Ohio should stick with front plate

Periodically, proposals to change Ohio law requiring that vehicle owners display license plates on the front and rear of their cars and trucks come up. The state House of Representatives appears poised to go down that road again later this year.

Proponents insist changing the law to allow plates only on the rear of vehicles would save owners a few dollars, while the state itself could cut spending by about $1 million a year.

Opponents say savings for motorists would be minimal and that the dual plates serve an important purpose.

Law enforcement agencies seem united as advocates for the two-plate system. Officers say it allows them to identify motorists guilty of wrongdoing more easily.

And, they add, witnesses to crimes are more likely to get plate numbers if they have two opportunities instead of just one.

Many states, including neighboring West Virginia and Pennsylvania, require only one plate per vehicle.

Yet legislators inclined to listen to law enforcement agencies are right. If the two-plate requirement is useful in solving crimes – and, quite possibly, getting dangerous drivers off Buckeye State highways quicker – it may be a good idea to retain it.

Beside and just below the American flag at many places in our area can be seen the black and white POW/MIA banner. It is a sign that many local residents view it as a duty to find out what happened to the thousands of Americans still listed as missing in action or as prisoners of war from our nation’s conflicts.

They deserve our best efforts as a nation.

They certainly deserve more than a Pentagon MIA program described by the military itself as so dysfunctional – and perhaps corrupt – that it is close to “total failure.”

The Associated Press recently investigated the military’s Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command and found it to be “woefully inept and even corrupt.”

Weaknesses in the program were detailed in a Pentagon report the military attempted to suppress, according to the AP. The POW/MIA program’s former commander, Army Major Gen. Stephen Tom, banned the report’s use “for any purpose,” insisting it went beyond its intended scope.

In other words, military investigators did a more thorough job than the program’s commander desired.

Members of Congress should be furious – reflecting the outrage their constituents will feel over the report. Those who gave their all for our country deserve – and should get – better than an “inept and even corrupt” program to find them.