Editorials from around Ohio

Excerpts of recent editorials of statewide and national interest from Ohio newspapers: The Toledo Blade, Sept. 17

It's no surprise that President Bush wants to downplay the Iraq war as an issue in the presidential race.

If the surge which Mr. Bush, former U.S. commander in Iraq Gen. David Petraeus, and Republican nominee Sen. John McCain continue to cite was a success in decreasing violence in Baghdad, it did so, in part, because the Iraqi forces decided that they would let it succeed, with the goal of getting the United States out of their country.

Two important facts run the risk of being overlooked as American leaders and candidates debate what worked in Iraq. One is that no matter which Iraqi institutions Americans try to build or encourage the Iraqis to build, the United States is an occupying power. It is not a partner in building Iraqi democracy or liberty, but a military force of around 140,000.

The second fact is, no matter what advantage the Iraqi factions may see in the presence of U.S. troops, in the end what Iraqis want is for the United States to get out of their country and let them determine its future.

... The public should keep in mind two very important questions.

The first is, if you are the Iraqis why would you do anything the Americans wanted except to achieve the shortest of short-term goals? The second is, why is the United States still there, playing this game with them?

On the Net: http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID/20080917/OPINI ON02/809170289/-1/OPINION

------ The Cincinnati Enquirer, Sept. 18

The $85 billion federal bailout of giant insurer American International Group puts taxpayers' money at risk with little evidence it will prevent dubious investment practices or tighten oversight of financial markets.

The emergency "loan" merely confirms that some conglomerates are too big and too interconnected to be allowed to fail. Too many jobs hang in the balance.

Although Lehman Brothers investment bank was allowed to collapse, the Federal Reserve caved on AIG. White House press secretary Dana Perino said the government will consider help for other endangered corporations on a "case-by-case basis."

Some members of Congress have begun floating ideas for regulatory reform or new agencies to take over troubled financial institutions, but in the final weeks of a presidential campaign, the chances of swift, meaningful legislation are about as likely as jail terms for executives guilty of creating this crisis. Any legislative action needs to reach beyond short-term fixes, and aim to alter risky practices and failed strategies. ...

Taxpayers could still make money on this bailout. But there's no guarantee. And no sign of long-term controls against risky finance.

On the Net:

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID/20080918/EDIT0 1/809180301/1019/EDIT

------ The (Findlay) Courier, Sept. 18

The Democrats in Congress really do think most Americans are stupid. How else can we explain the offshore drilling bill passed by the House Tuesday night (Sept. 16)?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants Americans to believe this bill "represents a new direction in energy policy" and a "bold step forward that will end our dependence on foreign oil."

But it's not what you think. The bill would not end U.S. dependence on foreign oil by lifting the ban on offshore drilling. In fact, it would virtually ensure that no additional drilling takes place.

The House bill would require drilling to take place 50 miles or more from the coast -- even though the U.S. Interior Department says about 88 percent of the 18 billion barrels of oil estimated to lie in the region is within the first 50 miles.

No offshore drilling would be allowed without the agreement of the coastal states -- but the bill would not share any royalties from increased offshore drilling with those same coastal states. So there's little incentive for the coastal states to allow the drilling. ...

If the Senate can't come up with a significantly better bill than this, President Bush should use his veto.

On the Net:

http://tinyurl.com/4blqpq

------ Akron Beach Journal, Sept. 21

Ohio's cities couldn't count on state lawmakers for help in their effort to control gun violence. It is a bigger shame they didn't get any help from the Ohio Supreme Court, either. In a 4-3 decision on Thursday (Sept. 18), the court ruled that cities have no right to bar entry to municipal parks to people carrying concealed weapons.

The decision struck down an ordinance in the city of Clyde in Sandusky County that barred firearms in the city parks soon after Ohio enacted the conceal-carry law in 2004. ...

The law bars weapons on public properties such as government buildings, schools, police stations and courthouses, and on private properties such as restaurants, bars and day-care centers. Presumably, there is value in designating some places, public and private, weapon-free zones.

Justice Paul Pfeifer noted the absurdity in granting the private owner of a public space, say, a shopping mall or a place of worship, the right to bar concealed weapons but denying the same right to a municipality, the owner of a public park, where people gather for recreation.

On the Net:

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/28821704.html