Letters To The Editor

IDAHO VIEWPOINTS

Chenoweth foes less than above board

I agree with Donald Morgan’s letter (“Case against Chenoweth nonsense,” June 28) about the nonsensical material being used against Rep. Helen Chenoweth, and those who use half truths to try to discredit her.

Knowing Ronald Esquibel’s workplace rhetoric about never voting for any Republican of any kind, I find it hypocritical of him to give the impression he made a decision based on the candidate rather than the party (“Chenoweth moves win Williams a vote,” Letters, July 5).

Esquibel, like Dan Williams, is a liberal Democrat from California, and it seems a lot of money from California is flowing to the Williams campaign to unseat what they perceive to be the weakest candidate.

Rather than campaign on honest issues, Democrats have used mudslinging, half truths and even criticism for not being at flood sites when they knew Chenoweth was in the hospital undergoing surgery.

I see Chenoweth as a person dedicated to serving her constituents. Family values the people of Idaho find important are evident in her actions.

Although the campaign style being used against her is normal in California, I find it appalling that it would be used in Idaho.

Shame on you, Esquibel, for perceiving yourself as the one to cast the stone of dishonesty toward a candidate because of party and gender. Janis E. Fink Post Falls

Hear Chenoweth for yourself

Is the White House for sale? Or is it the president who’s for sale?

David Brinkley reports that a campaign contribution of $130,000 is the price tag for a night in the historic Lincoln Bedroom. This bizarre fund-raising causes no call for Federal Election Commission (FEC) investigations, no shocked expressions on the Sunday news shows and no screaming headlines decrying the ethics of the man from Hope.

Let our Rep. Helen Chenoweth offer to meet with members of the environmental opposition and the unfair bias in our local press becomes obvious. No one claims Chenoweth is for sale, but time and again calls for FEC investigations (calls made only by her political opponents) become headline news.

I applaud Chenoweth for trying to reach out to the Sierra Club and encourage her to keep trying. I also applaud the way she makes herself available to constituents. She has visited North Idaho more often in one term than Larry LaRocco ever did. Unlike LaRocco, she never lies, never tries to cover up and accepts responsibility for her actions.

Rather than allow news accounts of Chenoweth to be your only source of data, I encourage every voter to call her office for her schedule, come to her next town hall and listen to the Lady from Orofino. Bud Kirchhoff Coeur d’Alene

Vote to end hunting abuses

The folks who hunt bears using bait would have us think they are ethical, law-abiding hunters. The following quote from the July 1996 Idaho Conservation Officers Association Newsletter is revealing. The quote is from the McCall report.

“All officers working bear bait this spring have found high violation rates. We had a major problem finding the violators because there was no way to call up the owner of a bait tag in the new POSM system. In spite of this, we made several cases in the McCall district involving bait too close to water and one individual using game birds, waterfowl, and big game pieces. It appears the individual hunted in the fall to supply his bear bait in the spring.”

Ethical and law-abiding? I think not. Baiting is inherently unsporting. It is not necessary for bear management. Those who use it violate even the liberal regulations applying to it.

Let us do away with it. Vote yes on Proposition 2. Lynn Fritchman, chairman Idaho Coalition United for Bears

BUSINESS AND LABOR

Service cutoff ‘unconscionable’

So, we’ve come to this (“Invalid nearly loses life support,” July 11). For the sake of fair play and being prudent to all customers (and more likely to Washington Water Power Co. stockholders) we cut off vital support to the poor.

Life hasn’t been fair to Marilyn Franck, but for a big business to be so calloused is unconscionable. Shame on our society to allow this type of treatment to our neighbors in need. If this were a natural disaster we would all pitch in. Spokane helps people all over the world during times of need. This is an unnatural disaster, but our response should be the same.

Hydroelectric power is simply the harnessing of water affected by gravity - natural resources that belong to all of us. The cost comes in the harnessing and distribution of these resources. We have so much of this natural resource in the Pacific Northwest that we send electricity to Oregon and California, which is OK, but not at the exclusion of our neighbors in need.

An answer to this problem could be a joint effort by the utilities and their customers: a 1 percent charge (approximately $1 per month for the average home) on all utilities bills, a 1 percent charge against utility companies’ profits and a 1 percent charge for all electricity sold to other states. This fund could forever support those with a real need.

Responsibility to customers and stockholders is “prudent” business practice, but the principles of human decency far outweigh any business principle. David Keister Medical Lake

Where was Project Share?

When I pay my Washington Water Power Co. bill I always include an extra $1 for Project Share. Not a large sum, granted, but assuming 10 percent of the population of Spokane does the same, that would come to about $20,000 a month or well over $1 million over a 10-year period.

