Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
Laurel: To Rich Fitzgerald. Allegheny County's chief executive says he'll intervene to give businesses more leeway in how and where pollution risks from their operations are measured. That's in response to new, stricter pollution controls adopted by county health officials this week. We're glad to see that the ACE understands there's a fine balance between protecting public health and forcing businesses to commit suicide to do so.
Lance: To William Isler. Pittsburgh Public Schools is failing. Despite a standards-weak college scholarship program (bribery) and astronomical per-pupil spending, its enrollment is tanking. Parents are sending their kids to better private, parochial and charter schools. The district will be broke by 2015. And as a “solution,” this school board member suggests that the county's school districts be consolidated. Which is “The Pittsburgh Way” — fix failure on a grand scale with failure on a monumental scale.
On the “Watch List”: Carnegie Mellon University. Former CMU trustee Marco Antonio Delgado has been charged by federal authorities with conspiring to launder more than half-a-billion dollars for a Mexican drug cartel. In 2003, Mr. Delgado endowed a fellowship in public policy and management for Hispanic graduate students with a $250,000 gift. Was any of the allegedly laundered money, or any proceeds from alleged drug deals, used to establish that chair?
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.