Letters To The Editor

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Only well-off few really count

The war on children has begun. I am sickened by the welfare reform bills being introduced by the “new majority” because who suffers? Kids.

The new solution to welfare is to put them out on the street with a tin cup. Maybe somebody will toss in a buck. Who cares?

After all, we need a villain to blame for debt and taxes and it’s easy to make it kids and abandoned moms. They have no high-priced hot shot lobbyists to wine and dine the new majority and plead their case.

Kids can’t point out that we’re in a financial mess because we’ve bailed out white collar savings and loan thieves to the tune of billions; we’ve covered the white collar illegal HUD manipulators, also to the tune of billions; we’ve been pouring billions into the deep pockets of greedy, price-gouging defense contractors; and finally, that the many loopholes that keep the wealthiest individuals and corporations from paying their fair share are the biggest reasons for our financial mess. Feeding the big boys’ appetites is what’s costly.

But blame it on the kids. They make great scapegoats. They’re little and helpless and can’t afford to fight back.

Oh, and don’t forget to throw in their usually victimized moms. They also offer little resistance. May as well kick the dog, too. That’ll fix him for being poor! Sally Jackson Spokane

You will regret Nov. 8 mistake

Well here it is, you people who voted for the Republicans. What are those of you who were not around from 1929 to 1932 going to do now?

If you think life is a bitch with the Democrats at the helm, just wait until the elephant gets through stomping around. You will wonder where the country went.

There will be no jobs, no money, stocks will drop 100 or more points and there will be lines around the block for food and handouts.

This really paints a rosy picture of the very near future doesn’t it? Well guess what, voters - the Republicans are back.

The peso is rapidly declining in value and the job market is going to decline rapidly also. The president wants to help but the Republicans don’t want this done.

Is see no good coming out of all this. Give the elephants another bag of peanuts for their pocket; don’t make peanut butter for everyone.

Don’t remember the Alamo; remember Herbert Hoover. Harold Moyel Moses Lake

Beating down kids, poor not moral

Republicans are worried about declining morality. Where is the morality in denying food to children, shelter to the homeless or medical care to veterans, children and pregnant women?

What kind of a country do we want to have? One that spends billions on prisons but considers job training and youth programs “pork”? One that subsidizes weapons sales worldwide but cannot see the value of charging $1 per citizen per year on public broadcasting programs? One that pays wealthy farmers not to farm but cuts funds for the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act?

We hear a lot about welfare reform. Now there is talk of abolishing the Department of Education. Is this nation’s children the only national resource not worthy of consideration?

Is it only coincidental that the much-discussed cuts in preschool and school breakfast and lunch programs, and cuts for teenage welfare mothers, all affect citizens who cannot vote? It is easy to cut welfare payments. Are we willing to invest that money in job training and education to break the cycle of poverty/despair/ignorance?

I, too, voted for change in 1992. Never did I imagine that change to be sacrifice of food, shelter, medical care and education for our youngest and most helpless citizens.

If you are concerned about the future of our country, write to your congressmen and to President Clinton. Voice your opinion or 20 percent of the citizenry will make decisions for all. Barbara Cross Coeur d’Alene

Streamlining is possible

A story is told regarding how our forefathers were discussing many good and not-so-good ideas during the writing of the Constitution. Being wary of the war and its expenses, one writer suggested the Constitution should limit defense troops to about 2,000 and put a limit on defense spending.

Ben Franklin showed the stupidity of that argument by suggesting that the United States limit its troops to 2,000 and order that no enemy should have more than 1,500.

If the present Congress cannot deal with the cuts necessary to steadily reduce the deficit to facilitate a balanced budget by 2002, how can it force a future elected body to suddenly come up with a balanced budget? The amendment would have to be loaded with emergency provision based on foreign relations, national safety, etc. Thus, just like Gramm-Rudman, the budget amendment will be languishing.

First, make the president responsible by giving him line-item editing - not veto - powers. The president could strike out certain parts but the Congress, by a simple majority for each line item, could reinstate. Each item would be made to stand on its own merit.

Second, eliminate some departments, like the Department of Transportation, and taxes collected to administer them. Then give authority to each state to collect its own taxes. For example, the federal government collects gasoline taxes and part of the revenues go back to the states. Avoid the brokers. State and local governments would be happy not to have to hire lobbyists in Washington, D.C. Mallur R. Nandagopal Spokane

Davis-Bacon protection still needed

The federal Davis-Bacon Act, which guarantees prevailing wages will be paid on federally funded projects, has come under attack in the U.S. Senate by Republicans, including Sens. Larry Craig of Idaho and Slade Gorton of Washington.

