Letters To The Editor
BUSINESS AND LABOR
Gagging unions is wrong
The latest plan to do away with labor involvement in politics is to make it as hard as possible to use union members’ money to fund candidates who support labor issues. The plan is to require written permission every year. While this may sound like a piece of cake, it’s very time consuming and expensive.
I would think that most union members would want to be represented by people who have their best interests at heart. I haven’t heard of any plan to get permission, written or otherwise, from stockholders when large corporations give money to candidates.
Since the 1996 elections, when labor spoke out against those who’ve been ignoring working class concerns, there has been an all-out effort to gag the voice of labor. Labor unions spend money for political purposes with the blessing of most members. Unions are, after all, run by members.
The bottom line is that they don’t want to hear the concerns of the working class and that disturbs me. Organized labor is a voice for the working people of this country and it should be heard. Paul W. “Bill” Carter Newport, Wash.
Posturing overtakes sincere bargaining
As an employee in another discipline at Sacred Heart Medical Center, I watch, wait and pray.
There is a sadness about this current situation in a hospital with a long tradition of value-based health care, nurtured by a Catholic spirituality. In this arbitration there has surfaced a mentality that someone must win while someone else loses. Further, as this arbitration is now playing itself out in the public arena, distortion of facts, name calling and manipulation to encourage sympathetic supporters puts the rest of us who work here in the middle. It feels like trying to choose which parent to go with while the judgment is made about divorce.
There is a hunger in our social system to see problems played out in public view, where facts become fictitious and spectators with good intentions add to the confusion in the pursuit of truth.
There is wisdom to be discovered in dialogue, and dialogue cannot be pursued when facts become distorted. Name calling and distortion of information is a sure way to end dialogue and promote sympathy, but it does little to encourage negotiation in good faith. Rev. Michael D. Venneri priest/chaplain, Sacred Heart Medical Center, Spokane
Things can’t be as they were
As a retired hospital president/CEO, health care commission member and management seminar faculty member from another state, I have long appreciated the critical contribution nurses make to a hospital’s success. I routinely “raided” the ranks of nursing, looking for people promotable to management positions. Many became my most capable managers.
No doubt, Sacred Heart Medical Center has many similar professionals in positions of responsibility who influence nurse staffing patterns.
Hospital President Ryland “Skip” Davis has begun to deal with the very real pressures of today’s health care economics. Although managing a hospital has many psychic and economic rewards, I have never met a hospital administrator who relished nurse staffing issues. Rather than suggesting a lack of compassion, his gutsy willingness to take the lead in confronting the economic reality of these times should be applauded.
This fine institution’s future, the job security of its people and perhaps the health status of the region depend on how successfully its people deal with the tightening health care economics that other more price-competitive communities have been facing for the past decade. Thus, it’s unimaginable that Davis would not welcome the Sacred Heart nurses’ insight and involvement in finding ways for the hospital to become leaner, better and different.
Those who long for the good old days of inflationary cost-plus reimbursement would better serve their hospital, their community and themselves by helping create necessary change, rather than criticizing it. John C. Goldthorpe Veradale
Wages not key issue for nurses
Re: Kenneth Harris’ Feb. 26 letter, “SHMC nurses should care more about their patients than money.”
When nurses say they can’t afford to strike, they are showing more concern for their immediate financial needs than for their patients’ safety in the long run. Our wages are not the main issue that separates the nurses and the administration at the bargaining table. Our patients have the right to receive care that meets the high standards of SHMC. Nurses are the direct, bedside link to that high standard of care.
Administration spent more than $3,000 for advertisements in the newspaper but refused to spend $4,000 for a joint education program for management and Washington State Nurses Association negotiators, to help settle our differences quickly.
Nurses, we need to stand together for our patients and ourselves. Vote strike! Bridget Morrison, R.N. Spokane
CEO’s strategy easy to track
In reference to the job of Skip Davis, Sacred Heart Medical Center CEO, I, too, would like to make over $180,000 a year.
I am looking for a business whose core of employees is made up of single or single-income families. The employees need only take an oath of devotion. The business need only provide my salary, a hatchet and a free trip or two (how about to Maui?). Would prefer job offer from out of town, so my feelings about employees or the community would not be of concern.
