Editorials
Wednesday, October 29, 1997THE United States will have another ambassador to Japan with top-flight political credentials. Former House Speaker Tom Foley was confirmed by the Senate Monday on a 91-0 vote, two months after his nomination by President Clinton. Foley succeeds former Vice President Walter Mondale, who resigned last December. Considering the importance of the U.S.-Japan relationship, too much time was allowed to pass in filling this vital post. Foley is good choice
as envoy to JapanThe Japanese government should be pleased with Clinton's choice. Foley represented the 5th district of eastern Washington in the House from 1965 until 1994, when he was defeated in the Republican rout. As speaker he was one of the most powerful figures in the capital. He will continue a tradition of ranking politicians serving as ambassador to Tokyo. In addition to Mondale, former Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield also held the post.
Foley is a longtime student of Japanese politics and culture. He has traveled to Japan at least 20 times, often to promote Washington state apples, wheat, lumber or aircraft. In 1996 he received Japan's highest civilian decoration.
This job has never been a sinecure. The relationship between Washington and Tokyo has been called the most important in the world, although China is assuming increasing importance these days. Having a knowledgeable and skillful ambassador in Tokyo whose advice is respected in Washington is crucial. Foley is an excellent choice.
ONE of the recommendations of the Economic Revitalization Task Force read: "Enable government to implement public-private competition through a managed process." This appears to be a weasel-worded endorsement of privatization. It's important that such a recommendation was made, but it should have been more forthright. Need for privatization
If a real effort is to be made to make state and county government more efficient, privatization is one of the most important approaches that should be explored. However, with two representatives of government employee unions on the task force, including Gary Rodrigues of the United Public Workers, it is little short of a miracle that privatization received any endorsement. And it is impossible to believe that Rodrigues' OK was anything more than a hollow gesture.
In its determination to preserve unanimity, the task force glossed over the fact that the UPW leader struck a huge blow against privatization with his successful suit against a Hawaii County landfill operation. Moreover, he has since tried to discredit privatization efforts by likening them to a corrupt spoils system, although this is certainly not the intention.
Having his signature on a pro-privatization recommendation weakened the report's credibility. So did the fact that none of the mayors was included on the task force, although it is the counties that have tried to introduce privatization.
The neighbor island mayors appealed to the Legislature last spring to fix the law in response to the Supreme Court's decision in the Konno case, but nothing happened because the legislators, the Senate in particular, refused to take on the government employee unions.
If the task force really wanted to support privatization, it would have recommended that next year's legislative session amend the law to permit contracting out of government services when it is determined to be in the public interest. But the task force didn't make such a recommendation, and there is no reason to expect the Legislature will face up to this problem, any more than it did in the last session.
URGED on by casino operators, Congress is considering proposals to ban gambling on the Internet, trying to put the brakes on activity that may be growing as rapidly at the Internet itself. In a country where gambling already is legal in some form in all states except Hawaii and Utah, targeting individuals who gamble on-line in the privacy of their homes probably is impossible, even though it is illegal under present federal law. Obliterating gambling operations altogether on the Web is unattainable because it is a World Wide Web. Internet gambling
The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved such a ban, and the bill is headed for the full Senate. It is backed by casino supporters in the Senate and by the American Gaming Association, which obviously fears competition from foreign operations. Most Internet gambling operations are located outside the United States, beyond the reach of U.S. law. The number of known on-line gambling sites has reportedly grown from 15 to 60 this year.
The Senate bill would require that Internet service providers block access to any gambling sites. It fails to recognize that service providers are basically common carriers, much like the telephone company, and are unable to analyze cyberspace anywhere near the level needed to identify gambling activity.
Congress was mistaken in trying to ban pornography from the Internet, and that issue is parallel with prohibition of Internet gambling. Interstate trafficking in pornography was illegal before Congress tried to grapple with Internet pornography; current law already bans interstate gambling over phone lines or other wire communications, but enforcement is difficult.
Just as proponents of the Internet pornography ban painted horror pictures of children gaining access to on-line obscene pictures, those favoring an Internet gambling ban warn of the nightmare of a child using a parent's credit card and losing thousands of dollars to an Internet casino. Because of the nature of the Web, the primary responsibility for preventing such catastrophes lies not with the government but with parents.
Rupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor
