Editorial voices from elsewhere
Editorial voices from newspapers in the United States:
Tiny homes represent a sizable break from residential construction trends seen in the United States during the past few decades.
There’s no universal set of size measurements that would define a home as “tiny,” but some see the category including dwellings of up to 400 or 500 square feet. By comparison, the U.S. Census Bureau notes that the average U.S. home size recently has stood at about 2,600 square feet – about half again as much as the average residential footprint measured in the 1980s.
The tiny home movement has drawn people interested in downsized living spaces that offer efficiency. Sometimes, buyers desire a residence with mobility as well, opting for models on wheels.
Whether tiny homes are fixed or trailer-mounted, buyers can run afoul of land-use regulations in many U.S. locales. While there may be legitimate cases for restricting their placement in some circumstances, we’d encourage local-level policymakers to consider the advantages some tiny homesteaders see in the dwelling category and explore workable options for accommodating them.
It’s common practice for local officials to revisit their zoning rules every years to see if conditions warrant updates. With the growing interest in downsized domiciles during the past decade we’d urge these policymakers to see if viable, harmonious solutions might exist for accomodating these homes within their territory.
Few would argue that the public is ever better-served by a more opaque government, and yet that is exactly what the federal agency that regulates the nation’s nuclear arsenal has decided to do. The Pentagon confirmed in early July that it would no longer disclose any information about the country’s nuclear weapons facilities, arguing even the very basic results of a pass-fail grading system potentially provide too much information to the nation’s enemies. Left unspoken was the fact that those reports also provided important information to the very people who fund the design, construction and maintenance of these same weapons, and who live with them in their midst.
Surely the very real need for security can coexist with the public’s right to know. After all, how can citizens of the United States truly feel safe if they cannot trust the very people who have been charged with defending them or the equipment being used in that pursuit?
Wednesday marked the 40th anniversary of the death of Elvis Presley. The King of Rock and Roll was pronounced dead on arrival at a Memphis hospital after collapsing on the floor of a bathroom in his Graceland mansion.
Elvis’ death was tragic. He was a talented entertainer and a cultural icon. His death shocked and saddened many Americans, much like the passing of Michael Jackson and Prince (under eerily similar circumstances) would some three decades later.
Unfortunately, Elvis was one of the first to put a famous face on a tragic drug problem that kills many and ruins lives daily. Abuse of opioids is a scourge that has law enforcement officials, lawmakers and medical providers looking for answers.
When Elvis Presley died in 1977 at the age 42, the cause of his death was officially listed as a “fatal heart arrhythmia.” Blood tests would later show traces of 14 different drugs in Elvis’ body at the time of his death.
He obtained most of these drugs from his physician, Dr. George Nichopoulos, who wrote thousands of prescriptions for Elvis for uppers, downers and assorted narcotics. Dr. Nick, as Nichopoulos was known in Memphis, told a British newspaper that he prescribed the drugs because he truly “cared” for Elvis.
Dr. Nick continued to practice medicine in Tennessee for years after Elvis’ death. Following a number of complaints, the Tennessee Medical Board finally charged him with overprescribing drugs. The board stripped Nichopoulos of his medical license in 1995. Elvis fans might argue that discipline was more than 18 years too late.