Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Opinion
Apr. 20, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: 'A license to do good'

Joining Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, GOP presidential heir apparent Sen. John McCain this week issued his own unexpected endorsement of Rep. Mike Pence's proposed federal shield law -- an endorsement that carries all the more weight not just because of the likelihood Sen. McCain will be the next president, but also because of his known "hard line" on national security.

Sen. McCain announced at the annual meeting of The Associated Press on Monday that, though he had "a hard time deciding," he "narrowly" decided to endorse shield legislation because, while it could be a "license to do harm," it also constitutes "a license to do good, to disclose injustice and unlawfulness and inequities, and to encourage their swift correction."

Many states offer immunity from prosecution to journalists who can acquire information about government wrongdoing only by promising confidentiality to their whistle-blowing sources. But until recently, attempts to provide such protection on the federal level were going nowhere.

Rep. Pence, R-Ind., has been pushing his current federal shield law for three years. It passed the House overwhelmingly in October, and a shield bill has also cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee. But the proposal has been kept off the Senate floor by vigorous opposition from Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl, Sen. McCain's junior colleague from Arizona.

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: School administrators immune from cuts
  • LETTERS: Power bills high enough? Not for Harry
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Inching back up the path toward freedom
  • ERIN NEFF: A depressing spectacle in Carson City
  • LETTERS: All kids should be able to bring books home
  • EDITORIAL: Jobs for life?
  • LETTERS: Blame social promotion, grade inflation
  • EDITORIAL: Schools need reform -- but not my school
  • ERIN NEFF: Snippets from the special session
  • EDITORIAL: Fixing a boondoggle



    • "Federal shield legislation became more urgent March 7, when drastic financial penalties were imposed on a reporter ordered to name all of her sources for a set of stories," reports syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak. "Opposition to relief by Bush and the Senate Republican leadership raises questions as to whether the Grand Old Party stands for limited government or, in its pursuit of global terrorism, disdain for constitutional liberties."

    Although no shield law had reached the floor in Congress for 30 years, "the climate was changed by pressure on journalists from special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald in the CIA leak case, including an 85-day stay in prison for New York Times reporter Judith Miller," Mr. Novak recalls.

    The most coherent criticism of a federal shield law -- voiced this week by Kevin Williamson at the National Review -- is that enforcement would require "a federal determination of who counts as a legal journalist and who doesn't. This amounts to having the federal government license journalists, which is undesirable on many levels."

    Indeed, any such law would have to interpret "journalist" broadly based on the work undertaken; any attempt by the government to turn "journalist" into a licensed profession must be resisted from the outset. But this is not a fatal objection, especially when the status quo faces legitimate reporters with prison and bankruptcy for no worse "offense" than refusing to participate in the identification and silencing of whistleblowers -- a cooperation that would promptly shut down the public's main access to accurate information on government abuse and excess.

    Sen. McCain's past "flexibility" on whittling down the First Amendment -- specifically, in the name of "campaign finance reform" -- has been a subject of concern. But his decision to support legitimate investigative journalism here is most welcome.



    Leave Your Comment 8 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    David Johann wrote on April 21, 2008 10:43 PM: Ou812 thinks we should take her seriously when she posts using that handle.


    0u812 wrote on April 20, 2008 08:01 PM: This is sad that we as Americans are bickering and slandering each other over a political party. Why not take it into consideration that niether of these party's have done America good. Everyone talks and calls others Liars, thiefs, ETC.. Yet no one does anything about America's needs as in WE THE PEOPLE category. Just go to the Congress web site and look at all the bills and what they have consider on the floor of congress, you be surprised that none of them has anything to do with WE THE PEOPLE. Oil,gas,food everything will go up even higher just because all these CORPORATIONS break into small businesses to get the highest price and most profibility they can. I have one corporation name but i own 20 businesses and all that money is mine. All i have to do is divide each company into pieces and then i claim a loss or profit depending on each of those 20 businesses projected earnings. Lat me tell they are high, way above on what they can do and i win no matter what. I do cater to all politicians through all my hand picked employees.


    David Johann wrote on April 20, 2008 02:02 PM: Helen Weils, how come none of your crazy AM radio gloom and doom scenarios never came true during the eight years Bill Clinton was in office?

    More, "In recent public rankings of American presidents, Bill Clinton ranked highly. The Gallup Organization published a poll in February 2007 that asked respondents to name the greatest president in U.S. history; Clinton came in fourth place, capturing 13% of the vote.

    In the light of all of the above does anybody really CARE what Helen Weils thinks? Either Helen gets all of her information from AM radio, or she's not taking all her meds.


    tim wrote on April 20, 2008 09:56 AM: i have to agree with br,first it was kerry and gore,now we get hillary and obama.i shudder to think what happens if either of those socialists get elected.just as last election,its the lesser of two evils,mccain wins.


    br wrote on April 20, 2008 08:37 AM: You are right, James. At least partially. Bush lost his way. That's my reluctant conclusion. I can only justify my votes for him by remembering Gore and Kerry as the alternatives. The only thing scarier are the current candidates. If you think things are tough right now, just wait. It promises to get worse.


    jerry wrote on April 20, 2008 08:36 AM: od help us if McCain is not our next president. We would have either a habitual liar or a man whose vision is to transform our country into a ???.


    Helen Weils wrote on April 20, 2008 07:34 AM: Hey James, are you really naive enough to believe that your gas prices aren't going to shoot through the roof if one
    of the Dems get in? Your taxes will go through the roof as you start paying for not only your health insurance but every other lazy bum or illegal immigrant who don't want to pay for their own. Remember, neither Obama nor
    Hillary are going to cover the illegals so it will be business as usual with them sucking off the taxpayer. At 5% to 10% of your income
    for health insurance (their current estimate which you know is low), raised social security taxes, raised gas price and the extra taxes they will be adding to subsidize Conagra and other
    large agricultural companies who make ethanol (which takes more oil to make than it does to buy gas), much more money to pay for subsidies for solar and other energy sources, etc. How do you think you will be better off?
    We're still going to be in Iraq indefinately because leaving would make oil prices go through the roof.
    Get real James, even though McCain is not my choice, Ron Paul is, he is alot better than either one of these career
    politicians who are promising to raise taxes. No, I'm not rich! Far from it!


    James wrote on April 20, 2008 06:37 AM: "the likelihood Sen. McCain will be the next president"...? What has RJ's rightwing editors been smoking?

    After eight years of Bush, the RJ's last choice for president (funny how you guys always pick a GOPer) Americans understand that electing a Republican is like shooting ourselves in the foot - or even the head.

    We cannot afford more of the same. The nation is deep in debt, we're paying $3.50 a gallon for gas, have a trillion dollar war that's destroying our military and picking the taxpayers pockets and - if that weren't enough misery - a housing market that's collapsed and caused a recession.

    Yet that full buffet of leadership failure is not enough for some - such as the people who control the LV Review Journal.

    We readers look forward (cough, cough)to your endorsments for the upcoming election. I'm sure your choices will be thoughtful and nonpartisan, right?