My plan of attack would include setting a minimum number of employees per shift (of course, I would give the employees input), requiring mandatory overtime and mandatory on-call. I will reduce the rest period between shifts from 12 hours to eight. When employees’ work starts to suffer, we’ll just advise them to quit. Don’t worry about the liability; the employees will have to be the first to answer why something was not done soon enough or correctly.
We will hide the real issues and make the employees look greedy by announcing they’re arguing over a 1.1 percent wage increase. We can sway the public and some employees to believe a lack of customer service is their fault, not ours. The icing on the cake will be to fool the community into believing all we’re trying to do is save money so their costs will be reduced. Tom Mattern Nine Mile Falls
WSNA membership not negotiable
In Opinion editor John Webster’s Feb. 26 editorial about the current labor negotiations at Sacred Heart Medical Center, he states, “The nurses’ union wants a closed shop. But this is simply unreasonable. Unions should seek dues on the merits of union services and employees should remain free to join, or not.”
Webster’s editorial betrays a lack of understanding about the Washington State Nurses’ Association ratio d’essere. WSNA is not a union; it is a professional organization with one of its many functions being that of collective bargaining, although this is far from its most important function, which is promoting patient safety and welfare at state and federal levels.
Through our organization, we are able to be the voice of the patient. This is our primary “reason to be,” to be patient advocates - a creed that we will not compromise!
So, we WSNA members believe membership is not a matter of choice but one of professional obligation. We wish to make membership mandatory for nurses who would shirk this responsibility.
We are now at an impasse precisely because Sacred Heart administration fails to grasp this basic concept, one which permeates all the other issues under negotiation. If CEO Skip Davis, as he publicly writes, “will not compromise” on mandatory membership, he will ultimately shortchange our patients. We will not allow this to happen! Michael Kaley C.C.R.N. Cheney
SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION
Compare apples to apples
We keep forgetting, or maybe some don’t know, that the European school systems are not set up the way the U.S. schools are. In Germany, all kids in the fourth grade are given a test to determine how much more schooling they are allowed to have. Some kids get to go through grade eight and are then put into a trade apprenticeship program. Others get to go to grade 10 (working half days after grade eight) before they have to stop schooling. Only the kids who score in the top 20 percent are allowed to go to what we call high school. Their high school goes to grade 13.
When speaking of high school seniors, do we mean 12th graders or college freshmen?
Our tests test everybody - special ed as well as honors - not just the top 20 percent. I don’t think these scores tell us much about what our future engineers, doctors, etc., can really do. They are not comparing apples to apples. F. Sheryl Mixey Davenport, Wash.
Legislators, leave teaching to teachers
I compliment John Kafentzis for his Feb. 27 editorial concerning legislators encouraging the return of phonics to the classroom.
First, what do legislators know about teaching reading that good teachers don’t? Secondly, most good teachers use a variety of ways to teach reading, incorporating phonics also.
As a former teacher, I agree with Kafentzis that poor reading skills may be in part due to poor nutrition and an inadequate home life.
The best methods to teach reading to an individual child should be left to a good teacher and not be prescribed by legislators. Jean B. Hales Spokane
Pay heed to religious calendar
Over the years, as a parent of children in District 81, I have been asked repeatedly for both support and participation in the lives of our children as students. Such a request has never struck me as unreasonable, for I am convinced that parental involvement is vital to the educational lives of our children.
Simultaneously, as a parent, I ask the school district to demonstrate equal sensitivity to the lives of our children outside of school. Specifically, I refer to Feb. 25, a day in the lives of Christians known as Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent. On the same day, and at the same time as our worship service at Prince of Peace Lutheran, Glover Middle School scheduled a special recognition night for students of high academic performance as well as excellent attendance and citizenship.
While I applaud Glover’s efforts to acknowledge students’ achievements, I was both frustrated and disappointed that the pastor of the church was not able to attend this affirmation of my son’s efforts.
While I recognize that we live in a thoroughly secularized culture and perhaps religious sensibilities are not what they once were, is it nonetheless unreasonable to request that the school district minimally glance at the ecclesiastical calendar and seek to schedule around what are significant holy days?
