Editorial Roundup: Recent editorials in Arkansas newspapers

Here are excerpts from recent editorials in Arkansas newspapers:

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Feb. 5, 2017.

“If you breathe air, drink water, eat food, take medicine, or in any other way interact with the courts, this is a very bad decision.” - Nancy Pelosi

My, my, she do get excited, no? If you were on the fence about whether Neil Gorsuch should replace his like-minded fellow jurist on the nation’s top court, Pelosi’s statement should put you over that fence. Anybody who makes the decidedly former Speaker of the House that apoplectic can’t be all bad. Get him a robe, stat!

Only the most partisan, grudging and resentful of Washington politicians could find reasons to oppose this promotion for Gorsuch. The main reason most do, even if they don’t say it on the record, is because they had an opportunity before the election to replace Antonin Scalia with one of their own, thus changing the makeup of the United States Supreme Court for years, but Hillary Clinton blew the election. So instead of crowding the court with lightweights who specialize in legalese and talk about the United States Constitution as a Living Document, whatever that means, they have in front of them another conservative, of all things, who might interpret the law instead of make it.

Not only that, but he’s young too. At all of 49 years old, he could follow in Scalia’s footsteps for decades. Gosh, if he were only Hispanic, that would be another reason for the Democrats to oppose him, much like they opposed Miguel Estrada 15 years ago when George W. Bush wanted to give him a seat on the federal Court of Appeals. But Estrada’s appointment would have taken away one of the brushes used to paint Republicans as anti-Hispanic, so Estrada’s nomination had to be defeated. And was. What a moment for the national Democratic Party.

Now comes Gorsuch. Say what you will about this president, he doesn’t have a tendency to go with easy or political savvy choices. Looking at his Cabinet so far, and this nomination, he apparently values competence over “diversity” and smooth political sailing.

So how extreme is Gorsuch? So extreme that he was approved by the United States Senate to be a federal appeals court judge in Denver. Without one vote against him.

But, some of our friends on the left and The New York Times argue, this was a stolen seat! That is, the last nominee didn’t get a fair hearing before the election. The best Republican response comes from a former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who said that Supreme Court vacancies in the middle of presidential elections should be put off until the voters speak, because that’s “what history supports (and) common sense dictates.”

That was Joe Biden speaking as the Judiciary chairman during a Republican administration. Not the same thing at all! (Because the parties have switched.)

Dispatches say that Judge Gorsuch knows the need to protect the role of religion in America, is a proponent of a “strict reading” of the Constitution, and is often compared to, yes, Justice Scalia. That, and he has the temperament of a judge. Call such temperament judicial. So naturally Democrats promise to make things difficult.

But as the current majority leader of the United States Senate, one Mitch McConnell, put it: “When Gerald Ford nominated John Paul Stevens, (Democrats) attacked Stevens as anti-woman. When Ronald Reagan chose Anthony M. Kennedy, they said Kennedy was unqualified. When George H.W. Bush put forward David Souter, they declared Souter a threat to minorities. The attacks seem ridiculous today, but they’re an important reminder that no matter who a Republican president nominates, the far left will say the same things.”

And they’ll say the same things this week. And next. The Gorsuch family should get used to it. Until he’s confirmed.

And he should be confirmed. And probably will be. And probably without the traditional 60 votes needed to stop a filibuster.

Why? Because a former majority leader named Harry Reid set it up this way. When the last president, a Democrat, couldn’t get nominees on the federal bench because the Senate Republicans demanded a 60-vote cloture, Reid changed the rules so a simple majority could confirm nominees. All it would take now is for the current majority leader and his party to expand that to Supreme Court nominees. And they just might. Some folks, including certain editorial pages, noted that Harry Reid’s decision might come back to bite Democrats.

