Letters To The Editor

AGRICULTURE

Growers can prosper without burning

Field burning is a health hazard and it robs us of our summers. There are 106 farmers who grow grass seed. There are 400,000 people in Spokane County who are subjected to the smoke created when 69,000 tons of grass straw are burned off 27,000 acres of grass fields.

Oregon is the world’s largest producer of grass seed with over 370,000 acres under cultivation. Thirty years ago, Oregon embarked upon a policy of eliminating open burning. Oregon is not yet smoke free, but that state has achieved a 72 percent decrease in open burning as of 1992.

Thirty years ago Oregon growers stated that if they could not burn their fields, they would go out of business. That did not happen. In fact, the grass seed industry is healthy and growing in the face of a burning phase-down.

Research into alternatives is presently ongoing in Spokane County. First-year results revealed that seed yields were greater from fields that were not burned. One manually dethatched field yielded twice as much seed as the burned field. This suggests that an every-other-year burn policy might be a logical first step toward solving Spokane County’s smoke problem.

As long as it is allowed, the farmers will continue to torch their fields. Change won’t come without public pressure. Voice your opinions and get involved. You can also call the American Lung Association and the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority. Patricia Hoffman Spokane

Not good to alienate legislators

In “Wheat farmers out in the cold” (April 23), I was dismayed by the statements of certain members of the Washington Association of Wheat Growers who spoke after their March lobbying campaign in Washington, D.C. The farmers’ own conduct may keep them out in the cold.

As a lifelong farmer and longtime Washington Association of Wheat Growers member, I was specifically concerned with derogatory comments about Rep. George Nethercutt, such as members expecting “a-nether-cut” in farm subsidies. Many of our group helped elect the congressman. To turn on him so quickly is absurd. Years ago we discovered the effects of such comments toward an elected official when a member of the association blasted Sen. Henry M. Jackson, thereby harming our relationship and our support from him.

We rely on these elected officials to help us in Washington, D.C., when we need help the most. It isn’t productive to alienate such an official. With respect to Sen. Jackson, a select group from the association met with him to mend that fence and he went on to be of immeasurable assistance in defending farm interests.

Two top supporters of farm interests have been Congressman Tom Foley and Sen. Bob Dole. Sen. Slade Gorton also served on the Senate Agricultural Committee. Sen. Patty Murray should be educated and brought into the debate as well to assist our other elected officials.

We should be supportive of these people we have entrusted to support our interests, rather than degrade their efforts in a time of crisis. Kenny Foulkes Spokane

Raising awareness a good move

It was refreshing to read the April 30 editorial by (Editor) Chris Peck regarding agricultural subsidies. I was beginning to wonder if anyone other than farmers really understands what makes the tractor wheels go around.

It is good to see you listening to real farmers rather than reciting the truths about farming as told by a retired Boeing instructor who has a brother-in-law who farms in the Dakotas.

As Peck’s editorial indicates, most non-farmers are not concerned about agriculture’s fate because they don’t think it affects them. With your help, maybe they will come to realize that agriculture’s financial health has a significant impact upon all of Eastern Washington, even if you work in downtown Spokane. Nat Webb Walla Walla

Subsidies no longer necessary

I commend The Spokesman-Review for the recent article on farm subsidies. I was born and raised on a diversified farm and since college I have spent the last 30 years raising fruit. One major reason I chose fruit was it had the least government interference of any agricultural commodity. I have seen once-proud, industrious farmers stoop to accept farm subsidies merely to eke out an existence caused by a constant oversupply of subsidized food products.

Farm subsidies were instituted in the dust bowl era of our country to provide jobs and ensure a plentiful food supply. These programs have completely outgrown their usefulness. They have just created a false demand, helping inefficient operators in marginal farms stay in business providing an oversupply of product. All this at a $10 billion annual cost to our taxpayers.

There is no greater economic system in the world than a free-market system allowing demand to determine supply. Every good, industrious farmer on a good farm should want to eliminate these subsidies. Those who cannot compete or have marginal land should go to other endeavors. That is what made America great: opportunity to excel and prosper, not a guarantee of security. Martin Verbrugge Wapato, Wash.