I thank the district for its efforts to affirm its students’ hard work and diligence. I just hope that in the future such events would be planned with sensitivity to the students’ religious convictions. Rev. John L. Vaswig Spokane
Mead school board pulled a fast one
I am voting no on the Mead School bond issue. This will be the first time I have ever cast a no vote for schools.
I attended the first workshop last fall and the consensus of each work group was that too much money was being proposed for Mead High School without any specifics. Plus, there was an awareness by most participants that the Mount Spokane High School bond had included money for remodeling Mead High.
The school board is being a little too slick in the way it promotes a second huge bond issue in five years. It obviously did a job on voters last time by confusing them with mention of remodeling Mead High, knowing the funds were not included.
The school board needs a no vote as a wake-up call to be more financially responsible to the voters. It should realize that just because it built one new, state-of-the-art, beautiful school, it doesn’t have to bring the other schools up to that level, other than for educational opportunities. Mike C. Davis Mead
All students need history, geography
Re: “History may be history,” (Feb. 13). Even those students who are not planning to go to college need to understand history and geography - maybe more so than the college-bound students. Limiting their base of knowledge will not make them better workers or citizens. Michelle L. Cook Spokane
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
Gorton part of problem, not solution
Campaign finance reform slipped up on us. Sen. Slade Gorton led resistance by Republicans, claiming the McCain-Feingold bipartisan bill would unconstitutionally restrict a voter’s “free speech.”
That’s the opposite of what it would do. It would help make an individual’s campaign contribution meaningful again, instead of being overwhelmed by the political contributions of tobacco companies and other huge corporations. Those are “soft money” donations, so called because they are unregulated. And the Federal Election Commission is too weak and underfunded to do its job.
Here’s how Gorton answered my request that he vote for McCain-Feingold:
“I believe mandating speedy, full disclosure of campaign contributions would be a significant step towards the campaign finance reform our political system needs. … This reform is aimed directly at the many television ads that are paid for by mystery groups (with names like “Committee for Good Government” or “Coalition to Save America”) that currently face no such disclosure requirements.”
This is from the senator who ran untrue television accusations against Mike Lowry the day before the 1994 Senate election!
I agree with his other complaint - that a union or corporation ought to have prior, written voluntary authorization of an individual before collecting or assessing fees that will be used for political purposes.
Since his 1988 election, Gorton has amassed PAC contributions of $1.4 million, plus other receipts of $4.2 million, including those from insurance and tobacco companies. (Figures compiled by Public Citizen from summary data of the Federal Election Commission as of Jan. 15, 1997.)
It’s time to contact your senator about reform. “Don’t come home without it.” Mildred Stout Pullman
Reagan at fault for ‘80s profligacy
In his Feb. 24 letter haranguing liberals and Democrats, James C. Allen distorts the truth he contentiously claims to honor. Specifically, he says the staggering ‘80s deficits were the fault of a Democratic Congress that prevailed in its spending glut because President Reagan lacked the line-item veto.
The federal budget originates in the executive branch, and President Reagan had an opportunity each year to submit a balanced budget to Congress. In reality, the sum total of Reagan’s budgets sent to Congress was greater than those returned to him by those spendy Democrats in Congress. Reagan’s unwillingness and political cowardice to bite the budget bullet was as great, but more hypocritical, than that of the Congressional leadership.
Allen abuses truthful reporting when he implies liberals and dishonesty go hand in hand. Playing with facts to support political doctrine is as evident in Allen’s letter as in the factors he describes. Lance Erie Spokane
Beware of Republican tax reformers
Recently, some of us received a letter from Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott pleading for funds so he and House Speaker Newt Gingrich can help elect more GOP congressmen to pass an all-new national tax law.
Most of us would agree our tax system needs an overhaul, but we must be ultra careful which mechanics we assign to the job.
Some 17 years ago, Ronald Reagan and crew took over the White House with big promises of budget and tax cuts, and spending reform. When their incumbency ended in 1988, they left two dozen new billionaires, 2 million homeless people, a mountain of unneeded military hardware and a tripled national debt that was $2 trillion greater than when they started.
Let’s not be conned by the GOP sales pitch. Republicans aren’t known for passing legislation to benefit American workers, but they would love to siphon off for their party any funds that citizens unhappy with the IRS might donate after reading the senator’s letter.
