Letters To The Editor
Pac-10 South earns status
The Pacific-10 Conference has the strongest overall athletic program in the country. It is the conference of champions. In baseball, the six schools of the Pac-10 South Division comprise the best league in America.
Recently, the Pac-10 South Division has been characterized as “elitist” by a Pac-10 North Division athletic director. This caustic comment is without merit.
I was fortunate to have played at a Pac-10 South school. Our distinction as the premier league has been earned only by our performance on the diamond.
Since its inception in 1979, the Pac-10 South has produced the following: six different league champions, 50 regional tournament appearances, 19 College World Series participants and five National Championships.
In contrast, during the last 14 years, although there have been several very good Pac-10 North teams, none has risen to the pinnacle of greatness associated with Pac-10 South teams.
For example, in “dictated” playoff games, the Pac-10 South teams have had a 90 percent success rate against Pac-10 North teams. In addition, the traditional Pac-10 North perennial winner has had a 35 percent success rate against Pac-10 South teams.
In general, the Pac-10 South teams have superior coaching, pitching, defense, power, and speed.
The Pac-10 North has been paying the price of parity, which is perpetual mediocrity. The Pac-10 South, the No. 1 (“elite”) conference of college baseball, has been reaping the benefit of blood, sweat and tears - excellence. Darryl M. Stephens Spokane
Article exposes ‘land rape’
Many kudos to Rich Landers for his right-on article (May 12, “Environmental pillagers deserve plaque buildup”) exposing I-164 for what it really is - corporate land rape at tax payers’ expense.
It was no coincidence that I-164 was going nowhere before the 1994 November elections. There was virtually no grassroots support to collect the signatures needed to get it on the ballot. The post-election change in the political climate prompted big timber, real estate and developer interests to join forces and pump more than $200,000 into a paid signature-gathering campaign that would assure its success. Paid professionals baited an unsuspecting public with promises that signatures would put it to a vote this November.
What they knew and the public didn’t was that this taxpayers’ nightmare was never intended to go to a vote of the public. Instead, it was cleverly maneuvered through the House and Senate despite the knowledge of a fiscal note warning of at least a several hundred million-dollar price tag in the 1995-97 biennium and the prediction it might rise closer to $3.9 billion when all was said and done. What happened to all that fiscal conservation we were promised?
Our thanks to you, Rich, for making it clear where the public interests really lie. Please add Rep. Steve Fuhrman’s name to your hall of evil doers. Despite voicing concern that people were misled when their signatures were gathered, he chose to vote corporate interests over private. Are these his family values? Bonnie Mager Washington Environmental Council, Spokane