St. Louis Post-Dispatch from St. Louis, Missouri • Page 26

6B ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH FRIDAY, JUNE 30.1995 THE POST-DISPATCH PLATFORM I KNOW THAT MY RETIREMENT WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE IN ITS CARDINAL PRINCIPLES, THAT IT WILL ALWAYS FIGHT FOR PROGRESS AND REFORM, NEVER TOLERATE INJUSTICE OR CORRUPTION, ALWAYS FIGHT DEMAGOGUES OF ALL PARTIES. NEVER BELONG TO ANY PARTY, ALWAYS OPPOSE PRIVILEGED CLASSES AND PUBLIC PLUNDERERS, NEVER LACK SYMPATHY WITH THE POOR. ALWAYS REMAIN DEVOTED TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE, NEVER BE SATISFIED WITH MERELY PRINTING NEWS. ALWAYS BE DRASTICALLY INDEPENDENT, NEVER BE AFRAID TO ATTACK WRONG, WHETHER BY PREDATORY PLUTOCRACY OR PREDATORY POVERTY.

Founded by JOSEPH PULITZER December 12, 1878 JOSEPH PULITZER. EDITOR AND PUBLISHER 1878-1911 JOSEPH PULITZER, EDITOR AND PUBLISHER 19121955 JOSEPH PULITZER EDITOR AND PUBLISHER 1955-1986, CHAIRMAN 1979-1993 MICHAEL E. PULITZER. CHMKMVi ASD PRESIDENT NICHOLAS G. PENNTMAN IV.

PUBLISHER WILLIAM F. WOO, ED1TOK FOSTER DAVIS, MANAGING EDITOR EDWARD A. H1GGINS, EDITOR OF THE EDITORIAL PAGE April 10, 1907 JOSEPH PULITZER 900 North Tucker Boulevard 63101 (314) 340-8000 EDITORIALS Ladue Schools Face A Choice Close Call LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE School Board then voted to eject all organizations, pending its appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal was denied on Thursday, without comment. Now, the district will have to decide: Should it open its buildings to all groups or to none of them? In its appeal, the district made a legitimate point: Students at the impressionable junior high age, where peer pressure has overwhelming power, could easily infer that any group meeting in school buildings has the sanction of school officials.

Such an inference may make little difference when the group involved collects stamps or learns the finer points of chess. Where religion is involved, however, younger students deserve to be shielded from values and beliefs that may clash with what they learn at home. Public school should always be religion-neutral. Neutrality toward religion is not the same as hostility toward it, as much as the current judicial climate seems to equate the two. Saying that religious teachings belong at home and in houses of worship is not the same as saying they are bad; it is simply saying that they have a proper time and place.

If the price of maintaining that propriety is keeping out other worthwhile groups like the Scouts, the Ladue schools should adopt a policy saying so. The U.S. Supreme Court's increasing tendency to erase the line between church and state touched the Ladue School District Thursday, when the court let stand a ruling against the district's policy on after-school clubs. The decision on the same day the court said the University of Virginia wrongly refused a subsidy to a student Christian magazine further undermines the constitutional ban on official support for religion and emphasizes one part of the First Amendment at the expense of others. The Good NewsGood Sports Club originally had met right after classes ended at Ladue Junior High School.

But in 1992, responding to concerns from parents who said such meetings would make it seem the district endorsed the club's religious views, Ladue changed its policy and barred all groups except scouting programs from using school buildings until 6 p.m. The club sued and won its case in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis. Its decision said allowing Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to use the buildings after school but denying the same permission to the religious club amounted to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.

Rather than adopt a new policy to allow all groups to use school buildings after classes, the Ladue A Fig Leaf Is Better Than War From his home in Illinois, he may -think everything's great in Califor- nia. He forgets that within the.last year, California had to borrow Jj money to meet its own payroll; the state nearly went bankrupt (arid may still); the state university tern is beyond the means of many middle-class students, let alone the poor; many public libraries closed and the entire state library system" is near collapse; and many community and service opportunities have been eliminated. Is this what we want in and Illinois or nationally? No thank you! I'm glad Missouri vot-' ers had the wisdom to defeat the similarly disastrous Hancock II amendment last November. For some reason, Republicans in general seem to be long on blame and short on memory. Clark J.

