A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
The Denver Post, July 9, on the U.S. Postal Service:
During the last five years, there has been only one kind of news about the U.S. Postal Service—bad news.
The quasi-government agency took another hit last week when The New York Times published a story about delivery delays that are posing serious problems for businesses that use the service.
And these delays precede the full implementation of a mail processing center closure plan involving 229 centers as a cost-cutting measure. What will happen then?
The Postal Service, like many other businesses, is facing a sea change as people increasingly conduct their lives and business online.
But it’s worse than that. The agency doesn’t get taxpayer support and must be financially self-sufficient—like a private business—but is subject to meddling by Congress.
The U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to establish post offices, and federal lawmakers seem to want to be involved in many of the Postal Service’s business decisions.
For instance, the agency is under statutory mandate to deliver mail six days a week. And federal lawmakers, responding to rural constituents, pressured the agency to halt a plan to shut down little-used post offices in order to save money.
When the Postal Service has tried important diversification initiatives, it has been hampered by Congress.
Foreseeing a decline in paper billing, the agency back in 2000 created a secure online bill-paying service so it could remain the primary bill processor. Internet-based businesses objected, and Congress pushed the Postal Service into dropping the effort.
Unfortunately, these are not isolated incidents.
It’s hard to imagine how a complex operation such as the Postal Service can make the changes necessary for financial survival so long as senators and representatives insist on dictating business strategy.
At this rate, the Postal Service, which is losing $36 million a day, hasn’t got a chance.
The Times story, published July 4, showed what we think are the symptoms of this interference in combination with legacy costs of running a behemoth of a bureaucracy. The Postal Service is struggling to maintain on-time delivery. Utility bills are arriving late. Newspapers are delayed. Sales or event promotions arrive after the fact.
As Congress mulls proposals to fix the agency’s financial problems, we think lawmakers should more often defer to the judgment of postal officials. The postmaster needs greater freedom to cut operations, trim the labor force, engage in new services and close facilities.
The last thing the Postal Service needs is more interference from lawmakers who may be basing their decisions on political motivations instead of business pragmatism.
Editorial:
———
The Reporter-Herald, July 7, on court fines:
More Americans are learning it’s not hard to get into a fine mess.
A recent New York Times story detailed the problems people can face as court fees and fines add up.
One Alabama woman was fined $179 for speeding three years ago. She failed to show up at court—she said the ticket had the wrong date—so her driver’s license was revoked. Pulled over again, she was fined for driving without a license, and her bill grew to $1,500.
But the problem got worse when a private probation company became involved after she was unable to pay that tab.
She was jailed, then charged an additional fee for each day she spent behind bars. In all she has been locked up three times for a total of 40 days and owes $3,170, much of it to the probation company.
Unfortunately, her problems are not unique, as more municipalities turn over their probation systems to for-profit companies. The companies can be aggressive in their efforts to collect fines and fees.
But now some lawyers are warning that such systems leave the poor at risk of ending up jailed and in debt for minor infractions.
John B. Long, a Georgia lawyer who plans to take the issue to a federal appeals court, said that when private companies are given the authority to jail someone for not paying a fine, it begins to affect liberty. “The closer you get to locking someone up, the closer you get to a constitutional issue,” he said.
The Conference of State Court Administrators recently cautioned that the fines, fees and surcharges associated with traffic violations should not be “simply an alternate form of taxation.” The Brennan Center for Justice has warned that extra fines and fees “create new paths to prison for those unable to pay their debts and make it harder to find employment and housing as well as to meet child support obligations.”
When the penalty for a simple speeding ticket can mushroom into thousands of dollars, the system needs to be changed.
Americans expect and deserve their courts, and their fines, to be fair.
Editorial:
———
STATE:
The Daily Sentinel, July 5, on the Colorado Roadless Rule:
A seven-year process that some environmental groups maintained was unnecessary has resulted in a final roadless plan that makes sense for Colorado.
Last Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack approved the record of decision that finalizes the Colorado Roadless Rule. The rule, drafted and amended with input from a multitude of Coloradans and users of the national forests, protects 4.2 million acres of national forest lands in the state from road building and related development.
However, because the roadless rule is unique to Colorado, it allows a variety of activities that aren’t allowed or are more restricted under the national roadless rule: expansion of coal mines in the North Fork Valley of Delta and Gunnison counties; enlarging of some ski areas operating on national forest lands; flexibility to build roads to address wildfire mitigation and pine beetle infestations.
But the Colorado rule isn’t just about easing restrictions imposed by the national rule. It sets a higher level of protection than the national rule for roughly 1.2 million acres of the 4.2 million roadless acres in this state. The final version also adds 400,000 acres of new roadless lands, and it offers additional protection for cutthroat trout habitat.
The fight over roadless areas began in 2001, when President Bill Clinton, in one of his final official acts, designated more than 50 million acres across the West as roadless, banning most development of those lands. But logging, mining and energy interests objected and challenged Clinton’s executive order in court. That led to a series of conflicting judicial rulings.
It also led President George W. Bush to offer states the opportunity to propose their own rules to protect roadless areas within their boundaries.
Only Idaho and Colorado followed through on that offer. In 2005, a statewide group authorized by the Legislature began holding hearings across Colorado to take input from citizens and user groups about what such a state rule should entail.
The Colorado rule was eventually adopted and amended several times. It was submitted to the U.S. Forest Service first by Republican Gov. Bill Owens and subsequently by Democratic Govs. Bill Ritter and John Hickenlooper. It also won bipartisan support from Colorado’s congressional delegation and the endorsement of many sportsmen’s groups.
However, even though representatives of environmental organizations took part in the original meetings on the rule, leading groups later opposed the Colorado Roadless Rule. They argued it was not needed because the national rule, which was eventually upheld in court, provides better protection.
They are wrong. The Colorado Roadless Rule does a better job of protecting roadless forest lands in this state in a manner that serves Colorado’s needs. We applaud Vilsack for giving it final approval.
Editorial:
———
The Pueblo Chieftain, July 8, on the potential for flooding in the wake of wildfires:
The Waldo Canyon Fire that burned thousands of acres of evergreens on the Pike National Forest—as well as causing the devastation of hundreds of Colorado Springs homes—has created the potential of flooding and pouring huge amounts of mud down Fountain Creek through Pueblo.
The U.S. Forest Service and other government agencies have formed a task force to address potential mudslides and flooding. Pueblo County and the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District are participating.
In addition, U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., has asked U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack for greater assistance with the removal of beetle-kill trees from Colorado’s forests.
“As you are aware, Colorado is experiencing one of the worst fire seasons on record,” Rep. Gardner wrote in a letter to Secretary Vilsack. “It is important that we work together to alleviate and assist the state and federal partners in removing beetle-kill infested forest areas. By accomplishing this goal, we can improve the prospects for maintaining and controlling future forest fires.”
There are huge swaths of beetle-kill trees around Colorado, and they are ripe for fire that could cause further flooding.
Rep. Gardner also highlighted a letter sent by Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty to Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper stressing the importance of a coordinated state and federal effort through active and preventive management of federal forest lands.
The nation needs to resume its rigorous management of our forest lands. Benign neglect favored by green groups no longer can be tolerated.
Editorial:
