Letters To The Editor

SPOKANE MATTERS

Sheriff’s office did good job

During the recent labor dispute between the United Steelworkers of America and Kaiser Aluminum, and all the problems that arose, we were particularly impressed with the ongoing assistance we received from the Spokane County Sheriff’s Department, especially Sheriff John Goldman and Lt. Dave Wiyrick.

Lt. Wiyrick met daily with the presidents and strike committees at each location to update, inform and head off conflicts as they arose. This professional behavior and continuing intervention throughout the duration of the strike was above and beyond the call of duty and will be long remembered.

We want this community to know that our collective hats are off in respect to all of the officers who participated in this great effort to make the best of what could have been many unpleasant situations. Paul F. Glavin, subdirector United Steelworkers of America, Spokane

Sypolt right for judgeship

The county commissioners are about to make an important selection of District Court judge to replace Judge Raymond Tanksley, who passed away recently.

There is one candidate, Greg Sypolt, who should be the clear choice for these gentlemen.

Greg has long been a community activist. He continues to serve many hours of volunteer time on a number of our community boards and organizations. He has distinguished himself as a trial lawyer, representing numerous people in all types of criminal cases. He enjoys the universal respect of peers and opposing attorneys alike, as demonstrated by his excellent rating in the recent bar poll.

His temperament is ideally suited for a judicial post; he is compassionate, respectful and dignified, yet he has a sense of humor. Greg has succeeded in his legal career despite having to overcome the misfortune of a disabling birth defect.

This post should be filled by the most qualified candidate. That person is Greg Sypolt. Leigh E. Hawley Spokane

Make room for those on two wheels

This is in response to Steve Sackett’s letter of March 19, “Joggers, cyclists, use discretion.”

Was there a sidewalk in the park that the jogger could have been on? Sidewalks, taken for granted in Spokane city, are an exception in the Valley. How about sharing the road with Steve?

Cyclists are being squeezed from our right to arterials, bridges, streets and trails that should be intermodal. If you use our existing transportation facilities to get to work other than by auto, your perception may be different.

On the new Ruby-Division Street couplet, cyclists’ only access is sidewalks, which statistics indicate are more dangerous for riding on than streets. The Division Street Bridge is wide enough for all, but cyclists are still banned.

On the Gonzaga University-River Inn trail loop, pedestrians are OK but cyclists are banned and considered dangerous. Why? The Maple Street Bridge now allows cycles, but increasing traffic speed to 35 mph makes this bridge a risk for all but the most experienced cyclists. These are examples of bureaucratic blunders denying access to our transportation facilities.

On Oil Smart Wednesdays and National Bike to Work Day, try walking, bicycling or taking the bus, or an intermodal mix, and see what a challenge it can be. There are lots of barriers out there.

For many of us, bicycles are our primary transportation, and not just for recreation. But many drivers infer that the streets are theirs and theirs alone. We must share our roads. Move over, Steve. Gerald Schuldt Spokane

Cyclists have rights, too

I can understand Steve Sackett’s frustrations and concerns regarding traffic flow and cyclists on Monroe Street during the 5 p.m. rush hour (Letters, March 19). As and avid cyclist and racer, I also have a hard time understanding why anyone would want to cycle on Monroe when there are so many alternative routes that could be used. That is also where my understanding ends.

Mr. Sackett needs to be reminded that the roadways are there for both cars and bikes. Most of the cyclists in our club are professional people. We have doctors, nurses, teachers, business owners and other taxpaying cyclists using the roads in the city and state. We don’t need Mr. Sackett to tell us where and when to ride.

We are fed up with motorists who feel that they have to blow their horns at us, throw things at us, cut us off and even try to run us off the road. All of these things do happen every day, even when we are well inside the cycling lanes on the roads.

When we ride, we try to be considerate of motorists around us and we expect the same from them. There are cyclists and drivers with bad attitudes and both need to wake up to reality. We are in this world together so let’s make the best of it and try to get along on the roadways.

Remember, Mr. Sackett, when you see a cyclist on the road, it is one less car to hold you up at the next red light. Alex Renner, president Baddlands Cycling Club

Paint street island dividers

We’ve all heard about the potholes in our streets, but my concern is those island dividers. Couldn’t the city or whoever has put them in the streets at least paint the sides of the islands? They are very hard to see, especially when it has been raining.

