Lincoln Journal Star from Lincoln, Nebraska • D8

OPINION Sunday, January 11, 2015 Lincoln Journal Star ONLINE ewly elected Rep. Brad Ashford, who crossed the aisle Friday to vote with Republicans in Congress to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, has the right perspective on the controversial project. Ashford thinks the importance of the pipeline as an environmental issue is overrated. time to build the Keystone XL and move on to bigger questions about the environment. Ashford has a mountain of evidence to support his view.

Most pertinently, the State Depart- ment, in a voluminous environmental impact statement, concluded that the pipeline would have minimal environmental impact. also true that Republican supporters of the pipeline have oversold it as a job creator and a boon to the national economy. The New York Times reported earlier this month that most energy and policy experts say the pipeline will have little effect on climate change, production of the Canadian oil sands, gasoline prices and the overall job market in the United States. But the economic benefits would be felt directly and significantly in Nebraska, where construction of the pipeline would draw hundreds of workers. And the com- munity benefits would be ongoing.

Nebraska counties along the route will collect at least $22 million, year after year. Longtime readers of the Journal Star are aware that the editorial board vociferously objected to the original route of the Keystone XL, which would have cut a long-lasting furrow through the Sandhills, where difficult to re- establish vegetation and where the groundwater is often inches below the surface. History shows that Gov. Dave Heineman called a spe- cial legislative session, and, in short order, TransCanada agreed to change the route. TransCanada not only pro- posed an alternate route that avoided the official Sand- hills, it also made subsequent revisions to avoid soils that were similar to the Sandhills.

On Friday, President Barack Obama lost his last excuse for postponing a decision on the Keystone XL when the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled that the process used to approve the pipeline route through Nebraska was valid. With House passage of the Keystone bill on Friday, and probable Senate approval of the bill next week, Obama soon will have on his desk a bill that would finally give the green light to a project that has been pending longer than it took the Allies to win World War II. Obama should sign it. Or he could give his approval on his own volition to a permit based on the stacks of re- search done by the State Department. Either way, clear that, based on the facts, time to build the pipeline.

Obama should approve pipeline our view WASHINGTON Senate con- firmation hearings put nominees on notice that, as a Michigan state legislator reportedly once said, watching everything you do with a fine-toothed Lo- retta Lynch, a talented lawyer and seasoned U.S. attorney, should be confirmed as attorney general. Her hearing, however, should not be perfunctory. Questions like the following would highlight some festering problems: Next year is the 800th an- niversary of Magna Carta, which began the slow, serpentine prog- ress to our modern panoply of rights, including those of persons accused of serious crimes. To- day, however, regarding sexual misconduct on campuses, the Department of Office for Civil Rights uses the threat of withdrawing federal funding to coerce colleges and universities into jettisoning crucial defen- protections when adjudi- cating, in improvised tribunals, accusations of sexual assault.

Pre- sumption of innocence? The new presumption is that accusations are valid until disproved. The right to confront accuser? No, it would be traumatizing to the (note the prejudg- ment). Proof beyond a reasonable doubt? Now a mere ance of the will suffice. Are you comfortable with this traducing of due process? Much ink and indignation have been properly expended concerning the torture of some detainees by counterterrorism personnel. But what about the promiscuous use currently impacting thousands of prisoners of long-term solitary confine- ment in prisons? In 1890, the Supreme Court said of such pun- ishment: considerable number of the prisoners fell, after even a short confine- ment, into a semi-fatuous condition, from which it was next to impos- sible to arouse them, and others became violently insane; others still commit- ted Given its deranging effects, does this practice consti- tute torture as defined by fed- eral law conduct intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or Years pass, studies are writ- ten and vows are made, yet the scandal of prison rape persists.

When will the government stop this crime against inmates in its custody? The U.S. incarceration rate is five times Wales and nine times 14 times Ja- In 2010, more than 200,000 inmates approximately the total number of prisoners in 1970 were over the age of 50. How can this be necessary? When choosing between two evils, Mae West said, always pick the one I never tried The number of drug offenders in federal prisons is 20 times the number in 1980, and accounts for more than half of our federal mass incarceration. The on is horrendously expensive (in money and shattered lives) and hardly effective (drug prices fall as quality rises). Is it time to consider decriminalizing some controlled substances? In California, which spends almost as much on corrections and rehabilitation as on universi- ties, approximately 2,000 persons who have committed no violent or otherwise serious crime are serv- ing 25 years to life under the strikes and law.

It mandates such sentences for any third felony. Do you think that mandatory and often draconian minimum sentences prevent judges from judging? And that the threat of such sentences, by extorting guilty pleas, can vitiate the right to a trial? The Justice Department has been, to say no more, unhelpful regarding attempts to fully in- vestigate and properly punish the politicization and corruption of the IRS. Given the seeming complicity in the cover- up, would it not be appropriate to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS practice of suppressing the political activity of conservative groups? Civil forfeiture the seizure of property suspected of being produced by, or involved with, crime has become a lucrative business for lawless law enforce- ment. Civil forfeiture treats citi- zens worse than criminals, seizing the property of persons neither convicted of nor even indicted for a crime. All or a portion of the proceeds from the sale of such property goes to those who seized it.

You are familiar with this form of moral hazard: Between 2011 and 2013, your U.S. office reaped more than $113 mil- lion from such forfeitures. Do you agree that this practice often is indistinguishable from robbery? Many progressives say that the 34 states that have passed laws requiring voters to have a govern- ment-issued photo ID are prac- ticing Does requiring a photo ID at airports constitute Visitors to the Justice Department are required to present photo IDs. Will you we will be watching with a fine-toothed comb plan to end this Questions for a nominee By CYNTHIA M. ALLEN Fort Worth Star-Telegram The irony illustrated on the pages of New York Times was almost too delicious.

