Letters To The Editor

WASHINGTON STATE

Pound-foolish initiatives a curse

Oregon State University, Corvallis, received a report card from the nonprofit National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education showing a failing university: a D in affordability, a D in college participation rates and C grades in other areas. It’s also near the bottom in the percentage of people 18-24 enrolled in college. Statewide, its average tuition is nearly $3,500, in comparison with California’s $2,700.

Oregon’s too-high tuition is a result of Measure 5, the property tax cut passed by voters in 1991. In one year alone, the state’s universities raised tuition 38 percent and lost 5,000 students.

Washington State University faces a similar situation. The recent initiatives have reduced our tax revenue and our faculty hasn’t kept up on salaries. The best faculty members are leaving and it is difficult to recruit new ones.

What can we do to avoid Oregon’s problems? Initiatives bypass our elected representatives. Don’t sign the original petitions. Vote no on initiatives that reduce state revenue.

Can we improve these initiatives to make them less drastic? It’s a forlorn hope, but perhaps initiatives can be amended out of the Constitution. Walter A. Becker Pullman

Reform unjust adoption laws

In the Nov. 2 article, “The Art of Regret,” there was a reference to how much more the birth mother suffers than the father. I believe that in the adoption process the birth father is terribly neglected.

Many times, an adopted person can’t find any information about their birth parents.

My mother was adopted when she was a very small baby. She wasn’t able to find her own father’s name without the help of her mother. This information should be open to the public to access, easy to find.

Until a couple of months ago my grandfather (my mom’s birth father) wasn’t even aware that he had a daughter. This is terrible. He should have the God-given right to know that my mother existed. The reason he didn’t know was because my mom’s birth mother was able to put her up for adoption without the consent of the birth father.

There should be a law against this. The adoption papers should have had to be signed by both parents. This would guarantee that the father knew about the child and then the child could easily be found. This terrible system should be changed. Levi T. Martin Spokane

BUSINESS AND LABOR

Utilities pushed people to use gas

We have an energy crisis. Avista has already received 31 percent increases in natural gas rates and wants another 29 percent. To pave the way and explain the reasons for these monumental increases, Avista took out a full-page ad in The Spokesman-Review highlighting the causes of energy shortages, and pointing out that the increased numbers of computers online would be major culprits. Avista, however, neglected to point out that it (previously WWP) and other power companies spent huge amounts of money over several years touting what a wonderful bargain natural gas was, begging the public to convert to it from other energy sources. The company forgot to mention in its ad that the companies subsidized the homeowners in their energy assistance programs to make the change. I myself received monetary assistance from WWP to change from an electric water heater to a gas one.

Now who is the culprit? Computers? I think not. I think the power companies were the major players in creating our current crisis and that they should accept their responsibility not in increased rates but decreased profits. We, the public, believed them and only did as they asked. Marlys L. Heston Spokane

Richardson should take close look

U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson is right on the money to question Kaiser Aluminum’s intent with its profits derived from power sales and subsequent shutdown of its Mead smelter (Spokesman-Review, Dec. 12). It’s his job to protect a federal resource from corporate greed.

If Rep. George Nethercutt is serving the same public (I think that’s what he’s supposed to do) he should not be opposed to an exploration of Kaiser-Maxxam Corp.’s latest surprise announcement to put families out of work. If it can be proved that this truly is a capital investment to keep the aluminum industry viable in our area, great.

I wish Richardson luck in his efforts. He’ll need to look long and hard to find the real reasons for Kaiser’s sell-off. Ruby A. Carney Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Takes two to be so irresponsible

In response to the letter from Diane Delanoy (Dec. 18) about irresponsible young women: What about the irresponsible young and not-so-young men who feel it’s OK to father children without regard for their responsibility to care for, feed and clothe those children?

There are both young women and men who go into relationships irresponsibly. It would behoove our society to encourage young people when they make mistakes or are faced with a life-changing experience, and to try to help them make wise decisions. Certainly, taking of an innocent life or abandoning a young woman and her child is not a humane solution. Surely, most of us could afford to help just a little.

Come on, guys, either step up and assume your responsibility or keep your pants zipped. Catherine L. Schauble Post Falls

Faulty notions serve us all badly

Re: “Bad decisions create welfare moms” (Letters, Dec. 18). Diane Delanoy tries to rebuff the statement by the Rev. Frank Bach about welfare reform creating a situation in which many women who have small children at home must go to work. It’s not welfare reform, preaches Delanoy, it’s the bad decision of young women who make babies they can’t provide for.

