Letters To The Editor

SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION

One factor matters most: parenting

The article regarding the District 81 testing results unfortunately confirms my observations over 15 years working for a local nonprofit human services agency, as a parent-teacher organization board member at my daughter’s school and as a Junior Girl Scout troop volunteer leader.

The table indicates a direct correlation between student scores in reading, language and math, and the income levels of the families of students at each school. Educators would have us believe that students from lowincome families do poorly due to a lack of books and computers at home (or travel, for goodness sake!), and “sometimes, less emphasis at home on doing well at school.”

Students in Spokane County have free access to both school and public library materials. Computer technology, although a helpful and dazzling tool to enhance learning, is by no means a panacea for the learning challenges of those supposedly disadvantaged children.

The “‘educators” referred to have it backwards. It is precisely that parental disinterest in academic achievement that is at the core of the problem of poor student performance.

Far too often I’ve observed parents who indicate little or no desire to invest their time or energy to focus on enriching the learning or life experiences of their children. Whichever reason it is that children from schools with a large percentage of low-income households perform unsatisfactorily, the blame cannot realistically be due to a lack of access to resources or exposure to life-enriching experiences except, if by definition, you mean caring parents. Rich Silva Spokane

Story creates a wrong impression

In “Poverty, test scores linked” (Spokesman-Review, Jan. 9) staff writer Carla Johnson either misquoted me or used one of my statements out of context. I refer to the quote: “We try, but it’s pretty minimal what we can do.”

This implies that I believe the task of educating the children in the West Central neighborhood is hopeless. This is in direct opposition to my beliefs. If I thought our efforts were fruitless, why would I mention many of the things that we, and our parent community, are doing to help increase the probability that our students will leave our school with the appropriate tools to be successful?

When Johnson asked for an interview, I was eager to reveal to the public the changes we are making based on current research and the wishes of our parent community. The changes she listed are just a part of what we are doing.

The Holmes staff is the most dedicated group of professionals I’ve ever worked with. They wouldn’t stand for an administrator who thought their efforts were hopeless. The parents in the West Central community love their children and want the best education available for them. They would know if I, or the staff at Holmes, didn’t think we could make a difference. This neighborhood has had problems, but it is also the Spokane neighborhood that has done the most to take care of itself.

The effect of that one statement in your newspaper could destroy the trust and rapport this community has in me and their school. This is highly disappointing to me and to the hard-working staff at Holmes Elementary. Brad Lundstrom, principal Holmes Elementary School, Spokane

Protect future by voting yes

On Feb. 6 you will be asked to approve the maintenance and operation levy for School District 81. I urge you to vote yes.

Without proper funding, education would suffer. Teachers could be laid off, student activities such as band and sports would be cut. This would leave many young people with a lot of free time but with little to do.

The current levy expires in December. The new levy will not increase your taxes. It could decrease them due to state funding. Voting yes could lead to a 19 percent reduction in the levy rate by 1998.

We are responsible for the kind of education children receive, for they are the future. Without an education the future would be bleak. We as voters need to say yes to protect the future of Spokane and our children. Vicki Nicodemus Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

So many go so wrong so young

Every time I pick up a newspaper or turn on the news there is another young person arrested for assault, rape or, worse yet, murder. The majority of them range in age from as young as 10 up to 20; most are in their mid-teens.

This is the age that they should be enjoying life, looking forward to a great future, and just being young and alive! Why then are so many risking a life of misery behind prison walls? Do they do these things on a dare, to prove they are gang material, or just to see what it’s like to take another person’s life?

Why are they allowed to roam the streets at all hours of the day and night? Where are their families? Doesn’t anyone care what happens to them?

Have our young people become expendable? Are they just society’s castaways?

Whatever happened to the idea that young people are the future of the world? Is our future behind prison walls? Betty Randall Moses Lake

LAW AND JUSTICE

Felon caused additional pain, loss

Re: Larry Stapleton’s sentencing to life imprisonment without parole. We feel that this is an appropriate punishment because of information that was not included in the newspaper story.

After Stapleton let the woman leave HiCo Village during his robbery in 1994, this young girl fled the store in fear for her life. She drove north on Mullan Road looking for a phone from which she could call the police. A few blocks away she saw a Circle K store and was intent on getting there to make her call.