The core of GOP campaign platforms is usually taxation items, many of which become law, so they share responsibility for the existing maze we detest. Paul Winkleman Spokane
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
Urge broader credit union eligibility
In your article regarding the Supreme Court decision to severely restrict credit union membership, you omitted a major reason credit unions can offer lower interest on loans and higher interest on savings. Credit unions do not have to pay profits to stockholders as do banks. A credit union’s members are its stockholders. They reap their profits through better interest rates, lower fees and friendly service.
Ask your congressmen to support House Resolution 1151, which will clarify the membership eligibility controversy between banks and credit unions, and make credit union membership available to the 62 million Americans now denied that privilege by the Supreme Court decision. Richard D. Clark Spokane
Block grants OK, with restrictions
The Feb. 19 Spokesman-Review reported that Sen. Slade Gorton is trying to make federal funds for education direct block grants to public school districts, with few strings attached. I support this concept, with the proviso that additional federal money won’t be poured into education - just a redistribution of what has been budgeted.
There are higher priorities for limited federal tax money. Maximize local control in locally elected school boards. If federal block grants go through the state Legislature, the state education bureaucracy will eat up a lot of dollars before they get to the local school districts.
Then, there’s charter schools. I oppose public money for charter schools if there is no accountability to a locally elected school board. To have just the charter school’s parents elect “their” school board is unacceptable, if tax money is involved. Charles E. Latimer Spokane
Military construction funds needed
Three cheers for the Republican Congress’ override of President Clinton’s line-item veto of 38 military construction projects. I’m glad these folks had the sense and compassion to understand how badly the military needs new construction in many areas.
Our family has sacrificed many things to serve this great nation. We have lived in decrepit conditions in what has been labeled as adequate housing. Our last “home” was a concrete house in the tropics with cracks wide enough to see outside and let critters in! The kitchen cupboards wouldn’t even close because of the many layers of accumulated paint.
Most military housing was built more than 40 years ago and has served its purpose well, but it’s time to replace the old with new. It costs the government more to maintain the old structures over the long term than to build new, in some cases.
With the increased operations tempo and frequency of long-term deployments, military service members and their families deserve better. Morale for everyone is directly connected to living conditions. Our president couldn’t understand how we live. Thank you, Republican Congress. L.S. Gill Spokane
IN THE PUBLIC EYE
Maybe Starr’s looking for a way out
It would almost appear that Ken Starr is trying to get himself fired, if some of his recent activities are any indication. This might not be such a bad move if, after $40 million and growing scorn from the public, one found himself with a weak case.
We should remember that it wasn’t that long ago Starr was going to quit for a job at Pepperdine. Do most prosecutors want to quit when they have a winner? Perhaps Starr believes in the old adage, “Out of sight out of mind.” Sorry, Starr, I have a feeling your place in history just may be in two categories: famous and infamous.
I guess I should be ready to be called before the grand jury for these words against Starr. Anyone know a good lawyer? Larry S. Rice Priest River, Idaho
Let’s not just single out Clinton
Gene K. Ealy’s (“Defense of Clinton doesn’t add up,” Letters, Feb. 20) reasoning would make more sense if he wasn’t making Clinton the exception.
In the past 100 years, politicians of all stripes have been involved in various scandals and criminal wrongdoing - governors, judges, state legislators, city council members, mayors, county commissioners, those in Congress and presidents. Clinton is being attacked for something Republicans also have done.
Clinton a draft dodger? Some Republicans now in Congress never went to Vietnam. Clinton involved in illegal campaign financing? So were Republicans. Clinton involved in a savings and loan scandal? So was one of George Bush’s sons. Clinton misusing FBI files? Nixon could be accused of that. Clinton attempting to “clean house.” Like Ronald Reagan did? To the Republicans, that was a scandal in itself. Clinton is being pounded on for failures anyone is capable of. Joan E. Harman Coeur d’Alene
U.S. AND THE WORLD
U.N. should rethink Iraq policy
The United Nations decision concerning Iraq must have been made late on a Friday night in a bar, because it makes no sense.
First, they made a deal with Saddam Hussein that they could inspect eight particular sites where they suspected Saddam was keeping biological weapons. It would be easy for him to move any weapons from those sites before the inspectors arrived.
