Letters for July 2

DOE refuses to respond about Hanford

I’m glad somebody is keeping track (or at least trying to) of what’s going on at the Hanford nuclear site. The Department of Energy has not responded to the Columbia Riverkeeper’s request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, which requires a response within 20 business days.

Since an entire year has gone by with no response, the Riverkeeper has brought a lawsuit. DOE is responsible for the cleanup of Hanford’s radioactive hazardous waste created by its production of plutonium for the atomic bomb dropped on Japan in 1945. Cleanup began in 1989, and they are decades from being finished. DOE’s main job at Hanford is cleanup, but it is spending time and money asking for proposals for creating “clean” energy on or near the Hanford site.

One proposal has been made public, but apparently, DOE is unwilling to let the public know about the other possibilities. Columbia Riverkeeper wants to know and wants the public to know. We do know that nuclear waste at the site is huge, and we also know a company is pushing to build a small nuclear reactor there. Though small, these reactors create waste of the most hazardous and long-lived kind and produce the material that is used to make nuclear weapons. They can easily be turned into a production facility for nuclear weapons. We don’t need the waste, and we don’t need the ability to make more nuclear weapons in our backyard. We already have way more than we need to destroy life on Earth as we know it.

Linda Greene

Spokane

Baumgartner fails in responsibilities

Recently, I received mail from Michael Baumgartner’s office which appears to be a mass mailing likely to have been received by most residents of Eastern Washington. There is a headline on each side of the letter; one stating “Baumgartner delivers tax savings,” and on the other side “Baumgartner explains tax cuts in “Big Beautiful Bill.”

There are also photos of Baumgartner with President Trump and another photo with Adams County Sheriff Dale Wagner. Baumgartner seems to be touting his allegiance to Donald Trump, a convicted felon, and his recent “special experience” in his trip to the White House. He sure seems to enjoy brushing shoulders with the executive branch, while failing in the responsibility of honoring his responsibility in the legislative branch. His photo and association with rural law enforcement officials seems to indicate his support of cruel ICE, DHS and Border Patrol roundups. To my knowledge, he has not expressed any empathy for local folks of Hispanic heritage deprived of “due process” rights, while declaring some semblance of sympathy for Afghani and Ukrainian refugees. His support about reduced border crossings may be laudable, but he doesn’t seem to care about the folks already in our country whose due process rights are being violated.

Baumgartners’s defense of the “Big Beautiful Bill” is laughable. The Congressional Budget Office, run by fellow Republicans, is concerned about Medicaid-related reductions, as well the planned increases in the national debt.

Baumgartner seems out of step with the thousands protesting on “No Kings” day.

David Alan McKinney

Spokane

Baumgartner supports 6.7% increase in national debt

As the House and Senate begin to reconcile their versions of the “Big, Beautiful Bill,” Rep. Baumgartner should take a firm stance against any part of the bill that increases the national debt.

The congressman wrote in his newsletter on April 18, “Last year, a shocking 13% of our federal spending went to pay the interest on our $36 trillion national debt. Congress must start to restore fiscal responsibility.”

Then he voted for the Big Beautiful Bill, even though it will increase the debt by $2.4 trillion plus interest expense, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. And we know that DOGE failed to find offsetting savings. This means that Baumgartner is supporting a 6.7% increase in the debt, despite his being “shocked” that 13% of federal spending went to servicing that debt in 2024.

To finance the debt, interest rates will have to be high to attract investors. This will slow down the already sluggish economy even further.

Baumgartner and his GOP colleagues believe that the tax cut extension in the bill will create more revenue; “trickle-down” has not worked since Reagan.

If Baumgartner is so cocksure that revenues will increase, he should propose an amendment to raise taxes on households earning more than $400,000 if revenue increases do not materialize by the end of 2026. This increase should balance the budget and begin reducing the debt. That would take courage, avoid having “shocked” congresspersons, and it would be good for the country.

David Bessen

Spokane