Opinion: In today’s pages: O.J., Brewer and Social Security

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

Bob Sipchen, former Times columnist and Pulitzer-winning editorial writer and editor, reflects today on the departure of L.A. Unified School District Supt. David Brewer. Though the retired admiral was an outsider with little school experience, his passion about improving education for poor kids raised hopes that he could overcome the bureaucracy that had brought down other L.A. schools chiefs. It didn’t take long for those hopes to be crushed. ‘Before his first anniversary, the Lilliputians had him hobbled,’ Sipchen writes. Parents and the public should demand a revolutionary leader to replace him, and should also demand that the search be conducted by a committee of smart parents, teachers and civic leaders.

The editorial board, meanwhile, also weighs in on Brewer, but is less concerned with the search process for his replacement than the nature of his successor’s contract. The school board not only botched Brewer’s separation, it agreed to a contract that included a budget-busting severance package (Brewer stands to leave with upwards of $500,000) and keeps paying his expense account even when he’s no longer doing district business.

Back on the Op-Ed page, USC professor Michael Messner takes the unusual tack of urging the president and Congress to tax him more. Messner decries the ‘prosperity bonus,’ under which Social Security taxes are phased out for those making more than $102,000 a year. He cites a study by the Economic Policy Institute concluding that doing away with the bonus and making the top 6% of workers pay their fair share would elimate 75% of the predicted coming shortfall in the Social Security account.

And columnist Jonah Goldberg looks at the wide gulf between today’s media perceptions of O.J. Simpson following his conviction on armed robbery and kidnapping charges, and the way he was treated 13 years ago after being acquitted in the murders of his ex-wife and her friend. The older verdict exposed a racial and cultural divide in which liberals and black commentators didn’t want to talk about whether Simpson was guilty, they wanted to talk about systemic racism, while conservatives blamed a cowardly media for failing to point out Simpson’s obvious guilt. Now, both sides seem well-pleased with the verdict. Finally, Goldberg points out the ironic timing of Simpson’s conviction:

Over on the editorial page, the board examines calls by state lawmakers for a California constitutional convention, which would rip up the state’s Constitution and start over again. With the state’s dysfunctions becoming ever more apparent during its budget meltdown, such calls aren’t surprising -- but the idea of holding a convention is very risky.

Finally, The Times considers the sticky issue of punitive damages, which is bedeviling the U.S. Supreme Court as it is asked to weigh in for the third time on the same lawsuit against Philip Morris USA by the widow of an Oregon smoker who died of lung cancer. The primary issue in the case is whether Oregon’s highest court circumvented a ruling last year by the Supreme Court, but there is another important element of the case: ‘the continuing refusal of state courts to take seriously a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions warning that punitive damage awards may not be ‘grossly excessive.’’ The court could solve this problem by coming up with a clear rule to determine when punitive damages become disproportionate to compensatory damages.

* Editorial cartoon by Signe Wilkinson / Philadelphia Daily News