Thursday’s thumbs

Arkansas efforts shine some light on solar power

With so many restrictions and guidelines on people around the world these days, we had to double-check to make sure it’s permissible to issue our upand down-turned digits. Turns out there’s no government guidance on the matter, but we washed our thumbs thoroughly with soap anyway, while singing Johnny Cash’s “Five Feet High and Rising.” That’s sure to get rid of that nasty ol’ virus.

It’s been slow coming and we can’t necessarily attest yet to all the financial promises of solar power promoters, but it’s great to see more government leaders appreciating the potential of that big, glowing ball in the sky. Towns and counties are getting into solar for cost savings and as a gesture toward clean energy. Alma has started work to put solar panels to use powering its municipal facilities, including the power-hungry sewage treatment plant. Last year, Fayetteville’s two treatment plants began running on solar energy from an 87-acre solar array. Clarksville cranked up its first solar farm in 2017 and has been working on more to power city buildings. Washington County’s government is now producing electricity for its buildings as part of an $8 million energy upgrade approved last year. Arkansas has lots of room to grow in its use of alternative means to produce energy and every little bit helps.

This is the United States. It’s a given we’re going to argue over this policy or that policy. Surely, though, we can come to some common ground on our response to the covid-19 crisis. As Gov. Asa Hutchinson and others navigate trying to reopen Arkansas’ businesses without causing any spikes in the spread of the virus, why can’t everyone follow social distancing advice and wear protective masks that are a necessity to the effort to move back toward normal activities? So many Arkansans have behaved responsibly. That’s why Hutchinson was able to successfully resist a complete shutdown/shelter-in-place approach. But as Arkansas begins clawing its way back to normalcy, is wearing a mask really such a problem? It shouldn’t be. The resistance by some to take such small but meaningful steps to protect themselves and others reflects a certain immaturity and obstinacy people need to get past.

In light of the preceding criticism, we’ve got to point to Vice President Mike Pence’s refusal to wear a mask during a visit to the Mayo Clinic and call foul. The clinic’s policies require all visitors to wear masks and others accompanying the vice president did. It’s unbelievable, really, that Pence couldn’t muster the tiny bit of leadership necessary to don a mask, to show his fellow Americans the small sacrifice of personal preference that public health experts say makes a big difference in slowing the transmission of covid-19. Pence had his justifications — sounded a lot like “I’m the vice president and I don’t need to follow the rules” — but what would be the harm, other than vanity? The refusal hurts the efforts to get Americans to behave responsibly by belittling recommendations by medical professionals.

Kudos to J.B. Hunt Transport Services, RevUnit, Walmart Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation for their combined donation of more than $3 million in money and in-kind contributions to Northwest Arkansas health care organizations. The funding will help increase testing capacity and buy protective gear for hospital workers.

Fourth District U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman, according to the headlines, is pushing the Trillion Tree Act and got some help last week at the White House from President Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Who can be against planting a trillion trees, after all? Well, as usual, it pays to read past the headlines. The legislation also makes it harder for people concerned about the environmental impact of forest management plans to sue, restricts how long injunctions against them can last and requires judges to consider new factors when forest management plans are challenged in courts. The legislation also seeks sustainable increases in domestic timber harvest. We’re not saying such matters aren’t worthy of debate, but with the act titled as it is, one might say it’s hard to see the legislation for the trees.