A battle is emerging over roadside memorials that are springing up everywhere. Sometimes the memorials themselves create traffic hazards. Memorials are becoming so commonplace
that this website documents thousands of such memorials from sea to sea. I have touched on this topic a couple of times in the past,
once in August 2003 and again in
June 2003.
There are questions about whether overly religious markers should be allowed on government property. Some states, like Wisconsin, decided to allow memorials to remain in some places for up a year. Alaska places the limit at two years.
USA Today reported:
Roadside memorials were once most common in the Southwest, where they evolved from centuries-old Catholic traditions in Spain and Mexico. Now, they're everywhere -- from rural Wyoming, where school kids designed the state's official memorial sign, to New York City, where artists install white "ghost bikes" at the site of deadly bicycle crashes. ...
There's no national law on roadside memorials. States and municipalities apply a hodge-podge of policies. The issue is often emotional: Arguments about traffic hazards and right-of-way aren't welcome by families in mourning.
Some states, like North Carolina and Oregon, prohibit the shrines. Others, like Florida and Washington, allow only state-sanctioned markers. Only Alaska and West Virginia have statutes that encourage memorials. (In fact, West Virginia asks that those who place the memorials put some contact information on the memorials in case highway workers have to disturb the markers.)
Utah will ban memorials later this year and instead offer to plant wildflowers or erect a state-approved sign. Delaware began engraving bricks this year for a state-maintained memorial garden. And in May, Norton, Mass., imposed a 30-day limit on roadside shrines.
As the number and scope of the memorials grow, battles have become more common:
- A year after a series of heated public hearings in 2004, Nevada has yet to decide how to regulate roadside memorials. The issue came to a head after state highway officials, threatened with a lawsuit, removed an 8-foot, steel cross from U.S. Highway 50 near Carson City.
"It became a huge emotional issue. And here we are, the big bad government, in between," says Scott Magruder, a spokesman for the Nevada Department of Transportation. ...
- Minnesota cracked down last summer by clearing interstates and freeways of personal memorials. The action came after the fatal car crash of hockey great Herb Brooks, who coached the U.S. Olympics team in 1980 to victory over the Soviet Union.
Hundreds of mourners left flowers, balloons, hockey paraphernalia, even a huge plywood "M" for the University of Minnesota at the site of Brooks' 2003 accident on Interstate 35. "The bottom line is safety," says Kevin Gutkneckt, a spokesman for Minnesota's transportation department. "We don't want things built on the roadsides that could cause a crash." [Read Minensota's official policy by clicking here.]
RoadsideAmerica.com also has a thoughtful piece from a few years ago that is worth a look.
Stateline.org did a big story about the conflicts emerging over roadside memorials in 2003. Be sure to check and see if specific state laws have changed since then.
A sociology professor from Virginia Tech, Clifton Bryant, says these roadside memorials can be important:
Roadside memorials also may be an attempt by the survivors to warn others of an unsafe stretch of road, Bryant suggests.
But, more importantly, roadside or other impromptu memorials mark the untimeliness of the deaths. When people are sick and hospitalized and their deaths are expected, there is no similar need to mark the spot of where they died. But when death is unexpected, it disturbs people's sense of time, of specificity. "There's something mystical, if not magic, about the site of the death," Bryant says. "There's a symbolic significance of the exact spot where they died. Instant monuments provide some symbolic stability, a lighthouse to the place people can go to pay homage."
Rehnquist Resources
Here is some information I pulled together last week for the end of the Supreme Court's session. It includes lots of links about Chief Justice Rehnquist.
Adults Stealing Juvenile IDs
This is apparently an under-reported problem because kids do not know that some adult has stolen his identity and ruined his credit until years later. Here is a story from The Boston Globe.
Airline Animal InjuriesA few months ago, Al's Morning Meeting told you that this month we would get the first reports from airlines about animal injuries and deaths when the animals are transported by plane.
Now you can read the report for May, which shows 10 animals that were injured, killed or even lost on U.S. airlines in that month. It's at:
http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/2005/july/0507atcr.doc
The report lists:
- Alaska Airlines: One death, one injury
- Comair: One injury
- Continental: Two deaths, one injury
- Frontier: One injury
- Northwest: One injury, one loss
- US Airways: One death
Is this an acceptable rate of injury and death? Before the reporting began this month, there were stories that made it appear that airlines were anything but safe for pets. But these reports make it look like the airlines are not always to blame.
Scripps Howard News Service says:
Six airlines reported incidents during the month, totaling four deaths, five injuries and one loss. Two of the incidents -- both injuries -- were blamed on the airline. The others were pegged on inadequate kennels, natural causes and, in one case, an attack by another animal.
The same report will show you how often your airport has delayed flights, the prime reasons for those delays, and the most on-time/delayed airlines.
