OUR VIEWS

Still missing point

At least that's how we interpret the delegation's latest proposal for dividing revenue from a reconstituted county occupational tax. Instead of taking all the growth revenue from the tax for legislative pork, the new proposal would divide revenue that exceeds $50 million between the county commission and legislators. And it would eliminate the pork expenditures by legislators completely after 2009.

However, this latest proposal, like the previous ones, completely misses the point. It doesn't matter how worthy the projects and groups to which the legislators would channel public funds, for how long they would do it or even the amount spent. State legislators have no business trying to control how county revenues are spent. Those spending decisions belong with the Jefferson County Commission.

Because of Alabama's straightjacket of a state constitution, the commission had to ask for legislative help when a court ruled its current occupational tax unconstitutional. Actually, commissioners began asking for that help years before the court ruled.

Instead of simply correcting the problem, legislators adopted a new job tax law that diverted part of the revenue to fund legislator-chosen projects. Fortunately, they did so in a patently unconstitutional way — as a judge finally ruled last week.

Unfortunately, legislators have also approved legislation to end the current occupational tax April 1. Unless a new tax is approved by then, the county is likely to face financial ruin — and the blame will rest squarely on Jefferson County legislators.

We'd like to think their latest proposal means county legislators are beginning to come to their senses, although they are still far from doing what is right.

But it's hard to hold on to that thought when legislators have yet to show any sign they understand the principles they are so grossly violating.

A blank check

This being an election year, Congress will be disposed toward doing nice things for the electorate and some form of government payment for seniors' drugs might fit that prescription. But Rep. Bill Archer, R-Texas, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, offers a clue as to why Congress should be hesitant. The Clinton plan, he says, will add $168 billion over 10 years to the cost of Medicare.

Still, the lawmakers will be mightily tempted, for new forecasts say the 10-year federal surplus will be $3.8 trillion, $800 billion higher than expected.

Does that mean the country can now afford prescription drug coverage? A new report from the government's Health Care Financing Administration suggests the answer is no.

The reason: The cost of prescription drugs is soaring.

Spending on drugs rose by 15.4 percent in 1998. That's nearly 10 times the rate of inflation for that year. Drug costs are leading all other increases in medical spending, and they have been steadily accelerating. That suggests that Clinton's proposed $24-per-month payment, rising to $44 in 2008, would not buy much in the way of coverage and would have to be significantly increased for any meaningful benefit.

Medicare costs have been moderating, and even fell slightly last fiscal year for the first time ever. But that lull is only temporary. Costs elsewhere in the health industry are going up — insurance premiums went up 8.2 percent in 1998, double the rate of increase for the three previous years — indicating that the savings achieved by HMOs and managed care may have run their course. And, most significantly, the huge baby boom generation will begin retiring and going on Medicare in roughly a decade.

Like the problem of Social Security, the problem of paying for the huge demands in store for Medicare has still not been solved. The president, this one or the next one, and Congress should not be adding costly new entitlements until it can pay for the ones it already has, and then should only adopt programs that are limited and capped.

YOUR VIEWS

Why won't Castro let father come?

THE MAIL

Elian's father wants him back. Shortly after Elian was rescued his father said on a TV newscast he wants him back "even if I have to go and get him." He has since changed his mind, or more likely Castro has changed it for him. He will not come to get him.

After 70 years of experience with communist dictators are we so naive as to believe that the boy's father is a free agent? Once again, as throughout the 20th century, a large segment of the political left (the vice president is an honorable exception) is willing to side with a bloody dictator to humiliate the United States. "The totalitarian temptation of the left," in the words of the French political philosopher Jean Francois Ravel, is alive and well in 21st century America.

A boy belongs with his father if it can be established that his father is not doing the bidding of the tyrant. Does anyone doubt that this boy would have a much better life in the United States? That was what his mother evidently wanted for him. Why are the tyrant and his supporters in America afraid to let the father come to the United States to plead in an American court of law to be allowed to take his little boy back to Cuba? What can the the father possibly lose? Nothing! Only Castro can lose and that is why the father will not be allowed to come to the United States.

I am surprised and saddened that The Birmingham Post-Herald is willing to sacrifice a little boy for the possibility of better relations with Cuba.

Sol Tropper
144 University Park Drive

It's mutual

Armond "Si" Simmons
104 Wadsworth Lane
Pell City

The big lie

The writer mentions millions of dollars that are not coming into the area and the lack of jobs. Power plants and industry emit far more pollutants than all the cars in Birmingham and yet the cars are the target. What industry is not coming into Birmingham? Is the writer in support of industry that will add to the pollution just to get jobs in the inner city? The writer appears to support the congestion of the inner city as a measure of progress and growth.

This is the year 2000. Industry is not looking at the large cities for their future. Ask any industry analyst and they will tell you the best employees come from the small towns away from the influence of the big cities. The young people from these rural schools have a far better work attitude. There is a community spirit that results in better employees.

All the hype and lies aside, the city of Birmingham has been antibusiness for the past 20 years. Industry wants nothing to do with the corruption that has plagued Birmingham. If the writer is serious about their concern for the growth of Birmingham, they should work to support the new mayor and cut the crap about the ''ozone."

Donald Dunlap
1335 Montevallo Road
Irondale

Bill of goods

Don't get ho hum. There will be many, many more stories and situations of "fear" in the days and years to come. It is the effective use and manipulation of the fear emotion that helps to keep the powers that be in control. Fear can and will be used in the future by the powers that want to be in control at any given time!

It is the belief of some that the Internet and e-commerce will set free the consumer of his own buying and selling destiny. It will be heaven on Earth, so they say. What a special spiel this may come to be, if it really doesn't turn out that way.

Think about it for a moment, and you will most likely come to the same conclusion that I did. This was basically the same idea that the Devil promoted to Eve so many years ago! We all know what really happened to Eve and Adam. She was sold a bill of goods. Things turned out not to be as good as the Devil said. There will always be this nip and tuck of the wired world. Which end will hold the most power? What part will greed and the other six deadly sins play in the coming days when each end of the wire is pulled to the breaking point?

P. J. Miller
190 Parnell St.
Munford

LOOK BACK

50 years ago, Jan. 19, 1950:

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts calls for formation of union of free democracies to avoid hydrogen-bomb war.

25 years ago, Jan. 19, 1975:

In Scottsboro, wealthy landowner Hugh Otis Bynum, 62, is indicted on charges connected with 1972 car bombing that destroyed both legs of attorney Loy Campbell.

Top of page