Here are excerpts from recent editorials in Arkansas newspapers:
Southwest Times Record. April 30, 2017.
Everyone know just how important the military is. (If you don’t, you should.) Aside from its obvious importance, however, comes word that the military is directly responsible for billions of dollars in economic benefit to Arkansas.
Two military facilities in our area, the Ebbing Air National Guard base and Fort Chaffee Joint Maneuver Training Facility, were part of an eye-opening analysis recently released by the Governor’s Military Affairs Committee. (The others in the analysis area Little Rock Air Force Base; Camp Robinson/Camp Pike; and Pine Bluff Arsenal.)
The committee was formed in September 2015 to study the financial impact of military installations in Arkansas. The panel, made up of public and private leaders, released its first findings on April 26, and they left quite an impression.
According to the report, the state’s military facilities employ 21,000 people, indirectly support 41,400 jobs and contribute annual totals of $3 billion in labor income, $4.5 billion in gross state product and $330 million in tax revenue. For western Arkansas, military facilities provide 4,357 jobs and $304 million to the economy, the report shows.
Ebbing Air National Guard Base is home to the 188th Wing, which features three primary missions: Remotely Piloted Aircraft (MQ-9 Reaper); Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (Distributed Ground Station-Arkansas); and Targeting (Space-Focused). The Fort Chaffee Joint Maneuver Training Center is an Arkansas National Guard installation that features a 64,592-acre training site.
We are grateful that these two facilities have remained such a large part of the Fort Smith area’s success. In many ways, they have helped keep us on the map, so to speak. It’s an unnerving thought when you take those economic numbers out of our area. To say our military institutions are a vital part of Fort Smith’s success is an understatement. They are also vital to Arkansas as a whole.
“Due to budget reductions, evolving threats, and new capabilities and missions, Arkansas must position its military bases as the best options available to the (Department of Defense) in a national security environment that demands readiness, capability, adaptability, innovation, and efficiency,” the report states.
The committee looks to serve as an advocate for the state’s military institutions, which could prove crucial in efforts to retain missions in Arkansas and keeping the state as a vital part of national defense. The analysis included site visits at each of the installations.
“As a result of this initiative, we have identified the strengths we can build upon to enhance our current military installations, as well as opportunities for growth within Arkansas,” Gov. Asa Hutchinson states in a letter included in the report. “We are better equipped to advocate for local communities to accomplish short- and long-term objectives and position Arkansas as a priority state in our national defense plan.”
One recommendation that came from the panel is initiating community-led partnerships in support of the installations. What a fantastic opportunity for the community to support our military in a variety of ways, if only to say thank you for the work that’s being done. We know of several groups and individuals who work to offer moral support for our military members; maybe now’s the time to come together as one to help make the support even better.
“Through the findings and recommendations from this study, we now have a clear vision for our next steps,” said Col. Gary Holland, Arkansas Economic Development Commission’s director of military affairs, in the report. “I look forward to working diligently with our team to create new opportunities for those who serve.”
We hope this report does, indeed, provide a clear vision for the future with regards to the state’s military installations and the impact they have on those of us who live here. We thank those who committed themselves to touring the five facilities and offering recommendations. The study is worth a look, whether you’re a member of the military or are just curious about the impact it has on our area. The full study can be found at www.arkansasedc.com/military-affairs .
___
Texarkana Gazette. April 30, 2017.
At one time we all pretty much counted on what we call the American Dream.
You work hard, you get ahead and your children have a shot at doing even better than you did.
That was the way things worked for generations. Especially with immigrant families, where it was not uncommon to see the children of janitors and sweatshop workers become doctors, lawyers and business owners. But the dream wasn’t just about college and professional status. There were plenty of opportunities in the blue-collar sector as well. Factory workers could count on a job for life and see their children work alongside them, maybe even rise into management. But things have changed.
The U.S. Census Bureau recently released a report examining the economic lives of so-called “millennials” who range in age from 18 to 34.
A third are living with their parents. More than 40 percent have student debt. Fewer than one-third are financially independent of their parents by age 21. Many college graduates cannot find a job in their field. Many high school grads cannot find a job outside the low-wage service sector.
