Letters To The Editor
PEOPLE AND ANIMALS
Landlords know only too well
Re: “Landlords too restrictive about pets” by Steve Carpenter (Letters, April 14).
My husband and I are landlords and there isn’t enough space on this page to tell all the experiences other landlords and we have had with “responsible tenants” and their pets.
One tenant we had said their pet was too valuable to take outside, and they only had a $150 damage-security deposit. The repair of replacing wallboards, trim, carpeting, etc., came to $2,500. It would have cost more if we had not done own repairs. An aquarium in a second-floor apartment sprung a leak. Imagine what the cost was after repairing water damage to the ceiling in the apartment below, plus the damage to that tenant’s belongings. The aquarium tenant’s deposit was only $275. These experiences do not even scratch the surface of what landlords have to withstand.
I can only assume the Carpenters have never owned their own home and are incapable of knowing firsthand what damage a pet can cause.
I deeply resent the implication that we, as landlords, should assume the blame for the countless pets euthanized every year. Why do tenants who do not own their own property go ahead and acquire these poor, defenseless pets without the thought of researching if they can have pets at the expense of other property owners? Let this weigh heavily on the tenants’ consciences. Bonnie Y. Reed Spokane
Responsible pet-owning tenants rare
Re: Steve D. Carpenter’s letter, “Landlords too restrictive about pets.”
We have been landlords for several years and we find renters with pets usually don’t know small dogs from large ones or the inside of a house from the outside.
Our rentals are well kept and we expect the renters to keep them looking nice. But once they move in, the outside dog also moves in. Sometimes, we will approve of one cat only to find there are two cats and a dog inside, and one barking on the outside.
Occasionally, we will get a clean tenant who is true to his word. Such people will stay until they save up enough money for a down payment on a house and then they are gone.
There are a lot of pet owners, but few responsible pet owners who rent, so don’t blame the landlord. Ruby Dunning Coeur d’Alene
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
Technology can resolve taxing problem
The tobacco debacle is related to three other serious federal tax issues: the proposed federal law to prevent taxing sales on the Internet, the proposed flat tax on income and/or sales and the high-profile reform or elimination of the IRS.
Many state and local governments depend on sales tax in their budgets and would be seriously affected by federal sales taxes. Preventing taxation of sales on the Internet would ruin the competitive process and force many retail business operations into bankruptcy.
Fortunately, there may be a way to solve all of these problems simultaneously, if we apply the latest communications technology, i.e. computerized business systems including the Internet. It must evolve over a period of years, realizing that each problem interacts with the other. Benefits would include reducing the cost of tax collection, simplifying the IRS and elimination of cheating and fraud. No single type of tax will satisfy the majority of people in our diverse society. It would even have to include world trade agreements and the International Monetary Fund, if we are to prevent economic collapse.
We have business systems that provide information on production, distribution, import-export and sales-consumption. Taxing products at the source of manufacturing, distribution and importation essentially by computer formulas would greatly reduce the cost of collection, the size of government and provide a record to be used to enforce the laws.
An integrated approach is required which can be tested and easily changed and controlled as necessary. Floyd F. Damman Colbert
Murray-bashing way out of line
In his April 18 letter, Bill Klein expresses anger because Sen. Patty Murray wants all veterans to have military honors at their funerals. Justifying his anger, Klein implies that Murray is responsible for a 1990 incident where Fairchild Air Force Base couldn’t provide military honors for his neighbor.
Murray is trying to do something nice for you, Mr. Klein; simple manners suggest you say thank you. Also, your neighbor died in 1990; Murray was elected in 1992. If you get a liberal to help you with the math, you’ll see that your cheap shot at Murray misses by two years.
But since you’re interested in questionable politics, lets talk about a slick deal the Republicans tried to pull off in 1995. In short, they tried to save a few million dollars by forcing a new retirement system on a large group of military members, effectively cutting our pensions by almost 10 percent. Meanwhile, the same Republicans were buying military equipment the Defense Department didn’t want!
Democrats, Klein, including Murray, went to bat for us, forcing the Republicans to honor the promises made to this country’s men and women in uniform. Republicans supported this treachery, but Murray, who supports veterans, fought it, promising she would not break faith with the retired military of this country.
Murray stands for what’s right, not what’s convenient. To a conservative, that may be touchy-feely liberal gobbledygook, but to me, it’s integrity and I’ll gladly take six more years of it. Timothy F. Taylor Spokane
Clinton let Chinese get secrets
True Americans should be furious that President Clinton gave his approval to give China our guided missile secrets that will now allow them to launch their atomic bombs against anyone they want to.
Apparently, scientists from U.S. aerospace companies Hughes Electronics and Loral Space inadvertently gave China forbidden technology. They gave this highly technical and secret information to the Chinese when they gave them a 200-page report explaining to them why the Chinese rocket carrying a Loral $200 million satellite crashed 22 seconds after lift-off in China on Feb. 15, 1996.
Regardless of the evidence against Hughes Electronics or Loral Space, criminal charges may never he brought against them because Clinton approved the export to China by Loral of similar satellite guidance information two months ago. Our Justice Department had advised Clinton against doing this because it would seriously undercut any criminal case.
Clinton made his actions legal by notifying Congress. He notified them when they were recessed.
According to a news article that appeared on the front page of The New York Times, Clinton administration officials said the $2.5 million contributions made to the Democratic Party by Hughes and Loral played no role in the decisions.
Why didn’t The Spokesman-Review print this story? It should have been front page news.
Yes, all real Americans should be furious and alarmed at what is taking place in this country. The Paula Jones case is nothing compared to this situation and other happenings involving our national security that are taking place behind closed doors. Gene F. Larson Spokane
BUSINESS AND LABOR
WWP went beyond call of duty
With all the complaining that Washington Water Power Co. gets, I thought it was time for one atta-boy.
Recently, when I came home from my walk, I found a large utility truck in my driveway. It belonged to WWP. They were replacing a utility pole in my back yard. I was a little bit annoyed that they had not even contacted me telling that they were coming. I talked to the foreman and he told me they had just decided to do it that morning.
I didn’t buy that, so I called WWP. I spoke to Bill Krogh, who told me they generally do notify the homeowner and he would find out why it had not been done. Within a half hour, Doug Kyle called to apologize for not informing me. We spoke and I thought that was that. To my surprise, that evening when I opened my door, a hand-delivered note fell out. Inside was a handwritten note from Kyle, again apologizing for the misunderstanding and it included a gift certificate that I can use toward my next WWP bill.
Wow! This was going beyond the call of duty. Thanks, WWP. Jackie Aguilera Spokane