Looking Back: Opinions from past add perspective

Looking Back reviews opinions published in The Spokesman-Review during this week in history.

Buy at home, May 18, 1916: An S-R editorial praised members of the chamber of commerce who pledged their support for a buy-at-home movement to aid Spokane manufacturers. But it offered a cautionary note:

“The vote was an admirable utterance of the Spokane spirit, a commendable expression of local loyalty. But it was more of a word than a deed. It requires to be followed with consistent and persisting action.”

The editorial concluded: “Our products are as good as those of the Coast and of the interior and the east, yet no more expensive. Purchasing them builds up Spokane in scores of ways. Go to it, gentlemen! Live and do what you have said. Action, not words, is the only thing that counts.”

State-sponsored lottery, May 17, 1956: An editorial panned the idea of a national lottery, which had been proposed in Great Britain, noting that “Britain is a sports-loving nation and gambling is widespread.”

It concluded: “The fact that only one state in the union has large-scale, publicly endorsed gambling indicates the sentiment of the American people in this respect.”

Basic education, May 17, 1976: The editorial board was somewhat encouraged to see the state Board of Education attempt to define the parameters of “basic education.” The board, for instance, set the maximum student-to-teacher ratio at 30-to-1. The editorial noted:

“Services such as busing, kindergarten and bilingual classes would be left totally to the discretion of local school boards.”

Since then, transportation and kindergarten have moved under the “basic definition” umbrella of services to be funded by the state. A transitional bilingual program is also a state responsibility.

The editorial noted: “It is not likely everyone will agree wholly with the board’s definition. What may be considered ‘basic’ by some may be considered ‘frills’ by others. The 30 to 1 ratio may bring some objections.”

Radioactive, May 19, 1986: After the federal government reluctantly admitted to the contamination of Eastern Washington and Oregon with radiation from Hanford, the U.S. Energy Department still insisted the states share in the costs of researching the extent of the problem. The S-R editorial board was not pleased:

“Last February … the Energy Department released 19,000 pages of previously classified documents describing 40 years of radiation releases by nuclear weapons facilities at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. The documents told a staggering tale of deliberate, secretive environmental contamination. Without alerting anyone to the danger, Hanford released more than a million curies of radioactive iodine and thousands of curies of other radioactive substances.”

The editorial concluded: “The states of Washington and Oregon did not spew radiation into their environment; the federal government did. The federal government ought to bear the full cost of this essential, independent investigation into its irresponsible conduct.”