I have seen cars hit them and bounce off. This could cause accidents.

As further proof that cars have hit them, just look at the chunks of chipped cement at the beginning of some of the island when turning onto Garland from Division, or turning onto Wall from Francis.

Let the people who have to do community service work paint them. Bonnie O. Hubert Spokane

Is downtown bleeding taxpayers?

I think someone should make a list of all the projects that were to stimulate and revitalize the downtown area for the last 25 years. It would be interesting to know how much of the citizens’ money was spent in this area.

City Councilman Chris Anderson and others are asking where our money is going. We should remember and ask also where the money has gone. Jim Meyer Spokane

Share library, share costs, too

Pauline Bresnahan and Janet Ray of the Washington Library Media Association (Letters, March 20, “Libraries should not exclude”) state that sharing materials is the premise of the library and the reason for its existence. That may very well be true, but only within the community that pays for the services.

I don’t wish to have the taxpayers who pay, or their children, denied access to the Internet or waiting for materials to be returned because a county resident is utilizing these services. Additionally, I doubt if it is legal for the city library to expand or sell services outside the community it serves. Do we need another lawsuit?

If we want to share materials, let’s share the expense of the bonds. Allan LeTourneau Spokane

Volunteers’ story warmed heart

I am responding to the March 21 article, “A gentle stroke.”

My mother was one of the volunteers who taught swimming at the YWCA to disabled people, i.e. Lakeland Village patients and students from the Spokane Guilds’ School. This gave her a great sense of satisfaction to see these people progress physically and emotionally from this activity.

She would also stay after sessions to help the people get dressed and help them get to their transportation which, for most, was as much an effort as the swimming.

I, being a teenager wrapped up in my own existence as we have tendency to do at that age, did not begin to appreciate all she was doing for these people. Now, as an adult, I know how much it meant to her and to them.

I was so glad to read the article and know that the program is still going strong, knowing she was one of these beautiful people. Jeri Hiershberger Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND HELP FOR THE POOR

No subsidies for the affluent

After reading “Proposed cuts cast shadow on day care” (March 18), I am incensed to learn that “nearly every child in day care gets the federal subsidy.”

When our first child was born, my wife resigned a wellpaying professional position in order to personally raise our children. I now support a family of four on teacher’s pay because we believe we are best serving our children - and society, too, frankly - by my wife staying at home with them.

We already find it outrageous that other parents who choose to earn money instead of raise their children during the day receive a hefty tax break for day care expenses. Now we learn that we also are helping to buy lunch for these people’s children.

We have always been - and will continue to be - supporters of free or reduced-cost lunches for the economically disadvantaged, whether they are in school or day care facilities.

I am 100 percent in favor of the new legislation that cuts middle- and upper-income children out of the free lunch pie. If their parents don’t like it, tough. If the legislation passes, I suggest an appropriate protest to disgruntled parents accustomed to feeding their children at the public trough: Quit one of your jobs, keep your preschoolers home and feed them yourselves. Larry Bernbaum Spokane

Help needy, not freeloaders

I must take exception to (Staff writer) Jim Lynch’s article of March 18 regarding the proposed cuts in Agriculture Department subsides for food provided to children in day care.

Mr. Lynch claims, “Nearly every child in day care gets the federal subsidy. The new legislation limits the taxpayer supplements to poor children, leaving the middle- and upper-income parents with the lunch bill.”

Oh no, you can’t mean that we would be responsible to feed our own children and help just the poor and needy? That parents who bring children into this world, who love and care for them, should actually take full responsibility for their welfare?

Get a grip!

The outrage expressed by the people who pay - and I do mean pay - the money to fund this great country is justified. Last November was just the start. This is not a partisan or race issue, it is one of common sense. People must take responsibility for their actions and not look to the state to fund the outcome.