Unfortunately, our niece was coming home from the Spokane Interstate Fair after celebrating her 18th birthday. She got to the intersection of Mullan and Broadway just in time to get hit broadside by the terrified girl’s car.

Miraculously, even though both cars were totaled, no one was killed. However, our niece has suffered injuries that will affect her for the rest of her life.

Even though Stapleton was portrayed as a thief who was driven by his drug addiction, who can say how many lives have been affected by this man’s crimes? Even though Stapleton never directly harmed anyone, his actions directly led to an accident that almost killed two innocent people.

With Stapleton in jail for life, he will never again put anyone else in danger. Who knows who may have been hurt or even killed if he was allowed to continue his string of “harmless” robberies? Allen and Pam Matsushita Troy, Mont.

Can’t hack ‘three strikes’? You’re out

In none of the three cases involving Larry Stapleton did someone hold a gun to his head and force him to commit the robberies he committed. He committed those crimes by his own free will.

Why should society continue to be victimized by someone like him? The passage of the three-strikes law is to prevent such victimization.

Any judge who has second thoughts, reluctance or hesitation about sentencing a three-time loser to life in prison - as Spokane County Superior Court Judge Richard Schroeder did because Stapleton’s crimes were so “minor” - should step down from the bench. Any judge who cannot willingly comply with society’s desire to tell the criminal, You did the crime, now you’ll do the time, and who is unwilling to step aside should be removed.

I hope the electorate remembers Judge Schroeder’s attitude toward the three-strikes law when he stands for re-election.

We need more judges who are less worried about the effect of a sentence on the criminal and more worried about the effect of the criminal on society. Jack Ranck Loon Lake

It’s about removing a threat

It is very disturbing that Superior Court Judge Richard Schroeder “wrestled with his decision” to uphold the three-strikes law. The issue is not that Larry Stapleton’s latest crime would be punishable by two years in jail. The issue is Stapleton’s record of three felonies in 10 years.

As a taxpayer, I strongly resent having to support this loser for the rest of his life. But, since he continues to be a menace to others it sure beats waiting until he kills someone. That is the intent of the three-strikes law.

It is high time for public officials like Judge Schroeder to realize that the public has spoken. Beverly Robertson Spokane

Message for a three-time loser

In reference to his three strikes, you’re out sentencing, Larry Stapleton said, “What they are doing is out of line…” (“Three-time loser strikes out,” News, Jan. 12)

Boo hoo, my violin is playing “My Heart Bleeds for You.”

I guarantee the hard-working people you terrified at Taco Bell, Jackpot, Bonanza Bargains and HiCo Village - high on drugs, with a gun, knife or bodily force - don’t feel this sentence was too stiff.

With your record, it was just a matter of time before you killed someone. We want you off the streets so you can’t terrorize anyone else.

Face the cold, hard facts: (1) You’re a criminal; (2) You chose to do drugs; (3) Because of your incarceration, you won’t be a part of your daughter’s life; (4) Be an adult, and thus be responsible for your actions; and (5) You’re going to have to pay the price because you were out of line. Susan Silva Spokane

Bad law starting to backfire

Washington state, prior to July 1984, had a habitual criminal penalty that authorized imposition of a life sentence. It was repealed by the 1982 Legislature, on recommendation of the Sentence Reform Commission and with the support of law enforcement agencies for well-documented reasons.

The adoption through an initiative of the current mandatory life sentence of “three strikes, you’re out” was based on emotional appeal. This ignored history by again striking minor offenders, not dangerous, major offenders, thereby wasting taxpayers’ money.

The Spokesman-Review, on Jan. 9, 1995, published the finding of a study by the California Legislative Analyst’s Office that there is no evidence available that crime has been reduced because of the three strikes law.

Both California and Washington are now beginning to experience what criminologists term “jury paroles.” Juries, in disagreement with mandatory life sentences being applied when circumstance of the committed offenses do not warrant it, find defendants not guilty and set them free. This is one of the seldom-recognized benefits of the jury system when legislatures, or the people by initiative, create automatic, costly and ineffective penalties.

