Deseret News from Salt Lake City, Utah • 26

The Dumb Bomb DESERET NEWS SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH We Stond For The Constitution Of The United States As Having Been Divinely Inspired A26 EDITORIAL PAGE Thursday, July 7, 1972 The Death Sentence Decision JAMES J. KILPATRICK tiniiiimmiiiuiniimiinimiiiimriinitiiimniiiiiiinimmmimintmninmtinmii! LETTERS TO THE EDITOR itiiiiiiHiiiiiiiiiiiriiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiHiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiHiiiiiinnniiiniiisiiiiiii'iiHijiiii. Fare-Tree Buses I told you so! The Utah Transit Authority no longer will be subsidized by Salt Lake City and it has been advised to seek a separate taxing authorin' from the 197 Legislature. Mayor Gam suggests a half cent sales tax increase to help solve the citys financial dilemma. And so I again warn the people against both taxes during this election time as I had repeatedly warned in talks before various groups; over radio and TV; on the floor of the Legislature: in letters in both local newspapers.

The people should not subsidize the UTA without receiving "no-fare bus service. Articles have appeared in the Deseret News pertaining to the (unnecessary 1-215 belt route project; pertaining to traffic deaths, injuries, noise and pollution: pertaining to the (beautiful) sil down staged by irate citizens at State Street and Gregerson Avenue (3000 South); pertaining to no-fault auto insurance. The only solutions the auto-oriented highway engineers have are more of the same road construction, road widening, traffic police, etc. Yet the one solution that can. will and must make dents in the problems is rapid and mass transit of people, not cars.

We can start building transit systems by saving our share of contributions to road construction projects and spending where it will do the most good rapid and mass transit. And, in order to have fair, countyvvide representation on Ihe Utah Transit Authority, I suggest that every S.L. County state legislator become a member of the Board of Directors of the UTA. And that is one sure way to eliminate the Chamber of Commerce from its drect and indirect influence in the UTA. SAMUEL S.

"AYI.OR 36S2 S. 5th East Backs Social Security I take exception to a recent article in the Deseret News. The Social Security system is the greatest plan that has ever been set up for the comfort and security of the human race. This writer stated that the system itself is socially secure, and that there is not the slightest chance of a taxpayers rebellion against it. Of this part in the article I have no quarrel.

It is only when he states that the young workers are being taken for a very expensive ride that I cant accept his Sure, they have to pay taxes. I paid into it for 28 years. Sure, I paid less, but my earnings were a great deal less, so it averages up. They are hurt no more than was. On my job the workers earn $30 to $40 per day.

I earned about $4. Social Security works. It is a haven in a time of need. Let us be thankful, not debunk it. Social Security protects not only the elderly, but the disabled and widows with children.

Those few who do complain, do so because they do not have a complete understanding of this great svstem. OLOF J. CHRISTENSEN Fountain Green. On Death Penalty The forgotten man of crime (the victim) is now past hope; gone is the death penalty, his last bulwark against the killers. Murderers may now proceed from savagery to total contempt of life, and destroy the means of identification, which could curtail his freedom.

B. perhaps even that can be removed. The 6th Amendment grants the right to a speedy trial and an impartial jury. Surely it can be proved to the august and sympathetic high court that he received neither and they will surely rule that his confinement is unconstitutional. Death penalty unconstitutional? Since it is not mentioned in the original constitution, nor the Bill of Rights, and is not the subject of an amendment, just how is it unconstitutional? However, uncons-titutionalities are plentiful in the last two decades, by the court itself.

Separation of powers gives solely to Congress the law-making power, but the high court has taken over this as it wished. The First Amendment reads, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Yet the high court, not Congress, wrote the infamous prayer amendment. Three times the Constitutional Convention of 1787 voted against giving the court power to declare acts of Congress clude on the basis of the material already considered that the death penalty is immoral and therefore unconstitutional." To the four dissenters, these are wholly extraneous considerations. Both Burger and Blackmun went to pains to say that if their own personal opinions were decisive, they would vote to abolish capital punishment.