Help the poor and needy, you bet. Anytime, anywhere. Fund my neighbors’ kids’ lunch so the parents can afford greens fees? I don’t think so, Jim. Jim White Spokane

We must not turn back on problem

If “big government” means having a big heart, then I’m entirely for a big government. Programs to help the unfortunate should by no means be cut. I cannot see how any decent human being can simply shrug their shoulders at a hungry child and say it’s not their problem. It may not be their problem, but together we can all make it our solution. Liberals and conservatives alike. Little by little, big by big.

To those who erroneously compare assisting the poor to armed robbery, I say, the only difference between uncompassionate politicking and trash is at least trash can be recycled. Karla Kirby Spokane

Most poor locked into poverty

I always see those pathetic children who are in desperate need of sponsors through Christian Children’s Fund and Children International. These are all children in other countries. You never see the desperate need of children in our own country.

We seem blind to the fact that there are children in the United States who live in the same kinds of places as those in other countries. There are children living in crowded shelters, in cars and in boxes in alleys and streets because there are no homes available for them or their families.

They can’t get help from the state because they have no permanent address. But without help, they can’t get a permanent address.

This is the vicious circle homeless people face in the good old U.S.A., but there are no sponsors for these pathetic children. They don’t exist.

To quote a former president, “There are no poor in our country, only those too lazy to work.”

This is a whole lot of B.S. There are not enough jobs to go around. If there were 1,000 jobs available, there would be 10,000 people in line for them.

Why is there no one to sponsor these families? Why is there no CCF for the United States? We are such a “rich country,” why are there so many homeless, hungry and scared families existing here? Betty Randall Moses Lake

Don’t wreck program that works

Gov. Mike Lowry is right. The family nutrition block grant would mean WIC, the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants and children, would lose $18.06 million in 1996 and $136.45 million from 1996 to 2000.

The cash return on our investment in WIC is real. In 70 studies, WIC proved that the education, health care referrals and supplemental foods women receive during pregnancy mean four times the savings in medical expenses.

WIC isn’t one of those government waste problems we all hope to be free of. It’s one of the best entrepreneurial government programs ever developed.

The proposed family nutrition block grant threatens to destroy future savings WIC could provide. Block grants have failed. If WIC had been block granted in 1989, 33 percent less would have been provided since then.

Having 50 separate WIC programs will destroy the continuity of national program standards and reverse WIC’s effectiveness in areas such as reducing the number of low birth weight babies and infant mortality and increasing access to prenatal care. Medicaid savings, now $400 million to $1.3 billion, would decline.

Washington now serves 56 percent of those eligible. The national average is 72 percent. To deny there will be losses due to block granting WIC is false. With past administrations working to fully fund the WIC program, with the medical and dietetic communities committed to reaching national nutrition objectives by 2000, with the need to cut medical expenses at an all-time high, tax dollars could be better spent than on experimenting with our babies’ nutritional safety. Dorothy Ross, DTR, coordinator West Central Community Center WIC program

OTHER TOPICS

Media unfair to Gingrich

There is much criticism in the media about House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The article in the March 19 Spokesman-Review quoted people saying they “don’t trust him as far as they can see him.” When they can’t think of anything else, they resort to name-calling, referring to him as “a slime.”

I challenge all concerned Americans to actually read a transcript of one of his speeches instead of making an opinion based on what you hear or read about him in the liberal media.

One such speech was one he made on Oct. 5, before he became speaker of the House, on “Religion and politics: The legitimate role.” It was an eloquent, breathtaking speech expressing the views that most Americans believe.

Let’s be fair and familiarize ourselves with what he really stands for before we scrutinize him. We owe this great statesman a big thank you for speaking the truth. Marilyn Lawson Spokane

So-called patriots treasonous

Recent letters to the Roundtable have defended the militia in Montana. One even called these people “patriots” who carry out the will of the founding fathers. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Stripped of their self-serving rhetoric, this group declares itself above the law and the Constitution. They claim the right to force the rest of us to do their will at gunpoint. This would be real tyranny.

Under the terms of our Constitution, their own statements show them to be guilty of treason. They conspire to commit, aid and abet that crime. In 1806, Aaron Burr was arrested and tried for the same crime on less evidence.

Two rebellions took place in the early nation: The Shays’ Rebellion in 1786-87, against Massachusetts, and the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794, against the federal government. In neither of these did any founding fathers defend the action of the rebels. Edward B. Keeley Spokane