The charges are that the law is obsolete and inflationary.

The act passed in 1931 after one of its authors, Rep. Robert L. Bacon, R-N.Y., observed how an Alabama contractor brought workers to a federally funded job in New York and paid them much lower than the area’s standard wages. In his opinion, the federal government could at least comply with the local standards of wages and labor prevailing in the locality where the construction was to take place.

Although that was some 60 years ago, it is my opinion that the repeal of Davis-Bacon today could generate a large influx of contractors from Utah, California, or wherever, who would bring their own work crews and pay them less than the wage rates established in this area, denying local residents employment and depressing the area wage standard - the same scenario as New York in 1931.

To call the Davis-Bacon law obsolete and inflationary is wrong. Repealing laws that protect hard-working construction workers is also wrong.

Contact your senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress and ask them to leave the Davis-Bacon Act alone. Craig Gruenig Spokane

FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE

Lobbying funds can be better-spent

The Jan. 31 edition of The Spokesman-Review reports that a special task force soon will ask the Spokane City Council and the Board of County Commissioners for “less than $20,000 each” to help fund the campaign to save Fairchild Air Force Base.

Let’s keep the debate simple. No amount of money spent on keeping Fairchild open for local economic reasons is going to enhance the military value of that base. If the council and board contribute to that fund, it becomes yet another case of taxpayer money chasing taxpayer money. Not very productive!

How about investing that $40,000 in planning for productive economic use of Fairchild if it is closed sometime in the future? Jon J. Tuning Spokane

Keep base’s fate in perspective

The defeat of former House Speaker Tom Foley and the possibility of Fairchild Air Force Base being closed are both subjects that seem to have no end.

First, Foley was defeated and now is receiving a pension for 30 years of service to his country that is almost the same as his pay was.

Second, he has a great position as a lawyer and lobbyist for a large, world-renowned firm and is making very good money. He may be weak at being a practicing lawyer but he sure knows about lobbying.

Third, if Fairchild’s mission was important to the safety and well-being of our country last year, when Foley was in Congress, then it still should be important this year with a new congressman. But if the base stayed open only because of political string-pulling, then that is wrong and the taxpaying citizens of this country are being taken advantage of.

I personally hope Fairchild and all other military bases remain open, funded and well-staffed, as the world today is in worse shape than it was 20 years ago. Steve Odell Spokane

IN THE PAPER

Flak barrage uncalled for

I’m responding to recent letters in the “Roundtable” about the story written about me (“Family project: Kelley Skotland and the Ziegler family raise a home from hard work and commitment,” Jan. 19).

Some people can be quick to judge when they don’t know anything about someone. The article in the newspaper wasn’t written about public assistance.

I want to thank Ziggy’s, Habitat for Humanity and all the volunteers. See you at the dedication.

What happened to the saying, “If you don’t have something nice to say, then don’t say anything at all”? Kelley Skotland Spokane

I see bias against pro-life view

I have followed with interest the various letters pointing out the bias in photograph selection for proabortion (anti-life) and pro-life (anti-abortion) events in your news coverage.

Not so subtle was the casual placement of an Associated Press article headlined, “Clinic owner sentenced for illegal abortion” in your Jan. 29 edition. There it was way back on page A15, tucked all the way down on the left edge near the bottom. The total size of the article was barely larger than the “25 percent off” portion of an adjacent ad.

Some deranged person kills people as a “protest” of some kind and immediately it makes the headlines. Your editorial cartoonist spits out his usual insulting and bigoted characterization of pro-lifers and killers (his latest showing a well-dressed man at a chalkboard bearing the words “kill, kill, kill” as instructions). TV and newspapers play it up for all it is worth.

However, a greedy abortionist killing a woman for $280 cash seems to rate no such expose. No regular coverage is ever given to the hundreds of women who die of complications or who are permanently injured due to damaged uteruses, etc. We seldom view women as victims (they are “clients”), much less the unborn babies as human beings. It makes me sick.

In the case of the Santa Ana woman, her waiting children were told she had “left without them.”

Indeed! In this case, she “left” with her murdered infant. How tragic! Mary Denise Taylor Coeur d’Alene

Whose moral bounds do we want?

