Letters To The Editor

BUSINESS AND LABOR

No checker, no chitchat and no good

Re: “No checker, no chitchat in this line,” (Aug. 20).

At what point in this transaction does the changeover occur from customer to unpaid employee? As we wheel our cart of goods to the checkout, do we now step behind the counter to unload the selection we have spent time loading while pushing down each aisle?

Just who is the robot here? Is it the machine or the programmed customer who has been cajoled into believing how blessed he or she is to be living a society that alienates us from contact with another human being who now is out of a serviceable job because his former employer has reputedly spent $200,000 to get rid of him?

Only poor community relations between customer, employee and store can result from this poor decision.

Another question: Do we now bag our own groceries? This point was consistently left out of the presentation. Perhaps because that would be the last straw for a tired shopper to accept.

From a loyal customer’s point of view, I resent being treated as a productive entity who will work for you even though I never applied for the job. No thanks. I will go elsewhere. Lorraine E. Nichols Hayden, Idaho

Paltry minimum wage costs us all

Our taxes are too high. When a significant sector of the work force is paid less than is sufficient for the necessities of life, we as a decent society make up the difference with subsidies out of the public treasury.

The below-the-poverty-level family income is supplemented with welfare, food stamps, housing and heating subsidies, Medicaid, etc. The cost of all this necessary aid for families is $60 billion per year nationally.

A major portion of this welfare bill is really a subsidy for the businesses that pay their employees the present minimum wage. Everyone knows that a family income of $10,300 per year ($5.15 per hour for 40 hours per week for fifty weeks) is far below a decent income for a family. We taxpayers make up some of the difference between the minimum wage and what is needed to have a poverty level family income.

An increase of the minimum wage in two steps to $6.50 (Oregon is already there) will narrow the gap considerably. This will lessen the need for welfare support, and restore dignity to minimum wage workers.

Please vote for I-688 on Nov. 3. It’s the decent thing to do. Wil L. Luedders Spokane

US West intransigence stands out

Re: The ongoing US West strike.

The Communications Workers of America is a national organization with a track record of bargaining in good faith. US West is not the only company CWA negotiates contracts with. Far from it. CWA represents workers at all of the so-called baby Bells as well as at GTE and AT&T.

It seems odd to me that all these contracts have been settled with no problems, except for Bell Atlantic, which was struck for a very short time, and Southern New England Telephone, whose workers just went on strike. Then we come to US West Communications. One company out of many that CWA deals with and no progress is being made, even at nine days into the strike. Common sense would tell you where the fault lies.

The union members voted by an overwhelming margin to strike if a fair agreement was not reached. This does not mean the strike will end just because it goes on for a long time or if medical benefits are canceled. This means the strike will end only when the CWA negotiators are able to get a fair and just contract for the workers. Carl Sperr Spokane

US West shows it cares - not

US West, which made $125 billion last year, is planning on taking away my health care Sept. 1.

This is the caring employer I’ve worked for for 24 years. My children won’t be able to get shots for school or physicals for sports activities. Yet US West sponsors all types of sports teams with its name all over stadiums throughout the corporation’s 14-state region. Note, however, that US West no longer supports Bloomsday or Hoopfest. I guess Spokane just doesn’t produce enough revenue for it to care about.

What gives, US West? How about caring about your employees? Kathy L. Speller Spokane

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

It’s all Hillary Clinton’s fault

It’s time that people woke up and stopped assigning Hillary Clinton the role of the long-suffering, “last-to-know” victim of Bill Clinton’s continuous philandering. There is plenty of evidence to suggest she has been aware of it since their early years together in Arkansas. Rather than being a victim, she has been an active participant in seeing that his behavior was concealed from the American people. It is likely that from the beginning, she saw in Bill Clinton a vehicle to political office.

With her brains and his uncanny political instincts, they might even win the presidency. Well, here they are. She stood by her man in ‘92, when the Gennifer Flowers scandal surfaced. “If Hillary doesn’t care, then why should we?” was the cry heard across the nation.