Saddam also believes diplomacy is a weakness. After the Gulf War, he agreed to weapons inspections whenever there was suspicion and did not keep that promise. There’s good reason to believe it won’t work this time, either.
Also, the U.N. is considering opening up some trade with Iraq to help the starving people. That’s just what Saddam wants, because it will give him more money to develop longer-range missiles and build more biological weapons. If that happens, he might send a missile with deadly VX gas right into France, Italy, England or even the United States. There’s no telling what range he has or what he might do. Attacks, maybe even more than air strikes, must be done to try to stop him. Ryan Wickre, age 15 Spokane
PEOPLE IN SOCIETY
Put husband and wife first
Re: Karen Peck’s Feb. 23 letter criticizing John Rosemond’s column, “Women also need to keep a promise.”
It’s Peck who doesn’t “get it.” Families are not only about children, but also about marriages. Too many times, the wife puts the children ahead of her husband so much that when the children are grown there is no marriage left.
Unfortunately, when communication and time together have been neglected for the child-rearing years, there isn’t much left of a marriage later. Men can be guilty of this, but for the most part, it’s the women because we tend to be our children’s primary care givers.
Children are a wonderful result of marriage and should be made to feel they are an important part of the family. But they should not come first or be the center of attention in a family.
Children need and want attention and should receive it. But many of society’s problems are because of selfishness parents display in raising children to believe they are the most important person in the world. As adults, they continue to believe this and if their spouse has been taught the same thing, how long will the marriage last?
If a husband and wife put each other before the children in a healthy home, the children will feel secure.
We have two teenagers and a pre-teen who will tell you they have not suffered because we put each other first. They know we love them and that our marriage is secure and thus, so is their family. Betsy Queen Spokane
Children part, not all, of our world
Karen D. Peck (Letters, Feb. 23) states that John Rosemond’s column is “archaic” and “sick.” I disagree. I find his column to be a breath of fresh air and agree with him wholly.
Peck states that families with children are about children. I say families with children are about families. That includes the husband and wife. Without your husband, you would not have your children. To inform him that the children will always come first is reprehensible.
Hopefully, you married your husband for life and your children will not be living with you for life. Therefore, they should not be placed ahead of the person you made that lifelong commitment to.
To further state that mother always knows best is an absolutely unbelievable comment. My husband and I both make decisions regarding child-raising and he is certainly just as qualified as I am. And yes, I align myself with him. As a result, our children will be raised knowing they are not the center of our world. Rather, they are a part of our world. This enables them to grow to be self-sufficient adults. Shayne McCaslin Spokane
Selfish couple ruined movie
On Feb. 28, my wife and I attended a showing of “Titanic” at the Valley Mall Theatres. The visual effects were stunning, and we assume that the dialogue was, too. However, we heard little of it.
Instead, we were forced to listen to a boorish loud-mouthed couple behind us who talked throughout the entire movie, in spite of being asked by others to please be quiet.
What gave this couple the right to ruin a fantastic movie for all those sitting around them? If all they wanted to do was talk, why didn’t they go someplace else?
I’m sure we weren’t the only couple to resent having spent money to listen to their mindless chatter. Michael S. Buck Spokane
Pro-life doesn’t mean ragged edge
I took great offense at the article, “Fatal attraction.”
I am pro-life and I do not in any way want to be connected with a militia or Neo-Nazi group. Because I believe that unborn children should not be killed doesn’t make me a neo-Nazi. In fact, the pro-life movement is the complete opposite of militia groups. Pro-life is based on love, militia groups on hate.
I agree with the director of the three abortion clinics in Detroit. Militia and Neo-Nazi groups don’t give two hoots about the abortion issue. They have linked the recent bomber of the abortion clinic in Birmingham with the bombing at the 1996 Summer Olympics. Militias don’t care about the issue. Their only agenda is hate and violence.
The so-called death of the pro-life movement is a myth, also. Abortions are down. The American people have seen what a partial-birth abortion is and are appalled. Diana C. Blume Colville, Wash.
CREATION VS. EVOLUTION
Evolution fact? No way
Jack DeBaun’s characterization of creationists as saboteurs of science, and evolution as proven fact, was wrong on both counts.
