Letters To The Editor

WASHINGTON STATE

County should run health affairs

Congratulations to the state Legislature for returning the option of local control to the people of Spokane County. I refer to the fact the county will once again be held accountable for the administration of Spokane County Health Services.

Why would anyone be opposed to local control by us, the people who live here in Spokane County, other than the bureaucrats in Olympia?

I read the hue and cry in the July 16 paper. What are some of us afraid of? Ourselves? Joanne McCann Spokane

Payoff, explanation don’t jibe

I am responding to the $97,000 settlement with Susanne Albright.

As you all may know, Gov. Lowry’s wife Mary said in May, “Mike just likes to give people a pat on the back every once in a while to congratulate people. Someone might have taken it the wrong way.”

Baloney! Since when does a pat on the back taken the wrong way equal a $97,000 settlement. If a pat on the back is all the harassment was, he must have knocked her dentures out with that little congratulation. I am convinced the out-of-court settlement was not about saving the state money or protecting his family from a grueling trial, but to attempt to save his political life from utter destruction.

A last word of advice for Mike Lowry: Don’t try to put out a grass-roots fire with a little glass of water; you might get burned. David Christensen Spokane

With state, it’s cash up front

I read Staff writer Rachel Konrad’s article about Smith’s Furniture’s deceptive advertising and their $450,000 settlement with the state of Washington. The article stated Smith’s Furniture has already paid the settlement.

Apparently, the state of Washington doesn’t offer a no money down, no interest, no payments for one year plan. Terry Griner Spokane

SPOKANE MATTERS

Councilman is all-around bad news

Spokane City Councilman Chris Anderson is angry because City Attorney Jim Sloane had the unbelievable gall to advise him that Anderson’s knowing disclosure of confidential information to the press violates a state law.

If a citizen sues, this could cause Anderson to have to forfeit his office. Now Anderson wants us to spend the money to have an election of the city attorney, and wants that office to depend on popularity, not on what is right and what is wrong in the law.

Anderson is a demagogue. He pickets outside council meetings, publicly tries to humiliate volunteers who help run the city’s beautiful park system and he is hated by police. In fact, Anderson’s only claim to fame is he repeatedly failed in business and hasn’t been able to hold down a job since he moved to Spokane.

Chris Anderson uses the city telephone system to advance his political views. He disrupts and attacks rather than trying to build. He uses the so-called Gang of Nine and anyone else he can to build his own political empire and woe be to anyone who tries to stand in his way.

Steve Eugster, where are you when we need you? Jim Lyons Spokane

Whole project missed the bus

Another day, another $20 million, another boondoggle for the City of Spokane.

Why, exactly, do we need the bus plaza? Was it to make the bus trips more efficient? No, the buses are no longer syncopated. Working people now have an even longer day because we get to wait around.

Was it done to encourage shopping in the so-called urban core? No, buses no longer stop in front of businesses. Where in the past I might run into Payless or the Bon, I now go directly to the plaza having not spent a dime in downtown Spokane.

Was it created for the comfort of the rider? No, I can’t see a single outside bus bench.

Was it meant to be more attractive? No, I much preferred the piped music and the pansy bed in front of the bank.

Is it safer? It wasn’t unsafe before. The only scary thing about the buses was an occasional driver with a lousy disposition.

Were more routes established? No, you can’t go anywhere in Spokane at night. Never could, never will.

Do the low income people benefit in any way? No, Spokane Transit Authority personnel on the premises wouldn’t even listen. Two young women, supposedly there to help me, walked away as I spoke.

Who, exactly, benefits from this? Is it so a few people in suits can saunter around what they consider to be an attractive building? Now the fares will increase.

Why is it worth $20 million? Sometimes I swear all the smart people born in this town grew up and moved to Seattle. Michela Morgan Spokane

Conservative savior’s on the job

The Spokane County Board of Commissioners has been totally in the hands of Democrats for the previous six to eight years. Not since the days when Keith Sheppard and Grant Peterson were commissioners have we had conservative, fiscally responsible commissioners.

That is, not until now! In November 1994, we were fortunate enough to elect Phil Harris. Since January 1995, when he took office, Commissioner Harris has diligently worked to undo the mass of liberal, tax-and-spend messes existing in the county. The public just hasn’t been paying attention or people would never have allowed their money to be abused and misused in such a wasteful way.

Maybe with Commissioners Harris and Hasson finally taking some responsible action, it isn’t too late to turn things around before the county bankrupts itself. Anne Franks Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Gingrich mindful of donations?

It’s ludicrous that House Speaker Newt Gingrich can say the Food and Drug Administration has “lost it’s mind” to consider regulating tobacco products. Nicotine has long been know to be addictive, but perhaps not as addictive as the tobacco industry campaign donation.

The July 14 article goes on quoting Gingrich, “If you want an example of big government interfering, it would be the FDA picking a brand new fight when we haven’t won the far more serious fights about crack cocaine and heroine.” Wrong on both counts.

As nicotine has been shown to be a brain-affecting drug, there’s every reason regulate it equally with other drugs. Street drugs may get more press because of their more dramatic, immediate effect, but it’s devious, insidious tobacco which has killed more people than all illegal drugs combined (every year), throughout our nations history, even during Prohibition! Richard Reed Spokane

Gingrich wrong about tobacco

Isn’t it marvelous, the things a politician can say with a straight face and presumably without blushing?

In the July 15 Spokesman-Review, House Speaker Newt Gingrich was quoted as advocating death for those importing drugs “… for the purpose of destroying our children …” However, as also reported, he simultaneously “belittled suggestions from the FDA that tobacco be regulated as a drug.”

Imagine we had no history of growing and using tobacco, and one day a stranger offered Mr. Gingrich and his family a new product which, when smoked or chewed, caused cancer in the user and others merely exposed to the vapors, damaged unborn babies, would kill more Americans than all the wars in our history and would cause untold sickness, misery and suffering. Further, this product is guaranteed to be addictive to the point the user would willingly beg strangers for it, steal or even search ashtrays for usable butts. I imagine Mr. Gingrich would rightfully list this product alongside the cocaine and marijuana he already despises.

Tobacco is an economically important crop in many states, including Gingrich’s Georgia. Thus, we have the humiliating picture of one of our nation’s highest elected leaders making a total fool of himself, his office and his principles and presumably doing so without a single blush or giggle.

The saddest part of the entire spectacle is that the gentleman undoubtedly assumes we will fail to note this inconsistency or seek to correct him. I, for one, intend to prove him wrong! Samuel Van Wyck Spokane

Scandals vindicate conservatives

The recent reports and reactions on the government’s handling of the Randy Weaver standoff are fascinating for the view they give us of the internal workings of a large government bureaucracy.

It seems every time we get this kind of a detailed inside look at the operations of a large government bureaucracy, we see confusion, miscommunication, mysterious shredding of documents, turf battles, self-serving actions, empire building, misleading statements, overreaction, inefficiencies, inflated egos and all kinds of abuse.

We have seen this pattern in the Nixon Presidency Watergate investigations, in the Department of Housing and Urban Development low-income housing programs, in the Department of Defense procurement controversies with their $100 hammers, in the Superfund cleanup, in the Agricultural Department subsidies for farmers, and in hundreds of government controversies for decades.

Isn’t this a true view of how government bureaucracies really work most of the time, even where there are no public controversies to allow us to see what is happening behind the reassuring words?

These investigators just add more proof we need to vote for more legislators and members of Congress who understand the limitations of government programs, who are skeptical of governmental promises, who are open to nongovernmental solutions and who realize legislation has it’s limits. Lon Woodbury Bonners Ferry