A14

R

KLMNO

FGHIJ

The coming tax debate

an independent newspaper

EDITORIALS

problematic. Not to worry, however. There is al- most no chance that Congress will let the tax cuts expire. The only question is whether it will act with a modicum of fiscal responsibility. Recent signs on that front — which we’ll get to in a bit — are not promising. But we urge lawmakers to al- low the upper-income tax cuts to expire and, if they must extend those for households making less than $250,000 a year, to do so for a year or two, not permanently. The tax cuts were unaffordable when passed;

I

that has become clearer in retrospect. President Obama has proposed making most of the cuts permanent, at a 10-year cost of $2.5 trillion. How- ever, he would let those for the wealthiest 2 per- cent of households expire, raising $680 billion in the next decade. Under Mr. Obama’s plan, the top

Politically correct,

legally wrong

Why a law school’s

nondiscrimination policy runs afoul of the Constitution

P

ICTURE THIS: gay student organizations forced to accept those who believe that homosexuality is an abomination. Stu- dent political groups, such as Young Re-

publicans or Young Democrats, compelled to al- low members of the other party to vote on policy platforms. A law association for African Amer- ican students being told that it must let white su- premacists run for leadership posts. Sound absurd? Welcome to the University of California, Hastings College of Law. The school says that student groups that want to enjoy certain benefits must adhere to the school’s nondiscrimination policy. Fair enough, except that the school’s “all comers” policy requires that a group accept as voting members even those who disagree with its core principles. Organiza- tions that comply gain the right to use campus meeting rooms and school e-mail lists and are in- vited to the annual student organization fair. They also have the right to apply for grants fund- ed by student activity fees and vending machine sales. The school lists about 60 such “recognized school organizations,” including the Hastings As- sociation of Muslim Law Students, the Hastings Jewish Law Students Association and Hastings Outlaw, a group founded by gay students. The Christian Law Society (CLS) is not among them. Although it allows all Hastings students to attend meetings, CLS reserves voting member- ship and leadership posts for those who sign a declaration of faith that includes belief in Jesus Christ. The group asserts that “in the view of the clear dictates of Scripture, unrepentant partici- pation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral life- style is inconsistent with an affirmation of the

If an extension of the Bush tax cuts is in the cards, Congress should make it temporary and partial.

N LITTLE MORE than eight months, the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush are set to expire. That would be, for the most part, fine with us, although the timing, at the beginning of an economic recovery, could be

marginal tax rates would return to the Clinton- era levels of 36 percent and 39.6 percent, up from 33 and 35 percent. Capital gains rates for the wealthiest taxpayers, now 15 percent, would rise to 20 percent. Economic performance during the 1990s suggests that these are not crippling burdens.

One mischievous suggestion has been to let the upper-income tax cuts expire but to carve out an exemption for small-business income. The argu- ment is that many small businesses are organized in such a way that they pay tax at the individual rate. That is true, but only a sliver of small busi- nesses earn enough to be affected by a change in the top rates and only a sliver of the “business” in- come reported by top-bracket filers represents what is typically thought of as a small business. Write a loophole into the tax code for business in- come, and smart, rich taxpayers will find creative ways to drive through it. Another mischievous notion is to extend all the tax cuts for a few years, which just increases the

likelihood that they will all be extended perma- nently. The next Congress is not likely to be more amenable to tax increases than this one. Which is saying something. Seizing on the po- litical opportunity of tax-filing day, Sen. John Mc- Cain (R-Ariz.) offered a “sense of the Senate” reso- lution expressing opposition to a value-added tax. A VAT is one promising mechanism to bring in additional revenue while promoting savings. There are reasonable arguments against such a tax, but putting any mechanism preemptively off the table is deeply unwise. Disturbingly, the reso- lution passed by a vote of 85 to 13, with just one Republican, retiring Ohio Sen. George V. Voinov- ich, and a dozen Democrats bravely voting against it: Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii), Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.), Byron L. Dor- gan (N.D.), Ted Kaufman (Del.), Carl M. Levin (Mich.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Tom Udall (N.M.), James Webb (Va.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.). This is not a good omen for the coming tax debate.

TOM TOLES

MONDAY, APRIL 19, 2010

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

dletters@washpost.com

Reconsider the laid-off D.C. teachers

Your spirited defense of D.C. Schools Chancellor

Michelle Rhee [“A surplus of indignation,” editorial, April 15] purported to lay out “facts,” but all it did was reinforce the perception that Ms. Rhee can do no wrong in your eyes. While you are correct that “no one questioned . . .

[the] financial foundation” of the layoffs, that is only because no one outside the D.C. government knew about the surplus at the time. A good analogy is the case of Lilly Ledbetter, whose claim for back pay on the basis of sex discrimination was unjustly thrown out by the Supreme Court on the spurious grounds that she had missed the deadline for filing — even though the company had concealed evidence of mis- conduct for decades. Justice delayed is justice denied. Until the laid-off teachers are reinstated or at least given a meaning- ful day in court, Ms. Rhee does not deserve the adu- lation you continue to accord her.