Evolution is theory, an as yet unproved explanation for the existence and order of the universe and everything in it. Evolution is the dominant theory in no small part because of a narrow definition of “science” that allows only materialistic explanations for phenomena, thereby conveniently disqualifying any interpretation of evidence as suggesting intelligent design as “religious.”
There are serious and legitimate challenges to the claims of the evolutionary faithful: How does evolution operate contrary to the second law of thermodynamics? How could life spontaneously arise in the hostile environment of a “young Earth,” from inorganic chemicals, when modern science cannot accomplish it in a laboratory?
How could complex systems evolve over millions of years when such organs as the eye would be useless until completely functional? Where would the staggering amount of information contained in the DNA molecule come from to enable the first cell to duplicate itself?
Where are the “jillions” of transitional species missing from the fossil record? Darwinists successfully argued in the Scopes “monkey trial” of 1925 that it’s bigotry to allow only one theory of origins to be taught. How true. Freedom of thought and inquiry doesn’t exist when students are force-fed only one theory, glibly passed off as fact. J.K. Valentine Priest River, Idaho What’s important is openness of debate
Re: Larry O. Henderson’s letter of Feb. 27.
One man’s science is another man’s myth. In other words, Henderson wishes to bet his life on the “science” of evolution and I wish to bet mine on the “science” of creationism. We could argue for days about which is the true science. I don’t wish to waste my time on that.
If we truly live in a free country and if many people believe in one theory and another large group believes in another, both theories should be taught - not as fact, but as commonly held beliefs.
Whether you wish to admit it or not, many people do believe this perfectly balanced world we live in was created by a designer, not by an accidental collision of cosmic winds.
I can hear the cry, But my science is fact! Why should I have to put up with your antiquated myths? I must admit that I have cried out, But my science is fact! Why should I have to put up with your modern, constantly changing myths?
In a truly free country, we shouldn’t fear an opposing viewpoint. We should fear the banning of an opposing viewpoint. Cary O. Seward Spokane
What are evolutionists afraid of?
With all due respect to Larry O. Henderson’s letter of Feb. 27, evolution is still just a theory and far from proven. Only for the true believer is it proven beyond a shadow of a doubt and true believers don’t need science anyway.
It’s ironic to witness the censorial dogmatism of many so-called evolutionists. What are they afraid of? Academic freedom? The First Amendment? That high school students are bright enough to realize that Darwin’s theory has a few holes? That it’s little more than a dressed up version of “spontaneous generation” - a theory advocated by Aristotle (and others) and convincingly disproved by Pasteur over a century ago?
Do they fear that the fossil record doesn’t show the gradual progression from simple to complex life forms theorized by Darwin, but rather shows the sudden appearance of nearly every major group of organisms alive today in Cambrian rock samples? That transitional forms seem inordinately scarce? That geneticists have not been able to come up with one convincing case of a mutation that was clearly beneficial to an organism? That natural selection has in fact weakened and not strengthened the gene pool?
No, most high school students are mature enough to handle a range of possibilities -even the possibility that Darwin was wrong. What about you? Paul J. Schrag Davenport, Wash.
Simple solution: Don’t teach this
A Feb. 27 letter to the editor addressed the idea of keeping clear what is faith and what is science. Beyond this, I think we need to keep clear what is science and what is scientific hypothesis.
I believe that God created Earth and placed man here to inhabit and take care of the Earth. I also believe evolution and adaptation occurs within species. A species of animal may change, grow longer hair, develop a sharper beak, etc., to adjust to a changing environment. Scientific evidence proves this type of evolution.
However, how Earth came to be, and how man and creature came to live on it is not so well proven. The many hypotheses have no business being in the public school curriculum.
When we set out to adopt creationism or evolutionism as appropriate topics in schools, we must consider why we teach children about this. Is it necessary for public schools to explain to children how Earth began? I don’t believe so.
Children do need a broad understanding of how our Earth works, how things change and adapt throughout the life of our planet. These teachings can be achieved without exposing children to a debate about how Earth was formed and how life began here.
I hope my children’s religious beliefs will not be challenged by scientific supposition in the public schools. Shaun Lorraine Brown Liberty Lake
Parents can teach creation
While I agree that public schools should teach the theory of creation along with the theory of evolution, based on the poor way our nation’s schools teach basics such as arithmetic, spelling, grammar and U.S. history, it might be better for parents to teach their children about creation at home.
