Replies

Excerpts from editorials in Florida newspapers
By The Associated Press
March 8, 2005

Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers in Florida:

__

Advertisement

March 8,

The Palm Beach Post, on narrowing the Legislature's agenda to hurricane insurance:

The Legislature begins its annual session with an especially important to-do list.

Legislators, who (gathered Tuesday) in Tallahassee, will do better at it if they also keep in mind the not-to-do list. Among the items: Do not waste time by trying again to interfere in the Terri Schiavo case. Do not cause needless trouble by trying to interfere in the selection of a site for The Scripps Research Institute.

There are plenty of other do-nots when it comes to the major statewide issues.... Do not change growth management laws in a way that will have the public subsidizing the sprawl that eats up water storage areas and strains services.

It's no fun to start out with the negative, but most Floridians would have benefited more recently from Tallahassee's inaction. In 2003, for example, the Legislature approved the largest phone-rate increase in the state's history, just after the companies had spent $5 million on election campaigns. Also that year, the Legislature delayed cleanup of Everglades pollution for 10 years. But even after 60 days, lawmakers did not pass a budget, the one issue where inaction is illegal. It took special sessions to work that out.

So this year, with property insurance the big consumer issue after last year's hurricanes, helping Floridians is atop the to-do list. We don't define "help" as merely making sure that if coverage is available, the only option will be the state-run insurer of last resort at exorbitant rates. We define "help" as changing the current market, in which the insurers basically choose their customers, to one in which the consumers choose their insurer...

___

March 8,

Sarasota Herald-Tribune, on aid distribution policies deserve congressional attention:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency's response to Florida's battering by four hurricanes last year may come under some much-needed congressional scrutiny.

U.S. Reps. Katherine Harris and Mark Foley have called for hearings to investigate how FEMA distributed relief aid.

Harris, R-Longboat Key, thinks smaller counties like Hardee have been shortchanged.

Foley, R-West Palm Beach, is irritated that FEMA has taken so long to reimburse counties for hurricane cleanup expenses that the agency promised to cover.

A Senate investigation is also under way, with hearings expected.

Undoubtedly, a pressing topic for any hearings will also be the mess in Miami-Dade County, where FEMA paid $30 million in damage claims to 10,000 people _ even though all of the hurricanes missed that area by at least 100 miles.

FEMA officials continue to defend those payments, despite the fact that 14 of the recipients have been indicted on federal fraud charges...

FEMA has much to explain. And perhaps congressional pressure will lead to a change in some misguided policies, such as FEMA's reluctance to pay for debris removal from private property _ a problem that has plagued Charlotte County.

Hurricane victims haven't gotten many answers from FEMA. Maybe Congress will.

___

March 7,

South Florida Sun-Sentinel, on U.S. rivals for political clout:

Wednesday's tres presidentes summit laid out the test facing the Bush administration in Latin America.

In a conference room atop a Uruguayan hotel, the leaders of Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela met to map out a collaborative strategy. At the end of the meeting, Argentina's foreign minister, Rafael Bielsa, reportedly said the gathering showed the animals had escaped from the farm, a reference to George Orwell's Animal Farm rebellion.

Bielsa was referring to the three countries' possible cooperation in negotiations with the International Monetary Fund, to give themselves stronger bargaining positions. The comment, however, could also apply to the countries' distancing from the "Washington Consensus" urging free-market strategies.

That's concerning, given the growing influence the "ABV" countries could wield...

The ABV countries have, to varying degrees, positioned themselves as rivals to U.S. diplomacy, and are laying out a significant challenge to the United States on its home field. Sure, Washington counts on support from other major players, including Mexico, Canada and Chile. A free-trade treaty with the Central American nations currently being debated in Congress would help, too.

But is a split hemisphere in anyone's interest?

The Bush administration should respond by acknowledging the threat to liberty and democracy posed by hemispheric poverty, which is at the root of political instability, economic nationalism and violence in the Americas. Proposing a comprehensive plan to deal with poverty would borrow, pun intended, the very issue the ABV populists have played up in their rise to power.

There is much to gain from strong partnerships and ties... and in the process defuse the brewing rivalry that could further divide and fracture hemispheric unity.

___

March 6,

The Gainesville Sun, on drilling oil off the coast of Florida and Alaska:

For all the emphasis being placed in Washington, D.C., on drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one might think it is the single most important element in the Bush administration's proposed energy policy. Certainly, it is shaping up to be the most hotly debated energy issue in Congress.

But wait a minute: If allowing oil companies to exploit the suspected oil reserves in that remote corner of the Alaskan wilderness is so central to America's future energy security, why do the oil companies appear so lukewarm about the idea?

"If the government gave them the leases for free, they wouldn't take them," a Bush adviser, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told The New York Times recently. "No oil company really cares about" drilling in the refuge...

The industry's seeming indifference may have to do with pessimistic or inconclusive evidence about just how much oil may be available for tapping in the refuge. By one government estimate, it's about 10 billion barrels of oil. At full production, that might yield one million barrels a day _ about 4 percent of the nation's daily need...

So why the political enthusiasm for drilling when the industry doesn't seem to care?

Well, one theory is that opening up the Arctic Refuge would make it politically easier to drill off the coasts of Florida and California later on...

So why should Floridians care about drilling in the Arctic? It's not like they want to start sinking wells off our own golden beaches.

At least, not yet.

http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/home/article/0,1651,TCP_996_3604266,00.html