STEVENALANHONLEY, Washington

Culling candidates for priesthood

Mary Beth McCutcheon [letters, April 15] re- vealed a common misconception that the Catholic Church has felt “compelled to ordain anyone who walked in the door.” As director of priest vocations and formation for the Archdiocese of Washington, as well as vice presi- dent of the National Conference of Diocesan Voca- tion Directors (NCDVD), I can attest that this is the furthest thing from the truth. In the archdiocese, ev- ery candidate for seminary goes through a battery of screening requirements including criminal back- ground checks; a psychological examination; a cred- it history report; a health examination; and numer- ous checks of references, transcripts and sacra- mental records, as well as multiple interviews. If accepted, the candidate must then apply to the sem- inary, where a screening committee reviews all the same material. In recent years, the NCDVD has trained hundreds

of vocations directors across the country to follow these now-standard screening procedures. U.S. sem- inaries require that a man complete an average of six years of study, during which he is constantly evaluated to ensure that only those most fit for min- istry are ordained. While there is always a desire for more priests to serve the faithful, the emphasis in recent years clearly has been in quality over quanti- ty and in a commitment to accept only the finest men to serve the people of God.

MONSIGNORROBERT PANKE, Washington

The writer is director of priest vocations and formation for the Archdiocese of Washington.

China’s industrial might

The perception of 44 percent of Americans that

“China is already the world’s top economic power,” while modestly inaccurate, alas is not so “completely at odds with the facts,” as Arthur Kroeber would have your readers believe [“Five myths about Chi- na’s economy,” Outlook, April 11]. In pure exchange rate terms, China’s $5 trillion gross domestic prod- uct is about a third of America’s $14 trillion econo- my. But as most economists would admit, China’s renminbi currency is grossly undervalued. The World Bank’s index of “purchasing power

Statement of Faith, and consequently may be re- garded by CLS as disqualifying such an individu- al from CLS membership.” What CLS considers as disqualifying are “all acts of sexual conduct out- side of God’s design for marriage between one man and one woman, which acts include fornica- tion, adultery, and homosexual conduct.” The policy did not go over well in the San Fran- cisco-based law school, which declined to recog- nize CLS after concluding that its policies dis- criminate on the basis of religion and sexual ori- entation. CLS filed suit, and the Supreme Court will hear argument Monday. The law school ar- gues that its actions are reasonable because it ap- plies the nondiscrimination policy fairly to all

groups. But the school approved the bylaws of La Raza Law Students Association even though they limited membership to “students of Raza back- ground”; La Raza amended its bylaws after a law- yer for CLS took note. It is one thing to require that groups that ac- cept school funds and use school facilities give every student the opportunity to attend meetings or explore the virtues of a particular organiza- tion. But it is altogether different to require groups to accept as members or leaders even those who disagree with its central beliefs. This cuts at the core of meaningful association; penal- izing a group by withholding school benefits only exacerbates the harm.

Medical marijuana

A professional regime is taking shape in D.C.

ately prohibited the use of local funds to support the program. The ban was lifted last year, and the 11-year lag has actually proved to be something of a blessing, because the District is crafting legisla- tion based on lessons learned from the experi- ence — and mistakes — of other states. Initiative 59 was pretty basic; it gave individu- als the right to use marijuana for medical pur- poses. By contrast, a bill (B18-622) that will come before the D.C. Council on Tuesday, with a vote scheduled for next month, would set up a strict regulatory structure that aims to guard against the problems experienced by some of the 14 other

I

N 1998, 69 PERCENT of D.C. voters endorsed the medicinal use of marijuana for those suf- fering from serious illnesses. Nothing came of the initiative because Congress immedi-

jurisdictions that allow marijuana use for indi- viduals debilitated by illnesses such as cancer or multiple sclerosis. Key to that effort are strict registration requirements for patients, care- givers, dispensaries and cultivation centers. In addition, the bill caps the number of dispensaries at five and limits the quantity of marijuana that can be prescribed each month, making the proposal one of the most restrictive in the country.

Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), chair of the council’s health committee and the bill’s lead sponsor, is right to want to prevent abuses that occurred in places such as California, where medical marijuana has become a euphe- mism for recreational drug use. There, dispensa- ries are akin to marijuana cafes and people with

complaints as minor as back pain caused by wearing high heels qualify for use. “I want this to be professional and orderly and evidence-based,” said Mr. Catania, mindful that anything less could invite renewed congressional intervention. If the proposal is approved, critical details will need to be worked out in its implementation, such as who will be allowed to grow and distrib- ute the drug. It’s commendable that particular at- tention is paid to the dangers of drug interaction and the need for proper education of consumers. If society wants to legalize marijuana for all, it should do so explicitly. Until then, council mem- bers are on the right track in formulating a pro- gram that meets the legitimate needs of the chronically ill but guards against those who just want permission to get high.

