A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald, Nov. 21, on the bankruptcy of Solyndra solar-tech company:
A common mantra during the debates about bailing out the financial industry and Detroit automakers was that the federal government was “picking winners and losers,” with the recipients of Washington’s cash being the winners.
Unfortunately, the country is finding out the government bet too heavily on losers, too. What remains in question is whether the cash infusion given by the federal government to promote policy goals was also part of an effort to promote overly political goals, too.
At the center of the controversy is the California-based solar technology company Solyndra, which received a federal loan guarantee of $528 million to develop its renewable energy technology and ability to manufacture energy-producing panels. When the loan guarantee was announced, Energy Secretary Steven Chu attended the company’s 2009 groundbreaking. Later, President Barack Obama went on a tour of the company’s headquarters and touted it as a clean energy company upon which future economic growth could occur.
By the end of 2010, the company had foundered, however.
What’s striking is the timing of the announcement of the company’s implosion: Nov. 3, one day after the midterm elections. If company officials delayed—or were asked to delay—their announcement because of the effect it would have on the general elections, such a move would be beyond the pale even in today’s hyperpartisan Washington.
Chu repeated last week that the Solyndra debacle was based more on poor timing and unforeseen events—the reduction of solar demand in Europe and the proliferation of cheap products from China — but as more information comes out, it could become apparent that a company working in lockstep with the administration’s goals received treatment not equivalent with its business fundamentals. And that reeks of corruption.
Editorial:
———
The Daily Camera, Nov. 16, on journalists’ rights while covering the Occupy Wall Street protests:
It should not matter what side of the political divide we reside in—whether we support the Occupy Wall Street protests or don’t—to thoroughly reject the justification for barring journalists from covering the protests, and in some cases arresting journalists who are protected by the First Amendment.
Freedom of the press has been absolutely critical to American freedom from the start; police states or authoritarian rule seem impossible to achieve in the full public view of a democratic citizenry.
Consider much of what has already been achieved by the Arab spring: Actions that have been suppressed by despots for decades are boldly covered by mainstream media like Al Jazeera and previously unavailable tools like Twitter. We’re hopeful that citizens there will get the fair and democratic societies so many of them have died for, and struggled for, for so long. But one thing is certain: The communications cat is out of the bag. In countries including Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, the local communities have demanded and sought out more information, even against powerfully dangerous odds.
Compare that with pre-Arab Spring suppression, or modern Communist China censorship.
And then you have America, with hundreds of years of a constitutionally protected press, the freedom to assemble, freedom of speech. And despite the fact that we have our worst economy since the Great Depression, we own and use as many tools and toys of communication that even the most spoiled toddler would coo with delight at the sight of them.
Yeah. We’re spoiled.
But you don’t keep rights you don’t fight to defend.
In the early hours of Nov. 15, New York police moved in to at least temporarily clear the Occupy Wall Street protests from the two-month old encampment. The state’s Supreme Court upheld the order later in the day, ruling “The court is mindful of the movements’ First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and peaceable assembly…Even protected speech is not equally permissible in all places and at all times.”
But journalists who tried to cover the evacuation in many cases weren’t let anywhere near it, and at least six working for organizations including National Public Radio, the Daily News, and the Associated Press were detained and arrested by the police. For doing their jobs. This is a dangerous precedent—whether you support the evacuation or not, you have the constitutional right to be informed about it.
What did journalists do? What people without a free press do: They took to Twitter. That’s not enough.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered an excuse that sounded positively Chinese: The police were just keeping the journalists safe.
“American foreign correspondents routinely put themselves in harm’s way to do their jobs, in some of the most brutal dictatorships in the world. And their NYC colleagues deserve the freedom to make the same choice,” Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer was quoted by the Washington Post. “Zuccotti Park is not Tiananmen Square.”
Indeed. The Society Of Professional Journalists condemned the arrests, but in fact, everyone should.
Editorial:
———
STATE:
The Coloradoan, Nov. 19, on health care access in Colorado:
The numbers in the latest Colorado Health Care Access Survey tell a story in a staggering way:
— Almost one-third of Larimer County’s residents are uninsured or underinsured.
