Arrow-right Camera
Go to e-Edition Sign up for newsletters Customer service
Subscribe now
Opinion >  Letters

Letters for Nov. 8, 2022

Nov. 8, 2022 Updated Tue., Nov. 8, 2022 at 8:12 a.m.

Opposing vouchers

In Idaho education news (, Debbie Critchfield, candidate for state superintendent of public instruction, said she would be willing to consider a voucher system which would allow parents to put public school funds toward non-public education. She indicated that this would not come at the expense of public schools. How is that possible? Where else would the money come from?

Lori McCann, candidate for District 6, Seat A, when asked about vouchers at the League of Women Voters of Moscow forum, said she opposes them because they would take funding away from public schools. She said she would rather support something like the “Empowering Parents Grants” program that the Legislature passed last year (S 1255).

The problem is that funds for that program came from federal American Rescue Plan Act funds in response to student needs during COVID. Those funds ($50 million) were to be used for both public and non-public students to address learning loss and support at risk students. However, since those funds will no longer be available, how does McCann propose funding a similar program without using state public education funds?

I am very concerned that the next Legislature will support voucher systems that will take money away from public schools to support private schools.

Please vote for Terry Gilbert for state superintendent and for District 6 candidates David Nelson, Tim Gresback and Trish Carter-Goodheart who oppose vouchers that would take funds away from our public schools.

Kathy Dawes


Madsen misplaces trust

It has been apparent for some time that Sue Lani Madsen is not capable of rational, reflective, critical thought. Her endorsement of Tiffany Smiley only solidifies this conclusion (“Electing Smiley will help reduce one-party rule,” Nov. 3).

Asking us to vote for a candidate whose campaign is based on hate, fear and divisiveness is bad enough. Asking us to vote for a candidate who believes the big lie of a stolen election is simply preposterous. There is no point in voting for such a person. It will do nothing to protect democracy. Voting for Smiley will do just the opposite. Basic common sense would see this. Ms. Madsen is too enamored with her own agenda to see the damage that a vote for Smiley would precipitate.

Ron Large


A question for all

My question is this: If the Republicans up and down the ballot are election deniers and great fixers, who can tell me (without any doubt) that their criticism of the present administration concerning high inflation, high crime, high gas prices, etc. is warranted and/or deserved?

President Biden and his administration is not at fault for any of that. Inflation in the grocery store and at the gas pumps are solely the blame of all companies that think corporate greed and corporate profits are more important than us ordinary citizens who are struggling to make it in this economy. News flash: There’s nothing Biden or the Republicans can do to stop them. Republicans are very good at casting stones, but very short of solutions to our everyday problems. What ARE the most important issues in this election are democracy (Republican states everywhere are trying to make it harder than ever to vote), personal freedoms (Republican states are all banded together in support of denying all women the right to choose their own health care thanks to the upending of Roe vs. Wade), horrible crime statistics (mostly up and prevalent in all the red states), etc., etc.

Inflation is not going to be fixed by the Republicans! Democracy can be upheld, prevail and show how the majority of people care about it! Vote like democracy depends on you! Enough is enough!

Fiona Gressler


Forward looking energy policy

We are effectively energy independent, but it doesn’t feel like it, Vol II.

The U.S. produces plenty of oil, but it is the wrong type. Historically, imported crude oil from the Middle East and other countries met most of our energy needs, so most of our refining infrastructure is geared towards “heavy” imported oil. Unfortunately, oil companies have not adequately invested in the infrastructure and refining capacity to fully utilize the “light” oil coming from U.S. shale oil producers. Making matters worse, total U.S. refining capacity, which has been declining for the last several years, is 17.9 million barrels/day vs. consumption of 19.8 mb/d, meaning we still have to import significant amounts of refined petroleum products. Finally, few if any institutions are keen on making longer term investments in oil infrastructure considering our goal of transitioning to renewables.

A coordinated, forward looking energy policy over the past few years would have addressed these issues. But this is asking way too much of our brain dead politicians who are consumed with petty partisan politics and special interests. Please consider the “forward” political party.