If these funds aren’t going to help people who suffer such dire circumstances, where are they going? For salary increase or yearly bonuses to overpaid executives?

I find the lack of compassion of WWP appalling and in the future intend to spend my Project Share dollar on a lottery ticket. Robert Bordeaux Medical Lake, Wash.

Price gouging just a rehearsal

Over the Fourth of July weekend the price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was $1.45 in Spokane, $1.57 in Portland and $1.15 in Richland. This disparity is far too great to be explained as standard market fluctuation.

An informal poll of attendants at major-corporation gasoline stations revealed that gasoline consumption dropped 10 to 15 percent as a result of the last price hike. This is why the price peaked at $1.47 and then crept back down.

The oil companies are testing the waters. Should we accept the current level of $1.44, they’ll try for $1.80. Eventually we will be coerced into paying $6 per gallon, and our consumption still will not have decreased.

Walk, skate, bike, ride the bus, car pool, van pool, consolidate shopping trips and limit vacations. We can beat them at their own game. Margaret Koivula Spokane

We’ll pass on the McSleazeball

My 11-year-old son was deeply disappointed when I told him we won’t be eating at McDonald’s anymore. He won’t be getting any more Happy Meals because McDonald’s has signed up Dennis Rodman of the Chicago Bulls to endorse its products.

Rodman may be a great basketball player but he never should be lifted up as a role model for children to emulate. Rodman’s hairstyle and cross-dressing put him squarely in the category of what is politely described as crude. He’s the last individual that a youth-oriented advertiser should use to sell a product.

Apparently, McDonald’s believes it is necessary to push the boundaries of good taste in its advertising. However, I see nothing to be gained by promoting a man who headbutts referees, openly talks about sleeping with men and dresses like a woman. The more he is promoted, the more his conduct is celebrated as normal and mainstream, not an aberration.

For decades McDonald’s customers have been induced to buy through the joy and innocence of Ronald McDonald. Now we have Rodman’s astro-bright hair, lipstick, earrings, tattoos and disgusting, bad-boy antics.

My son has trouble understanding what I’m trying to achieve by passing up McDonald’s for another restaurant. I will keep explaining that it’s important for a person to have principles and live up to them. Some day he will understand, when he has children of his own. Ron Hauenstein Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Lack of concern is what’s wrong

I note with interest the quotes of Rep. George Nethercutt in reply to charges by environmental groups that he was a “mouthpiece for special interests” when it came to environmental issues (“Environmental groups take aim at Nethercutt,” Region, July 10).

Nethercutt’s statement, “I don’t have any concerns about my environmental votes. Even from a moderate standpoint, many of the past environmental programs haven’t worked,” is simply not correct.

At Liberty Lake we found that both EPA’s pollution control and clean lakes programs worked miracles to restore a dying lake.

Actually, I believe the problem is the lack of concern by the freshman congressman for so many things important to us in the 5th District. He seems to think one so-called newsletter to voters, mailed at taxpayers’ expense, will make up for his failure to support measures to protect the environment, preserve and protect families, strengthen our education support, etc.

Let’s hope that during the campaign he will bring the “environmental debate,” as he calls it, to the district. I, for one, would welcome the opportunity to share the debate platform with him. Susan Kaun Spokane

Spare us corporate national parks

Within the last two days I read two very interesting articles that were not related but should be.

The New York Times had a lengthy story about our national parks and how their budgets are so strained that services and facilities are being shut down while the number of visitors is at historical highs. To combat this problem, corporate sponsorship is being considered.

Supporters of this idea realize the very fine line being tread, fearful that someday signs may read Going-to-the-Sun Highway brought to you by General Motors. Do you want our national treasures sponsored by corporations? I say, keep their narcissistic hands off! (Let’s forget for the moment the billions of dollars that the U.S. government hands out to corporate America in the form of subsidies and tax breaks that could otherwise be used to fund the national park system. That’s another issue.)

The other story was on the front page of The Spokesman-Review. The Senate approved a budget for the Defense Department that was $11 billion more than the department requested.

(Never mind that the money is to fund huge projects in certain congressional districts.)

The point is that with just a fraction of this $11 billion excess our national parks could be fully funded, services and facilities could be restored to handle the increase in visitors and our national treasures would continue to be a source of national pride.

The national parks’ budget is a small percentage of our federal budget. Help ensure that our treasures stay out of the hands of corporate America and that Old Faithful will never be brought to us by McDonald’s.

It’s already ours; let’s keep it that way. Peter Sanburn Spokane