Crime in the streets can be reduced in Washington state, as is done in a majority of the United States, by extending behavior controls over post-prison releasees and reestablishing the indeterminate sentence to allow imposition of enforceable behavioral parole conditions. A. LaMont Smith, DPA Spokane

Keep and apply ‘three strikes’ law

Every time a law is passed to impose tougher punishment for crime, someone wants to change it.

I could count on one hand the executions that have taken place since the death penalty became law. No judge wants to enforce it.

Now we have the “three strikes, you’re out” law, and people want to change that. I congratulate Superior Court Judge Richard Schroeder for enforcing the law created by Initiative 593.

Larry Stapleton has been in jail a total of five years and hasn’t learned. If he isn’t stopped now it would only be a matter of time before he shot or stabbed someone.

The arguments for not enforcing “three strikes” are so shallow. Some say it’s unconstitutional. Isn’t it unconstitutional to rob someone at gunpoint?

Why does everyone worry about the rights of the criminal and not the rights of victims?

The cost of keeping Stapleton in jail for the rest of his life has also been mentioned. No one mentioned the cost of arresting, trying and jailing him every two years. This applies to all repeat offenders.

We need to stop crime in Spokane now. The three-strikes law is a step in the right direction. Gwen Ruegsegger Otis Orchards

ROW ON GREEK ROW

Sororities aren’t all that way

As a member of a sorority on the Washington State University campus, I find Doug Clark’s column concerning Summer Vail’s $400 Tri Delta fine (“WSU sorority lifts fine but misses point,” Jan. 14) extremely disheartening. It’s important to recognize, as you failed to do, that different sororities hold completely different policies regarding missed rush days.

My sorority holds the utmost respect for academics. High grades are encouraged with study table hours, while missed rush days, due to any form of academics, are excused without any questions. Just because one sorority has seemingly put academics on the back burner, it seems unfair to label all sororities in the same manner.

Also, columnist Clark stated that rush is the time when pledges are tested to see if they can hold liquor well enough to join the Greek system. For your information, rush is a time to review candidates for sorority membership. This doesn’t include any liquor consumption. The Inner Fraternity Council and the Panhellenic at WSU have strict guidelines that mandate all rush-affiliated activities are to be nonalcoholic. Any noncompliance with these rules results in severe penalties to the chapter house, including forfeiture of rush.

I’ve found my sorority to be a great addition and form of support to my college years, along with nurturing my academics. I only hope your harsh words won’t overshadow the true meaning of belonging to a sorority. Jennifer Tirk Spokane

What got smashed was the truth

Re: Doug Clark’s Jan. 14 column:

I won’t let Clark get away with blatant lies about rush week at Washington State University.

He states that rush is a time when pledges are tested to see if they can hold their liquor well enough to join the Greek system. That simply isn’t true. It’s not even an exaggeration.

During rush week, all Greek members, including fraternities, aren’t allowed to possess or consume alcohol on their chapter house premises. Even people of age can’t have alcohol with them. This policy ensures that rushers are able to decide on the proper living environments without the sometimes blinding effect of liquor.

If I were still associated with the Inner Fraternity Council and the Panhellenic, I would have an attorney on the phone with Clark tomorrow morning. I’d remind Clark that in this country you can print your opinion but you can’t print lies. Craig Brommers Spokane

Column wrong, inappropriate

The pen may be mighty, but the trivia that Doug Clark wrote about in his Jan. 7 column about a Washington State University sorority is hardly a noteworthy human interest story. This is a matter that should be settled between the sorority house officials and the member, without public or press involvement, especially when both sides of the story were not presented.

This column was not only an unwarranted slam, but very biased against the Greek system in terms of academics. If Clark had done his homework he would have learned that the sororities have many more rules and policies for studying and academic achievement than most other campus living groups.

A real surprise to him might be the great number of members who manage their studies with high grade-point averages, participate in house and campus activities, work at outside jobs and earn advanced degrees and honors.

I encourage Clark in future columns to include the facts of both sides with less demeaning terminology toward either.

Furthermore, after reading the Jan. 14 column on the same subject, I challenge him to research and report factually correct information. If he had done this he would have known that it is an absolute rule of all houses and the university that alcohol is not allowed under any circumstances in sorority houses or on their premises during rush week or at any other time of the year.

Accurate, fair and good journalism is expected of The Spokesman-Review writers by your readers. Elita Jones Spokane