Author: The Seattle Times: Northwest Voices

Not enough funding for OSHA to adequately protect workers

The recent accident at the Tesoro refinery in Anacortes provides us with a teachable moment about the role of government in providing for the life and safety of its citizens. [“Refinery tragedies all too common,” page one, April 4.]

There are certainly technical reasons behind the cause of this accident, but one of our societal causes is the poor oversight provided by the Occupational Safe and Health Administration (OSHA), charged with protecting the workers in the plant.

It is not that OSHA does not care or is staffed by incompetents. Quite simply, there are not enough tax dollars available to fund OSHA adequately. As a result, it is understaffed and the existing staff is often inadequately trained to accomplish timely, competent inspections and has been given little in the way of real teeth to enforce and fix the violations it does find. It is a sad state of affairs when agencies such as OSHA are unable to adequately protect society because society does not give them funds they needs to do their jobs well.

If we want a society of low taxes and limited government, accidents such as the one at Tesoro and the deaths that result are what we must learn to live with.

What a weird thing it is to see groups such as the tea party preach low taxes and limited government when it seems that the tea party is made up largely of people who are the workers or retirees from places such as the Tesoro refinery. They are the members of our society who are the most vulnerable to these kinds of accidents, yet are the ones marching in the street to have it that way.

— Jeff Christensen, Kirkland

Coverage details still unclear

The story “Parents ask about health bill, young adults” [News, April 2] raises more questions than it gives answers.

It does point out that nobody knows what is in the overall bill. The politicians voting for it tout certain provisions in general terms implying that it is a done deal. For instance, “You can keep your children on your policy now until they are 26.” The article clearly shows that this may not be the case.

Must they live at home or still attend college? Would this be automatic on a health-care policy provided by an employer? What constitutes a “dependent”? If they live far away rather than at home, would area coverage restrictions in their parents’ policy be applicable? Until all these questions can be answered, no one can say for certain.

There are many more questions in other parts of the bill that require detail and definitions before any of us will know how it affects us. Do not count on general statements by politicians to tell you what is in it for you. The pudding is in the detail.

— Wayne Jensen, Kirkland

Chase should have pitched in

I am not a purchaser of fireworks, nor do I own a flag or wear flag-related clothing or accessories. But I do enjoy the Fourth of July, particularly the fireworks. [“Donors, big and small, fired up to save Fourth,” page one, April 2.]

I understand how hard it is in this economy to find a sponsor now that WaMu is no more. But that left me wondering something: The only business (or individuals, for that matter) that are doing well in this economy are the banks and the bankers.

Further, Chase stepped into WaMu’s shoes pretty seamlessly and tried to convince the community that it was part of the community. Remember the ads about how they are the big small-town bank? Remember the billboards of silhouetted bicyclists being all Seattle-like?

Chase got the monetary benefit of people giving it the benefit of the doubt, but yet, when it comes to the community aspect of WAMU, it shrugged and walked away.

The WAMU philanthropy was felt by many organizations in Washington. That philanthropy and sense of community has gone straight into the pocket of Chase. Its executives’ lack of stepping up to the plate for the fireworks is just another example. They asked us to do them a favor and then did not return it.

Perhaps Seattle residents should reconsider doing business with them —I know I am.

— Jeremy Cairns, Seattle

Still proud, Seattle?

This is a response to the editorial “The show will go on” [Opinion, April 5].

Are you proud, Seattle?

If that money was not destined for the fireworks display, it could have been used to feed and shelter the homeless or for medical attention for those who could not afford it; or even to spay and neuter dogs and cats so that our shelters would be less full.

It could have purchased books for schools or be sent as aid to earthquake victims in Haiti.

But the money was not raised for any of these causes. The public outpouring of support was for something near and dear to the hearts of those who donated. They want a fireworks display.

Are you still proud, Seattle?

— David Orders, Edmonds

Real story behind the Falkland Islands

The assertion that the Obama administration of “out-of-the-blue … called for Britain to negotiate with Argentina over the Falklands.” [“With friends like us …,” Opinion, April 3] is wrong.

The entire conversation is documented in the transcript of the news conference with President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina and U.S. Secretary Hilary Clinton.

President de Kirchner suggested possible U.S. assistance in resolving the Falkland Islands sovereignty issue between Great Britain and Argentina. This was not to decide whether the Falkland Islands should be awarded to Great Britain or Argentina, but rather to permit compliance with U.N. resolutions to remedy the colonial status of those islands.