Jim Baumker

Liberty Lake

Serious policy discussions

In regard to the opinion piece by Michael Gallager about the need for serious policy discussions, most Americans couldn’t agree more (“Time to engage in serious policy discussions,” Nov. 2).

Instead of constantly talking about a stolen election and that Trump is still the president, Jewish space lasers, reptilian democrats that eat babies, world wide inflation that is somehow Biden’s fault, (he has it in for Europe you know) blaming safe vaccines that save lives for making people magnetic or whatever ridiculous thing you can think of.

When do you think Mr. Gallager and the rest of the right might actually get serious about policy? My guess is never.

Bill Todd


McMorris Rodgers has got to go

A recent article in Science News ( shows just how poorly Ms. McMorris Rodgers serves the 5th Congressional District, that’s you and me. In a 16 page letter to the National Academy of Medicine, she and two other members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce claimed that Dr. Peter Daszak, a public expert on disease ecology, especially zoonoses (diseases transmitted from animals to humans), was somehow linked to the mysterious origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. True, Dr. Daszak runs a research nonprofit, EcoHealth Alliance, that has collaborated with China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. McMorris Rogers and colleagues focused on a grant EcoHealth received from the National Institutes of Health (a renowned US institution), that included a subaward to WIV. Reps. McMorris Rodgers; Guthrie, R-Ky.; and Griffith, R-Va., asked NAM to investigate whether Daszak should be expelled from the prestigious institution. A member of the National Academy of Medicine recently confirmed that Dr. Daszak was exonerated by NAM, and further stated that the request for the probe by the representatives was “frivolous and political.”

When we need to be looking at disease prevention on a global scale, when we need representatives who are knowledgeable and thoughtful about issues of science, ones that involve our well-being, Ms. McMorris Rodgers frivolously wastes her time and our tax dollars on political shenanigans and in so doing, does not serve us at all well. McMorris Rodgers has got to go! Please vote for Natasha Hill.

John Ludders


Vote for action

Democratic candidates are more likely to understand how climate chaos effects inflation, immigration, and health. They earnestly want to address ocean acidification, sea level rise and the “feedback loop.”

We need action, not denial and obstruction.

Please do not vote for those who will help the climate crash.

This year especially, it’s critical to vote for Democrats.

Cathy Conrad-Rice


Best navigation strategy

The premier idea for navigating a voting strategy should be “which way forward is best for the country, short and long term.” Where is the compass that will tell us which way is north, so we can be sure we are headed in the right direction? The best source of a social true north is truth! Take that thought with you to the voters booth.

Donald Brady

Liberty Lake

Smiley’s Second Amendment stance

The Senate election choice between Tiffany Smiley and Sen. Patty Murray comes down to one issue. Which of the two would strive to impose tougher gun controls on easy access to automatic rifles and weapons with high capacity magazines?

Ms. Smiley says: Don’t mess with my Second Amendment. Murray’s record shows a solid commitment for gun control at the federal level.

Sorry, Ms. Smiley. We need better than that.

Tom Sowa


This American lie

Baseball, America’s pastime.

Philadelphia lost this year’s World Series, they should say they won. Regardless of the umpires call and several million witnesses.

They should insist the game was stolen. They should say it on TV, hold rallies and spread it across social media.

It’s the American way.

George Lathrop


Letters policy

The Spokesman-Review invites original letters on topics of public interest. Your letter must adhere to the following rules:

  • No more than 250 words
  • We reserve the right to reject letters that are not factually correct, racist or are written with malice.
  • We cannot accept more than one letter a month from the same writer.
  • With each letter, include your daytime phone number and street address.
  • The Spokesman-Review retains the nonexclusive right to archive and re-publish any material submitted for publication.
Unfortunately, we don’t have space to publish all letters received, nor are we able to acknowledge their receipt.
Click here to learn more.

Submit letters using any of the following:

Our online form

Mail: Letters to the Editor
The Spokesman-Review
999 W. Riverside Ave.
Spokane, WA 99201

Fax: (509) 459-3815
Questions?: (509) 459-5430