A20
R
KLMNO
FGHIJ The English patient
an independent newspaper EDITORIALS
U.S. policymakers could learn from the painful budget treatment being administered in the United Kingdom. R
EASONABLE ECONOMISTS can differ about whether the United Kingdom’s aus- terity plan is too austere, too soon. Cer- tainly, an immediate retrenchment of this magnitude would not make sense for the United States, nor is it necessary: The United States, with a global reserve currency, is in a stronger and more independent economic posi- tion than is the United Kingdom. But the plan un- veiled last week by Britain’s coalition government offers a useful and, in many ways, impressive example of what a serious approach to deficit- cutting entails — and will eventually require from U.S. policymakers. The budget-balancing plan would reduce spending by $128 billion over four years — equiv- alent to about $650 billion in cuts in U.S. govern- ment spending. From the U.S. perspective, several aspects of the plan are striking. Almost unthink- able from Republicans here, the Conservative Par- ty government embraced a mix of spending cuts (77 percent) and tax increases (23 percent), in- cluding increases in the value-added tax and the capital gains rate for higher-income taxpayers. Al-
For Maryland’s
legislature The Post’s picks among candidates in Montgomery County
T
HE FOLLOWING are The Post’s endorse- ments in contested legislative races in Montgomery County for the Maryland General Assembly. The Post makes no en- dorsements or mention of races that are un- contested. The names of candidates endorsed by The Post appear in boldface. (Identify your legislative district and current representatives by entering your address online at
http://mdelect.net/electedofficials/. See a list of all candidates listed by district at http://www.
elections.state.md.us/elections/2010/candidates/ general/
index.html#state.) DISTRICT 14: In the race for the state Senate,
Del. Karen S. Montgomery won a hard-fought Democratic primary battle for the nomination without our support, but she has it now in her race against Republican Eric Cary, a Tea Party ac- tivist whose doctrinaire, unfocused opposition to taxes and spending does not stack up against Ms. Montgomery’s record of service and expertise on health issues. Democrats running for delegate in this district — veteran Anne R. Kaiser and new- comers Craig Zucker and Eric Luedtke — also merit support. DISTRICT 15: Three exceptionally well-qual-
ified Democratic incumbents deserve reelection. Sen. Robert Garagiola, who chairs the Senate Democratic caucus, has spurred progress on en- ergy, health care and transportation. In the House race, incumbent Del. Brian J. Feldman has played a constructive role in the development of the biotech corridor, and Del. Kathleen M. Du- mais has distinguished herself by pushing for tougher laws addressing domestic violence. New- comer Aruna Miller, a transportation engineer, would bring expertise in an area critical to the county’s development. DISTRICT 16: Sen. Brian Frosh, the veteran Democratic incumbent, is widely regarded not only as one of the more knowledgeable and inde- pendent-minded lawmakers in Annapolis but also among the most honest. He has been a champion of enlightened environmental legislation and a voice for reason on judicial matters, where he holds sway as a committee chairman. His Repub- lican opponent, Jerry Cave, has used his consider- able personal wealth on a demagogic mail attack suggesting that Mr. Frosh is soft on child sexual abuse, which is nonsense. Mr. Frosh deserves reelection. In the House races, we support the two Demo-
cratic incumbents, newcomer Del. C. William Frick, who has made a promising debut after hav- ing been appointed to an open seat three years ago, and Del. Susan C. Lee, who has made herself an authority on identity theft and Internet fraud. For the third seat, the best bet is Democrat Ari- ana Kelly, a veteran activist on women’s rights, environmental health and consumer product safety issues. DISTRICT 17: We didn’t endorse Sen. Jennie M. Forehand for the Democratic nomination,
most unthinkable from Democrats here, the La- bor opposition agreed that drastic spending cuts were called for. The disagreement between the two camps concerned the proper distribution and magnitude of cuts: The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition envisioned cuts averaging 25 percent per government department while Labor, in theory at least, acknowledged the need for cuts averaging 20 percent.
Almost unthinkable from both parties here, the plan tackles some — although far from all — enti- tlement spending. The budget of the politically untouchable Public Health Service will actually go up in nominal terms. The government will means-test the “child benefit,” an automatic pay- ment to families based on the number of children they have, but it left intact such other universal benefits as seniors’ winter fuel payments and free bus passes. A previously scheduled increase in the retirement age was accelerated by several years; it will rise from 65 for men and 60 for women to 66 for both genders by 2020. Nearly 500,000 govern- ment jobs — about one in 10 — will be cut, and government employees will have to ante up more
for their pensions. There are legitimate questions about whether
the cuts could have been distributed more fairly. The government claims that, in the words of Prime Minister David Cameron, “those with broader shoulders” have been asked to “bear a greater load." But the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that the cuts would fall disproportionately on working families with children — although, even in the IFS analysis, the richest 2 percent take the biggest hit. Similarly, the scope of cuts to de- fense spending is of concern. The government ar- gues that the 8 percent cut will still leave U.K. de- fense spending above 2 percent of gross domestic product, the NATO-recommended level; British efforts in Afghanistan will be fully funded, offi- cials say. But the reductions can only heighten concern about the extent to which Europe can play its traditional role as military ally to the United States. The British exercise demonstrates the painful realities that budget balancing entails — realities that politicians of both parties in the United States have yet to grapple with.