But constitutional questions ought not to be resolved upon a judge's opinion of what the average citizen or the great mass of citizens might regard as shocking or immoral. Such a view converts fhe Supreme Court into a legislative body; it permits a majority of five to impose their own naked will upon our fundamental law. It seems to me that liberals, no less than conservatives, should protest the activist concept. For the pasi 20 years, to be sure, activism has worked to the liberals advantage. They have found it agreeable.

But if liberals accept, principle, the power of judges to make sweeping changes in law on their own notions of moral acceptability, liberals will be hard put to object when the composition of the court changes, and the wind shifts. Many persons who abhor the death penalty, and agree that capital punishment has been imposed irrationally and ineffecutally In the past, will rejoice in what the five activists have done. But those who love the law, and believe in the separation of powers, will emphatically condemn the wav in which they did it. With its explosion of opinions last week in the capital punishment cases, The Supreme Court laid bare the great line of cleavage- that divides the old Warren court from the new Nixon court. It is the line that defines the role of judges.

This is the most important aspect of the decision that' will be known to historians as Furman v. Georgia. For all practical purposes, the court voted 5-4 to prohib- Kilpatrick it the imposition of death sentences under existing state and federal laws. The immediate and dramatic consequence is that death sentences must be commuted for some 600 prisoners across the nation. Otherwise, the impact will be small.

There is no convincing eviderce that the mere existence of the death penalty has serviced as a deterrent to heinous crimes. So far as law and order is concerned, the sun will come up in the morning as blood-red as it set last night. The significance of this landmark case lies in its exposition of the fundamental division between those who believe in judicial activism, and those who believe in judicial restraint. The activists on the court, led in this case by Justice Thurgood Marshall, believe it proper to rest decisions upon their own subjective readings of what is morally unacceptable or shocking to the conscience." The defenders of restraint Burger. Blackntun, Powell and Hehnquist repudiate that viewpoint altogether.

Marshalls long concurnng opinion is a classic statement of the activist position. It Ls immaterial, in this view, that the framers of the Eighth Amendment never intended that cruel and unusual punishment should exclude the deatli penalty. It is immaterial that an unbroken line of judicial precedents one of them only a year old has supported the constitutionality of capital punishment. It is immaterial that four times within the past 11 years, Congress explicitly has sanctioned the death penalty. It is immaterial that 40 states have thought such sentences within their constitutional powers.

What. then, is material' It is Marshall's personal assessment that counts. He states it with breathtaking certainty. Capital punishment, he says, is unconstitutional "because it is morally unacceptable to the people of the United States at this time their history." Farther along. Marshall says: Assuming knowledge of all the facts presently available regarding capital punishment, the average citizen would, in my opinion, find it shocking to his conscience and sense of justice.

For this reason alone, capital punishment cannot stand." Still again, he says: I believe that the great mass of citizens would con Of Wealth And Workmanship By SIDNEY J. HARRIS i Why Utah Must Soive School Board Dilemma When Third District Judge Gordon Hall ruled last week that the Higher Education Act of 1969 was unconstitutional, he was acting on a question which should have been cleared up before the Education Act was ever passed. That question was: Shall a higher board be set up to administer Utahs colleges and universities when the Utah Constitution gives that responsibility to, the State Board of Education? Section 2 of the Constitution reads in part: The public school system shall include an agricultural college; a university; and such other schools as the Legislature may establish. Section 8 adds that The general control and supervision of the public school system shall be vested in a State Board of Education, the members of which shall be elected as provided by law. If tb's language makes the State Board of Higher Education unconstitutional, as Judge Hall ruled, what about the other governing boards not mentioned specifically in the constitution? must be done now? One alternative is a prompt decision by the State Supreme Court so that a special legislative session could be called by the governor to place the constitutional issue on the November ballot.

That path is fraught with hazards. The court decision, the gov-' ernors call, the legislative session all must occur in time to publish the constitutional revision proposal assuming it takes that lorm at least 60 days before the election. Another alternative is to wait for action by the 1973 Legislature. This path raises even more questions: Will responsibility for the colleges and universities fall back on the institutional boards or on the State Board of Education? If the latter, will the Legislature augment its powers to handle the job, either on a temporary or permanent basis? Some nrsconceptions growing out of the suit badly need clearing up. One is that, the Stale Board of Education was somehow derelict in its duty in administering higher education in the state, and thus lost its right to do so.