— One in six Coloradans has no health insurance.
— $63.6 million: Amount absorbed by Poudre Valley Health System last year in non-reimbursed care for participants in the Colorado Indigent Care Program.
— $9.3 million: Amount of charity care provided by Poudre Valley Health System in 2010.
— About 10.5 percent of Larimer County residents said they had no primary health care home.
— Of the average 30,000 deaths reported each year in Colorado, about half are considered preventable with adequate medical care.
A combination of increasing unemployment and rising health care costs in Colorado has created a perfect storm of circumstances in which compassion has been abandoned and the cost of medical care has veritably been shifted to the general public.
When people can’t afford health insurance, they often wait until their condition worsens and then pursue help from hospital emergency rooms. This approach is much more expensive. In turn, hospitals often have to write off bad debt or absorb the cost of providing care to those who can’t pay for it. Either approach means that costs are picked up either by taxpayers in general or by other health care customers.
In a reflection of the same problem faced by individuals, companies are starting to drop health care coverage because of prohibitive costs. A 2009 University of Denver study offers a reminder that this is not an issue in a vacuum: Colorado lost between $1.8 billion and $3.9 billion in productivity and lost work hours because of uninsured worker illness and untreated conditions.
Oddly, these are the consequences many policymakers say they wanted to avoid amid wrangling over health care reform.
The compassionate argument to ensure health care access to all should have been enough, but it wasn’t. Two of the most significant barriers between the haves and have-nots remain access to health care and access to education. Until these barriers are eliminated, Coloradans will lose ground in the most fundamental of ways.
Lawmakers must connect the dots between Colorado’s economy and its strategy on health- care or our residents will continue to struggle, and the economic outlook will falter.
Coloradans are encouraged to remind their lawmakers that what they are doing on a state and federal level is neither working for our pocketbooks nor for our hearts.
Editorial:
———
The Denver Post, Nov. 18 , on restroom rule for transgender student:
It’s hard to imagine that in 2011 a transgender student would be prohibited from using a student restroom at a public high school, but here we are.
The Coloradoan newspaper in Fort Collins reported this week that 16-year-old Dionne Malikowski, who was born male but identifies as a female, was told by Fort Collins High School officials that she could use only staff restrooms.
She said she was told it was for her own protection.
It’s also, we suspect from a reading of Colorado’s civil right statutes, a violation of state law.
Colorado’s sexual orientation discrimination rules say transgender individuals shall be allowed the use of “gender-segregated facilities that are consistent with their gender identity.”
State officials tell us that applies to public facilities, including schools.
Malikowski could, and we hope will, file a complaint with the state’s civil rights division against the school under the public accommodations law.
Malikowski, a high school junior, told the Coloradoan she was suspended a month ago for using the girls’ restroom instead of a staff facility. She had previously received a warning for using the girls’ room.
Malikowski said she found the prohibition to be discriminatory.
“I want to be able to use the girls’ bathroom without being harassed for it or suspended or having charges pressed against me,” she told the Coloradoan.
“I just want people to understand that there are so many kinds of people out there, and people who are a little different shouldn’t have to be treated differently or looked down on.”
Those are mature words. Poudre School District officials should heed them and reverse course on the matter.
We checked in with them Thursday afternoon to see if the situation had changed, knowing there was a limited amount they could say about the particulars involving a student. We were assured nothing had changed.
What a shame.
It’s difficult enough to navigate the waters of gender identification as a teenager. We would have hoped the school would support this student’s choice to use the girls’ restroom.
If issues arise with Malikowski being bullied, as she says she has been, then school officials ought to address that behavior, not prohibit her from using a facility she is entitled to use.
Transgender people often experience hurtful comments that come out of ignorance and prejudice.
It’s disappointing that a transgender girl would be treated the way she reportedly has been by an institution that is supposed to be dedicated to knowledge and learning.
We expect more enlightened behavior from school officials, and Malikowski certainly deserves it.
Editorial:
