Letters To The Editor

WASHINGTON STATE

Let bar owners set smoking policy

In regard to “State may ban smoking in bars, restaurants” (News, April 23), has anyone considered the possible consequences of such legislation?

As bar owners, we can tell you what effect this could have on our business. Nearly all of our customers indulge in smoking while drinking beer and playing pool and darts. How many would feel comfortable having to go outside every time they want a cigarette?

How much business would be lost? How many people would it put out of business? How many jobs would be lost?

Consider an alternative. Let the individual restaurant and/or bar owner decide for themselves whether they wish to cater to a smoking or a nonsmoking clientele and post on all entrances which they prefer.

This is not about an illegal activity; it’s about choice. If a smoker chooses to enter a nonsmoking establishment they would be agreeing not to smoke. If a nonsmoker chooses to enter a smoking establishment they would be agreeing not to complain about people smoking.

A prospective employee would have the choice of whether or not to apply at a smoking or nonsmoking establishment. We realize the logic of such tolerance may escape people who haven’t any. However, they don’t have to enter any establishment they don’t wish to.

As bar owners, we should be allowed to let our customers decide for themselves whether or not to engage in a legal activity while inside our establishment. So, until smoking itself becomes illegal, please let us run our business our way. David and Tommie Wilson Rosalia, Wash.

Bureaucrat continues power trip

The last time I checked, this nation - this state - was a democracy. I am hearing from Mark Brown, director of the state Department of Labor and Industries, that this state is under his self-appointed dictatorship. I feel that he’s abusing the power of his position.

When he was appointed by our governor, Brown’s first quest was to eliminate smoking in all public places. As a smoker, I wasn’t happy that this one-man special interest group was attacking me. He was telling me that I was a dirty person and shouldn’t be allowed in public, while public restaurants offered me a smoking section and treated me like I was still part of the human race.

Somewhere, Brown’s idea was challenged and the issue died for a time.

I’m now a nonsmoker. Now when I walk into a public restaurant and they ask me if I want the smoking or nonsmoking section, I reply, “Whichever isn’t full.” I have two choices now instead of one.

The smoking issue is back and so is Brown, trying to ban smokers from all public places again. This time he has been lobbying our elected officials to uphold his dictatorship. Since lobbying was his job before he got this one, he’s probably pretty good at manipulating our officials into following his personal agenda.

All this time I thought the people of this state were doing a pretty good job on their own at providing goods and services while accommodating both those who choose and those who choose not to smoke. Tammera Wagner Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

First requirement: recognize problem

I don’t regularly read the Our Generation section, except for an occasional education on new movies. However, the April 24 issue on “Armed and dangerous” got my attention.

Duke Davis, Andrea Palpant and the editorial group that summarized the teen survey got it all right. I’m confident that most of their peers agree with their assessment that the basic fault lies not with society in general or even with family dysfunctions, but with teen failures to take personal responsibility for their words and acts. Also with their sometimes fatal, always erroneous belief that respect can be generated by fear rather than admiration.

We adults should all be trying to persuade our peers of the same assessment.

It’s not easy; worthwhile goal-seeking is not a sweat-free exercise. With local politicians who still minimize the concerns of police and social analysts about the threat that results from ignoring gang invasions and drug peddlings, with education administrators still trapped in mythologies of the 1960s and with a congressional representative who appears mentally and morally incapable of seeing any similarity between death by tobacco and death by firearms, it is little wonder we’ve got trouble in River City.

I’ll not likely be around to see a whole lot of change, but I’ll bet Duke, Andrea and their peers will give it a better try than we have. Jack Poole Nine Mile Falls

Our Generation writers right-on

Anyone who believes young people should be stereotyped as lazy, dumb or dangerous ought to read the April 24 Our Generation section. Yes, I know this section is by and for teens, but it is a good way to find out what they think and feel.

I’m 48, and read it every week.

The articles written by Andrea Palpant and Duke Davis about teen violence are thoughtful, articulate and accurate. They don’t blame society or circumstances for violence. Instead, they put the blame where it belongs, in the hearts and minds of individuals.

Society is composed of individuals, and each of us must be responsible for our actions. Treat others with respect, politeness and understanding, while recognizing that each person is unique, and violence becomes unnecessary. It isn’t government’s job to control violence it is your job and mine.

