be. One example from his column: "The ROAR initiative is deeply flawed
and makes demands that violate the U.S. Constitution."
The columnist does not mention what the supposed deep flaws might be.
It is my belief that he is just blowing smoke in this regard. Regarding
the constitutionality of ROAR, if the columnist had ever read the U.S.
Constitution, he would know that it makes no mention of initiatives.
Initiatives are a creation of, and are regulated by, those individual
states that allow the initiative process. The columnist would do well to
read the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, in which it is simply
stated: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution are reserved to the states or to the people."
Based on the fact that Measure F in Orange County was overturned in
court, the columnist implies that the ROAR initiative will meet a similar
fate. At best, he tells half the story.
The two primary reasons why Measure F was overturned are that it deals
with more than one issue -- airports, prisons and dumps -- and because it
directly contradicts an earlier measure passed by Orange County voters.
The ROAR initiative will face neither of these legal hurdles.
The omissions and inaccuracies perpetuated in his column are, in my
opinion, deliberately grossly misleading. Sadly, this type of writing has
become the columnist's signature in recent years.
It has not always been so.
During earlier years, the columnist built himself a tremendous bank
account of credibility. He now seems intent on squandering his
credibility account by his oft-demonstrated willingness to allow his
biases to override anything that even closely resembles fact in his