For starters, many single mothers were abandoned by their husbands. What does that have to do with “making babies?” Out-of-wedlock pregnancies are not desirable but that fact will not eliminate them. In the case of a never-married single mother who takes care of her child, unlike the rest of us who never fail, she made a bad decision. However, she also made two noble and brave decisions: to not abort the child and to not put it up for adoption.

What’s wrong with providing generous financial support to welfare moms? Mothers, welfare or otherwise, should have the option of staying home with their children with no substantial financial sacrifice. If we as a society are impotent to cater to this need then we are missing the best investment we can make - investment in our children. Investment in our future. Peter C. Dolina Veradale

What about no-account males?

In response to Diane Delanoy’s Dec. 18 letter, “Bad decisions create welfare moms,” she lambastes welfare moms for their “poor decisions to have children when they are not able to provide for them.”

These women do not get pregnant by themselves. I find it sad that Delanoy does not point any blame at the so-called men who got these women pregnant and are not taking any responsibility. Most women on welfare are raising and supporting these children alone and the men are not held accountable.

As a woman herself, it is sad that Delanoy has fallen into the trap of blaming only the women who get pregnant instead of sharing the blame with the men in these cases who are nothing more than sperm donors. Anne Stanek Spokane

Most teen gun owners safe, sane

I agree with John Lang, Dick Bond and others who wrote positive letters recently regarding Nick Burger. I, too, was raised with guns. At the age of 12 I kept a .22 rifle and 12-gauge shotgun in my room, along with the ammunition. My two older brothers also had guns. We used them for hunting, target, trap and skeet shooting. Dad was often complimented on the fine, upstanding sons he was raising. We never injured or intimidated anybody with our guns.

I found encouraging your picture and story of a teenager wielding a shotgun in the spirit of self-defense. Though perhaps lacking a bit in savvy and judgment, the kid had moxie and good intentions.

We should realize that not all kids who own guns are irresponsible, maladjusted misfits. In fact, my guess is that the vast majority of teenage gun owners are healthy, responsible citizens who respect authority. I am comforted in the belief that there are far more Nick Burgers in this country than there are Columbine duos. Doug F. Naugler Spokane

`Nobody is worth $252 million’

Regarding Alex Rodriguez, enough is enough! Have we gone mad as a society? Nobody is worth $252 million not to mention in a noncontact sport.

This is ludicrous. I can see a professional athlete getting paid high salaries, especially when life as a pro athlete is usually less than the life span of my dog. But come on - $252 million? Did he cure some pandemic disease? No. Did he discover life on other planets? No. Did he save thousands of lives by playing baseball? Nope.

I think we need to get a grip. This has spun seriously out of control, because you know there is another player out there right now going, “He got what? Where’s my cell phone? I need to call my agent.”

Let’s look at this another way. A-Rod’s going to get paid approximately $129,000 per game. Per game! This is a kid’s game that we love to watch. But just when baseball was making a comeback with spectators, this has to happen.

Let’s put this in perspective. The people who teach our children to read, write and play baseball start at about $22,000 a year. One of the most powerful positions in the world - and it’s not shortstop - the president of the United States, only gets paid $200,000 a year.

Professional athletes’ salaries are way out of control. Let’s turn off the TV and go play baseball. Douglas A. Britton Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Gore erred in seeking partial recount

Recently, while the Supreme Court was pondering the Bush appeal, Lanny Davis, a former Clinton administration appointee, made a very revealing comment while on “The O’Rielly Factor” news show.

O’Reilly felt Al Gore had missed his opportunity to take the high ground in the Florida recount. Davis felt that immediately after the original machine recount, Gore should have requested a statewide manual recount, using a statewide standard of a punched-through hole and or hanging chad, no dimpled or “pregnant” chads, no bends or marks. But to request manual recounts in selective Democrat counties, directed by Democrat-led canvassing boards, using ever-changing criteria, produced the 36-day court battles and indeed was unfair - as was verified finally by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The fact there were immediately eight lawsuits filed by individual Democrat citizens following the election, and with the count being so close, the Bush team had no choice but to proceed in the courts in an effort to protect Bush’s lead.

Davis was right. If Gore had requested a statewide recount from the start, it might not have been granted but at least the perception of fairness would have been credited to his cause and perhaps would have led to a win. But the way the process proceeded was not fair.