My confidence in the future is renewed when I see anyone, particularly teens, who can look beyond the rhetoric to find the truth. Noah Cummins Spokane

Columnist abuses feminism

Donna Britt’s column, “Is ‘feminism’ a dirty word today?” should be renamed, “The Spokesman-Review joins force with other narrow-minded voices to perpetuate superficial and misleading definitions of feminism.”

Britt whines about her choice to return to work part time after the birth of her son. She reduces a very complex, multifaceted and important philosophy into a single issue of whether moms work or not. Does she realize that her limited, narrow view provides ammunition to those who would like women defined only by their reproductive ability?

The problems she identifies in her column aren’t the waste products of feminism; they are the products of capitalism, i.e. lack of paid maternity leave and no family leave time.

Feminism shouldn’t be a threatening concept. Feminism tries to examine human power balances and strive for equality. Feminism rejects gender labels. Almost all feminist theory focuses family as society’s most fundamental and important structure. It only questions the traditional idea of having an imbalance of power in the family.

Feminism confront all areas of power abuse. We all have feminists to thank for identifying domestic abuse and creating sexual assault centers, for curtailing gender labels and appreciating individuals for their worth. By examining issues of power imbalance, feminists have strived to create a better society for all humans.

Shame on Britt for focusing on a misleading aspect many associate with feminism. Every movement has extremists who don’t’ represent the cause. Britt highlighted a few of these bad cliches to make her weak point. Connye M. Draper Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Clinton just a big phony

I really enjoyed Doug Clark’s column on the world’s greatest con man (April 23), but I must say this man Abagnale is only the world’s second-greatest con man.

I seldom watch Rush Limbaugh on TV, but I recently saw his show wherein a video of President “Willy” Clinton at Ron Brown’s funeral was shown. I don’t believe the major media have shown this clip and probably won’t, but everyone in this country should see it. It proves Clinton is the top con artist in the world by a rather large margin.

Clinton is clearly shown laughing and smiling while walking with a companion, until he sees a video camera. Then he instantly goes into his big-frown mode: sincerity, with the lower lip completely covering the upper lip, his head bowed, with his chin on his chest. He can even be seen wiping his face as though there were tears in his eyes. His sorrowful, somber look must have taken hours in front of a mirror to perfect and be convincing.

He is impersonating the presidency and a human being at levels never before seen, and people are falling for it right and left. Dick Brauner Spokane

French system not so beneficial

Born and raised in France, I feel qualified in responding to Art Jaecks’ April 2 letter (“Corporate economy serves us badly”). While corporate economy isn’t perfect, insight into the French social economy needs close scrutiny.

As with Social Security, the French government takes paycheck deductions for social needs. This continues well past retirement. Luxury items, such as each TV in the home, are taxed each year.

Hospital/doctor ratios to patients are on par with ours - except at vacation time. Free health care? So is ours, when one can’t afford to pay!

Most Europeans close shop and go on vacation at the same time. Travel is a mess. You think our gasoline prices are high? They pay over $2 a liter.

Powerplants (mostly nuclear), phones, transportation, mail, garbage collection - all state operated - are shut down during frequent strikes.

Our government provides welfare to not only many Americans but also to illegal aliens and to other countries. How much welfare does France provide to other countries?

Jaecks says, “The state provides … cinemas and cafes … for people in poorer areas.” I never saw that. As for museums and libraries, that’s done here, too.

Granted, our education isn’t totally free but there are lots of grants and other help available.

For all the great giveaways provided by the French (and the U.S.) just who does he think pays for it all? Yes, unfortunately, politics enter into the picture. But is there really a better system of government than ours? I don’t think so! Andree Mathonnat Mount Vernon, Wash.

Minimum wage good litmus test

Let’s hear a round of applause for Ellen Goodman’s recent column, “It’s only fair to raise minimum wage” (Opinion, April 23). How right she is.

As a leader and innovator in the Northwest’s dishwashing community, it pleases me to see Goodman providing a voice and a thread of argument to a sector of workers normally denied the forum to speak for themselves.