But what a gift this nominee could be to the country. Gorsuch has written books on the moral and legal arguments for life, that is, against euthanasia and assisted suicide. He’s written opinions on the bench that backed companies who, for religious reasons, didn’t provide contraception to employees. Not only that, he’s from Colorado, a flyover state. And is said to raise chickens and goats, and enjoys fly fishing. Which might be as close to a good old boy as the nation’s top court could get. (If good old boys can get degrees from Columbia University and Harvard. Which, of course, they can.)

Irony of ironies, if you’re looking for a monument to Harry Reid, it might just come in a nameplate that will probably be made in the coming months:

Nail Gorsuch, justice, United States Supreme Court.

___

The Jonesboro Sun. Feb. 7, 2017.

If Republican state lawmakers get their way and it looks like they will there will be gun-toting professors, custodians and coaches all over our college and university campuses, ready to duel it out with would-be mass murderers and assassins.

Even though all of the state’s public colleges and universities have consistently voted against allowing concealed handguns on campus, the Arkansas House voted this month to require them to do so essentially telling college and university administrators they don’t know what’s best for their campuses.

The measure, approved by the majority-Republican House on a 71- 22 vote, would require the schools to allow faculty and staff with a concealed handgun license to carry on campus, according to The Associated Press. The proposal now heads to the GOP-majority Senate.

So, who do you trust most with such a decision college and university leaders on campus or state lawmakers in Little Rock?

We’re fairly confident most of our state lawmakers aren’t qualified to lead a college or university. We’re opposed to state lawmakers mandating that colleges and universities allow faculty and staff to carry guns on campus.

It should be a moot point: They all voted against it.

But now state lawmakers want to force them. Why?

Well, according to Republican Rep. Charlie Collins, who had proposed the 2013 law leaving the concealed carry decision up to colleges, making it mandatory would help deter potential mass shooters and would supplement existing campus security.

“I’m recommending to you that we allow faculty and staff who have a concealed carry permit to carry on campus, not to create more gun- fights at the O.K. Corral but to deter some of the gunfights that we might otherwise have,” Collins was quoted by the AP before the vote.

It’s ironic that Collins would use gunfights at the O.K. Corral as a metaphor for allowing faculty and staff to carry guns on college campuses because that’s certainly more likely to happen if this bill is passed into law.

The police chief for the University of Arkansas’ flagship campus in Fayetteville told lawmakers this month he opposed the ban.

Austin Bailey, the head of the Arkansas Chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, summed it up perfectly for lawmakers who either weren’t listening or didn’t want to listen.

“Our law enforcement officers have told us that this legislation will make their jobs harder and more dangerous in crisis situations, and Arkansas professors have told us that this will change the focused learning environment they’re trying to cultivate in their classrooms,” Bailey said.

Here’s a simple scenario: Campus police get a call of an active shooter at the university library. When they arrive they find several people with guns drawn and shots being fired.

Who do they shoot?

Obviously, the people with the guns. That might include several faculty and staff members.

Poor Professor Plum was shot with a gun in the library. Lawmakers need to get a clue.

It should be up to each individual campus to decide if faculty and staff should be allowed to carry guns on campus, not politicians in Little Rock.

Several other gun-rights expansion efforts are also expected to be presented to lawmakers. They include requiring private employers to allow employees with concealed handgun licenses to keep their firearms locked in their cars at work.

Again, lawmakers have no business telling private businesses they have to allow guns on their property. That violates private property rights.

An even sillier proposal in the works would create a sales tax holiday weekend for firearms purchases.

Yippee! Maybe retailers can combine that with a BOGO promotion.

Our GOP lawmakers in Little Rock apparently have gone gun nuts. Maybe we all need to carry guns.

___

Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Feb. 7, 2017.

No one at Ecclesia College, a private Christian institution operating in Springdale since 1975, has been accused of anything illegal in relation to its quest for more than $700,000 in Arkansas taxpayers’ money.