Hickman Maplewood The Republican Party, by ac-tions reminiscent of the Reagan administration, appears to be in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease: proposing to cut taxes, increase military spending and balance the budget. Maybe "an early warning system" for the disease in individuals and institutions has been revealed. Mary Jane Schutzius Florissant Fast Enough As a motorist, citizen and driver education teacher in Missouri, I am strongly opposed to the recent vote our U.S. senators took re- garding an increase in speed limits. The reason and the advantage I do not know, but the following comments support my position on this issue involving driver safety and human waste (death).

Many motorists have difficulty controlling their automobiles at the present rates. All one has to do is drive on Interstates 70, 270, 55 now to about 2.65 million in 1998. But they were going to do that anyway; the rise in the yen's value makes it cheaper to produce here than import from Japan. The car companies also agreed to buy more U.S.-made parts for their U.S. plants as well as for their Japanese plants.

The gain for U.S. car parts sales is estimated at $6.75 billion. But the sum isn't binding, and only a third of it reflects increased sales inside Japan, the central American goal. Japan also promised to encourage its car dealers to carry U.S. cars.

The administration estimates this will raise the number of U.S. outlets in Japan to 1,000 from 200 by the year 2000. Japan also agreed to trim barriers to permit its car repair shops to carry U.S. parts. But these results, if achieved, would hardly dent America's $33 billion trade deficit in vehicles and parts with Japan, half the $66 billion overall deficit.

Given what the administration was willing to accept, threatening a trade war wasn't worth it. As well, U.S. threats, far from causing Japan to bend, created uncertainty and ill will in Japan and elsewhere about America's commitment to free trade. As for opening the Japanese market in autos or anything else slow but steady progress is being made. It will take more than U.S.

threats to accelerate things. The rest of the world, using the WTO as a forum, must relentlessly pressure Japan until it has no choice but to finally and fully open its markets to the world. At the last moment, the United States and Japan drew back from the brink of a trade war and reached an agreement on increased Japanese purchases of U.S. cars and car parts by Japanese manufacturers. Accordingly, threatened U.S.

sanctions on Japanese luxury cars were canceled. But the deal isn't written in stone. The Japanese government was barely involved in it. The deal is with Japan's car companies, not the government. It remains to be seen whether they will honor it.

Nonetheless, the agreement isn't a bad one. Actually, it's the best possible under the circumstances, and moves in the right direction, though it may not increase Japanese purchases of U.S. autos and auto parts all that much. The pact's chief virtue is that while the commitments are voluntary, if no improvements occur, the United States has earned the right to take Japan to the World Trade Organization to impeach its entire approach to trade. That's a better course than a trade war.

Fortunately, at the 1 1th hour, U.S. officials finally realized the Japanese would never agree to guaranteed numerical targets for U.S. car or car parts sales. They were right to refuse. Managing trade is no way to promote commerce; in the long run, managing retards commerce by giving control of a process to governments that should belong to the market.

Just what did the United States get? A voluntary commitment by Japanese car companies to increase production at its U.S. plants from 2.1 million cars Jones Is Innocent Until Proven Guilty Comptroller Virvus Jones was, is and continues to be an asset to the city of St. Louis, having performed his official duties with unquestionable skills. Jones is a man of candor, truth and integrity. Often people do not like the truth, preferring to be lied to instead.

Unlike many politicians, Jones is true to his word, as evidenced by the fact that be has kept his campaign promises. For example, he dramatically improved St. Louis' credit rating. In addition and, perhaps, what is more important, he tilled a level playing field for all residents of St. Louis.

Jones has opened the doors of opportunity for all people, not just a designated, self-appointed few who possessed the secret password. I call for people to look beyond the rhetoric and examine the facts. Fact one: Jones has benefited the city of St. Louis and its residents by implementing and supporting a policy of inclusion and unification as opposed to the business-as-usual ideology of exclusion and polarization. Fact two: Jones is innocent and, at a minimum, is presumed so, until proven guilty.

