BCT Editorial – 6/19/06

This page was last updated on June 19, 2006.

Salutes & Boots; Editorial; Beaver County Times; June 19, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Salute: To Auditor General Jack Wagner for his suggestion that the Rural Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Program be expanded to serve more people. Wagner reported that about 30 counties are not currently covered by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. The program keeps growing, and PennDOT wouldn’t mind seeing it continue to expand. For that to happen, though, the Legislature would need to increase funding. Given the state’s large rural population, it should come through with the money as soon as possible.”

[RWC] First, is it the job of an auditor to recommend how his client should spend his money?

Second, if you choose to live in a rural area, you should not expect the same services as a person living in the city, not that I believe the government should be providing transportation services to anyone regardless of location.

Third, this editorial is another example of the Times contradicting itself. If you recall the June 5^th editorial entitled “Forked tongue,” the Times chided elected PA Republicans for not cutting spending.

“Boot: To the federal government for the scope of the fraud that took place in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The Associated Press reported last week the government handed out as much as $1.4 billion in bogus aid to people who claimed to be victims of the hurricanes. Congressional investigators found the federal government paid for a Caribbean vacation, season tickets to New Orleans Saints games, expensive champagne and a divorce lawyer’s services. In all, the $1.4 billion represented about 16 percent of the total funds spent on hurricane relief. Given the chaos, some waste and fraud was to be expected. But not to the tune of one in every $8 that was spent.”

[RWC] Obviously I don’t like the fraud and I believe the crooks should be tracked down and prosecuted. That said, can you imagine the stink the Times would have raised if a report found people who needed assistance didn’t get it in a timely manner? This is one of those cases in which the feds were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t.

“Salute: To the American Medical Association for its decision to urge the federal government to require high-salt foods to be labeled. The AMA also decided to push the food industry to drastically reduce the amount of salt in restaurant and processed food. The AMA reports Americans eat almost twice the amount of salt they should, which contributes to high blood pressure and heart problems. We do eat food with too much salt and fat in it for our own good.”

[RWC] Food nutrition labels already include salt content. What more is the AMA requesting?

Regarding “We do eat food with too much salt and fat in it for our own good,” how do we know? Just about every warning about one food component or another has been eventually followed up with a report negating the previous warning.