Staff writer Lynda Mapes wrote a front page story headlined “Trying to legislate morality” (Jan. 29). This attacking headline mirrors the newspaper’s leftist mentality toward the GOP.

If the Democrats were trying to legislate some positive changes, would your editors be brave enough to say “Liberals attempt to legislate immorality”?

All laws are the definition of moral boundaries. The question is: Whose moral boundaries do we want to accept - those of the moral right or the immoral left? Glen Talbott Clayton

Youth-positive story pleases

Thank you so much to (staff writer) John Craig for his article, “Teens taking adult leadership roles” on the front page of the Jan. 30 edition of The Spokesman-Review. The Adolescent Health Consortium applauds your effort to present positive messages about youth in our community. We look forward to seeing more of the same. Keep up the good work! Deanna R. Cooper Adolescent Health Consortium, Spokane County Health District

Molester notice badly underplayed

I have read and admired your newspaper for years but, as of Jan. 27, that ended. I am furious at your lack of concern for the residents - especially the children - of Spokane and surrounding areas.

Do you expect us to thank you for your little police alert on Page 2 of the Region section about a child molester, level 3? Don’t you people at The Spokesman-Review realize how dangerous this animal is to our children? The police even say he’s very predatory and impulsive. How many more children have to be kidnapped and molested before you wake up and smell the coffee?

I know what I’m talking about; my daughter was kidnapped and molested by a predator just like this one.

What’s wrong with putting an article like this where people can find it? Where’s his picture? Maybe you’ll finally learn when someone close to you is hurt. Debra Kern Coeur d’Alene

Targets poorly chosen

For years, I have read Milt Priggee’s cartoons. I have agreed and disagreed with them.

I must now say that I agree totally with him on his Jan. 28 cartoon. Who do Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh think they are? Who are they to think they can change this country away from bankruptcy, murder, rape and politicians who pad their pockets at taxpayers’ expense and then retire with a bigger income every year than most people make in five years?

Yes, 40 years of in-your-pocketbook-rule will be hard to change. Forty years of “you’re too stupid to know anything, so we will tell you what to do” leadership will be hard to stop. Remember one thing, Mr. Priggee: It wasn’t Newt or Rush who got us into this mess your paper writes about. Joe Wollman Odessa, Wash.

ENVIRONMENT

Writer went beyond downplaying

I see Edwin G. Davis of the Umbrella Group (letters, Jan. 27) continues to demonstrate truth chicanery. The issue was species endangerment. The real issue is that some in the timber industry do not want to acknowledge that their past activity unquestionably has threatened many animal and plant species.

Davis questions the rate of species extinction, an arguable point. However, he goes on to lead the reader to think there really is no problem at all. Any reasonably intelligent person or organization that suggests we are not faced with serious concerns of species endangerment is bordering on hypocrisy.

To focus on the sockeye salmon as not being in danger of extinction and then conveniently fail to mention the critical problems in the Snake River system is incredibly and intentionally misleading. Does the fact that we slaughtered millions of bison and now have only small, isolated pockets left mean there is no species problem?

In the continental United States, we killed the very last known “great golden” bear in the California Sierras but, since those bears have just a few relatives, the grizzlies, in remote areas of our Northern states, does that mean all is well with the bear family?

To debate the fine definition of the word “extinction” is one thing. It is significantly different to dispute the real destruction of habitat - hence, our tremendous issues of species endangerment. This is the worst form of denial.

Let’s not stick our heads in the sand to ignore these problems and let’s not play games with words. John E. Bentley Post Falls

Wolf-phobe stance unnecessary

We should all be gratified by the level-headed, compassionate opinion on the reintroduction of wolves to central Idaho, backed by sound statistics and research, which was advanced by Anne Windishar (opinion, Jan. 20). I encourage those of you determined to restore and preserve the natural world to make an effort to find and read her editorial in the event you missed it.

But what to do about Dave? In Mr. Oliveria’s counteropinion, we witnessed the employment of emotional rhetoric manifested from fear and speculation and designed to inflame and alarm the uninformed and self-indulgent. Dave labeled the wolves as “ravenous killing machines.”

Dave, you and I and all like us are the real killing machines. Just how many fish, cattle, pigs, chickens, turkeys, wild birds and beasts, etc., do you think you and I are responsible for caging, killing and devouring in our lives so far? Certainly, it will far exceed the lifetime take of any dozen wolves. Dave, it’s time to stop whining and start howling! Merlyn Nelson Harrison, Idaho