Letters to the editor
A sampling of readers' letters, faxes and e-mail.
The next U.S. senator
As green as Green: Cantwell alone has environment covered
Editor, The Times:
There are clear differences between the national parties' views on the environment, and the state of our state and nation can be decided by a few handfuls of votes this Nov. 7. As an outspoken marine conservationist, I am dismayed that the Green Party has recruited a candidate for this year's U.S. Senate race when Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., has earned our broad support by distinguishing herself as an environmental champion and defender of the public's interests ["Green Party Senate candidate has roots as '60s activist," Times, Local News, Oct. 15].
Despite being a freshman in the minority party who has refused to take PAC money, Cantwell has remarkably been able to defeat the entrenched powers of the energy industry by protecting ratepayers from Enron; keeping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge pristine; and defending the late Washington Sen. Warren Magnuson's legacy from BP's repeated legislative attacks on his tanker restrictions through Washington waters.
While defending against such short-term corporate greed, Cantwell has promoted an economically viable alternative-energy future.
Green candidate Aaron Dixon has a strong record of civic involvement that would better serve us if he sought a more local office for his entry into politics and thought again before suggesting Cantwell's environmental record is overrated.
— Fred Felleman, Seattle
Looking a little flush
Sen. Maria Cantwell claims to be "Looking out for the people of Washington state." Was she looking out for us when she voted against the amendment by Sens. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, which would have kept greedy senators from robbing our Social Security, as they did in 1985, when they appropriated $1.7 trillion for their pork and vote-buying programs? Due to the senators' wealth, they don't care, they don't need Social Security. It failed by one "nay" vote.
Then they whine when warning us of the impending doom for the future of our Social Security.
The real liberal slant is, ironically, when the liberals turn around and blame the shortage on the "baby boomers," who have funded it; while the likes of Cantwell don't want to dry up the source of more money for her and her colleagues to use for pork programs.
Now Cantwell wants to give our money away to "illegal aliens." How does she suppose to fund the liberals' new giveaways? Simple!! Now she wants to put a higher tax on our Social Security benefits, in reality, robbing us more directly.
Stop looking out for me, OK?
Oh, by the way, my name is Terry and I approve this message!!
— Terry Stull, Kennewick
Accent on McGavick
I am so happy Mike McGavick is running for senator. I have long been frustrated by the fact that illegal aliens can come into our country, have a child and be considered American. I have also been frustrated that my money is going to pay for welfare for many of these people. A false Social Security card and they are in. What??
Yes, we are a country of freedom. I feel people should be able to come into our country and stay. But let's use the proper steps. I am also frustrated that our English-speaking country now has "Se habla Español" all over the place. Even McGavick's own Web site [has a Spanish page]. Why can't people learn to speak English? I went to Mexico and spoke Spanish — not great — but I was in their country and I did my best. That's all I ask, is the same.
Thanks again to McGavick for running. There are four voters in my household. McGavick has have every one of our votes.
— Katre Milliron, Puyallup
Free session with this ad
Thanks, Mike McGavick, for your three-quarter page ad in The Times Monday, Oct. 16. Pointing out all the problems the Republican Congress has caused, by its leadership for the past six years! Good example why you need to vote Democratic.
— Virginia Larson, Edmonds
Way, no way
It can't be done
Living in Bellevue, I probably shouldn't get worked up about which abomination Seattle chooses to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, but the way government works, I suspect I'll help pay for it one way or another ["Mayor firm: No new viaduct," Local News, Oct. 16].
Since some rocket scientist will have to figure out how people are going to live without either for five years or so, why not figure out how they can live without it permanently? It seems to me the only reasonable solution is to divert Aurora Avenue traffic to Interstate 5 in the vicinity of Mercer Street with sufficient lanes to solve the Mercer Mess and access Seattle Center at the same time.
Perhaps some lanes in I-5 or the connector would have to be elevated to be accommodated, but so what? Maybe a few more people will have to take the bus.
Some reasonably intelligent traffic analyst should be able to figure out whether a comparable connector is needed south of downtown in the vicinity of the stadiums or whether I-5 should be expanded as far as Spokane Street.
— Gary McGavran, Bellevue
It can and then some
I have been closely following the debate over whether to build a tunnel or an elevated viaduct ["Times poll: Voters say rebuild the viaduct," page one, Oct. 15]. I have listened carefully to all the alternatives. I believe here in Seattle it's of utmost importance that everyone be happy with the final outcome.
In the interest of harmony and moving forward, I would like to propose a solution which I have yet to hear any mention of. Build both! It's the only fair solution.
— Eric Shalit, West Seattle
Still life with saltpeter
Of all the liver-withering news reports in your pages recently — articles about madmen with nukes, schoolboys with guns, executives with sticky fingers and politicians with forked tongues — none was more bilious than "More parents open to large families" [News, Oct. 9]. And no line in the piece was as troubling as the one that suggested that overpopulation has ceased to be a threat.
Virtually every problem haunting humanity today — from road rage to global warming, from dying oceans to territorial warfare, from deteriorating health care to high gas prices — can be traced to the fact that there are simply more of us than a sane society and a livable planet can bear.
Having been addled by their conniving clergy or misreading of Scripture, religious fundamentalists may have a bit of an excuse for breeding like fruit flies, but sophisticated professionals who flaunt their status-symbol Brady Bunches without a thought to the pressures they're putting on our eroding infrastructures and dwindling natural resources are selfish and irresponsible to a criminal degree. I'd like to feed the happy rabbits some anti-Viagra.
— Tom Robbins, La Conner