BUSINESS

Company sound, honestly run

Over the past few months, several very slanted articles have appeared regarding Wismer Martin, a longtime local company. By distorting facts, using innuendo and quotes from unaccountable sources, the articles appear to be designed to cause disruption and fear among clients as well as employees. Is this a concerted effort to destroy Wismer Martin? Or does the newspaper and/or Mike Murphey simply have a personal vendetta to satisfy or something to gain from the demise of this company?

The April 30 piece was obviously meant to turn everyone against the current management, especially Ron Holden. He was painted as a corporate raider who was using the company for his own illegal purposes. As a longtime investor in the company, I have absolute faith that Glen and Judy Martin would never have sold their company to anyone who is unethical, irresponsible or who skirts the law to feather his own nest. Ron and his management team must be given an equal opportunity to prove they’re on the right track. They don’t deserve to be prejudged.

To the employees and clients, I say, don’t let these fear tactics affect you or detract from the business at hand. Wismer Martin is still a local company whose interest remains in the community and one which contributes and will continue to contribute a great deal to Spokane. My confidence in the company is not diminished; it has been and will continue to be a leader in its field. Charles Ruyle Spokane

Deny phone company a monopoly

Nice ad on page B8 of the May 1 Spokesman-Review. Maybe they think all people are afflicted with a short memory. I am not.

Do you remember when you wanted an extra telephone in your house and they charged you an extra $2.50 per month? Or if you wanted to buy a phone, they charged you $50 or $60? You can now buy phones for $10 and up.

Remember when your phone used to ring at all different hours, just once or twice, and no one was there? It was the phone company checking the impedance on your line. They could tell if you had more phones on your line than you were paying for. Then you got a letter and a bill.

They were a part of one of the world’s largest monopolies. Let’s not let them get started on that route again. It took many years, lots of taxpayers’ money and a judge with lots of guts to break them up last time.

Every time they want to raise the rates, the average user gets bowled over and they get their way. Maybe, finally, it is our turn. Charles E. McCollim Spokane

GIRLS’ DAY AT WORK

For girls’ day, why feature a boy?

It is amazing how far off the mark The SpokesmanReview can be when it publishes a story. The Take Our Daughters to Work Day story (April 28) falls right into the very trap the educational day is designed to avoid. Greg Stintzi illustrates perfectly why daughters need this day.

Studies for the last 10 years have shown that boys get more attention in school, often because they are more aggressive, shouting out answers in class instead of sitting quietly and politely raising their hands as the girls do. Ryan followed the pattern. He threw a tantrum, gained attention and was taken to work. His tantrum was rewarded with a front page photo in The SpokesmanReview.

Meanwhile, daughter Teagan went to Lamonts with her grandmother. Teagan undoubtedly smiled at customers and learned about the retail clothing industry, in which women are the predominant work force. She missed seeing the work experience of the insurance industry, where only last year one company paid millions in a lawsuit which proved women had been consistently denied the opportunity to advance to higher levels in the company.

There were hundreds of girls who went to work that day. There were dozens of boys. Why publish a boy’s experience as your lead story? Florence E. Young Spokane

Day helps meet girls’ special needs

How often are little boys encouraged by their families and society to learn household skills in preparation for the day when they’ll be married, stay home and be supported by their wives?

Many little girls grow up expecting to get married and be taken care of. In other words, to be dependent on someone else. If and when they get divorced, usually with kids, they too often have to find some low-skill, lowpaying job that keeps them at the poverty level, or else go on welfare.

The traditional Cinderella story doesn’t work too well these days. If they prepare themselves with career skills, and are responsible for themselves, we are all better off.

In my opinion, Take Our Daughters to Work Day isn’t a celebration of feminist values or discrimination against boys. It’s about focusing attention on a problem specific to girls and their future.

It’s part of the solution and shouldn’t be turned into an issue that divides us even more. Sarah Schoenfeld Spokane

Be fair include all children

Take Your Daughters to Work Day is discrimination. What it does, both by name and event, is tell the newest generation of people that females should get the advantages and focus in the career world.

