A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
The Denver Post, May 17, on the debt ceiling:
The country hit a debt milestone Monday, officially maxing out its credit cards with no deal in sight to end the insanity.
Congress has a lot of work to do.
During the next three months, federal lawmakers must come up with a bipartisan agreement to raise the debt ceiling above its current $14.3 trillion level so the country does not default on its obligations.
That agreement must include elements that are odious to both sides—entitlement cuts that Democrats will object to, and revenue increases that Republicans will oppose.
The best hope for such a compromise lies with the so-called Gang of Six, a bipartisan group of senior lawmakers who have considerable sway with their peers. News stories in recent weeks have raised suspicions that the group’s work has reached impasse. We hope this is not the case and urge its members to redouble their efforts.
Allowing the country to lurch into default is not an option. Neither is the current course of spending and revenue collection.
The group, which is working with Vice President Joe Biden, is keeping the details of its negotiations close to the vest so that individual pieces do not become political footballs before they are presented as part of a package.
The Gang of Six drew several of its members from the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform—the panel chaired by former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., and Erskine Bowles, former White House Chief of Staff in the Clinton administration.
We hope the group of lawmakers also adopted some of the central recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles commission, further refining them to gain enough support in Congress.
As you may recall, that panel suggested changes that would cut nearly $4 trillion from projected deficits through 2020. It would establish ceilings for annual military and domestic program spending, increase payroll taxes on the affluent to make Social Security solvent, and gradually increase the age of full retirement from 67 to 69.
The panel recommended revamping the tax code, and eliminating or reducing $1 trillion in annual tax breaks popular among individuals and corporations. The panel’s well-researched recommendations are a good place to start. The job now is to get enough federal lawmakers on board with a compromise.
It won’t be easy.
Republicans are asking for deep spending cuts without revenue increases if they are to support increasing the debt limit.
In a speech last week to the Economic Club in New York, House Speaker John Boehner said negotiated spending reductions would have to exceed the amount of the increase in the debt ceiling, a number that is expected to be about $2 trillion.
Assuredly, some Democrats will take issue with some of the spending cuts, particularly as they are fully fleshed out.
But that’s how compromise goes—both sides find themselves unhappy with parts of the final result.
For the good of the country, members of Congress must spend the coming weeks staking out a piece of debt reduction common ground that’s big enough to share.
Editorial:
———
The Reporter Herald, May 17, on FEMA providing aid to some who should not have received funds:
When most Americans have their first contact with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, it comes on the heels of perhaps their worst days. Floods or tornadoes may have ravaged their communities, and the federal agency and the help it provides could be the only lifeline back to “normal.”
So it was for thousands of Americans who received aid from the agency in recent years. They applied for and received money to help them rebuild their homes and businesses.
Now, however, the agency acknowledges that some of those people who received money should not have done so, either because they already had insurance in place to cover the losses or were otherwise ineligible to receive funds.
FEMA wants the money back, and it has given the recipients an embarrassingly short time to return it: 30 days. The law requires such repayments.
While the goal of government to root out waste and fraud from its programs is not only laudable but necessary, almost all of the recipients of the federal disaster funds had played by the rules. They received money because of poorly trained agency staffers in most cases.
An equitable solution would be to extend the time period for repayments. While the disasters that warranted the request for aid may be a few years in the past, only the most fortunate would have amassed the funds for large-scale restitution to the government. Repayments should occur, but they should be on a schedule that acknowledges that the government was the party that made the error.
Congress should act quickly on this matter, because almost all of those affected by the forced repayments thought they were playing by the rules and were caught up by unbending federal mandates.
One financial disaster should be enough for those victims.
Editorial:
———
STATE:
The Daily Sentinel, May 16, on the process to amend the Colorado Constitution:
We’re pleased to learn that a group called Colorado’s Future is not abandoning its plan to seek voter approval to make it more difficult to amend Colorado’s Constitution, even though the state Legislature failed to pass a resolution this year that would have referred the issue to voters.
Colorado’s Constitution is one of the easiest in the country to amend, and the result has been a raft of ballot items to do just that every two years. Most are more about changing state procedures—and should be amendments to state statutes rather than the Constitution—while others, like last year’s attempts to eviscerate state and local government, probably wouldn’t have even made it to the ballot if there had been tougher standards.
The Daily Sentinel has long supported efforts to make it more difficult to amend the state Constitution. That document should not be a vehicle of micromanaging state budgets or state agencies, but for addressing broad policy issues.
The measure that died in the Legislature this year would have required signatures from all seven congressional districts in the state to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot, and it would have required a super-majority of more than 60 percent of voters to approve an amendment.
That’s a sensible approach to ensuring citizens still have a right to petition to change the Constitution, but those pursuing personal agendas or frivolous ideas don’t see amending the Constitution as such an easy route to take. We hope Coloradans get to vote on something very much like that plan in 2012.
Editorial:
———
The Coloradoan, May 12, on the merger of the Division of Parks and Wildlife:
Accountability and transparency will be essential as the Colorado Division of Wildlife and Colorado State Parks merge into what will be the Division of Parks and Wildlife.
At the urging of Gov. John Hickenlooper, who suggested such a merger would save money, the state Legislature approved the bill to merge the two agencies. Although no evidence exists to show that the merger will create efficiencies and save taxpayer dollars, the bill awaits the governor’s signature.
Now, the heavy lifting begins. The focus must be on ensuring that the expectations of Coloradans regarding services provided by this agency are well defined. Human nature is such that much emphasis could be placed on justifying the merger rather than ensuring that the missions, responsibilities and services are fulfilled. That would be a mistake on top of what already is a flawed process.
The onus will be on officials to clearly explain to the public how the agency will be funded and operated. For example, the new agency must demonstrate to Coloradans that money from fishing and hunting licenses will not be used to shore up parks. The public has a role here, too, by keeping watch over this merger.
Colorado places high value on its natural resources. Managing parks and wildlife in a responsible and responsive manner is vital to the state’s economy and its culture.
Editorial:
