Letters To The Editor

WASHINGTON STATE

Craswell aligns with field burners

The Washington state Department of Ecology has proposed to phase out grass burning in three years. The governor has the authority to repeal this regulation.

I called Gary Locke’s headquarters to determine his position on this issue. He said he supports the Department of Ecology and believes the burning should stop.

Ellen Craswell, on the other hand, supports the burning. She stated that Ecology’s decision was based upon “poor science” and she opposes Ecology’s phase-out.

The supposedly poor science she refers to consists of over 50 scientific studies and statements from the Department of Health, the American Lung Association, Washington Thoracic Society and Spokane Medical Society, which have all identified grass smoke as a health hazard. All Spokane area pulmonologists have filed affidavits in support of Ecology’s phase-out.

I find it interesting that Craswell, who promotes her Christian values and claims to care for children, has chosen to champion the cause of a polluting industry composed of 106 individuals at the expense of the hundreds of thousands of citizens who are forced to breathe smoke each summer. There are 44,000 asthmatics in Spokane County - over 12,000 of these are children.

It would seem that Craswell is just another politician who will sacrifice the health of the community to the demands of industry and big business.

I will vote for Locke. Francis Mutton Veradale

Craswell exhibits inner goodness

I am not particularly religious, but the most stirring moment at the Shadle Park High School rally for Ellen Craswell was when the word “God” was mentioned. People actually clapped at the sound of the word. I saw nobody trembling in fear.

The reason I will vote for Craswell is that she is a good person. Her goodness appears to come from within. When Craswell responds to the will of a higher being, she is no different from all the millions of children who have listened to their parents and have respected and loved them. To be obedient to one who knows more and is wiser is actually a brilliant position to have. There is accord and peace in that.

We can be sure of one thing: Craswell will not be motivated by power, greed, prestige or money. If she were, she would be a total contradiction. Furthermore, because she is levelheaded, compassionate and considerate she is not, despite what many accuse her of, a radical person. Craswell sounds like a terrific answer for Washington’s governorship. Phil Stack Medical Lake

Locke’s way is decency, tolerance

Julian Powers (Letters, Oct. 11) has it right, “Beware of Craswell victory.”

What I wonder about is how does Marie Crampton’s attack on The Spokesman Review’s report about the Christian Reich (“Craswell thunder? Story just static,” Letters, Oct. 11) square with the quote by Charles Barbee on the Oct. 9 front page, “Slaying people’s not always wrong if it’s justified by God’s law.”

Gary Locke is on track for being tolerant for other belief systems. While he did not name them, any one alternative to the Christian club does not deserve the religious cleansing the Christian Reich is organizing to perpetuate.

I think Locke, our next governor, must be humored by his historically incorrect opponent, who tries to tie God, the U.S. Constitution and the forefathers together. Locke understands that many basic principles of governance under this Constitution came from the Iriquois Confederacy as a result of Ben Franklin’s research over 50 years before the Constitution was written. Not only were the forefathers natives, they were not even Christians. Indeed, the natives are those the Christian club has always called pagan, heathen and barbaric.

Locke simply rejects the barbarism of intolerance by the Christian Reich. So should you. Lou Stone Inchelium, Wash.

Moyer’s OK but Brown is better

Voters often complain about being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. If you want democracy at its best, however, with a meaningful choice as to who represents you, look no farther than the 3rd District state Senate race.

Democrat Rep. Lisa Brown and Republican Sen. John Moyer are both credits to Spokane and to their respective parties. Each has a loyal following here and has earned the respect of colleagues in Olympia. So far, neither has resorted to sleazy, negative mailings or TV ads.

There is a clear choice, however, if you compare voting records on key votes.

Brown voted for raising the minimum wage. Moyer voted against it. Brown rejected the timber-backed “takings initiative.” Moyer told the environmental council he was opposed, but ultimately provided the passing vote for the initiative, which voters later overwhelmingly rejected.

In my book, they are both good people, but Brown is the legislator we can count on to defend working men and women, children and the environment. She deserves to be our next state senator. Marianne Connelly Spokane

Ignore negative tactics; elect Brown

Now is the time in the campaign season when candidates who are behind make a desperate attempt to pull their opponent down with negative mail and letters to the editor filled with half truths. The Bob Dole campaign is doing it and so is Sen. John Moyer’s campaign.

Nasty letters about Rep. Lisa Brown are uncalled for. She has been a great state representative for four years, helping constituents and defending working families and the environment.

The letter writers conveniently forget to mention the tax cuts she voted for and her efforts to make the tax code more fair for homeowners and small businesses. Let’s face it - big business gave Moyer a 100 percent rating and they want him back.

We need a new voice in the state Senate. I’m voting for Brown. Ruthie Zimmer

Moyer should stop negative campaign

Not long ago, Sen. John Moyer was quoted in a newspaper article in the Easterner as saying that Lisa Brown was a fine state representative. Now, his campaign is recycling four-year-old allegations that she is somehow suspect because she spent six months in 1990 living and teaching as a volunteer in Nicaragua, and because, along with millions of other Americans, she opposed U.S. foreign policy in Central America.

These are activities that reflect well on her as a candidate for state senate. She has always cared about people and has always stood up for her beliefs. Even better, she does more than talk. She acts on her beliefs. Look at her record.

I call on the Moyer campaign to stop these attacks. I’d rather see candidates standing on their record instead of running down the other side. Golie Jansen Spokane

SCHOOL INITIATIVES

Devil’s in the troubling details

Initiative 177, the “choice in education act,” may sound good. “Choice” has positive connotations. However, there are some provisions in the initiative that voters should be aware of.

Schools created as a result of this initiative would not be accountable to the public for how public tax money is spent, not be required to meet accepted state standards for academic achievement, not be accountable to a locally elected school board. They would not be required to provide transportation for students or to hire certificated teachers (non-certificated teachers wouldn’t be required to undergo a background check) and would not be able to receive vouchers for children born before Sept. 1, 1989.

Initiative 173, the “education excellence act,” also sounds like a good thing. Who wouldn’t want excellence in education for our children? However, there are some provisions in this initiative of which voters should be aware.

Schools created as a result of this initiative would not be accountable to the public for how public tax money is spent, not be required to meet accepted state standards for academic achievement, not have to adhere to the standards and safeguards that apply to public schools. They would not be accountable to a locally elected school board and not need to have a certificated teacher in the classroom; non-certificated teachers wouldn’t be required to undergo background checks.

These schools would be required to have one certificated employee per 25 students, but the certificated employee wouldn’t have to be in the classroom.

Voters, please consider these initiatives carefully before voting. Brigitte Wolf Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Something wrong with witch hunts

I was appalled by John Webster’s recent editorial (“Nothing wrong with frank talk,” From both sides, Opinion, Oct. 11). What respectable editorial writer manufactures “facts” from whole cloth?

President Clinton has no “record as a skirt-chaser,” unless the first discredited, later retracted accusations of Larry Nichols are to be believed.

There is no evidence that Clinton either accepted or concealed any financial favors from any person, “shady” or otherwise.

No person has left the administration in handcuffs.

The Republican house of cards termed Whitewater, built of carefully orchestrated innuendo, unfounded accusation and the occasional outright lie, has permeated the press. This modern witch hunt rivals the McCarthy era in its frenzy of accusation without basis in fact.

Republicans knew as they began their inquiry that the Resolution Trust Corp. investigation of Madison Guaranty’s collapse had found the Clintons blameless. The Clintons, like many in Arkansas, were duped by Jim McDougal. That simple fact has continued to escape the Republicans.

The real scandal of Whitewater is that the American people have been cheated of more than $17 million spent on a special prosecutor, and additional untold millions on congressional hearings, with the sole purpose of broadcasting slander at public expense.

Fortunately, this calumny has managed only to produce a vague uneasiness in the American people; they have not succumbed to the defamation of an honorable man. They are apparently waiting, as am I, for even one fact to support the fanciful Whitewater castle. Since no fact has yet been revealed, perhaps it is time we asked the congressional Republicans, “Have you, at last, no shame?” Jim Wallis Cocolalla, Idaho

Election makes statement on morality

I could hardly believe my eyes when I read that The Spokesman-Review is endorsing Bob Dole for president. It lifted me like the sun peeking through the clouds after a rain. Thank you for your editorial integrity. More people must say enough is enough!

Voting for a candidate who will return the government to the states and the people is the wisest choice we can make this election. For me, honesty and integrity are extremely important character traits and a must for public officials. To vote otherwise abdicates my only say in the morality of our public leadership.

Who we vote into office reflects the morals of our society. I don’t believe the United States is morally bankrupt yet, but another four years of President Clinton will have us filing Chapter 11.

Thank you for the courage to take what you might perceive to be an unpopular stand by endorsing Dole. By so doing, you are reflecting more closely the moral fiber of this community than you think. Michael D. Brashear Spokane

Shame is ignoring Clinton qualities

Re: Bill Klein’s Oct. 10 letter, “Shame on all who support Clinton”:

Shame on you for having no respect for the president of the United States. Shame on all who didn’t vote for President Clinton, and won’t vote for him in November. If all you have to complain about is his pot remarks and his underwear, forget it. At least he didn’t lie about it and I respect him for that.

Apparently, you didn’t watch the Oct. 9 debate between Vice President Al Gore and Jack Kemp. Gore said it all about our President. I am behind President Clinton 100 percent. Dorothy Maier Newman Lake

Republicans trust me and you

Congratulations to the editorial board for making the difficult, but correct, decision to endorse Bob Dole for President.

When one has sifted through all the chaff and waded through all the bovine scat, one comes to a simple comparison between Dole and the Republicans and President Clinton and the Democrats. In his acceptance speech, Dole said he believes in Americans, he believes in the people.

Here we have one of the fundamental differences between the two parties and their leaders. Dole and the Republicans believe in the people, in their ability to do for themselves if government gets out of the road, in their ability to wisely spend or invest their own money.

Clinton and the Democrats do not believe in the people, in their ability to do for themselves, in their ability to wisely spend or invest their own money. That is why the Democrats believe in big government taking more and more money from the people via taxes so it can wisely spend or invest the people’s money.

The question each voter must consider when voting on Nov. 5 is, “Do I vote for the candidates of the party that believes in me or do I vote for the candidates of the party that does not believe in me and thinks I need to be treated as a little child?” I don’t know about you, but I have been a responsible adult for more years than I care to count. I know I’m worthy of trust. I know I’m voting for the candidates of the party that believes in me. I know I am voting for Republicans. Jack Ranck Loon Lake

Nethercutt approach obnoxious

One of Rep. George Nethercutt’s advisors should inform him that women can vote now. He was so arrogant and condescending to Judy Olson in Sunday’s debate that he needed a swift kick in his well- pressed pants.

I hope other women in our 5th District remember Nethercutt’s arrogance on election day, while they are voting for Judy Olson. Sally Jo Hampton Deer Park

Make your vote a positive thing

What a choice. Two men hopelessly bogged down, one in time, the other in slime. Just how did we arrive at this point?

Apathy hatched this situation years ago. We nourished it with the metamorphosis of public service to self-service, a change embraced by the voters as well as the elected.

We’ve become such a nation of “what can this candidate do for me” and “what would that one take from me” that we vote defensively rather than offensively. We keep our eyes on the short term and ignore the impact that today’s choices will have in the years ahead. Is it any wonder our children tend toward an attitude of helplessness and not caring?

It is not too late to make the changes necessary to reverse this mess, but are we willing to pay the price? Can we set aside the NIMBYism, the “me too” and the era of entitlements without responsibilities? Or will we continue to form action groups, coalitions and leagues to “empower” those perceived as without power? Superficial digging usually uncovers just who is being empowered.

Vote the whole picture. Don’t let your wallet override your heart, or vise versa. Think beyond your own situation to the community we share. We’re in this together, and voting negatively, against someone rather than for their opponent, is counterproductive and perpetuates the downward spiral that defines our current political environment.

Only when we change that atmosphere will the government remove the appearance of serving only those in its employ and those with access to them. Dave Knecht Spokane