Florida editorial roundup

Recent editorials from Florida newspapers:

___

Oct. 1

The Florida Times-Union on the state’s higher than average infant mortality rate:

You can write and write about an important issue but sometime a picture really does speak like 1,000 words.

That is the case with infant mortality.

Too many babies die before their first birthday, but these deaths usually take place outside the public eye.

Northeast Florida Healthy Start came up with the idea years ago that enough babies were dying in Duval County every year to fill several classrooms.

Then visitors to City Hall during September saw a display in the main lobby that showed 147 pairs of baby booties. It tugged at your heart.

Infant mortality is a sentinel indicator of a community’s overall health. Often that is connected to poverty.

Northeast Florida’s infant mortality rate of 7.9 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2018 was a slight increase from the 7.3 rate in 2017.

The Northeast Florida rate of 7.9 is higher than the rate for Florida (6.0) and the nation (5.8).

Though the local rate has dropped by 35 percent since the Healthy Start program was established in 1991, it has hit another stubborn plateau.

Among urban counties in Florida, Duval unfortunately leads the way in infant mortality rate as well as murder rate.

Here are some examples of infant mortality rates before age 1 in 2018:

_Duval: 9.5.

_Hillsborough: 6.2.

_Orange: 6.1.

_Broward: 4.7.

_Miami-Dade: 4.5.

A U.S. ISSUE

The United States has the highest infant mortality rate of developed nations. U.S. babies are three times as likely to due from premature birth and 2.3 times as likely to due of sudden infant death syndrome as infants in comparable nations, reports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Florida’s rate is higher than the national average while Duval County’s rate is higher than the state average.

MORE DATA NEEDED

Not only is the average rate high here, but African-American babies are dying at twice the rate as white babies.

While infant mortality rates have been high in Northwest Jacksonville, death rates have spiked in the Westside and Arlington.

Faye Johnson, CEO of the Northeast Florida Healthy Start Coalition, told the Times-Union Editorial Board that there are various factors that can result in infant deaths.

Solutions have focused on the health of the mother and spreading information on safe sleeping habits is another.

While a handful of cases of infant deaths are required to be reviewed every year, Duval County has never examined every infant death in a calendar year.

The Times-Union Editorial Board called for such a review. It ought to be funded by government, but in its absence major health care providers stepped up: Florida Blue, Baptist Health and UF Health Jacksonville.

The report from that annual review is expected in a few weeks. Once the report is released, Johnson expects to call for solutions.

“When we come away from this, there will be some strong actions,” she said.

Since 2005, when the Times-Union Editorial Page published a three-part series on infant mortality, the issue has come and gone on the community’s radar.

These babies are too often ignored.

“It does get very frustrating,” Johnson said. “I don’t know why it’s not on the radar.”

Duval needs to advocate for our less fortunate. Who could be more worthy of that than infants?

Online: https://www.jacksonville.com

___

Oct. 1

The Orlando Sentinel on the proposal to build a memorial and museum honoring Pulse Nightclub shooting victims:

The three-year anniversary of the Pulse nightclub massacre came and went this summer.

Now, plans are beginning to crystallize for a memorial at the shooting site and a museum several blocks away to honor the dead and injured. Organizers are set to unveil design proposals to the public this week.

Good. The time has come for a proper and enduring tribute to those whose lives were ended or altered on that terrible Orlando night.

Done well, a memorial and a museum can pay homage to victims and provide information and context to help us understand not just what happened but what we can learn from it.

We’re aware of the contrary view that while a memorial is appropriate, a museum is not. That a museum will capitalize on tragedy and become a lurid tourist attraction. That an entrance fee and a museum gift shop would capitalize on human loss.

Some opponents of a museum prefer just a memorial as quiet place for reflection. We respect the opinions they’ve earned through profound grief and loss.

But a memorial alone would limit the ability to preserve the memories of those who died. It also wouldn’t provide a place to learn, which is the role a museum can play.

The debate over how to memorialize tragedy isn’t new.

The greatest tragedy of modern human history was the targeted, systematic killing by the Nazis of 6 million Jews in the mid-20th century.

President Carter’s decision to appoint a commission to study creating a Holocaust memorial was followed by arguments over the commission’s membership, who should be memorialized, where the museum should be located, how it would be funded, even how much technology would be appropriate.

But the effort endured and today the museum is considered among Washington’s best, a tribute to those who suffered in the past and an educational resource for today.

The World War II memorial in Washington faced criticism because of its location on the National Mall between the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument.