Finally, others in this community who know the truth about Jones and his honor, integrity and commitment should speak out in support of the man who has faithfully, untiringly stepped forth, spoken out and supported them directly or indirectly over the years. Cheryl Denise Smith St. Louis The June 27 editorial headline said, "Mr. Jones Should Step Aside." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought St. Louis Comptroller Virvus Jones was only indicted.

Jones should be given a chance to defend himself in a court of law, and not be tried by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Carl S. Garrett Valley Park Charities Need Help In response to the June 20 editorial, "Can Private Charities Do It?" I support your opinion with the hearty response not by ourselves! I am the executive director of Evangelical Children's Home, a private, non-profit social agency serving abused and neglected children and their families. Our budget is about $5 million a year.

Three-fifths of this budget is underwritten by fees for services, much of which come from governmental agencies. A small percentage of this amount comes from Medicaid. An even smaller percentage comes from the clients themselves. When we serve children or families who are referred to us by governmental agencies, we recover just over half of our cost. So our agency must raise two-fifths of our budget requirements from private, charitable sources.

We are voluntarily affiliated with the United Church of Christ and are able to appeal to the congregations of this denomination for a considerable portion of this needed support. However, there is a point of diminishing returns. The local churches are besieged on all sides by agencies such as mine, including services for the aged, for the poor and for the sick and disabled. Many of these congregations work valiantly to increase their offerings to us each year but cannot keep up with the demands of agencies, which must deal with OSHA regulations, ADA requirements, licensing rules and accreditation standards, not to mention the effects of increased demand for service and the escalating degree of the severity of symptoms presented. Such factors as these have meant a 600 percent increase in our costs in 10 years.

No church can keep up with that. House Speaker Newt Gingrich may indeed be sincere in his belief that churches have the capability of taking over government responsibility in meeting the desperate needs of people in our society. But it is unrealistic. The agency I serve could eat up all the resources of the churches in our denomination all by itself. And we are only one small agency in a sea of non-profit agencies trying desperately to meet sorely pressing needs.

The partnership between private agencies and the public (government) must continue. Government can't do it alone, and neither can private agencies, no matter how well-backed by charity. Any other view is simply naive. R.A. Baur St.

Louis MetroLink Failures John V. Byrd's June 24 letter suggested that if MetroLink were extended to St. Charles County, there would be no need for the Page Avenue extension. Let us take a short, hard look at MetroLink. It was sold to the St.

Louis area voters as an inexpensive, rapid, mass transit system. However, it is not inexpensive, it is not rapid and it is certainly not a mass transit system. Revenue from MetroLink pays only one-third the cost of operating the system. The remaining two-thirds come from the pockets of the taxpayers. If MetroLink were to base its fares on its costs, the charge for riding it would be $3, or $24 for a round trip for a family of four.

That's not inexpensive! A recent study for extending MetroLink to St. Charles County revealed that travel from a proposed station at Mexico and Mid Rivers Roads to Busch Stadium would take IV2 hours. It takes less than 45 minutes by auto. That's not rapid! As for mass transit, MetroLink operates seven trains an hour during rush hours. Each train can carry approximately 300 passengers a total of 2,100 passengers an hour.

Contrast that with the 15,000 vehicles that cross the Blanchette (Interstate 70) Bridge during one hour of the morning rush. Rail transportation of passengers is an idea whose time has come and gone. It is simply an outmoded technology. It cannot move as many people, as quickly, as cheaply or to as many different destinations as our highway system can. MetroLink should never have been built.

Let us not compound the folly by extending it anywhere! Mel Edwards St. Peters Short Memory I had to laugh when I read Rick Davenport's (June 22) letter about the federal budget. He rhetorically states that his "memory must be failing" because he seems to remember Bill Clinton promising to balance the federal budget in five years and reneging on a middle-class tax cut before even taking office. I'm afraid his memory actually is failing. What he doesn't remember is that George Bush lied to the American people about the size of the deficit in order to win re-election.