When the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, Hillary began wailing about the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” He was a sleazebag and she knew it. But instead of dumping him, she defended him and attacked us. At the bottom of all this is one very strong likelihood: Bill Clinton is not Hillary’s loving husband. He is merely the horse she rode in on. Jerry Bartholomew Coeur d’Alene

Hysteria unbelievable, bad for country

It’s hard for me to believe the hysteria surrounding President Clinton’s private life. I am a very square and uptight moral person, but I have to concede that what the president does in the infidelity area, even though distasteful to me, is his own business.

How distressing that Ken Starr, who should have absolutely no legal right to examine these issues, has made the United States a worldwide spectacle, effectively drawing attention away from the many crises facing our country.

Who do you suppose is behind this diversionary tactic? Dianne L. Cook Spokane

Clinton presidency an aberration

I am at a loss to understand the surprise of so many people, worldwide, that Bill Clinton is in the position he is in. To replace him would certainly be no challenge. Perhaps as a salesman, but his capabilities, no. Clinton is everything that represents a loser.

Let’s hope when children hear the old adage “You can grow up to be a president,” that the parent will qualify the proclamation by excluding Clinton. I have never, ever been ashamed of being an American, but this man is not, has not and never will be what this nation is about. He has no right to represent this country. Ken R. Brown Post Falls

Was that a dress or ammunition?

Question: If you were having an affair, got your dress stained with semen, or anything else for that matter, would you send it to the cleaner’s or send it to your mother for safekeeping?

Well, I guess if I wanted to cause trouble for someone, especially a president, I’d send it to mom. Dianne S. Gorle Chewelah, Wash.

We’ll all be held to account

Bill Clinton says we should leave his personal life alone and get on with the business of this country. Perhaps this is true. But I am afraid the president’s life is the business of the country.

The president is responsible for appointing judges. The president appoints officials and ultimately manages some very large law enforcement agencies. The president is the commander in chief of our highly sophisticated military. The president oversees the management of the organization of the American government. In other words, the president sets an example for many people who have authority in the day to day workings of our country and affect the lives of its people.

The issue has gone beyond what Clinton has done and the lies he has told. The real issue is the American people. Is Clinton setting an example for the people? Or is Clinton merely a reflection of the condition of the hearts of the American people?

Clinton says he bears the responsibility for his actions. He shows this by telling us to forget them. If we can believe the polls, this is what the people would do.

Whoever would tolerate or encourage inappropriate behavior bears the same responsibility as the perpetrator himself. Believe it folks: God will not be mocked. We all stand accused and we will all be tried. Are you ready? Peter A. Breuer Colville

GRASS FIELD BURNING

Dangerous, abusive practice must end

Again, we’re seeing some beautiful August days ruined by the grass burning. I hesitate to call the grass burners farmers, as they are not raising any food-type crop. In most instances, they are raising grass seed that is used for exclusive golf course greens. These are not farmers trying to earn a living off a few acres. These are large landowners who have developed a very profitable grass business at the expense of the public’s health.

They have enough influence to persuade and manipulate our Legislature to enact laws allowing this kind of pollution. They intimidate anyone who tries to stop them. They have spent plenty of money for an extensive public relations campaign which somehow tries to justify their practice.

The field burning presents a major traffic hazard as the smoke engulfs and blocks our roads. In Oregon, a multiple car accident on a smoke-covered highway resulted in tragic loss of life. The smoke is a hazard to everyone’s health and a life-threatening assault to those with respiratory problems.

What amazes me is the arrogance of those who burn. Although an alternative exists, they refuse to do it. Why? Because burning is cheaper? The greed factor is more important that the public’s health.

If my business were to cause the smoke damage that field burning produces, you would close down my office immediately. What gives these prima donnas the right to pollute when the rest of us can’t?

Field burning has been protected long enough. It is time to end the burning. Steve F. Bell Coeur d’Alene

Let farmers do their burning

Re: the Grass burning articles by Ken Olson (Aug. 18 and 19) The coverage given to the complainers shows your writers’ intent and bias. To incite an issue by one-sided reporting has been going on for too long now, on all manner of topics.

