Letters To The Editor

IDAHO VIEWPOINTS

Funeral home right to withhold body

I strongly support funeral home director Dale Coffelt’s decision to not release the body of Albert Atkinson. A funeral home, like any legitimate business, has a mission to make a profit. The owners of the funeral home are not supported by taxes or donations.

The funeral director no doubt realizes that once the body is released for burial, the odds of collecting his expenses are extremely slim. Even with court-ordered judgment, collection is nearly impossible.

I believe that the current system of increasing bankruptcies and absolving personal financial responsibility is a real financial threat to our system of credit and banking, needlessly clogs our judicial system and weakens the moral fiber of this country’s citizenry.

Also remember, the costs of these expenses are directly passed on to responsible consumers through higher costs and interest rates.

I suggest the funeral director provide an incentive for the debtor to pay the legitimate expenses by charging a daily storage cost, regardless of whether Atkinson picks up his father’s body or not. Eric Ross Wiksten Coeur d’Alene

Students right to protest inequality

It was wonderful to read that the students at Coeur d’Alene High School are standing up for themselves about the inadequate and unequal school facilities. The truth is, most adults don’t know or care to find out what kind of facility they are sending their children to.

I graduated from Central Valley High School, where the school orchestra was delegated to the band storage room. How ironic that the district had no money to buy the orchestra sheet music but the band had an entire room reserved for the storage of theirs.

This type of inequality is not new. However, it is new that students are willing to voice their concern about it. Go, Vikings! Tonia L. Green Viola, Idaho

WASHINGTON STATE

DOE should apply common sense

Again, we see the state’s lack of common sense and compassion in reference to the Sept. 24 article, “City being fined for pollution after Ice Storm.”

State Department of Ecology official Grant Pfeifer commented, “I understand the mitigating circumstances, having lived through the ice storm. But it’s our belief that the (air pollution) permit conditions were violated.”

Well, Pfeifer, I don’t know if we lived through the same storm. The mitigating circumstances I recall was a city that got hit with a once-in-a-hundred-years storm that left our streets looking like a war zone, a forest of trees destroyed and thousands of people left without power.

It doesn’t take great wisdom to realize the mountain of ice-coated debris had to be cleaned up and disposed of. Stacking it up in landfills, leaving it around as fuel for our fire season or allowing a long time to let it dry prior to incineration doesn’t seem practical to me.

Instead of considering fining Spokane $100,000 for socalled Clean Air Act violations, which, by the way, is taxpayers’ money and could be used for other purposes (street repairs, ect.), how about some sympathy, and common sense toward a city, its citizens and their garbage plant pulling together to get through an extraordinary disaster the best way that it could? Dale W. Golman Spokane

DOE right to burn burners

Three cheers for the state Department of Ecology. It was heartening to see DOE stand up for the quality of air and cite the city Solid Waste Department for its violation of the Clean Air Act during the ice storm.

The ice storm episode was an unusual event, but the methods and process used to make decisions were not unusual or precedent-setting. For years we have been treated to glimpses of the unilateral decision making policies of the Solid Waste Department, i.e. medical waste, tire burns, Canadian pesticide containers, oil field fuel filters, diesel-soaked rags from a Canadian spill and other “special” wastes.

Each time, SRSWD got caught, I expected measures would be taken to bring the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority or DOE into the loop to protect our health. Each time, the city-county ownership of the plant created a reluctance to enforce any penalties by the SCAPCA board. (Two county commissioners and one City Council member sit on the five-member board.) As a result, past director Phil Williams was able to create a department that is out of control and feels no obligation to consult or even inform anyone regarding its actions.

Hopefully, this answerable-to-no-one attitude will finally come to an end and oversight of our air quality will be restored to the level of accountability and checks and balances that could be expected if the plant were privately owned. Bonnie Mager, Eastern Washington field organizer Washington Environmental Council, Spokane

SPOKANE MATTERS

STA priorities misplaced

What is the mission of the Spokane Transit Authority?