But its president, Oren Paris III, has avoided interviews in the wake of former state Rep. Micah Neal’s guilty plea in federal court to accepting a kickback for directing $50,000 in state money - money taken through the state’s taxing authority from Arkansas residents and businesses - to the private college. Neal’s guilty plea revealed a federal investigation that appears to be ongoing, and shined a light on the lack of significant accountability in state lawmakers’ use of General Improvement Fund money.

Neal is the only person to be charged with a crime and for all the public knows, he may be the only one who will ever be. But the trail of so-called GIF money demonstrates other lawmakers, chief among them former Republican state Sen. Jon Woods of Springdale, have some serious questions to answer about how they doled out taxpayer dollars.

Between 2013 and 2015, 10 lawmakers directed state GIF grants to Ecclesia College totaling $617,500. Another $100,000 also went to the college, but records are unclear about who directed the public money there.

Woods’ publicly funded largesse totaled $350,000. Neal’s giveaway of state money was paltry in comparison, just $50,000. Other smaller grants using taxpayer money came from Rep. Stephen Meeks, R-Greenbrier; former Springdale Republican state Rep. Randy Alexander; state Sen. Bart Hester, R-Cave Springs; state Sen. Cecile Bledsoe, R-Rogers; former state Rep. Debra Hobbs, R-Rogers; state Rep. Jim Dotson, R-Bentonville; state Rep. Charlie Collins, R-Fayetteville; and Rep. Bob Ballinger, R-Hindsville.

Federal investigators told a judge that Neal’s kickback arrangement also involved a state senator, who they have not named. That senator, according to court documents, was to arrange for Ecclesia College to receive $150,000.

Political corruption is a disgusting and cynical abuse of the trust the public places in the people it elects to office. Federal officials are playing their cards close to the vest, but we sure hope the investigation exposes all who have taken advantage of state taxpayers to enrich themselves.

But for just a moment, let’s forget about the political corruption. Let’s forget about any criminal behaviors. There’s still a glaring question that Ecclesia’s leadership has left unanswered: Why should state taxpayers be funding a private Bible college?

Such colleges generally eschew public money entanglements that could get in the way of their Bible-based foundations, and that’s a wise choice that ensures their ability to instruct students in ways that are true to their faith. Legally speaking, the taxes paid by Arkansans - ones of all faiths or none at all - are not supposed to support any religion.

But Ecclesia clearly pursued access to these legislator-controlled state grants, requesting the money so it could buy two properties totaling 50 acres. According to applications for the grants, the college needed land for student housing to accommodate rapid growth in its 2013 and 2014 enrollments. According to Springdale building records, no new buildings or structural changes have occurred on the properties.

The college, or someone working on the college’s behalf, had found a pool of public money that came with absolutely no strings - and virtually no accountability - attached. That’s unfortunate. Public money ought to always come with strings attached to protect the interests of state taxpayers.

Beyond the question of whether everything about the grants represented an honest transaction lingers the question of why Arkansans should be shouldering the financial burdens of a private Christian college. Ask most Arkansans, except for some GOP lawmakers, and the answer would be simple: This isn’t what state tax dollars should be spent on.

Don’t conservative lawmakers often tell people Americans should get to keep more of their money (i.e., lower taxes) and decide for themselves what charitable causes to support? Shouldn’t taxpayers be left to their own decisions on whether to support a private religious school (Christian, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or others) rather than having taxes forcibly extracted from them so that lawmakers can dole out money to their own pet religious projects?

As for Ecclesia officials, they should really be ashamed of themselves for pursing public money for what is clearly not a public purpose. It is particularly offensive that now, in the light of investigations, the college’s leaders have declined to reveal information about their use of $700,000 in state money. Why? Because now they declare they’re a private college that isn’t obligated to release any documents. How does a private college justify such a two-faced approach to public money? Take the money but hide from all accountability?

As we noted, no one at Ecclesia College officials has been accused of doing anything illegal. But it’s an entirely different question to ask whether they did anything wrong.