Letters To The Editor

Sat., March 30, 1996

WASHINGTON STATE

We are doing ourselves in

I read your article on the New Century Task Force. The five benchmarks amaze me because three out of five goals relate to jobs and income growth.

If these are to be realized, it is time we understand that our state is currently considered among the least friendly environments - 47th - for business growth and development. When we lose 350 potential jobs to Montana because of our unfriendly business climate, it is time to look at our laws and tax structure. If we don’t, the goals won’t be reachable no matter what we do.

The fifth benchmark, relating to housing affordability, will continue to go in the wrong direction as long as we continue to create artificial shortages through the Growth Management Act. There is no reason we can’t decide how we will zone and develop land at the local level without state intervention.

These policies have driven start-up housing costs out of sight in other parts of the country. In King County a lot costing $12,000 five years ago now costs $100,000.

We need to understand we can’t be all things to all people. There are choices and compromises that we all need to make. I would like to see my children be able to find a job here and also not have to live with their parents until they are 30 because they can’t afford a house. Glen R. Pollock Spokane

Lawyer backs Senn; It figures

In response to Charles Conrad’s letter about Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn (“Companies don’t need Senn, people do,” March 23), it amazes me how an attorney with 18 years of practice could write such a naive letter.

Before coming down solely on the insurance companies for our health care situation, you should have taken a long look in the mirror, Conrad. Of course insurance companies are in business to make money. Why are you in business? Isn’t your profession also a billion-dollar industry?

We need to get to the real bottom-line issue, which is total cost of health care, not just insurance company cost.

A big part of the total cost is a result of your industry, Conrad. Rampant lawsuits against physicians for malpractice forces them to increase their fees for services, and also to do every procedure possible on a patient, even when they know it won’t make a difference, just to avoid lawsuits. Insurance companies then must either not cover the extra cost or increase their premiums to cover it.

State Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn is as letter writer Justin Childers stated: a loose cannon. She appears to be on the consumers’ side but ultimately is devastating to them. If she could take her motivation and direct it toward the whole problem, not just a part of it, we might be on the right track. Scott M. Burkhardt Spokane

Senn doing consumers no favor

Here’s a quick test for you. Is it better for consumers to have two insurance companies to choose from, or 20?

Obviously, the more choices available to consumers, the better. Why? More competition forces price policing. With lots of companies to choose from consumers can shop for the best deal. Companies have to keep their pencils sharp or they lose market share and profits.

So if having more, not fewer, companies is in the best interest of the consumer, why is our insurance commissioner advocating policies that are driving health insurance carriers out of our state? Washington state has developed a reputation among carriers as the worst place to do business in America. Why? Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn’s plans to “protect” us have created a rich market basket of benefits with inadequate premiums to allow insurance companies to pay for the state-mandated coverage. Carriers have been denied rate increases and are evaluating the cost of staying in Washington.

If the increases continue to be denied, even more companies will leave the state or will stay and slowly slide into insolvency. Can anyone find a winner in this scenario?

Believe me, Commissioner Senn will try to stand on top of the carnage and declare victory. Smart consumers will recognize that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Leave her in the office four more years and she will have your lunch.

Hillary 2 health care is just around the corner unless we act in November to get rid of our “protector.” Berge A. Borrevik Jr. Spokane

GRASS FIELD BURNING

Right down Mussolini’s alley

With the stroke of her pen, the head of the State Department of Ecology, Mary Riveland - appointed by our lame-duck governor - has devastated one of our largest businesses in Eastern Washington. Grass growers are the target of our state government and this attack will cost them millions of dollars.

This shocking, undemocratic act by our state government caused me to look up “fascism” in my dictionary. It says: “Fascism: system of government characterized by rigid, one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition (and), private economic enterprise under centralized government control.”

Wake up, Americans. Your business could be next. Barbara Green Spokane

CHILDREN’S BOOKS

Don’t end what you seek to preserve

I recently read a letter to the editor on “The Giver” with which I disagree. I have read the book in class and found it to be well written and intriguing.

I enthusiastically agree with Muriel Tingley on the subject of having a society with the right to make decisions, unlike a nonchoosing society that promotes euthanasia. That doesn’t mean that people should not have the freedom to read “The Giver.”

Tingley wrote about freedom and choice. By writing that students should not read “The Giver” she is attempting to take away my and others’ freedom and right to make choices.

This is exactly like a society that incorporates euthanasia, with no choices, which is what Muriel Tingley preaches against!

“The Giver” is acceptable for classes to read. The book illustrates the downfalls of a society using euthanasia. Abel Cuskelly, age 14 Libby, Mont.