Since it is a tax-funded public service utility, one would suppose the mission would be to provide the best possible service to as many county residents as possible. The new plan does not follow such a mission. STA should not be chopping service to neighborhoods while increasing service to core routes already in place.

This would mean serving fewer residents overall. The rider count maybe higher since they are offering excellent service to a particular group of residents, but what about the rest of us? No one expects service at the door of each household, but certainly, fringe residents deserve at least some consideration.

STA should be looking to serve a larger area, rather than increasing service to profitable routes. Charles F. Dayley Spokane

Oversights behind most racism

The major lesson to be learned from the Spokane Area Chamber of Commerce’s annual meeting and its nondiverse image of the future is how unintentionally such damage can occur.

The chamber really went out on a limb to invite Andrew Young to keynote its celebration of a century that certainly has not thus far brought a lot of diversity to Spokane, for whatever reasons. But I applaud the chamber’s apparent intent in that regard and other aspects of the meeting which declared openness. The chamber’s own staffing has become more diverse in recent years. And yet, with all these good intentions, the message was non-inclusive, i.e. racist.

We too often get caught in thinking that racism must be mean-spirited. There are a few of those types around - fortunately, only a few. By far the most damage is done by we well-intentioned folks whose oversights and continued blindness continue to create this kind of damage. To the extent we have blind spots, we are racists. We all need better vision. Douglas W. Huigen Spokane

Real gaffe is chamber’s left turn

It was with much sadness and dismay that I read that the Spokane Area Chamber of Commerce has abandoned its mission of working to maintain the property rights of its members. A business and the jobs that are created by it should be the private property of its owners. This idea seems to have been given up in favor of the socialist agenda of making jobs the property of the state and compelling businesses to hire based on race and other irrelevant factors, rather than hire based on ability.

If the chamber really wants to serve its members and the community, it would become an advocate of capitalism in its purest form. Under laissez-faire capitalism, businesses are punished by the market for hiring based on race, and conversely are rewarded for hiring based on ability regardless of race. Under laissez-faire capitalism, the politicians and bureaucrats would have little or no say in the economy. No one would have any political pull. Everyone - red, yellow, black and white - would have a level playing field. Ability and perspiration would be the only factors that count.

The Spokesman-Review’s bias was evident in the lack of coverage given to those who didn’t have a problem with the program, like Vernon Baker, a World War II hero of African descent. The chamber, The Spokesman-Review and the rest of America would do well to emulate Baker’s attitude and take a lesson from his words, “I wasn’t offended. I don’t understand why people are upset. (The program) was OK, as far as I was concerned… I’m not color conscious.” Sam E. Cathcart Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

No harm in Promise Keepers

I am the wife of a Promise Keeper. I do not equate Promise Keepers with holy machismo or chauvinism, as stated in the article, “In God’s image” (Sept. 26).

I am a homemaker, hold a four-year degree and own and, with my husband, operate my own business. I am not frightened by my husband’s commitment to Promise Keepers.

Promise Keepers not only calls men back to God and married men to be the head of the household, it challenges all men, not just Christians, to lead pure lives and to be productive in their communities.

You would think married women would be delighted, as I am, to have their husbands put them and their children first and to “love them just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Not to mention raising the standards in our neighborhoods and cities.

Who among you could deny that need in our country today?

So what if the men gather to seek God and to pray and cry together? Is that not a good thing?

My husband and I have a great marriage. It’s no more perfect than either of us. But as we grow closer to the design our creator has for us, our lives are truly blessed.

Our nation, city and families could do with a little bit of blessing! Let the men gather, let them pray. What or who is it hurting? Lisa L. Fairburn Spokane

Mindless squabbling not what we need

Hooray for M. Cori Cutler’s Sept. 30 letter (“Be proud - and lighten up”). It points out perfectly how focusing our attention on the dumb aspects of issues actually clouds the important stuff and hinders progress.