TAKING EXCEPTION

The U.S. license to kill is invalid

The Post endorses a program of targeted kill- ing under which the executive branch has uni- lateral authority to hunt and kill individu- als — including U.S. cit- izens — anywhere in the world [“In defense of drones,” editorial, April 13]. The program is un-

lawful. Lethal force may be used outside armed- conflict zones only when there is an imminent threat of deadly attack — and, even then, only if nonlethal means such as arrest are truly not fea- sible. The program you endorse — under which names are added to a kill list after a secret bu- reaucratic process and remain there for months

— is clearly not limited to imminent threats and is far more sweeping than the law allows. Over the past eight years,

We have seen the government over and over again detain men as “terrorists,” only to discover later that the evidence was weak, wrong or nonexistent.

we have seen the govern- ment over and over again detain men as “terrorists,” only to discover later that the evidence was weak, wrong or nonexistent. This experience should lead us to reject out of hand a program that would invest executive officials with the authority

to effectively impose death sentences on U.S. cit- izens and others far from any battlefield with- out charge or trial.

ANTHONY D. ROMERO, New York

The writer is executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

ABCDE

EUGENE MEYER, 1875-1959 • PHILIP L. GRAHAM, 1915-1963 KATHARINE GRAHAM, 1917-2001

BOISFEUILLET JONES JR., Chairman KATHARINE WEYMOUTH, Publisher and Chief Executive Officer

News pages:

MARCUS W. BRAUCHLI Executive Editor

RAJU NARISETTI, Managing Editor ELIZABETH SPAYD, Managing Editor

SHIRLEY CARSWELL Deputy Managing Editor

Editorial and opinion pages:

FRED HIATT

Deputy Editorial Page Editor

STEPHEN P. HILLS, President and General Manager

Vice Presidents

ROGER ANDELIN ......................................................................................... Technology KENNETH R. BABBY .................................................................................... Advertising BENJAMIN C. BRADLEE .................................................................................... At Large USHA CHAUDHARY..................................................................... Finance & Admin/CFO JAMES W. COLEY JR. ......................................................................................Production L. WAYNE CONNELL ......................................................................... Human Resources LEONARD DOWNIE JR. ...................................................................................... At Large GREGG J. FERNANDES .................................................................................Circulation JOHN B. KENNEDY ............................................................................................... Labor ERIC N. LIEBERMAN ......................................................................................... Counsel CHRISTOPHER MA ................................................................................... Development GOLI SHEIKHOLESLAMI ...................................................................................... Digital STEVE STUP ..................................................................................... Digital Advertising

1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-6000

The Washington Post Company:

DONALD E. GRAHAM, Chairman of the Board

d

Business and advertising:

Editorial Page Editor JACKSON DIEHL

parity” indicates that a dollar’s worth of Chinese currency buys the rough equivalent of $2 worth of goods and services in China. But the most unsettling aspect of China’s eco- nomic power is its manufacturing output. Accord- ing to the latest figures in the CIA’s World Factbook, industry accounts for about 22 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product and about 49 percent of Chi- na’s. In terms of purchasing power parity, China’s in- dustrial output is already about $4.3 trillion, com- pared with $3.1 trillion in the United States. The two countries calculate their industrial product differ- ently, but it’s probably accurate to say China’s indus- trial sector is already bigger than America’s. It is no myth that China’s trade and financial

cheating give Americans plenty to be worried about — and our elected representatives are understand- ably angry. But will they do anything about it?

JOHN J. TKACIK JR., Alexandria

The writer is a retired foreign service officer.

Why commuters drive

Anne-Taylor Adams [letters, April 14] believes

that it would take 90 minutes to get from Alexandria to Georgetown University by subway and bus. But it might be shorter if she stopped at Rosslyn and took the free Georgetown shuttle. In taking the No. 37 Ride-On to Grosvenor for the past 19 years, I’ve met many who appear only when their cars need repair or the weather is severe. Some ask whether they have to pay; others tell me proudly that the Metro stops at their office buildings but they still drive. They drive because they always have and because the true costs are hidden — not because buses or trains are inaccessible.

GEORGEGUESS, Potomac

Health-care frills

Regarding the April 10 Washington Business

news story “New Rx: Patient entertainment”: No wonder health-care expenses keep rising. Who

is going to pay for this? Instead of installing more electronics, why not take televisions out of patients’ rooms and let them focus on convalescing in peace? If patients are well enough to check their Face- book accounts, they can bloody well use their own computers for information about their conditions, ask friends or relatives for help or, better yet, tromp down the hall to a common room and play video games there. In fact, if they are well enough to walk around or check out Facebook, why are they still in the hospital? It’s hard to defend health-care reform when hos-

pitals keep adding frills instead of eliminating non- medical perks.

C.E. WRAY, Charlottesville

letters@washpost.com.

Submissions must be exclusive to The Post and should include the writer’s address and day and evening telephone numbers. Letters are subject to editing and abridgment. Please do not send letters as attachments. Because of the volume of material we receive, we are unable to acknowledge submissions; writers whose letters are under consideration for publication will be contacted. Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56