Many books on creation are available at Christian book stores, including ones by physicians, geophysicists, chemists, geologists, physicists, paleontologists and biophysicists. Parents who teach creation on their own will be certain it’s being taught and will be able to answer any questions about any other subject the child is having a hard time understanding. David C. Fernau Spokane
IN THE PAPER
Mangan, police usually get bad press
I congratulate Police Chief Terry Mangan on his acceptance of a post with the FBI, as it is aware of his ability and that he made page 2 of The Spokesman-Review, rather than page 8 or 10. Of course, if he had told off someone he felt could endanger his family, that would have made the front page.
I attended the police employee awards ceremony, a nice, warm affair with many standing ovations. The Spokesman-Review’s coverage made it sound as though two officers were honored because they shot an individual and didn’t mention that those shootings no doubt saved others’ lives.
Coverage of our police chief and officers has been biased for several years. I hope the new police chief will receive fairer treatment. Marie E. Yates Spokane
Watch what you call ‘funky’
Re: “Shadow over Sprague” (Feb. 22).
It’s irresponsible to refer to the East Sprague area as a collection of “funky” antique shops and “junk malls.”
The actual antique district of East Sprague starts with Country Classics Antique Mall and Marcus Toys and Collectibles in the 1800 block, to the Antique Emporium in the 1900 block, down a few doors to The Collectible Shoppe and More Better Antiques owned by Roy McCloud (which has some of the finest true antiques in this region) and Bennys’ Antiques (which also carries some of the nicest antique furniture). To be referred to as “junk marts” by reporters who never even bothered to interview us is a disservice to the business people who invest their time and energy to make shopping pleasurable in this area. The Antique Emporium, Spokane’s largest antique mall, wasn’t even contacted.
It’s sad and unacceptable that girls are being killed for whatever reason. It’s also unacceptable to suggest responsibility for these acts fall on the neighborhood.
Not one word in your article dealt with the police position of ignoring prostitution in this area. One day last summer, when three prostitutes were on our corner, we called Crime Check over 20 times in two hours trying to get an officer out to remove them. We finally just asked them to move, which they graciously did. Now that the glare of publicity is on, they’re finally paying attention.
This seems to be a classic case of a reporter taking a story where they think it should go. Tom Nick, owner Antique Emporium, Spokane
It was the Spokane Youth Symphony
On behalf of all the talented, dedicated musicians and staff members of the Spokane Youth Symphony, I’d submit this correction regarding the photo caption (Region, Feb. 25) informing readers of an extraordinary event which occurred at the Opera House.
The Spokane Youth Symphony is in its 48th season. Our orchestra members represent most, if not all, Spokane-area school districts. Some commute from as far as Coeur d’Alene, Sandpoint and Colville.
The concert highlighted in your photo was in fact our l5th annual appearance at the Opera House. Sponsored by Boeing and in cooperation with Spokane School District 81, thousands of fifth- through eighth-grade students were invited to “see” music as Jung Ho Pak, associate conductor of the Spokane Symphony, and our four orchestras led them on a musical sightseeing expedition, complete with animals and a Russian bridge.
I am reluctant to report these misrepresentations since all involved with our efforts feel that any coverage was an improvement over years past. However, our delight this year was quickly dashed when that caption even failed to name our organization correctly!
Attend “The Age of Exuberance” performed by the Spokane Youth Orchestra on March 15 at the Met. Tori A. Piecuch, board president Spokane Youth Symphony
Praying boy photo ‘a winner’
The picture of the praying boy on the front page of the paper on Ash Wednesday just took my breath away. I certainly do hope it has been submitted for some kind of award. It is already a winner! Jacqueline Volz Spokane
Denoting region demeans Ukraine
Re: “A church is born again” (March 2).
Staff writer Kelly McBride regrettably reflects an illiterate and insulting attitude toward people who have endured this humiliation far too long.
It is not the Spokane, it is not the Washington, it is not the America and it certainly is not the Ukraine.
Ukraine is a free and independent country, and whenever a geopolitically incorrect reporter refers to it as a geographical region, insult is heaped upon injury to these proud people. Thomas C. Garrett Spokane