Letters To The Editor

IN THE PAPER

Cartoon a royal affront to decency

Some things that get into television, movies and, yes, newspapers, are sickening, but the cartoon that appeared in the Nov. 30 paper (showing members of Britain’s royal family) was the sickest of all. Does freedom of speech give one freedom to express filth as news interest or humor?

I don’t think those who wrote the Constitution ever dreamed it would be so interpreted. Those of us who object could just sit back and keep still, but I think we should express our disapproval or it might be interpreted as acceptable. It was especially tasteless because it brought children into the action.

I don’t believe this is a presentation of the general feeling of expression in our country. It’s time we tried to curb its growth by speaking out. Bernice Snyder Colville, Wash.

Claypool story sensationalized

Joyce Claypool has always been honest about her marriage, past and mistakes. She told her family and friends. She also told groups she addressed that she made mistakes and could have contracted the disease because of them.

It’s another thing to have a newspaper tell 250,000 people about your indiscretions and poor choices in life. The Review focused on the sensationalism in Joyce’s life but left out many important parts.

Claypool received the Washington 1993 HIV/AIDS Educator of the Year award. She was chosen to represent our state in Washington, D.C. She served on a committee involved with AIDS and children, and was a Spokane YWCA Woman of Distinction. In addition to being Spokane County United Way Volunteer of the Year and receiving a national J.C. Penney Spire Award, she was featured in the November Family Magazine.

When Social Security decided she could work even though she could barely get through the day, she had to fight the system. She also had to fight for reinstatement of her daughter Kara’s benefits. And there was Dale, her oldest son, who spoke at an AIDS sypmosium last year about what it’s like to lose your father to AIDS and know it will take your mother and sister, too.

Where was the Spokesman-Review’s sense of responsibility to (son) Chris and Dale as the subject matter was chosen. Couldn’t you have accomplished toward educating people about AIDS and about the battles families have to fight, if the above-mentioned subjects had been expanded upon? Toni Nersesian Spangle, Wash.

Why tell about Claypools?

For three days your newspaper has carried full pages of reports along with photos, pictures of the lives and lifestyle of the Claypools. Theirs was certainly nothing to be admired or honored and I, for one, can’t understand why they’ve been honored and made famous by the telling of their sordid life.

There are so many beautiful people, places and creatures that do need to be known about and honored. Why in the world would anyone pass them all over to print all this about the Claypools? W. Richards Spokane

LAW AND JUSTICE

Reform making things worse

The number of needed cells is determined by the median time mandated to be served by each admission.

In July 1984 the minimum prison time of all new commitments was increased by two thirds by abolishing the eligibility for parole consideration provided by the indeterminate sentence. This action was taken by the Legislature and only the Legislature can change it.

Every reported crime can’t be counted as an individual requiring imprisonment or the cause of prison overcrowding. Unless you believe that every person arrested is guilty of committing a felony and will be imprisoned, neither do these figures measure the extent of serious crime in the community or a cause of overcrowding.

Parole was over 70 percent successful in Washington before it was abolished in 1984 under the erroneous belief that an increase in time served would eliminate the need for conditional releases that would provide post-prison control of an inmate’s place of employment, residence, travel and associations. Violations could cause return to prison without costly time consuming police, court work and costly local jail overcrowding.

The current annual cost per inmate and prison construction outlays would be better used in a return to a system with controlled supervision of released prisoners by well-trained professional officers.

Fear of punishment if caught is not as effective in controlling crime as is an increase in the certainty of apprehension. A. LaMont Smith Spokane

White collar types get off easy

Molly Ivins’ Dec. 2 column, “Corporations get away with murder,” was quite interesting but not shocking in this political arena. Crime other than crack, robbery and rape is still crime.

In the article “Wife says marriage counselor stole husband” on Dec. 2, did you recall this passage?

“When insurance companies refused claims filed by Quackenbush because of her illegal status, Benjamin Hole rebilled them as if the patients were treated by him, not her, the medical commission found.”

One can easily see why white collar crime goes underreported in the statement of the medical commission’s supervisor, Betty Elliot: “It’s dishonest. It’s fraud.”

Now we await the punch line - “The commission gave Benjamin Hole a choice: retire or face charges.” What criminal wouldn’t opt to retire?

This is the problem with corrections. It’s only reserved for the underclass. Edward Thomas, Jr. Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Military spending role misstated

It’s obvious from the letters printed, your writers never watch anything else for their source of news but the three newscasts, CNN and read your paper. They’re obviously not getting all the facts when they regurgitate such media phrases as “tax cuts for the rich,” “recession-plagued ‘80s,” “Medicare cuts,” etc.

But the most outrageous statement I’ve read is from Gregory Hande, who claims military spending is why we have such a huge debt.

First, Hande, you’re wrong. Since 1965, Great Society spending has totaled $3.5 trillion. Entitlement spending takes up more than half of the federal budget. Military spending takes up less than one-fifth, even after Clinton whacked $112 billion from it, the only department he cut.

I would like to know how Ronald Reagan spent $3 trillion on the military in eight years. I’m sure you mean entitlement spending, which has gotten totally out of control and needs to be dramatically slowed down.

If not, we’ll soon have enough money for Social Security, welfare, interest on the debt and nothing else.

The debate going on in Washington is the most important debate in our lifetime. We have two choices: More government taxing and spending us into oblivion or a smaller government which preserves and protects our constitutional rights. Mark Duclos Spokane

Answer lies in Bureau of Engraving

I am a 15-year old freshman at John R. Rogers High School. I have recently been puzzled by this question: If the federal government can spend money it really doesn’t have on dumb things like paying for damage along the Mississippi River, why can’t the money printed up by the thousands every day go toward fixing the deficit? It seems logical, doesn’t it? Gina Peterson Spokane