The equality problems in this country aren’t the fault of this innocent generation, so why should those who are part of it be openly exposed to early forms of discrimination? I applaud the parents and businesses that participated in Take Your Children to Work Day, who care enough for all children - male and female alike.

Now more than ever is the time to show children they are all equally important, gender notwithstanding. They do not need to be segregated due to history at this young age. Jim Woodruff Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Our priorities are all wrong

OK, America, here we go again.

Let’s argue about welfare cuts, school lunches, timber, salmon depletion, spotted owl endangerment, smoke-free workplaces and all the other environmental concerns. Meanwhile, our country goes to hell in a handbasket.

Drugs, street gangs, terrorists, illegal aliens, violations of people’s rights - where are the guardians against all this? They have been cut back to the point that there are not enough left to protect us against it all.

Our government can’t seem to see the forest for the trees.

We need a united government that will consider all our country’s needs, not just the needs of the rich, spoiled bureaucrats.

Don’t the middle class and the poor deserve to live like human beings, or are they expendable? My pets live better than some humans.

It has been said that the meek shall inherit the earth, but when the government finishes with the earth, what will be left to inherit?

Where have Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ideals gone? Is idealism as dead as our country will soon be? Harold Moyel Moses Lake

Cartoonist showed he’s part of problem

The April 29 “Your View” cartoon by Bob Garrett of Bonners Ferry was certainly thought provoking.

My initial response was of anger that anyone could be so out of touch with reality. However, I soon realized that the zealots who masterminded the massacre in Oklahoma City feel the same way.

These zealots are people who take for granted all the privileges this society affords them. What other countries could Bob Garrett live in and espouse his views and see those views published in a mainstream newspaper?

Garrett and his ilk are nothing more than lackeys for corporate America. Conservative talk shows are continually making government out to be “the people’s” enemy. Paranoid people grasp this rhetoric as being true and demand less regulation and less government.

What getting their way will accomplish is that environmental laws and other regulatory laws will be gutted to the benefit of the corporate conglomerates. We will have more Helen Chenoweths elected - people who are in the pocket of corporate America - and the division between the wealthy and poor in this country will continue to grow.

Meanwhile, good old Bob will be looking for the black helicopters to descend and take away his liberties. Wayne Christofferson Coeur d’Alene

Examine money flow, then think

Articles in The Spokesman-Review and the May 1 Newsweek on wealth in the United States were interesting and informative.

According to Newsweek, 1 percent of the population holds 35.7 percent of the nation’s wealth. That is the highest since 1929, when the rich had 44 percent of the wealth. The one redeeming aspect of it is when the equity in pension plans and projected Social Security payments when capitalized and added to the value of the wealth of the balance of the people, it reduces the computed wealth of the rich to 21 percent.

In 1969, the top one-fifth of households received 7.5 times the amount of the poorest one-fifth. In 1992, the ratio had jumped to 11 times the income of the poorest 20 percent.

Compared with Canada and Britain, in 1992 it was 7 to 1. In Germany the ratio was 5.5 to 1. These figures are from a Newsweek article by Rich Thomas. He doesn’t cover the income tax relationship between the countries.

From all I’ve learned, taxes in both Britain and Germany are much higher.

As we consider that Social Security was the product of a Democratic administration and that most of company pensions were negotiated by labor unions, the liberals have helped the general population a great deal. The apparent effort of Congress to eliminate the benefits that are so badly needed would be devastating.

The Newsweek article should be required reading for all who wonder about the “Contract With America.” It gives us a great deal to think about. Richard B. Hopp Spokane

I support property tax freeze

Several years ago when Rep. Dellwo was campaigning for his first election, he came by my home and asked for my vote. One of the things he said was that he would campaign for a freeze on property taxes for the elderly retired.

During the next two years I reminded him, or his office, about our conversation. I, too, would very much like to see a Proposition 13 passed in Washington state. Leon A. Barefield Spokane