The design of a memorial in Pennsylvania for the United Flight 93 passengers _ whose heroics stopped a plane from reaching Washington, D.C., on Sept. 11, 2001 _ was criticized by some who believed it contained “Islamic symbols.”

The National September 11 Memorial Museum in New York City was criticized on a variety of fronts, from its design to its exhibits to its gift shop, which at one point featured a tacky cheese platter shaped like the United States, with points marking the locations of the terrorist attacks.

Gift shops are a tricky business. They produce the revenue a museum needs to keep its doors open and fulfill many tourists’ desire to take home something as a keepsake.

The Pulse museum will have a gift shop, which the museum’s operators will need to curate with the same care as the exhibits. That’s especially true because of the museum’s location in Orlando, well known for its tourist tchotchkes.

The strongest argument for a museum, however, is the human and social context it can provide. Pulse wasn’t just a nightclub. For some it was a refuge, a place of acceptance, especially for the Hispanic LGBTQ community.

The poisonous atmosphere in our country today provides an even more powerful argument for telling the story of communities that endure mistreatment because of who they love or the color of their skin or an accent in their speech.

We understand the challenges this effort faces. It needs to have leadership that’s effective, credible and diverse. Its decisions and actions must be open and transparent. Opposing voices should be heard, not dismissed.

So far, the leaders of this effort have largely adhered to those ideas. They seem both sincere and compassionate.

But there’s little room for error. Orlando’s emotional wounds are still raw.

We’re looking forward to seeing the designs, and ultimately to seeing a memorial and museum that help the city heal from its worst day.

Online: https://www.orlandosentinel.com

___

Oct. 1

The St. Augustine Record on the Florida agriculture commissioner’s decision to eliminate mandatory efficiency goals for a large state utility provider:

Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried has surprised environmental groups and angered many supporters by taking the side of Florida Power & Light’s efforts to eliminate mandated efficiency and conservation goals for the state’s largest utility.

We see the announcement as a philosophical about-face for the state’s only Democratic Cabinet member _ an ethical one as well. She accepted a $25,000 contribution from FP&L in August.

The state’s Public Service Commission oversees utilities in most matters, especially rates. The five-year efficiency goals were last established in 2014. The PSC, with a long-standing rap as being lapdogs for the utilities, agreed then to allow utilities to reduce efficiency goals by 80 percent.

This year, their goal is zero.

How might one justify having no goals or guidelines for achieving better service and rates? Here’s FP&L’s spokesman Bill Orlove explaining the utility’s position to Florida Phoenix last month: “We don’t think inefficient energy efficiency mandates make sense…. We have long believed that empowering our customers to make energy-efficient choices that are right for them is a better approach than charging higher rates for handouts that only some customers can use.”

So FP&L touts “inefficient efficiencies,” empowers customers to make it better at its job and believes it should have no standards of efficacy and performance in regard to ratepayers?

Fried’s department is required to intervene and advise on the Florida Energy Efficiency Conservation Act, also known as FEECA _ passed by the legislature in 1980 with a goal of reducing electricity and fossil fuel consumption. FEECA sets energy efficiency goals for seven major utilities; five investor-owned and two municipal utilities.

For her part Fried gave this statement Sept. 26: “Despite 40 years of goal-setting, our current energy efficiency and conservation process has outlived its usefulness. FEECA no longer holds utilities accountable for failing to establish meaningful energy goals.”

Remember, Fried runs the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. She is the point woman in Florida for its consumers _ and utility bills are a big part of most of our monthly budgets.

So is it at least curious she recommends zero goals.

Southern Alliance for Clean Energy attorney George Cavros said Fried’s brief “endorsed the utility goals and their flawed methodologies and even called for the end of utility-sponsored programs…. This is particularly stunning coming from an agency led by Commissioner Nikki Fried, who claims that consumer protection and climate action are a priority for her.”

Earth Justice attorney Bradley Marshall told Phoenix, “We are confused why the state Cabinet official who is supposed to have consumers’ backs is instead siding with big businesses that want to wriggle out of their obligation to help over 6 million Florida families cut their electric bills. … ‘Hey, the utilities promise they will keep offering energy efficiency programs to people, so we don’t need to require it.’ That’s bad public policy.”

Fried and the utilities insist the methodology of the conservation process is outdated. She promises to look at other methods to improve it.

But why would you end a program _ even if moderately successful _ before having any plan of action to replace it?

And with what?

This move simply ensures there will be no oversight in the interim _ if, in fact, there is an interim.

Online: https://www.staugustine.com