Hopefully, we can now all pull together, again showing the rest of the world that our method of government, though not perfect, can continue to be an example for others. John Davis Spokane

Bush did not steal the election

To all of you disappointed Democrats and alarmists who claim five justices of the Supreme Court handed George W. Bush the election, consider this.

The election decision would not have reached the Supreme Court if: 1, Al Gore had accepted the legal recount and time frame that Florida law provides; 2, Gore had not appealed to the Florida Supreme Court when lower courts ruled in favor of existing Florida law; and 3, the Florida Supreme Court was not made up of activist Democrat-appointed justices and had refused to create law from the bench.

I find it amazing that those who complain that Bush won his presidency because of judicial fiat ignore the fact that Gore was attempting to overturn, by judicial fiat, an election where the winner was legally certified. Bush won the election Nov. 7 and won the recount. Therefore, he stole nothing and was given what was rightfully his.

It was a close race and both candidates have much to be praised for concerning their tone during the five weeks of legal wrangling. Gore deserves praise for his concession speech and not wanting to drag out his legal battles with no hope of winning.

Now we can all get on with a more important celebration. Merry Christmas to all. Varnel Williams Moscow, Idaho

Wholesale curtailing of rights is wrong

Every time we turn around, some liberal wants to enact new laws to take away everyone’s rights because of the irresponsibility of a few. It may be guns. It may be medical care issues. It may be SUVs. Now, it’s cell phones in cars (Opinion editor John Webster, Dec. 15).

I am sure statistics could show that when someone is talking to someone else in a car, accidents go up. I had an accident myself as a teen because I was adjusting the radio. Does that mean we should do away with radios in cars?

All of our lives we have talked to other people while driving. Sometimes they are in the front seat, sometimes in the back seat and sometimes on the phone. But should we take away everyone’s right to do something responsibly because of the mistakes, misfortunes or irresponsibility of a few?

Back in April 1994, to an MTV crowd of young folks, President Clinton said, “When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” (As quoted by Lee Bellinger in The American Sentinel.) That sentiment holds troubling implications for the rights of everyone, abusers and nonabusers alike.

Let’s not confuse things by comparing talking with someone “thundering down the street with a TV, a screen to read e-mail and surfing the web while driving.” Media types may think they can confuse people with such nonsense but most Americans still think and act responsibly.

A government that can protect people completely will control them absolutely. Foster W. Cline Sandpoint

OTHER TOPICS

Reasons for joy are with us still

Here we are again at one of the most sacred times of the year - although one can hardly tell with the panic in the streets, the bumper-to-bumper cars and crying babies being pushed around malls for hours. It truly is a time to rejoice! A time to count your blessings, to reconcile your differences, to imbibe and make merry.

So after throwing the annual Christmas party and indulging in a bottle of fine wine, I sit back and reflect on what this Christmas thing is really about. I think about the man in the store who’s a little nervous because a 12-year-old boy with Down syndrome says to him, “Hi, I’m Chris. What’s your name?” The man fumbles a little, then replies, “I’m Bob.” Then Chris says, “Nice to meet you.” The man blushes, then nods, smiles and walks away. I’m glad. I see the innocence of a child force an act of kindness.

I see a child born in a manger - no doctors, no warm fire, no home; just a lean-to, and hay for this weary family to rest on. I see him grow, and like Chris I see him teach others acts of kindness. I see him misunderstood, ignored, brushed off, turned away. But he persisted, like the boy in my story, and one day he made a difference.

This season I’m reminded of this special boy, and a special boy born many years ago, far away. I am comforted in this hope and I rejoice! Lori Michels Spokane

With broader view one sees art

Re: Randy W. Richter’s criticism of the Fremont neighborhood’s Lenin statue (Letters, Dec. 15).

I have been a resident of Seattle’s “Funky Fremont” neighborhood for over a year now. Fremont’s official motto is “delibertas quirkas” or “freedom to be peculiar.” It is a very accepting and eclectic neighborhood.

It seems Richter probably did not stop to enlighten himself with the information near the Lenin statue that explains its presence in Seattle. The owner of the statue was impressed by the art, not the subject. The whole point of the statue in Fremont is to point out that art outlives politics. Good art doesn’t always make us feel good, it just makes us feel. By that definition, I would say that this fits into the category of good art: it evoked a feeling. This does not indicate that Seattle “has shades of pink,” as Richter points out in his uninformed manifesto.

Fremont is a neighborhood that embraces art in all forms. Unfortunately, Richter was too narrow-minded to notice. Darcy L. Brixey Seattle