Such right was whittled aWay by the Legislature. It was the Legislatures stripping of all but limited prerogatives in regards to only the two technical colleges which forced the State Board of Education to take the law suit route. In the past 20 years, the Legislature has relieved the school board of control over Weber College, Dixie and Carbon (College of Eastern Utah) and, for practical purposes, the two technical colleges. The Legislature, at least to a large degree, has acted inconsistently with the constitution. Then, too, while problems of the public schools and the colleges may appear to be dissimilar, they are very much related.

Probably the best example of poor educational coordination in the state is the almost absolute lack of articulation between the public schools and the colleges. Results of College Level Entrance Program (CLEP) tests administered recently show that the colleges and universities are duplicating much general education offered in the high schools. There should be much more coordination in this area. Even if Utah is to have two boards, some entity perhaps a joint committee of the two boards should address this question. Less Secrecy Please In this government of the people, by the people, for the people, some 38.000 persons have the power to classify documents and thus keep the people from seeing them.

Then. too. the people's elected representatives in Congress hold 41 percent of their committee meetings in secret. Is all this secrecy really necessary? Undoubtedly some of the 22 million documents now classified and the matters congressional committees discuss deal with sensitive se-curitv matters. But it's hard to believe every bit of this information is really so touchy that its disclosure could seriously harm the coun-t try.

Ser. Edward M. Kennedy recently released diplomatic cables warning of possible famine in Pakistan, and Sen. William Proxmire has disclosed amounts of U.S. aid to foreign countries for fiscal 1972.

Not only does this material seem too innocuous to be classified, as it was. but it also seems citizens have an inherent interest in and night to know the information involved. The White House earlier this year ordered a review of procedures and policy on classification of documents. But. characteristic of the close-mouthed tendency that has developed in Washington, the order authorizing the study was withheld from the public for five months.

These incidents suggest that an investigation of reasons, as well as procedures, for classification of documents is in order. As the priiil-uig of the Pentagon Papers pointed cut. some information may be kept from the public more because it is embarrassing to someone than because-its disclosure could harm the country. What is needed is a change in government policy on access to information. In effect, the public official who is all too willing to give the press and people information that favors his cause must be obliged not to withhold that which may bo unfavorable.

Scrupulous review of classified materials should make public that which will not jeopardize military or diplomatic operations, and perhaps a statutory time limit should be placed on classification as well. Congress should throw open more committee sessions to the public. For years, government officials have been telling the public, in effect. Vou must take our word that we have handled our affairs as well as possible: you cannot be trusted to judge for yourself. That attitude just won't do.

A War Of Nerves In 2 sense, the chess match has already begun between Americas bad boy Bobby Fischer and reigning world champion Boris Spassky of Russia. Chess is a war of nerves as well as of skill. By keeping his opponent on edge, Fischer may be playing for small psychological advantages like the basketball team that keeps its adversary waiting nervously on the floor before making a grand entrance. Spassky, the perfect gentleman so far, shows indications the tactics may be getting to him in demanding that Fischer apologize and that he be reprimanded by the Internationa! Chess Federation In a match between two grandmasters, such small and insig-. nificant factors may indeed have an important bearing.

Its almost-certain that the temperamental Fischer will spring many more such ploys during the 24-game match, assuming it lasts that long or. Indeed, even gets started. Must quality deteriorate as quantity rises? Is there any necessary inverse relationship between the two? Should a S10 umbrella be expected to bust after a year, when my father's was faulted after 15? Or should a S25.uu0 house fall apart at the seams after a few years, when some log cabins standing near my summer house are still snug and tight and immensely liveable after 100 years of fierce winters? We have scarcely begun to ask ourselves these questions, so infatuated have we been with our zooming standard of living. But is that standard real or illusory when the extra money we make can only purchase products that crumble in our hands overnight? new one free, apologizing for the defect." I suppose part of it is what is called "planned obsolescence." That is. if the economy is going to continue to churn furiously, we must make things that will not last, so that people will keep buying new opes at frequent intervals.

