Should Individual Charity Replace Government Aid?

Spokane put its generosity and compassion on display following last week’s bombing in Oklahoma City.

Hardly had the debris settled before various radio stations and charities had rallied residents to raise more than $30,000 for relief.

Yes, it sounds cynical, but relief of what? The Oklahoma City victims did not lose clothing, food and shelter. Some surely will incur uninsured medical costs and loss of family income, but the horrible grief they feel is not, for the most part, the kind you can put a price on.

If Spokane alone has raised such a sum, how much is rolling in from elsewhere, including Oklahoma?

If there is a surplus, no doubt it will be put to humanitarian purposes. But in most communities, innocent victims cope daily with tragedies that lack the drama to attract CNN’s attention or spontaneous fund-raising drives - but are just as devastating to individuals as the bombing in Oklahoma City.

The private American’s exemplary readiness to help the needy, without question or hesitation if the need is shown compellingly, is a spirit that many lawmakers count on when they tackle welfare-reform proposals.

I’d like to hear readers’ ideas about how this charitable impulse can be harnessed effectively to replace current government programs. Or if it should be. Replies will be printed Thursday, so respond promptly. The information at the end of this column tells how.

Talk about your burning issues …

It’s hard to believe that legislation deregulating grass field burning could sail through the Washington House and Senate without a dissenting vote. But it did, and that’s why Gov. Mike Lowry signed it.

It won’t be many months before the contentious fall field-burning season is upon us. What suggestions do you have for how the region’s grass growers and their neighbors can live in harmony when it does?

There are promises, and there are promises

State Sen. John Moyer, a Spokane Republican, promised environmentalist constituents he’d vote against a controversial property-rights initiative. And he promised his Republican caucus leader, Sen. Dan McDonald of Bellevue, he’d vote for it.

He gave McDonald his vote and his constituents an apology. Your thoughts?

xxxx