TOM TOLES
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2010
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
dletters@washpost.com
Virginia’s textbook case of denial
The layers of excuses and justifications accompany- ing the Oct. 20 front-page article “In Va., an old front reemerges in battles over Civil War history” were in- comprehensible, yet disturbingly familiar. A fourth-grade textbook containing unfounded claims exposes unqualified authorship, sloppy histor- ical research, a flawed textbook vetting process and a complicit Virginia Department of Education. All of it is a serious indictment of our educational system and a reason that parents should be concerned for, and en- gaged in, our children’s classroom experiences. The author’s response to the inaccuracy of her writ- ing is alarming, both for its glib tone and lack of pro- fessional accountability. And the response of Educa- tion Department spokesman Charles Pyle is cause for greater concern when he defends his department’s ap- proval of the text irrespective of its false assertions. There is simply no room for propaganda or myth when it comes to historical scholarship used in a school’s curriculum. Likewise, those who participate in the educational process — teachers, administrators, parents, textbook authors and their publishers — all share the responsibility to educate our children with rigorous attention to the highest standards of schol- arship and unequivocal accountability for outcomes. NICKTIMRECK, Reston
The article about the fourth-grade Virginia history
textbook refers to a passage asserting that thousands of African Americans (presumably slaves) fought for the South and quotes one of the Sons of Confederate Veterans as saying that the Civil War was fought “to preserve their homes and livelihood.” My mother’s family hails from Page County in the Shenandoah Val- ley, and my great-grandfather, who served in the Dixie Artillery, was wounded at Malvern Hill in 1862. This probably qualifies me for membership in the Sons of Confederate Veterans. I’m eternally grateful that my great-grandfather survived, and while I don’t know why he volunteered, it likely had something to do with the peculiarities of “the southern way of life.” Unlike those who wish to keep on fighting the Civil
War, some of us learned a little history along the way from “trained historians,” if not from Virginia school- books. Our self-worth doesn’t depend on forever de- nying the truth of our complex past or the centrality of slavery to the Southern cause.
NORMHOWARD, Reston The recent flap over Virginia’s fourth-grade history
textbook presents a perfect teaching moment. Students need to examine the sources of informa- tion carefully, whether from books, the Internet or the media. They need to know that they don’t have to be- lieve everything they read or hear. It would be good if authors followed this advice, too. SHEILA IHDEMURAWSKI, Arlington
Punishing thoughts? Not quite.
but we have no reservation about doing so in her general election race against Montgomery Coun- ty’s Republican chairman, Adol T. Owen-Williams. Ms. Forehand may not have tremendous sway in Annapolis, despite her decades in office, but she is admired for her experience and temperament. By contrast, Mr. Owen-Williams’s boisterous opposi- tion to a 2007 law barring transgender discrimi- nation, whose enactment he said was achieved in a “Nazi-like manner,” was a shameful display of in- tolerance. His insistence that gay men and lesbi- ans are seeking “special rights” puts him at odds with the district he hopes to represent. In the House races, two Democratic incum- bents — Dels. Kumar Barve and Luiz R.S. Sim- mons— should be returned to office. Our support for Mr. Simmons comes with an asterisk: He helped kill good legislation that would have of- fered more protection to victims of domestic violence. But his broad legislative experience still argues in his favor. For the district’s third seat, we favor Dan Campos, a young, moderate and ener- getic Republican whose strong stands on the envi- ronment, drunk driving and domestic violence make him a much stronger alternative to Del. James W. Gilchrist, a lackluster first-term law- maker.
DISTRICT 18: Incumbent Sen. Richard Ma-
daleno, a Democrat, has chaired the Montgomery County delegation and played a leading role on the Budget and Taxation Committee. His respon- sible attempt to reform the funding of teachers’ pensions and his advocacy for marriage and other civil rights for gays should make his reelection an easy choice. The Republican challenger, Kurt Osuch, a retired Marine, proposes an impractical across-the-board cut in state spending. DISTRICT 19: Del. Roger P. Manno, an able
LOCAL OPINIONS 3Join the debate at
washingtonpost.com/localopinions
Baltimore teachers were right to reject a flawed reform plan The Oct. 18 editorial “An education setback in
Charm City” missed the mark about education re- form. As a teacher in Baltimore City, I am one of the
“rank and file” who voted on the proposed contract Oct. 14. Most teachers opposing the contract were concerned primarily about its lack of specifics regarding teacher evaluation, especially since the Maryland State Department of Education has yet to issue subject- area-specific evaluation procedures. Regarding The Post’s criticisms, most faculty support the idea of receiving evaluation credit for profession- al development; after all, it makes sense to objec- tively assess and reward teachers who are com-
Most were concerned about the lack of specifics on teacher evaluations.
mitted to leadership within their content fields. Second, why does the Post suggest that teacher
“performance pay . . . [be] tied exclusively to stu- dent achievement?” In my content area (foreign language) there are no state- administered exams by which to judge student progress. Does that mean that those of us in non-tested areas should quit the profession?