Harvard University professors an elite group of academics with a collective IQ in the mil- lions have finally discovered what most of the uneducated masses discerned almost im- mediately: The Affordable Care Act is expensive, and working Americans are paying the bill. According to the Robert Pear, members of the storied Faculty of Arts and Sciences have over- whelmingly opposed changes to the university health plan that will increase out-of-pocket health care costs for thousands of Harvard employees. The changes responsible for causing the apoplexy are things like cost-free preventive ser- vices, the extension of coverage for younger adults up to age 26 and the so-called (which taxes many of the expensive plans Harvard pro- vides its faculty) all the result of the sweeping health care law we now call Obamacare. In the words of one disgrun- tled professor, the cost increases are and Another referred to them as pay Hmm. Those are peculiar complaints about a law hailed by the progressive left and pur- ported to save the average fam- ily $2,500 a year in premiums.

Of course, the real humor in this revelation is that most Harvard academics, and their colleagues at exclusive insti- tutions around the country, overwhelmingly supported the Affordable Care Act. Some even advised Congress on its construction. But like many of the advocates, come to realize that its high ideals are translating into harsh realities for Americans, many of whom are experiencing higher pre- miums and deductibles, more cost-sharing and more limited networks. worth noting that the increased burdens that will hit Harvard employees this year are not terribly substantial, at least when compared to costs that will be borne by ordinary working folks. The university is merely adopting features present in most employer- sponsored health plans where employees pay deductibles and a share of other costs, such as surgery and di- agnostic testing.

And the costs to be incurred by Harvard employ- ees are excep- tionally modest. As the Times reports, new plan is far more gen- erous than plans sold on public insurance exchanges under the Affordable Care Act. Harvard says its plan pays 91 percent of the cost of services for the cov- ered population, while the most popular plans on the exchanges, known as silver plans, pay 70 percent, on We should all be so lucky. But the reality is that happening at Harvard an isolated incident. One of the more realistic employees, health economist David M.

Cutler, told the Times: is a microcosm of happening in health care in the an overstatement for sure, as even mod- estly compensated employ- ees will avoid the costs that are plaguing many small and medium-sized businesses (on account of the Health Insurance Tax, the impending employer mandate and the new definition of a full-time employee) and the self-employed, many of whom have seen their bills rise so steeply that the idea of forgoing insurance and paying the pen- alty (a tax according to the U.S. Supreme Court) is an appealing alternative. As exasperated Megan McArdle writes, the deepest irony of the Harvard uproar is that its faculty suffer from the same mass delusion that animates so many of the advocates elsewhere, there is some magic pot of money in the health care system, which can be painlessly tapped to provide universal coverage without dislocating any of the generous arrange- ments that insured people cur- rently For all the degrees among them, even brightest minds believed that government benefits were free. Perhaps even instructors at the most elite institu- tions have things to learn. When Harvard meets Obamacare Gas tax makes sense Gasoline prices at the pump for Nebraskans are now at or even below $2 per gallon after plung- ing more than $1.40 in six months Prices were biggest business Dec.

27). Mean- while, the road and bridge infrastructure seriously needs repair and improvement, but is hampered by insufficient gas tax revenue rural bridges need billion-dollar fix, group Dec. 12). Just raising the state gas tax by 5 cents per gallon could gen- erate more than $50 million of additional revenue annually to do just that. Given that the U.S.

Congress appears incapable of adjusting the federal gas tax up- ward even though the federal tax been increased since 1993, what better time could our state lawmakers have to adjust Nebras- gasoline tax rate upward? While tax increases of any ver- sion are not politically favorable in world, the gasoline tax is one of the most fair and rea- sonable of all taxes because it is based on the where those who pay the tax are those who benefit the most. Opponents to any fuel tax hike will certainly make the argument that prices will go back up sooner rather than and right. Even so, consider that argument in a relative sense. If prices at the pump climb back up a dollar or more and we still keep driving, would it be so bad if an additional nickel per gallon of state tax provided us with better and safer roads and bridges? a tax increase that makes sense. Bruce B.

Johnson, Lincoln letters to the editor Editorial Board Dave Bundy Gordon Winters Ava Thomas Brady Svendgard Editor Opinion Page Editor Publisher Operations Manager Megan Stubenhofer-Barrett L. Kent Wolgamott Alexandra Hayne Regional Digital Director Entertainment Writer Night City Editor Opinion page editor Gordon Winters 402-473-7434 Letters, Local View submissions Submissions must include full first and last name, street address and phone number. Editors may edit and condense letters; suggested length limit is 200 words. Send to (preferred) or address to Letters to Editor, Lincoln Journal Star, P.O. Box 81689, Lincoln NE 68501.

Fax: 402-473-7291. Inquiries: Jackson Adams, 402-473-2684 or What should be on the editorial board agenda? Every January, the Journal Star editorial board pres- ents its agenda for the coming year. Our tradition is to ask readers for suggestions. your chance. In past years many of those who responded said they were worried about climate change.

We decided to make it a priority to add our voice to discussion of the topic. Every year, we cross some items off the list and add new ones. What do you think the editorial priori- ties should be? Suggestions can be emailed to sent to Editorial Board, Lincoln Journal Star, P.O. Box 81689, Lincoln NE 68501, or faxed to 402-473-7291. The deadline for suggestions is Tuesday, Jan.

13. GeorGe Will Washington Post Writers Group See LeTTerS Page D9 Allen.