RUST COMMENTARY: NEWSPAPERS PROVIDE FORUM FOR DISCUSSION

We in the newspaper business are aware we'd better be careful of what we write or that we might have to eat or correct our remarks. It's one thing to have a different opinion. That's rather common with anyone who states clearly their personal opinion. It's another thing to mistate, take out of context, etc. someone else's opinion.

The following editiorial about JOHN POWELL (a friend of the highest integrity) and Powell's response makes one realize the dangers of a "cheap shot" if you print letters to the editor (my compliments to the POST for its unusual next day printing of Powell's letter of response).

It is our newspapers policy to print letters to the editor, columns, and speak out calls to give the public the opportunity to express their opinions...or add facts or corrections to our news stories or editorials. A newspaper provides a town hall for public discussion and information.

The follow is the St. Louis Post Dispatch editorial.

"MR. POWELL CRIES POLITICS"

"John Powell complaining about politics influencing the Missouri Conservation Commission is like Howard Stern bemoaning vulgarity in the media: Considering the source, the criticism is hollow.

Mr. Powell, a lumberman from Rolla and former chairman of the state Republican Party, is completing his 12th year on the commission. Democratic Gov. Mel Carnahan has decided to replace him and must choose a Republican to keep the four-member commission bipartisan. But the governor should choose someone who can make decisions about the state's natural resources based on the health of the environment, not on ideology or on partisan politics.

Such wasn't always the case with Mr. Powell. As a commissioner, he often ranted against environmentalists, branding them as "tree huggers." He once told a group of school children that "the only way to improve a forest is with an ax and a saw." In a visit to the Post-Dispatch in 1991, he said, "To me, the liberal element in this country is leading the preservationist movement." As a lumberman, he looked at a forest and saw not natural beauty but tree stumps and dollar signs.

Politics played a big role in his power. A former campaign manager for John Ashcroft's successful run for governor, he was rewarded with an appointment to the commission in 1985. When his first term expired, Mr. Ashcroft coyly said he declined to reappoint Mr. Powell. He let the other commissioners choose their colleague. To no one's surprise, Mr. Powell got six more years.

Against such a backdrop, Mr. Powell's whining last week about political pressure affecting the issue of lead mining in Shannon County is hypocritical. Doe Run and ASARCO, two lead companies, had planned to seek drilling permits in the area, but they withdrew the request after opposition arose. Serious concerns about the effects of the mining were justified, but Mr. Powell saw nefarious motives just the same. He issued a statement accusing Mr. Carnahan of putting more pressure on the Conservation Commission than any governor in history. He further said that Mr. Carnahan is a friend of "fanatic environmental groups, politics, radical media and preservationists."

The bad news is that Mr. Powell is leaving with such bad grace. The good news is that he is leaving."

JOHN POWELL'S RESPONSE IN A LETTER TO THE EDITOR TO THE POST-DISPATCH JUNE 5, 1997.

"Your June 4 editorial lambasting me was of no surprise or concern to me. I cannot recall any important issue on which we have been in agreement. The main contention is whether then-Gov. John Ashcroft did indeed apply political pressure on the Missouri Conservation Commission and my integrity as a good steward of the land.

In all fairness, I ask that you do four things.

(1) Find out if there was pressure applied to the three other commissioners concerning the mining issue. The best way to do that is to ask them if they were repeatedly called and also if they were called to the governor's office to persuade them to vote against mining exploration. If the commissioners refuse to discuss the matter, then ask them to deny the governor did this.

(2) Ask the three other commissioners if the governor put pressure on the commission to pay approximately $8 million of designated funds meant only for fish, forestry and wildlife into state revenue. Ask them if we resisted and then if the governor put pressure on us by altering our budget. Next, check the public records of the commission and verify that this payment was approved in our minutes in last March's meeting and was budgeted in our last meeting. Then check the statutes or the department code book and verify that all our funding has been designated for fish, forestry and wildlife and for no other purpose. This is a violation of the law and could be challenged in court.

(3) Check my environmental record. Ask those in authority and with expertise about my record as a good steward of the land. Find out if, as you indicate, my only desire is to produce tree stumps to rape the forest. I would suggest that you verify this with the director of the School of Natural Resources in Columbia, the director of the Conservation Federation, the supervisor of the Mark Twain National Forests and the District Foresters of the Conservation Department who have the obligation to determine if I have violated the conditions of the state Forestry Act and even members of the Sierra Club who were on our last forest tour. Even better, you could come to Rolla and see all the conservation awards I have received throughout the years, including the prestigious Forest Conservation of the Year Award that is given by the Conservation Federation of Missouri, the National Wildlife Federation and the Sears Foundation, and then tour our land and see first-hand how it is managed

(4) Report your findings. If you are honest, I have no fear of the results.

John Powell

Commissioner

Missouri Conservation Commission

Rolla"

NOTE: I'll be waiting to see if the Post Dispatch responds to Powell's request for investigation of the actions by the Conservation Commissioner.

CORRECTION PRINTED IN THE ST. LOUIS POST DISPATCH JUNE 6, 1997:

"An editing error in Thursday's paper altered the meaning of a letter from Conservation Commissioner John D. Powell.

Powell wrote: "The main contention is whether the governor did indeed apply pressure on the Conservation Commission and my integrity as a good steward of the land."

The governor to which Powell was referring was Gov. Mel Carnahan, not former Gov. John Ashcroft, as was printed. We regret the error."

---

Mobbing for the Fifth

As the White House fund-raising scandals grind on, the number of potential witnesses, both in and out of government, who are "taking the Fifth" is growing to record proportions. The Fifth Amendment provides appropriate safeguards against self-incrimination, but one columnist this week noted that the number of Clinton administration hands invoking the Amendment is the largest since the Senate's Kefauver hearings on organized crime 50 years ago.

Every citizen has the right to invoke the Fifth Amendment without anyone inferring guilt, but no administration likes to be told that it is about as forthcoming as the Mob. So far, all these "5th takers" are telling Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) of their decision through the mail. I agree with the columinst who wrote that Thompson should make them all do so in person before his committee on the same day.

Washington Update

~Gary Rust is president of Rust Communications, which owns the Southeast Missourian and other newspapers.