I live in Rathdrum and I support field burning. It is a time-tested method that is the most environmentally and economically sound that there is. I, too, have asthma but have found my own alternative health methods to alleviate my symptoms. This temporary inconvenience is nothing compared to the daily onslaught of pollution all around us, 75 percent of it automobile exhaust.

The community needs farmers of wheat, grass or mint, not pressure from people who can’t see both sides of an issue and realize which one is more beneficial to sustain our beautiful area. I don’t want pesticides or any other noxious solution. Nor do I want the farmers to leave.

The burning is only temporary, yet an inconvenience that we live with. There are alternatives for health problems, unlike the farmers and our lands.

The right thing for everyone in this issue is to let the farmers burn. Debbie S. Harper Rathdrum

APPRECIATION

Street Fair was a splendid gift

Metropolitan Mortgage Company deserves enthusiastic thanks from our community.

The recent Street Fair was an incredible gift to the families of Spokane. I saw so many smiling little faces bright with face paint and glitter. Kids and parents were happily munching on free hot dogs and cotton candy while music rollicked through the streets.

There were lots of fun things to do, from throwing bean bags, to Dumbo rides, to watching a fascinating street magician and some wonderful carnival acts. There was also the Pacific Science Center show that had kids and adults enthralled. Then there was the fantastic Laser Light show.

Thanks so much to everyone involved in throwing this generous party for our fair city. This paper should be filled with letters of thanks. Parents, you should be encouraging your children to write a thank you note to Metropolitan Mortgage for all they’ve done. Mary A. Naber Spokane

OTHER TOPICS

Missile strikes only make things worse

I was appalled at the retaliation bombings in Sudan and Afghanistan. A look at history as well as current events suggests this impulsive action will only escalate the conflict, causing more loss of life (see Northern Ireland).

Only a short time ago, President Clinton was urging Pakistan to refrain from retaliating against India in its nuclear testing. Yet somehow, he justifies U.S. use of violence. If the U.S. has the audacity to label itself a superpower, its elected (i.e. corporate-funded) officials should set the example of restraint they preach to the rest of the world.

The bombings in East Africa were inexcusable acts which caused tremendous suffering. But to commit those detestable acts ourselves in an effort to strike back killed many innocent people and set the stage for many more to die in a counterattack. I find it interesting that the casualties from the attack were mentioned briefly, if at all.

Getting to the root of the problem as to what prompts terrorists to commit atrocities is a laborious process which may uncover some unpleasant realities surrounding U.S. involvement in foreign affairs, but if it saves one mother from getting a knock on her door informing her of a child’s death due to a bomb, isn’t it worth it?

No wonder kids are killing each other. Look at the example of institutionalized violence they have to follow. Laura L. Toussaint Spokane

How can anyone destroy new life?

The thought of abortion sickens me and I can’t comprehend why partial-birth abortion is still legal anywhere. I wonder how anyone could destroy a child, no matter how many weeks in the womb. There are smarter and more unselfish options.

My energy stems from having been conceived by a 17-year-old mother and being put up for adoption. When I hear about an abortion, I think about someone who didn’t have the chance to touch people like I have or receive parents’ love. Would-be mothers and fathers need to take responsibility for their actions.

What human has the right to defy the laws of nature and decide when an infant’s life has begun and when it should end? Also, if someone does have the right to make these decisions for another human being, how far will it go? A child, which is the greatest gift to our world, should not be treated as an unwanted burden. Michael Brown Rocky Mountain Academy, Bonners Ferry

Hypocrisy in name change idea

To think that anyone would propose renaming the U.S. Courthouse after Tom Foley is without a doubt hypocrisy at its finest … especially when he and his staff moved out of the building years ago because it was not good enough for them. They needed luxurious suites at the Farm Credit Service Building, at more expense for the poor taxpayer…us. Leo Fagan Spokane