‘The Giver’ highly objectionable

I’m not sure that even the right-to-die Hemlock Society would endorse the children’s book, “The Giver.”

“The Giver” gives new meaning to the use of toxic injections to “release” selected members of society. This slippery slope of euthanasia includes underweight newborns, toddlers who don’t sleep soundly, the elderly and offenders who fail to follow the community rules after two warnings. It seems that the only members who are exempt from being “released” are the obedient, “contributing” members of this planned society.

In addition, this book portrays a teen who selects assisted suicide with a self-inflicted toxic injection, since she can’t cope with life’s pressures.

President Clinton strongly recommends that parents select or filter out objectionable or violent issues on television. Shouldn’t parents have the same right in opting their children out of objectionable issues in the classroom? Gloria Clark Spokane

Parental choice sought, that’s all

Published comments regarding “The Giver” are, rather than addressing the issue, an attack on Muriel Tingley, writer of the March 18 letter calling parents’ attention to the use of this book in schools.

While some parents may not mind their child reading a book that paints parents as liars and killers, and that subjects children to graphic infanticide, genocide, suicide and euthanasia, other parents may mind this very much.

The overall message of the book, that society should be centered on feelings, is not admirable either. History tells us blatantly that a society that runs on feelings rather than knowledge will soon tear itself apart.

As heavily published by supporters of education reform, parents are the primary educators of their children. Then is it not the right of the parent to voice their acceptance of, or objection to, this book, to expect the school to abide the decision of parents as to whether their child is subjected to this book?

Tingley asked that children have “limited access” to this book. She made no request for censorship. She has respected the right of parents to make up their own minds.

It is apropos that the writers who blasted her did not show the same respect. It seems it is they who want to impose their will on everyone else. Michelle Stuter Nine Mile Falls

Think before taking away

Recently I read Muriel Tingley’s letter about limiting children’s reading of “The Giver.” I must say to the people who dislike some children’s books, what about the novels some adults read?

I recently saw the cover of an adult novel which said, “money, love, sex, violence, the ultimate thriller.” Nobody ever tries to ban some of the adult novels which are full of very unnecessary violence, but they try to ban a simple children’s novel, whose hidden meaning is appreciating our capability of having choices and feelings.

In the book, a 12-year-old is growing up in a community of sameness, with no feelings, color, climate, music, etc. Everything is always the same. The people release the newborns that are twins, because one baby would mess up their whole perfect society. They are able to do this because they feel no pain or sympathy.

I am 11 years old and “The Giver” is one of my very favorite books. Please think about which books we should ban and which books we should keep and learn from. Megan Beck Spokane

‘Goosebumps’ books great for some

In response to Anita O’Brien’s request to have “Goosebumps” books removed from school shelves because “these books have given my children nightmares”:

These books have given my son a love of reading that nothing else ever could.

I applaud R.L. Stine for his writing. The books may not be considered great literature but they are exciting. They offer page-turning adventures that in turn have developed a love for reading, not to mention an opportunity to use the imagination.

I can appreciate that these books might not be enjoyable for every child. I believe that decision should be made at home between parent and child, not through censorship. Susan A. Schon Spokane

‘Goosebumps’ books positive influence

To the mom who would like to see “Goosebumps” taken off the shelves of the library, shame on you. What are you teaching your children about free speech?

Nothing thrilled me more than when my daughter switched from requesting pogs to requesting books as the major “cool” collection at school. I immediately bought her three of these books and sat down to read one myself, just to see what the attraction was.

Basically, they are the equivalent of telling scary stories at a sleep-over or at the camp fire - something everyone has, or should have, done as a child.

As in all free speech issues, you and your children have the right to not read these stories. But please, don’t take them away from the rest of us.

My son and daughter read other literature as well, but their free time is much better spent reading a popular book than watching TV. They are learning to read a book and comprehend it enough to discuss it with their friends.

“Goosebumps” author R.L. Stine is a hero of mine. He makes children want to read. Angela Clarry Spokane

Parent should speak for her own, only

If Anita O’Brien (“Goosebumps” gives mom the heebie-jeebies,” News, March 27) does not want her children to read Goosebumps books that is her prerogative.

However, this is the United States of America. Because a book gives her children nightmares does not mean that my children are not allowed to check that book out of the school library.

It is because of author R.L. Stine that my 11-year-old son, and 8-year-old nephew finally enjoy reading. And they do not have nightmares. I, not Anita O’Brien, am my son’s mother. Tracy Johnson Spokane

Letters To The Editor

Downtown Spokane stadium groundbreaking set for Tuesday

Pandemic project: Dental lab owner Robert Carnell paints pop art abstracts of celebrities

Gardening: Bird feeders safe to hang this winter after salmonella epidemic in 2020