Education Secretary Arne Duncan was correct in his Oct. 20 letter to support collaboration ef- forts among all interested stakeholders (yes, in- cluding even the teachers unions). Just as we have local control of schools, we have a variety of local models for school reform. JIM SWEIGERT, Rockville
Democrat with a collegial approach, seeks to move up to the Senate after unseating the in- cumbent in a primary battle. He is a better choice for the state Senate than is the Republican nomi- nee, Don Irvine, who runs the hyper-conservative Web site Accuracy in Media. For the House of Delegates, a pair of well- meaning Republicans, Tom Masser and Linn Riv- era are no match for the Democratic team: in- cumbent Del. Benjamin F. Kramer, a capable, centrist incumbent who deserves another term; Bonnie Cullison, the smart former head of the Montgomery County teachers union; and Sam Arora, an energetic, young, former Hillary Clin- ton staffer eager to dig into state policy. DISTRICT 39: Sen. Nancy J. King, the in-
cumbent Democrat, has for the most part been a loyal follower of her party’s commanders, which is not always a constructive role in this one-party- rule legislature. Her Republican challenger, Rob- ert J. Smith, has long experience and knowledge of state and regional affairs and could provide a welcome challenge to the old-pol maneuvers and railroading of bills by Senate leaders. Mr. Smith deserves a chance to deliver some fresh air to Annapolis. In the House races, two skilled incumbents — Democratic Dels. Charles E. Barkley and Kirill Reznik — know the ropes and the issues, and they are worthy of reelection. For the third seat in this district, Republican Jim Pettit offers voters an attractive opportunity to challenge lock-step, all-Democratic rule. His experience — in state gov- ernment, on Capitol Hill and with the U.S. Confer- ence of Mayors — outweighs that of the other three candidates, and his positions on fiscal mat- ters, job creation and the environment are pru- dent and thoughtful.
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 KENNETH R. BABBY, Chief Revenue Officer/GM, Digital
Business and advertising: Vice Presidents
ROGER ANDELIN ......................................................................................... Technology 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 WENDY EVANS ............................................................................................. Advertising GREGG J. FERNANDES .................................................................................Circulation JOHN B. KENNEDY ............................................................................................... Labor ERIC N. LIEBERMAN ......................................................................................... Counsel CHRISTOPHER MA ................................................................................... Development 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 Letters can be sent to
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.
Editorial Page Editor JACKSON DIEHL
Regarding Richard Cohen’s Oct. 19 op-ed, “When thoughts become a crime”: Hate-crime legislation does not “seek punishment for unpopular and often dreadful political views — for thought” — emphasis in the original. It punishes actions motivated by “dreadful political views.” Criminal law has a tradition of meting out pun- ishment based on an actor’s state of mind. Consider, for example, that criminal law punishes perpetra- tors of intentional homicide more severely than per- petrators of negligent homicide — that is, criminal law attempts to understand a person’s reasons for committing a crime. Just so with hate crime: The criminal law punishes criminals who are motivated by prejudice toward an immutable trait such as race or color. Just as the law does not prohibit wishing someone dead (which would be pure thought), hate- crime legislation does not criminalize “dreadful po- litical views.” It merely enhances the penalty for crimes motivated by those “dreadful political views.” And to the extent that Mr. Cohen is concerned with sorting out the “dumb kid[s]” from those who “hate, pure and simple,” that is what juries are for. J. TIMOTHY BRAMWELL, Chicago
Why a foreclosure halt is needed
The suggestion that a foreclosure moratorium would slow the housing recovery [“How not to help homeowners,” editorial, Oct. 18] ignored the mangled and dysfunctional state of the “foreclosure market.” Widespread securitization has given loan servicers in- centives to avoid reasonable mortgage modifications, including much-needed principal reductions. Foreclosures too often fail to answer the question,
“Why is the bank willing to throw me out of my house, to sell it to someone else who’ll pay less than I’m will- ing and able to pay right now?” Too often, foreclosure harms the owners of the mortgages, but the incen- tives are such that the servicers just grind them out. A national foreclosure moratorium would un- doubtedly force the big banks, the servicers and the securitized mortgage holders to reevaluate their fore- closure and modification practices and clean up the bureaucratic nightmare they now run. Avoiding fore- closures by reducing mortgage principal to reason- able levels will help the housing market find its true level more efficiently and minimize the “value crash” and collateral damage that foreclosure causes. SHELDONWHITEHOUSE, Washington
The writer, a Democrat, represents Rhode Island in the Senate.
‘Man up,’ sensitive new-age guys
So I’m confused. Ruth Marcus [“Man up? Try sim- mering down,” op-ed, Oct. 20] noted that some female politicians and politically oriented figures (there is a difference) want men to “man up” and gen- erally stop acting like girls. And here I thought most women wanted men to tap their feminine side, cook dinner and run the dishwasher, and then listen to us as if they really care about our woes and worries. Talk like this helps ensure that barriers to mean- ingful understanding between the sexes will stay in place. It also proves that you don’t have to be a lady to want to go to a tea party.
MARY STANIK, Minneapolis
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 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164