Tell Ronald Reagan, Billy Graham, Sidney Poitier and Burt Reynolds that their time and labors are worth only $4.25 an hour before taxes. If the late John Wayne or Bruce Lee were alive today, I doubt if the trend of Republican thought known as Newtspeak would fly with them. All of the above celebrities, living and dead, started their work life in dishwashing rooms.

The campaign slogan “four more years” helped Reagan win a second term in office. It could well do the same for President Clinton. Whoever will most effectively address the plight and issues of minimum wage workers now will victoriously shout them in his inaugural address. As an uncommitted voter this year, I will personally see to it. Monte McCormick Spokane

Earth’s enemies celebrate their way

When the U.S. House voted 287-138 for the National Wildlife Refuge (so-called) Reform bill, it was not the right way to celebrate Earth Week or the environment.

‘It will do serious environmental damage,” said Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt.

Also, Sen. Larry Craig pushed his “forest health” bill. While Sen. Bill Bradley, D-N.J., said there is not a “forest health” problem at all and said he will offer an amendment to the measure to phase out money-losing timber sales from the national forests. Sen. Bradley was joined by scientists with a new study debunking use of salvage logging for forest health. Again, was this really Earth Week?

As a part of the ongoing Earth Day celebration in Washington, D.C., the House Resources Committee took up legislation to roll back environmental safeguards on public lands grazing while continuing costly subsidies.

The majority’s “R” must stand for rip-off, as that is what they are going to the public’s natural resources in the most offensive corporate welfare I can remember. What a way to celebrate Earth Week. David Hunt Coeur d’Alene

OTHER TOPICS

Finally, we get some truth

It’s gratifying to see our Spokesman-Review print the story about Hanford scientists’ job termination following their efforts to provide the truth to the court (“O’Leary questions 3 layoffs,” Region, April 19). It was also good to see “Genetic mutation in Chernobyl kids” (News, April 25).

Except for downwinder attorney Nancy Oreskovich,lawyers and judges in the Hanford litigation have been drawn into the scam of cover-up and secrecy like flies to a pile of horse manure.

Many of us who’ve fought long and hard for the hideous truth to be known are too tired and sick to feel relief that at last our one time enemy is reporting radiation-induced health effects that our Department of Energy has known about all along. Within the travesty of secrecy is bound corruption and criminality. I wonder if anyone gives a damn. Lois Camp LaCrosse, Wash.

Heavenward, on wings of applause

What’s this great buildup after a person dies? Suddenly, I know more about Erma Bombeck than I’d ever dreamed of knowing. Having her life history literally thrust at me, I’m now ready to read at least three of her books. But where was all this hype when she could have benefited from it?

Must we pour such wonderful accolades on a person only when they die? Is this expansive review of a life motivated by guilt, feelings of helplessness, or what? Bombeck left a legacy to be appreciated and emulated by all. But can we ignore her future?

I would rather think of the generous accolades, not as acts to eventually cease in time, but as prayers which do not look backward, but ahead to her future. I see all of the wonderful pronouncements about Bombeck as wings, lifting her spirit to a heavenly place of peace and joy. I think she would like that now. Phil Stack Medical Lake

We support eco-friendly farmers

My family recently moved west from Spokane to the Edwall area. Our home sits within a thin line of pine on the edge of rolling farmland.

As I drive through the area or ride my bicycle along its back roads, I enjoy the openness of the large farms, the land laid out before me.

But lately I have noticed transport tanks on wheels sitting in the fields. The tanks are orange, mostly, sometimes yellow or black. They contain herbicides and pesticides - chemicals to fight the plants and insects that would damage the crops. I have noticed also that the fields have no brush piles, tree rows or weedy areas left for when the crops are taken out of the ground. Hundreds of acres are trimmed clean.

We understand some of what challenges farmers these days. Partially, they are victims of our system. But my family shops at organic stores when we can now. We want to keep those herbicides and pesticides out of our bodies.

We buy from providers who farm smaller plots that they can manage without chemical assistance. They use smaller machinery that can negotiate the occasional brush pile and weedy ditch left for wildlife to shelter themselves and travel along.

We support people who support human food demand and the land, by helping it stay free of pollutants and letting it provide shelter and nourishment for all its creatures. These are the farmers we are most proud of. Patrick M. Murphy Edwall, Wash.