challenge. The bill creates a licensing process for dispensaries, as well as more stringent requirements for doctors who recommend marijuana for patients. The bill also allows local governments to ban dispensaries, which could be a legal sticking point in the legislation. However, it at least creates some regulation and guidelines for this booming industry.
The Legislature passed the 2010-11 budget with major cuts in tax incentives, and proposed cuts in such previously untouched areas as public education. While the budget is balanced, lawmakers did little to address some of the state’s long-term budget issues, such as finding a stable funding source for higher education.
Even though their funding is still up in the air, institutions of higher education were given some flexibility by a bill that changes how colleges and universities structure tuition, allowing them to charge a higher rate while offering more financial aid to low- and middle-income students.
In the 11th hour, lawmakers passed new requirements for teacher tenure, linking it more to performance than longevity. Principals are given more power over teacher performance evaluations, as well as the hiring and firing of teachers.
In a true bipartisan effort, the Legislature passed a bill that will push Xcel Energy to convert several coal-fired plants to natural gas and will encourage the use of more “clean” energy sources.
These and many other bills address some long-standing and important issues for our state. And several also were the result of bipartisan efforts, which of course we like to see.
Our lawmakers, especially those in Weld County, work very hard during the session to represent their constituents. We thank them for their service.
We also hope that next year, lawmakers are ready to tackle some of those unresolved issues facing the state, such as continued conflicts in the budgeting process and stabilizing education funding, both K-12 and higher education.
Editorial:
