Letters To The Editor

Wed., Jan. 3, 1996

SPOKANE MATTERS

People came through for greyhounds

The Inland Empire chapter of Greyhound Pets of America was inundated with phone calls and applications from people in Spokane and surrounding areas who opened their hearts and homes to retired racers.

It’s truly been heartwarming and gratifying to know that so many care. Our organization is committed to locating loving homes for retired greyhounds. With all the recent adoptions, I’m certain we have found the very best homes.

Spokane can be proud of having helped us to do the impossible. With the aid of additional adoption groups, approximately 400 greyhounds were adopted since the November ‘95 closure announcement of the Coeur d’Alene Greyhound Park. This accomplishment wouldn’t have been realized if the community hadn’t shown its overwhelming concern and support for our retired racers.

Our organization did the work, but you made it a reality. Our chapter wishes to thank the people of Spokane for their support and encouragement during this time. Special thanks to staff writer Todd Foster for his concise work on this issue. Sandi Babcock, secretary Greyhound Pets of America, Inland Empire chapter

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

May the other woman triumph

According to The Spokesman-Review on Dec. 24, the Church of England’s “elders” are telling Prince Charles that he should dump his longtime “paramour,” Camilla Parker-Bowles, to “preserve the sanctity of the British monarchy.”

Let’s not forget that Prince Charles is 47 years old and for 47 years has been dominated by both the Church of England and his parents, who not only supervise his every activity but also told him who he should marry.

Camilla Parker-Bowles is a very dignified and dedicated woman who gives Charles the companionship and support he needs. Diana only chased him because of his title and for the publicity she yearned for.

Go for it, Charles. Stay with Parler-Bowles and dump Diana.

Likewise, England should dump the archaic and useless monarchy. Nancy Harris Chewelah, Wash.

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Selfish mom spoils show

On Dec. 27, I took my three small children to the 2 p.m. showing of Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast on Ice.” This was one of their Christmas presents and they were quite anxious to see it. I bought the most expensive seats so my children would have a good view.

Well, it didn’t turn out that way. Three rows ahead of us, a woman allowed her small daughter to sit on the back of her chair, completely blocking anyone’s view behind her. If that weren’t bad enough, after a while she added a few coats for her daughter to sit on, which put her at least a full head above everyone else.

If I would have been able to climb over the three rows and take my three children with me, I would have let the woman know how completely rude she was.

My children didn’t always have a clear view, but I would never allow them to stand or sit on the back of a chair and ruin someone else’s view to better their own.

To that woman, I say: Get some manners. Your child isn’t the only one who paid good money to see the show.

Next year, I’ll try to get front-row seats so that won’t happen to us again. Angela Hayes Spokane

Somehow, ragged looks good

Fascinating reading in The Spokesman-Review’s “The Ragged Edge” special report.

The audacity of those “right-wing constitutionalists” - you know the ones: They make the hair on the backs of those so-called liberals’ necks stand on end. How dare they want to keep the money they’ve earned; that’s absurd!

How dare they believe in God - for that matter, any god they want. Can’t have that.

To not want their children indoctrinated into this school system is next to abuse. The next thing you know, they’ll probably want to home-school their own children. And of course, they want to be able to write and have printed - and yes, even say - anything that they want. I tell you folks, if this trend keeps up, we’re all heading for hell in a handbasket.

We even hear (and we hope it’s a rumor) they’re trying to instill into their children morality and personal self-worth. What’s next? Forcing upon them achievable, positive goals?

I know, it’s almost too horrible to fathom. But wait, it gets worse. Those right-wingers even own firearms. Yes, that’s right - guns. Whew!

That’s all right though. Don’t panic because we have Bill Clinton, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the FBI hostage rescue team to save us. They just ordered 65,000 fully automatic weapons. Thank God we have some sanity in our society.

You never know about those right-wingers, though. We heard they want to put back into our society something called family values. If that happens, God have mercy on all of us. Scott A. Smith Kettle Falls, Wash.

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

The sorcerer’s new apprentices

As one who’s been professionally involved with estimating future revenues for government budgets, I find the current excitement over a balanced budget disturbing and entertaining.

Since 1900, the federal budget never has been in balance. Each president has presented a presumably balanced budget at the beginning of each fiscal year (except in major recessions and wars). But at the end of the 12 months, they usually ran deficits.

Since 1940, the federal budget has been in surplus eight times, in deficit 47 times and in balance - never. President Nixon recognized that an unbalanced budget could later stimulate growth, investment and, finally, a surplus when he proposed a $200 billion tax cut and a $150 billion increase in military spending.

It’s difficult to estimate tax revenues when legislators are changing the tax system. One first must guess what the politicians are going to do, then predict the levels of employment, personal income, corporate profits and some 20 other slippery variables 12 months down the road.

Now we’re deluged with clowns telling us they know what tax revenues will be seven years down the road. Perhaps divine inspiration has told them the future interest rates and state of the economy.

Furthermore, they must claim to know the military and welfare needs seven years hence, even though their track record for just 12 months has been more pretentious than precise. What’s even more amazing is their assumption they’ll still be in office and the will of Congress will remain unchanged. Reed Hansen Pullman

Here’s a way to end impasse

I have sent the following letter to Idaho’s congressional delegation.

I believe the shutdowns of the U.S. government are ridiculous and completely unnecessary. It is not saving anyone any money in the long run, and it is causing many hardships in the short term.

I believe I have a solution that would work.

You politicians are perceived to be making much more money than the average American who pays your salaries. You need more incentive to solve the national budget problem.

Rather than put working men and women out of work and cutting their pay, let’s leave them working, serving the American public as they are trained to do. Let’s put all the federally elected people into a no-pay status, as well as all appointees of these elected people. Keep them on the job but in a no-pay status.

I’m sure these politicians would work much harder to solve the budget problem then. There also would be no provision for them to get back pay when the problem’s settled. Isn’t it worth a try? Larry Smith Sandpoint

Tell them what you expect

Does anyone else find it outrageous that hundreds of thousands of federal workers are still out of work and a paycheck while Congress and the president are being paid and taking holidays off?

Congress and the president don’t seem to be in any hurry to get this budget dispute resolved, and it is the people’s fault. Congress and the president will not be motivated to get their act together until the people express unequivocal outrage at what is taking place.

The majority of Americans, regardless of their political ideology, want this nonsense stopped. Have you called your senators to tell them your views? Their phone numbers are listed under “Federal Government” in the blue pages of the phone book. The White House has a comment line where you can voice your opinions. The number is (202) 456-1414.

We are too far away to march in protest in Washington, D.C., but we aren’t helpless. We elected the leaders and have to make sure they are acting in accordance with our wishes. Nicole Alley Spokane

Democracy, you say? Not quite

I hate to disillusion JoAnn Brady (Dec. 25), but America wasn’t established as a “democratic society.” America purposely was established as a constitutionally represented republic.

This was by design, not by happenstance. Federalist Paper No. 10 speaks specifically of why “… democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

Our country was established as a government “of the people, by the people and for the people,” - the people the master, the government the servant, not vice versa, as is the reality of democratic societies and participatory democracies.

Throughout books written advocating education reform are to be found the terms “democratic society” and “participatory democracy.” Both are socialist terms, both are rule by appointment, not election, placing in appointed bodies the power of representation. Such circumvents the voice of the people through the elective process. It precludes open public debate of the issues, placing our education system in the stranglehold of left-wing politics. Site-based councils being established at schools is but one example of this.

Dear Americans, you are the frog in the frying pan. The skillet is getting hotter, your goose is being cooked and there you sit. The price of failure to maintain our vigilance over freedom will be our freedom. Lynn M. Stuter Nine Mile Falls

FORESTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Concern is not crookedness

Re: “Clinton, his fans all shady characters,” letters, Dec. 22:

I deeply resent being called a crook because I might support President Clinton for re-election. As it happens, I’m an extremely upstanding citizen and have dedicated my life to public service.

It so happens also that I’ve been forced to become a one-issue voter in recent years. Since the Clinton-Gore ticket was the only choice for environmentally concerned citizens, those two got my vote. If the situation is the same next time, they’ll get it again.

This behavior doesn’t make me a crook, Kim Utke. I happen to think those who would sell off our national parks, forests, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas to industry are stealing from our grandchildren. Clinton is the only person who stands between our valuable national lands and the oil and mining companies.

Right now, I can’t imagine Clinton doing anything that would make me so angry I’d prefer opening our national parks, forests, wildlife and wilderness areas to exploitation. I’m absolutely terrified at the thought of a Republican president happily signing every piece of legislation being proffered, thereby destroying the environment.

Surely there’s a way to prevent our grandchildren from being stuck with our debts without robbing them of the chance to enjoy clean air, water and pristine natural areas.

Nobody’s perfect, Utke, but President Clinton is apparently my only choice. Like Newt Gingrich, I’m on a mission to protect our grandchildren. Caring for the environment doesn’t make me a crook. It should make me a hero. Sharon D. Aizer Spokane

Don’t believe all you hear

There are so many conflicting reports on the care of our beautiful woodlands, I felt I must ask for an authoritative voice as to their true status.

We are advised of the terrible washouts in the Idaho forests, and blame for this came from clearcuts and multi-log roads. Another voice claimed that an area clear of clearcuts and roads suffered the same fate, so therefore, clearcuts and roads can’t be blamed.

Another authority claims there are more trees now than in 1920. I was an infant then and can’t verify the number of trees. I can assure this party that if the cache of trees were divulged to the log-hungry mills across our land, instant wealth could prevail.

We hear again that timber is growing faster than it can be harvested. Does this mean the encroaching forest will reclaim our beautiful malls and sports arenas?

PBS television shows us the latest in timber-harvesting machines. One person at the wheel can harvest more trees than 300 ax-and-saw people of yesterday. Can we send our Paul Bunyan to digging Grand Canyons - and leave the cutting to us?

Lastly, it’s stated that if the dead and dying timber is not removed, it’s wasted. Our Creator designed forests to be self-sustaining. Fallen debris is the fertilizer for trees left standing. Science can readily prove that to remove one pine cone from a forest is detrimental to that forest.

Given our short-term goals, would we really cut down the last tree? Don Kerley Grand Coulee