Editorials
Monday, November 9, 1998

Gingrich’s decision
to quit as speaker

BILL Clinton and Newt Gingrich have a lot in common. They're overweight, prematurely gray, loquacious baby boomers who rose to the top of their respective parties in unusual ways. Both have outsized egos and undersized consciences. Clinton's ethical problems have inspired a flock of investigations, culminating in the Monica Lewinsky sex and perjury scandal that the House will examine as a possible basis for impeachment. Gingrich was reprimanded and fined by the House last year for using tax-exempt donations for political purposes.

Yet both have survived politically thus far, Clinton in the presidency and Gingrich as speaker of the House. Now, in the wake of Republican losses in last Tuesday's elections, Gingrich has abandoned his bid for a third term as speaker and has announced that he may leave Congress.

One would think the Lewinsky outrage would be enough to destroy any politician, but Clinton seems to be riding out the storm. The election results gave no indication that the voters want the president to be impeached for his disgraceful behavior. With the economy doing well, many Americans evidently can't be bothered.

Instead, it's Gingrich who's in trouble, although he easily won re-election to his Georgia seat. Many Republicans are disappointed with their party's election showing and are blaming the speaker for their losses in five congressional races. The results reduced the GOP majority in the House to a slim 233-221, with one independent who usually votes with the Democrats. That's a far cry from the gains the Republicans had expected.

Gingrich disclosed his decision to step down a few hours after Bob Livingston, R-La., launched a challenge for the speakership. Livingston, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said he would change the "management style" of the speakership -- less flamboyant and provocative, probably, in contrast to Gingrich -- and focus more on the business of the House. Other Republicans are considering bids for leadership posts.

In 1994 Gingrich led the Republicans to a gain of 52 seats and control of the House for the first time since 1954. For a while, he seemed more powerful than the president himself. But three years ago Americans blamed the Republicans when portions of the federal government were shut down as a result of their budget battle with the president, and Gingrich took the rap.

This year he let Clinton outmaneuver him in the annual budget fight. Republicans complained that he failed to provide GOP candidates with a legislative program to run on, and that the attempt to call attention to Clinton's foibles backfired.

So now it's the fellow in the White House who still has his job. The one in the speaker's chair who seemed so powerful a few years ago is the loser.

French Festival

OUI, oui! Those large, decorative banners fluttering throughout Honolulu, emblazoned with the logo of the Eiffel Tower topped by a palm tree, herald the official onset of the French Festival in Hawaii. The second annual celebration of all things "francais" is being celebrated island-style from Nov. 7-22.

This joint endeavor of government and the private sector -- especially retail and tourism-related businesses -- was purposely planned for this lull in the visitor business. Participants include such famous names as Cartier, Celine, Chanel, Christian Dior, Hermes and Louis Vuitton. The festival's aim is to draw out-of-towners while entertaining residents at mostly free events.

The climax will be an exclusive French Festival Gala on Nov. 14 at the Hilton Hawaiian Village, with proceeds to benefit the Honolulu Academy of Arts. Tickets for the dinner and fashion show range from $250-$350 per person. Many other complimentary, French-flavored events are being held all over Oahu, including entertainment and culinary demonstrations. See the large newspaper ads for a schedule of events or call the French Festival hotline at 1-877-THE FEST (843-3378), s'il vous plait.

Protect the parks

WITH the number of visitors growing every year, the national parks are under increasing strain. Meanwhile, Congress hasn't appropriated enough money -- the 1999 budget is $1.7 billion -- to pay for needed repairs and maintenance at the popular public places.

According to an independent analysis, the National Park Service budget declined by $202 million in constant dollars from 1983 to 1996. Meanwhile annual visits have increased by 77 million people. In 1997, 270 million people visited the national parks.

One answer has been to solicit donations of land and money for the park system. The National Park Foundation collected $7.9 million in donations in 1997 and $15.3 million this year from individuals and businesses.

Aurora Foods, General Electric and Target department stores pledged a combined $11 million to repair an assortment of park properties, including the Washington Monument and Thomas Edison's New Jersey home and laboratory.

Park officials are collaborating with researchers from private industry, hoping organisms found in the geysers at Yellowstone National Park may provide a cure for cancer and generate royalties for the government.

Donations provide givers with tax deductions and the opportunity to tout their generosity in advertising. This policy can be a good deal for taxpayers and park users, but there is a danger of commercialization spoiling what should be an experience free of such distractions. In negotiating these arrangements, park officials must take pains to protect the parks from exploitation.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor