Opinion: In today’s pages: Regulating E-war, safer parole, taxfree Interwebs
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
The editorial board thinks Bush’s veto of a kids’ healthcare plan was not only cruel, but also bad policy:
In purporting to defend against a government takeover of the insurance industry, he blocked one of the best options for lifting families from wholly government-paid entitlements like Medicaid and into private insurance paid for in part by parents. SCHIP isn’t welfare. In California, it is Healthy Families, the highly successful program that matches every state dollar with two from the federal government and entices parents to obtain and contribute to health coverage for their kids. Families that earn too much to qualify for Medi-Cal (the California incarnation of Medicaid) but not enough to buy insurance on their own use Healthy Families to get their kids off to a good start in life and correct any problems that, left untreated, would turn into a larger taxpayer burden down the road. Those parents also get into the habit of making health insurance part of their budget, which is exactly what opponents of government-provided healthcare want.
The board also discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to reexamine sentencing guidelines in a case involving a crack cocaine conviction, and recommends that Congress should extend and make permanent a ban on Internet taxes.
Columnist Gregory Rodriguez thinks the new citizenship exam rightly emphasizes ideas over regurgitation. Temple University’s Duncan B. Hollis argues that it’s time international law expand to govern cyberwarfare. UC Irvine’s Joan Petersilia says reducing the number of parolees on the streets would make for a safer system. And columnist Niall Ferguson explains how developing countries’ debt purchases from Europe and the U.S. make Western leaders feel less influential.
Terry Schauer of Westlake Village takes issue with The Times’ editorial chastising county sheriff’s deputies for partaking in arrest contests: ‘I’m guessing genuine local law enforcement misconduct must be way down if The Times can only expose a productivity contest. I don’t see mention of anything illegal -- no false arrests, no bad tickets, no humbug impounds and no complaints, except from professional complainers.’