I am struck by how few complaints there have been against the TSA security workers. As a percentage of the people who pass through the screener stations, it is a tiny fraction of a percent who complain about security workers.
The State of the First Amendment
The First Amendment Center just released its new survey that says one out of four Americans believe the press have too much freedom. The only comfort that journalists may find in the survey is that fewer people say that than in recent years.
The 2005 State of the First Amendment survey shows that 70 percent of Americans would OK the posting the Ten Commandments in government buildings, and that 85 percent would approve if the commandments are included as "one document among many historical documents" when displayed in public buildings, the First Amendment Center said. The study also found:
- Nearly 80 percent of respondents agreed that broadcasters should be allowed to televise the proceedings of the U.S. Supreme Court, though less than half agreed that broadcasters should be able to televise any courtroom trial they wish.
- 75 percent said that as part of a classroom discussion, public school students should be allowed to express views that others might find offensive, but just 27 percent agreed that students should be allowed to wear T-shirts with messages or pictures that might offend others.
- 64 percent endorsed increasing fines to as much as $500,000 for over-the-airwaves broadcasters "who violate government rules" regarding content on broadcast television, But 60 percent opposed extending government authority to regulate content on broadcast television to programs on cable or satellite television systems.
- 63 percent disagreed that the "government should be allowed to access records of materials borrowed by public library patrons," while 77 percent said library patrons should be told when the government asks for records of what they have borrowed from the library. On June 15, the House of Representatives weighed in, voting 238-187 to block the part of the Patriot Act that applies to library and bookstore records, though not to online searches.
- 23 percent of Americans said "the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees," compared to 49 percent in 2002 (the first survey done after the 9/11 attacks) and down from 30 percent in 2004.
Here are some of the specific questions and findings:
As you may know, the First Amendment is part of the U.S. Constitution. Can you name any of the specific rights that are guaranteed by the First Amendment? (PROBE: Are there any others you can name?)
|
|
1997 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
Freedom of the press |
11% |
12% |
12% |
14% |
14% |
16% |
15% |
16% |
|
Freedom of speech |
49% |
44% |
60% |
59% |
58% |
63% |
58% |
63% |
|
Freedom of religion |
21% |
13% |
16% |
16% |
18% |
22% |
17% |
20% |
|
Right to petition |
2% |
2% |
2% |
1% |
2% |
2% |
1% |
3% |
|
Right of assembly/association |
10% |
8% |
9% |
10% |
10% |
11% |
10% |
14% |
|
DK/Ref. (to all questions/follow-ups) |
N/A |
N/A |
37% |
36% |
35% |
37% |
35% |
29% |
The First Amendment became part of the U.S. Constitution more than 200 years ago. This is what it says: 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.' Based on your own feelings about the First Amendment, please tell me whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: The First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees.
|
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
Strongly agree |
16% |
10% |
29% |
41% |
19% |
19% |
13% |
|
Mildly agree |
12% |
12% |
10% |
8% |
15% |
11% |
10% |
|
Mildly disagree |
22% |
26% |
19% |
15% |
18% |
21% |
16% |
|
Strongly disagree |
45% |
48% |
39% |
32% |
42% |
44% |
56% |
|
DK/Ref. |
5% |
5% |
3% |
3% |
7% |
5% |
5% |
Overall, do you think the press in America has too much freedom to do what it wants, too little freedom to do what it wants, or is the amount of freedom the press has about right?
|
|
1997 |
1999 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
Too much freedom |
38% |
53% |
42% |
51% |
46% |
42% |
46% |
42% |
39% |
|
Too little freedom |
9% |
7% |
8% |
7% |
8% |
8% |
9% |
12% |
10% |
|
About right |
50% |
37% |
48% |
41% |
42% |
49% |
43% |
44% |
47% |
|
DK/Ref. |
3% |
2% |
3% |
2% |
3% |
1% |
1% |
3% |
4% |
Cleanest/Dirtiest Cities
Reader's Digest looked at air pollution, water quality, industrial pollution, Superfund sites and such and came up with a list of the nation's cleanest and dirtiest cities.
Portland was listed as the cleanest city and Chicago was the dirtiest. We can expect that the cleanest cities will say the survey is exactly right and the dirtiest will say it is off-base.
The top five clean cities were listed as:
- Portland
- San Jose
- Buffalo
- Columbus
- San Francisco
The five dirtiest were:
- Chicago
- New York
- Pittsburgh
- St. Louis
- Birmingham
We are always looking for your great ideas. Send Al a few sentences and hot links.
Editor's Note: Al's Morning Meeting is a compendium of ideas, edited story excerpts and other materials from a variety of Web sites, as well as original concepts and analysis. When the information comes directly from another source, it will be attributed, and a link will be provided, whenever possible.
Roadside memorials go back in New Mexico at least to...
