Playing With Matches on the Debt
Just ignore Tuesday’s vote against raising the debt ceiling, House Republican leaders whispered to Wall Street. We didn’t really vote against it, members suggested; we just sent another of our endless symbolic messages, pretending to take the nation’s credit to the brink of collapse in order to extract the maximum concessions from President Obama.
Once he caves, members said, the debt limit will be raised and the credit scare will end. And the business world apparently got the message. It’s just a “joke,” said a leader of the United States Chamber of Commerce, and Wall Street is in on it. Not everyone found it funny.
No matter how they tried to spin it, 318 House members actually voted against paying the country’s bills and keeping the promise made to federal bondholders. That’s an incredibly dangerous message to send in a softening global economy. Among the jokesters were 236 Republicans playing the politics of extortion, and 82 feckless Democrats who fret that Republicans could transform a courageous vote into a foul-smelling advertisement.
The games that now pass for governing in an increasingly embarrassing 112th Congress are menacing the nation’s future. It was bad enough when Republicans threatened to shut down the government to achieve their extreme and extremely misguided spending cuts, but that threat would have caused temporary damage. The debt limit is something else altogether. If the global credit markets decide that the debt of the United States will regularly be held hostage to ideological demands, it could cause significant harm to investment in long-term bonds and other obligations. That, in turn, could damage domestic credit markets and easily spark another recession.
To prevent this from happening, 114 Democrats in April asked for a “clean” vote without conditions. But Republicans were not about to set their hostage free. Knowing that the clean vote would not pass — and imposing a two-thirds majority requirement to ensure its failure — House Republicans gave the Democrats what they requested. They then voted it down, sending their reckless message to the world.
But there was no excuse for so many Democrats to go along with that message, including the leadership. Steny Hoyer, the minority whip, urged his members to vote no so they would not “subject themselves to a political 30-second ad attack” with all Republicans voting no. Apparently Mr. Hoyer did not trust voters to understand what a dangerous and dishonest game the Republicans are playing.
The exercise has prompted the White House to convene talks to discuss the Republicans’ scattershot demands, which have ranged from trillions in spending cuts to the outright dismantling of vital safety-net programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Democrats have hoped to get an increase in revenues out of any deal, but House Republican leaders emerged from a White House meeting on Wednesday spouting the usual discredited claims that higher taxes on the rich would impede job growth.
What Republicans seem unwilling to acknowledge is that the debt-limit debate is not about future spending. It is about paying for a deficit already incurred because of two wars and tax cuts approved by both Republicans and Democrats at the behest of a Republican president. Tuesday’s vote was a chance to do the right thing and educate the public on why it was necessary. Instead, too many lawmakers walked away from the truth.
The Cellphone Study
Cellphone users have every right to be befuddled. Just last year, a major study in 13 countries found no clear evidence that exposure to the radiation from cellphones causes brain cancer. Yet, this week, a panel convened by the same agency, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, declared that the radiation is “possibly carcinogenic” to humans. It made this pronouncement by press release before publishing a monograph that will lay out the basis for its concerns — and will give independent scientists their first chance to evaluate this new judgment.
The agency, a unit of the World Health Organization, based its determination on what it called “limited evidence” that heavy users of cellphones had an increased risk of developing a rare brain tumor known as a glioma. Cellphones were placed in a “possibly carcinogenic” category that also includes pesticides, dry cleaning chemicals, engine exhaust, lead, pickled vegetables and coffee.
The I.A.R.C. is a respected organization whose judgments influence regulatory policies in many nations. Still, many experts remain dubious. Despite a huge upsurge in cellphone use over the past two decades, brain cancer rates in the United States have been declining. Scientists are mostly stumped as to how the radio frequency waves emitted by cellphones, which lack the punch to break chemical bonds or disrupt DNA, might cause cancer.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the safety of cellphone emissions, said it would review the forthcoming monograph carefully but that “the existing weight of scientific evidence does not show an association between non-thermal radio frequency energy and adverse health outcomes.”
For now, it seems reasonable to conduct more research and to monitor usage by children, who could have a lifetime of exposure ahead. Heavy users of cellphones might want to use headsets, speaker phones or text messaging to keep the device at a distance. Most would be surprised to learn that cellphone manufacturers, presumably to ward off liability claims, already advise users in very small print to hold the phones a short distance from the body while calling.
Syed Saleem Shahzad’s Courage
The Pakistani journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad knew he was a marked man. Mr. Shahzad, who covered national security and terrorism, had received repeated threats from Pakistan’s powerful spy agency. Yet he courageously kept doing his job — until somebody silenced him. His body, his face horribly beaten, was buried on Wednesday.
Suspicion inevitably falls on Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s chief intelligence agency. For the sake of justice, and the shredded credibility of Pakistan’s government, his murderers must be found quickly and held accountable.
Mr. Shahzad disappeared from Islamabad on Sunday, two days after he published an article suggesting a militant attack on a naval base in Karachi was retaliation for the navy’s attempt to crack down on Al Qaeda militants in the armed forces. American analysts doubt an Al Qaeda cell infiltrated Pakistani security, but they have long worried about individual sympathizers.
Whatever the case, the attack humiliated the ISI and the armed services. They were already fending off allegations that they sheltered Osama bin Laden and criticism for failing to stop the American raid that killed him.
An ISI spokesman described Mr. Shahzad’s death as “tragic” but dismissed as “absurd” charges of his agency’s involvement and said ISI would help bring the perpetrators to justice. That is not enough. The ISI’s chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, and his boss, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the army chief of staff, must personally pledge a robust and transparent hunt for whoever was responsible. They must make clear to all who work for them that they will not tolerate attempts to silence reporters or anyone who dares to raise questions.
Under Pakistan’s civilian government, journalists are freer to work than during the years of the military dictatorship. Still, at least 16 have been murdered since 2002, making Pakistan the deadliest country for the news media last year, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Even as they mourned Mr. Shahzad, Pakistani journalists vowed they would keep doing their jobs. “We will not shut our voices down,” said Azhar Abbas. For the sake of Pakistan, we hope they keep up the fight.
Quiet? In New York City?
The irony would not have been lost on John Lennon. Musicians at Strawberry Fields, a memorial to the murdered Beatle and one of eight quiet zones in New York City’s Central Park, have drawn more police attention lately. If some minstrel belts out “Imagine” or gets a crowd to sing along hoping to carry away a hatful of coins, this busker could face a fine ranging from $50 to $200.
Why this more urgent push for silence at the center of this wonderfully boisterous metropolis? Why forbid singing and guitars, even if the tune is not always in harmony with some of the park’s ritzy neighbors? A similar impulse to keep the park tidy has led to rigid limits on demonstrations and political rallies on the park’s Great Lawn.
Adrian Benepe, the city’s parks commissioner, said that with Central Park getting 38 million visitors a year, the city is “trying to avert the tragedy of the commons,” where too little regulation destroys a good thing for all. A saxophonist playing at Bethesda Terrace, a newly designated quiet area, could wipe out the gentle sound of the Bethesda Fountain for everyone else. Besides, he said, the eight quiet zones (most in place for years) make up only 5 percent of park land and amplification equipment, including large radios, has long been barred without a permit.
While that may be true, the new zeal in enforcing the rules seems an odd use of park police. They seem busier than usual silencing or ticketing street musicians, including those who like playing in a stone passageway near the Bethesda Fountain because of its rich, natural acoustics.
This is New York, a very big noisy place that should not be forced to keep quiet.