The millennials still believe education is key to success and they want financial stability. For about half of them the dream is working. For the other half it’s still just a dream.
So what can be done?
The most important thing is creating not just jobs - we have plenty of minimum-wage positions out there - but higher-paying jobs. Professional and manufacturing jobs.
The kind that help you move up, move out and build a life.
Opportunity.
That was one of the cornerstones of President Donald’s Trump’s campaign. It’s a promise we hope he keeps. It’s a promise we hope lawmakers, by putting aside their partisan bickering, can embrace and help him keep.
___
Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. April 30, 2017.
On April 27, as the state administered the death penalty for the fourth time in eight days, questions about how to proceed with executions remained very much alive.
Arkansas law declares that executions are private matters, but there is no responsible form of government that should carry out such a penalty without public accountability. Executions and secrecy may be standard practice in places like Japan, China, Syria, Iran and similar countries, but Americans have long expected that someone other than government officials should be present to document a government-sponsored killing as a form of justice.
Why does it matter? Because government officials have been known, once or twice, to reveal only information that supports the government’s position on an issue. And, yes, the implication there is also that they’ve been known to cover up a thing or two.
Arkansas’ protocol for killing inmates has been scrutinized in a general sense ad nauseam. Arkansas’ conduct of four executions in barely more than a week provided fodder for specific assertions that the lethal injection process amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, something the U.S. Constitution outlaws.
Ledell Lee became the first Arkansas prisoner in a dozen years to die at the hands of an executioner. Witnesses to the April 20 execution said the 12-minute process went smoothly. Even an attorney known as an advocate for death row inmates and against executions said Lee’s death “appeared to be without incident.”
Then came Jack Jones and Marcel Williams. Jones’ death took 14 minutes, during which he moved his lips for about two minutes after the first of three drugs entered his body. A microphone inside the death chamber was turned off, so it was impossible for witnesses to tell if he was speaking. Reporters said they saw no signs of obvious suffering or pain.
But attorneys trying to stop Williams’ execution quickly posted a filing in court claiming Jones’ death was “torturous” and asserting he was “gulping” for air. State officials called the description “inaccurate.” After a two-hour delay, Williams was given the lethal doses. His execution took 17 minutes, during which a reporter said he stopped breathing and “grimaced.” He was pronounced dead nine minutes later.
Lastly, was the killing of Kenneth Williams, which added fuel to the debate over the state’s methods. In a 13-minute execution, a reporter documented a period of 10 to 15 seconds in which he was “coughing, convulsing, lurching, jerking with sound even with the (execution chamber) microphone turned off.” The reporter said Williams’ breathing appeared as a “clear attempt to draw oxygen.”
State officials called the shaking an “involuntary muscular reaction.” A spokesman for Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who issued the death warrants and had the power to stop the executions, called them “flawless.”
On April 28, however, federal public defenders filed a motion seeking to preserve evidence in Williams’ execution, arguing the accounts of his death show the “Arkansas execution protocol did not prevent execution by torture.” Also, Hutchinson dismissed calls from the American Civil Liberties Union for an investigation beyond the standard review of any inmate’s death.
Did what happened to Williams amount to torture, or was it just a natural body reaction to the sedative? It’s far beyond our medical expertise to determine.
But what we will assert is how vital the role of unbiased execution witnesses is when it comes to documenting this most serious of punishments. Yet, while the state allows - indeed, requires - witnesses, its approach appears designed to limit information those witnesses can actually collect.
For example, reporters were first told they would not be able to take even pens and paper in with them, a ludicrous policy soon reversed by the Arkansas Department of Correction. And the business of turning a death chamber microphone on for an inmate’s statement but off for all other aspects of the event? It seems geared toward limiting the available information about what’s happening.
Naturally, there will be differing accounts and interpretations of what’s seen. But the reason people are there at all are to be witnesses. The state doesn’t serve those ends by limiting what those witnesses can see and report. Unbiased witnesses serve as a check and balance against what the state prefers to describe and what opponents to the execution claim.
State law demands witnesses should be present, and they should be. Government policy should let them be full witnesses to this most serious of state actions.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.