But I can't believe that is a sound principle on which to base a long-term economy. Almost everything seems to be shoddily made tnese davs. and I dont think it's fair to blame all of it on negligent workmanship. It's certainly as simple to grind out solid products as flimsy ones, but I suppose it's not as remunerative, and people have been trained to accept whatever they get and shrug it off. "You -diaft me, and I'll shaft you," seems to be the credo of the day.

What I don't understand is that as we get weal'hier. everything we buy seems to get tattler. You would think that one of the indices of a rising standard of living would be a rise in the quality of goods: but almost the reverse seems to be true. This may be explained by one of Par- kinsons Laws, but I have never heard of it. My father had an Essex (and later a Graham-Paige) that lasted a decade and was still going strong: I feel compelled to trade in my car every two years, before it falls apart and costs more to repair than I would get for it.

When we came to this country from England, he mailed back an umbrella that he had used for 15 years, ami had cracked The London store sent him a Her 'Last Breath Performance' My mother-in-law and I have a 'great relationship. She calls me Edna and I call her on her birthday. Mother's Day and Christmas. At the wedding when she insisted they put a funeral flag on the fender of her car and drove with her lights on. I sensed somehow 1 was not what she would have chosen for her son.

"Darn it," she said, I just remembered 1 forgot to lock my back door." During subsequent drives, I was to learn that she gasped and groaned at girls in shorts, roses in full bloom, a half-stick of gum discovered in her raincoat. I pride myself in being able to Iiv in peace with my mothenn-lavv. and she puts up with me. The other day we were driving together when she sucked in her breath, clutched her purse and mumbled, Oh my. Figuring sh? had just remembered a dental appointment, I kept moving and promptly smacked into a truck.

She shook her head and made a clicking noise with her tongue. "1 tried to warn you, Edna, but you vvouldn listen." "Face it. Mother." I said "I'm unstable. ERMA BOMBECK will never adjust to I call it her Last Breath Performance. Check this I am driving the car and she is sitting beside me.

Out of the clear blue sky, I hear her suck in her breath, moan slightly and slump, steadying her head with tier hand. I wait, but she doesn't exhale. The first time this happened. I lig-ured (a) she was leaving the car on a permanent basis: (b) I had closed the electnc windows on a gas attendant and was towing him by his fingers: or (c) we were being followed by a tornado tunnel. Instinctively.

I jammed on the brakes of the car. nearly hurling her through the windshield, turned around, grabbed her shoulders, and shouted hysterically. "What's the matter?" Mrs. Bombeck Chief Justice John Marshall simply assumed this power and no court since has had the grace to submit it as an amendment. But by far the greater danger has come and settled upon us unnoticed.

We are in the grip of a dictatorship as definite as Hitler's or Stalins. If the Constitution, which has been hailed as the "greatest work ever struck off by the mind and hand of man at a given time, requires amendments, a Supreme Court, which is not subject to the will of the electorate, should not have the power of unalterable decisions. GOMER CASEMAN 2310 S. 2700 East Cruel To Victims In declaring the death penalty unconstitutional, the U. S.

Supreme Court has saved the lives of at least half the number of persons involved in the act of murder. The only ones to eeeive cruel and unusual punishment from now on will be the victims. SUNN'IE THOMPSON Richfield Refreshing Change As a "new voter looking at the election line-up for 1972, 1 have come across a refreshing' change. A change from the smooth politician fresh out of public relations school. A change from officials maxing decisions for political expediency.

This man, Nick Strike, is very concerned with issues of today. As a successful businessman he knows that the problems of the' 70s cannot be solved with the tools of the 60s. A revolution in state and local governments cannot be brought about. However, many worthwhile changes can and should be made to slop the spiraling of government growth in Utah, -nd end the ever-increasing tax burden on the citizens. The people cf Utah should be for this change and not for third term of tax increases and expensive government growth.

DAVID ALEXANDER 2374 E. 4510 South But heaven love her. she has a sense of humor and somehow we've all survived. She has accepted me for what I am. A mistake.

And 1 have learned to live with her through the miracle of sedation One of her idiosyncrasies, however, by Briekman the small society ALL A (2oTSfl cotiepsSSMAtl- a UlfogTAHT. An r- Star Synd-cot.