As long as we argue semantics and not issues, the issues will remain unsolved and most of the energy will be wasted.

By the way, the powers that be (government, big business, et al) love it when we argue semantics amongst ourselves because as long as we focus our energy on petty differences and words, they don’t have to perform or face up to real problems, either.

Get over it! John M. Bolan Coeur d’Alene

THE MILITARY

Gender parity in Congress would help

I suggest a remedy for George Carpenter’s complaints about women in the military (Letters, Sept. 23).

During World War II, female personnel did the basic training of women enlistees. They read us the Articles of War, taught us how to march, how to salute, how to put on a gas mask, and they took us through a gas chamber. They taught us military protocol and disciplined us, when necessary. They also taught us to serve our country in specialized fields with honor and dignity. We were then detailed to our duty stations.

We didn’t need men to teach us how to serve our country then and I am sure that women today could serve in the military services under the same type of training.

Perhaps if there was a closer balance of male and female members of Congress, more thought would be given to women who desire to serve in the military, as to where and how their training takes place.

I served my country with pride, honor and dignity. I hope Carpenter did also. Neda I. Fisher Spokane

OTHER TOPICS

Idaho justice system worth emulating

Why is Idaho being criticized for having one of the lowest crime rates in the country and the fourth-highest percentage of their sentence that inmates actually serve? Did the editor of the Sept. 21 Spokesman-Review (“Lock ‘em up”) need something to put on the front page ? That is the only reason I can come up with.

The article says that we are wasting too much money on prisons. It says you should not be put in jail for drunken driving and that that your license should not even be suspended. Therefore, the suggested answer is to give the criminal a fine, and then he is on his way to doing it all over again.

The next time, though, someone could die. Do we need to wait until someone dies before we put an offender in prison?

Idahoans care more about staying alive than paying a little extra money for prisons. I think Idaho’s approach to crime is very effective and should be a model for other states to follow, not condemn. Carol J. Davenport Newport, Wash.

Political leadership lacking

One of our country’s greatest assets is the fact that we have diversity. We have the resources and the ingenuity to make this country the best possible. What we lack is leadership with substance and vision.

As our communities slowly decay, our elected officials say we need more police. As our jails fill, they say we need new laws. As violent, drug-addicted criminals gun down more innocent people, they say we need to restrict the guns of law-abiding citizens.

I say it’s time to demand real solutions to our real problems. What are our leaders doing to stop family and neighborhood decay? What are their ideas to rebuild these neighborhoods? What is being done to stop revolving-door justice? What is being done to take the power away from the drug dealers? What is being done to help families raise responsible, caring children who respect human life?

Any psychologist will tell you that who we are is mostly determined in our first five years. I am not amused as I watch our officials pushing no smoking on the House floor, favoring sport teams in their district, and going on about the all-important name change to Spokane Falls!

Were is the substance? Elliott Allen Baade Spokane

Don’t co-opt King or distort his words

Editorial writer D.F. Oliveria’s Sept. 26 editorial, “America is still land of opportunity”, is a wonderful example of the truth of the old adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Oliveria parrots the conservative effort to claim Martin Luther King Jr. as an opponent of affirmative action. It is interesting how a group that, for the most part, could have cared less for what Dr. King was doing then is now trying to call him one of their own.

In declaring that affirmative action should be ended, by using King’s famous phrase that his children would be judged by their character, not their color, Oliveria totally misrepresents King’s meaning.

King was not discussing affirmative action at all. He was speaking of a situation where African-Americans were judged inferior solely on the basis of skin color. His focus was on dignity.

If Oliveria had bothered to read Dr. King’s writings, instead of proof-texting, it would be obvious that King was speaking of something like affirmative action when he wrote that “adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation” of blacks in America was needed.

King was also referring to something like affirmative action when he wrote that this “payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government.”

Whether King would still be in favor of affirmative action today is a matter of debate. What is not acceptable is the deliberate distortion and twisting of his words to imply what he did not mean. William “Ron” Large Spokane