While Davenport blames Clinton for a continuing federal deficit, he forgets that the federal debt quadrupled under the Reagan and Bush administrations. Where his memory fails him most, however, is in his admiration of California's Proposition 13. I A Bond Deal In Jeopardy Only weeks after receiving an upgraded credit rating, St. Louis finds itself struggling to prevent a $24 million bond issue from turning into a financial headache. Let's hope the Board of Aldermen acts promptly to resolve the situation.

As part of the Kiel Center project, the city issued $24 million in revenue bonds for construction of a parking garage on the west side of the facility. The bonds were to be retired from parking revenue from the garage itself and from revenue from additional parking on land now occupied by the City Jail and, possibly, land on which the Children's Building sits. Because revenue from the Kiel garage alone is insufficient to meet the bond payments, the city has had to dip into other funds to cover the difference. Some city officials are warning that the bonds could be called as early as December because the city hasn't demolished the Children's Building as it had promised to generate more parking revenue to retire the bonds. Both the Children's Building and the jail are situated across the street from Kiel Center.

The jail will be demolished and the site converted to parking once the city builds a new downtown jail. The parking garage bond ordinance gave the city over a year to redevelop the Children's Building site. In the event that no redevelopment occurred, the site was supposed to be converted to parking, the proceeds from which would be used to help retire the bonds. The deadline for the redevelopment plan expired last year. Because the city has yet to take steps to put parking on the Children's Building site, bond trustees are warning that the city risks being declared in default.

The next move is up to Alderman Phyllis Young of the 7th Ward, who has power over the project because the building is in her ward. She, like most St. Louisans, probably would prefer that the building be recycled rather than demolished. But that no longer appears to be an option. The city's hands are essentially tied until she introduces a bill to demolish the building.

Hard Times Ahead For Cities and the nearby highways in the St. Louis area. I suspect the lobbyists in Washington pushed their own selfish interests and forgot the common motorist not only in Missouri but in the other 49 states. As residents of the Show-Me state, we should take the initiative to start a strong campaign withal our own senators and representa-j tives in Jefferson City to say rlo to increase speeds in Missouri. The -rate of 65 mph is fast enough.

Peo pie who want to go faster should 'J -take the plane. 'n Bernie Cooper St. Peters We want to know what our read- ers think. Mail your opinions to Letters From The People, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 900 North Tucker St.

Louis, Mo. 63101, contact us by e-mail at letters pd.stlnet.com, or fax your opinions to (314) 340-3139, Please keep letters short and to the point; they may be edited length or clarity. Letters must in- elude name, address and daytime phone number for verification. Because we receive so much mail, we cannot acknowledge or return letter Mayors of the nation's largest cities will have to adjust to the fact that efforts to reshape federal-state relations and cut the federal deficit are likely to mean less spending on urban programs through the end of this century and beyond. President Bill Clinton recently gave the mayors the bad news, acknowledging the "real pain" their cities will face.

But Washington can help ease the pain. The most flawed idea to come out of Congress has been the notion that every social-policy program should be turned over to the states. The premise behind this argument is that governors and state lawmakers know better the needs of their constituents than Washington. If that's true, then it can also be said that mayors and other locally elected officials often are more in tune with the needs of urban constituents than are state legislatures and governors. The mayors could use that logic to make a strong case for Congress to provide more direct aid to cities rather than channeling all federal dollars to the state, as would be the case with much of the Contract With America legislation.

This approach is flawed in that the rural orientation of some state legislatures and the general indifference of lawmakers to urban problems mean that many statehouses will be less sympathetic to cities. At least two GOP presidential candidates, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander, say they favor direct block grants to cities as are now made through the Community Development Block Grant program. But cities must first get assurances that the Community Development program itself won't become the next target of Congress' ax. Unfortunately, Mr.

Clinton has given mayors no assurances that he will fight to save this $4 billion program, which helps St. Louis and other cities fund a range of housing, economic development and social service programs. Mayors also deserve a seat at the table with federal and state lawmakers to help shape the future of community development programs and to push for continuation of direct block grant funding to major cities..