Those U.N. resolutions pertained to allowing the Falkland Islands to decide its political status, which could be independence or some form of political alignment with another country. The same resolutions apply to three U.S. territories.

This was all part of a long-standing U.N. requirement to decolonize the 16 remaining colonies in the world.

President de Kirchner, responding to a question at this news conference, clearly stated the purpose was “to get both countries to … address these negotiations within the framework of the U.N. resolutions strictly.” She and her advisers “do not want to move away from that in any letter whatsoever, any comma, of what has been stated by dozens of U.N. resolutions and resolutions by its decolonization committee.”

— Malcolm McPhee, Sequim

American history goes rogue

This is a response to “Rewriting American history” [News, April 4].

Revisionist history was a charge levied against the Soviets. We maintained that our history contained the credible elements of a social science. Now Texas greets Joe McCarthy as a hero, Franklin D. Roosevelt as a Great Depression instigator and President Barack Obama as an Islamic socialist?

If ideologues want to reconstruct events and people, let them write books such as Palin’s “Going Rogue” and sell them at Costco.

But in schools, children risk brainwashing. Ideology triumphs over providing them with objective constructs for understanding events.

Sure, the left and right pen nastily tendentious stuff. Pundits for each side rebut. Who rebuts in school when Teddy Roosevelt is portrayed as a socialist? What test grade do you get for thinking of him, instead, as the quintessential Rough Rider?

Pretty scary, and growing. That is what the right seems bent upon: Recreating events to suit the special interests funding supposedly neutral think tanks that disguise the ideology, calling it “history.”

— Peter Loeb, Sequim

Where were the Space Needle owners?

Editor, The Times:

It is interesting, reading about all the donations for the fireworks coming from companies large and small, as well as individual citizens who love the show over Lake Union. [“Donors, big and small, fired up to save Fourth,” page one, April 2.]

However, I find it strange that out of all the donations offered, not one dime has come from the place of business that actually makes a lot of money from that show each year: the Space Needle.

The owners charge $100 and more to “enjoy” the fireworks from the top of the Needle, but cannot put any dollars toward the show that brings them revenue, that the whole city enjoys and that people around the world watch on TV.

Then they propose a museum at the Seattle Center.

Over the last couple of years, the Space Needle’s owners have shown where their interests lie, and it is not with the people or the city of Seattle. They have become interested in the bottom line and not with the people who love the Space Needle as their city’s icon.

What a shame.

— Jan Erickson, Issaquah

Saving fireworks the least of Seattle’s troubles

I like fireworks as much as the next person, but I cannot see using money to save the fireworks when there are thousands of people who are homeless, children who are starving and many families that are just one unemployment check away from losing a homes in Washington State. I just don’t get it.

I have an idea; how about companies pledging to feed the hungry?

— Dennis Sigler, Everett

Lessons to be learned from nuclear meltdowns

This is a response to “Refineries have history of safety violations” [page one, April 3].

After the Three Mile Island meltdown, the U.S. nuclear industry, led by the NRC, undertook the most comprehensive, thorough and expensive safety-improvement program ever conducted.

All aspects of nuclear power plants that could affect safety were examined and upgraded as found necessary. Some examples — by no means all —include operator training and qualification, safety systems adequacy, information exchange among the operating companies, maintenance practices and quality assurance programs.

The underlying philosophy was defense in depth, meaning provisions must be in place to counteract any event, such as operator error or instrument failure, that could lead to an accident.

Was the program effective? U.S. reactors have had an outstanding safety record since then. No people hurt, no environmental damage, no reactors wrecked.

Should a similar program be undertaken for our nation’s oil refineries?

— Clark McKee, Anacortes

Actions speak louder than words, Dorn

I am writing in response to the gall of Randy Dorn, the state superintendent of public instruction, saying his experience getting a DUI is a teachable moment. [“School Chief Dorn pleads guilty to DUI charge,” NWSaturday, April 3.]

Indeed, if he had the self-awareness to realize his privilege as a white, male public official enabled him to get his jail sentence reduced from a year to a day, it might be. Again, if he had actually taken the high road, as his attorney suggested he did, and had his license suspended for two years and not 90 days, the teachable moment might have some credibility.

Instead he has been offered the easy way out — the road not available to the majority of students and families in the schools he represents. The disconnect is appalling.

Sadly, Dorn exhibits neither the realism nor the cynicism required for his statement about the teachability of the moment to have any validity.

— Jeanne Morel, Seattle

No balance and fairness for Cardinal Levada

Your editorial “A Vatican on defense” [Opinion, April 5] clearly misrepresents the criticism by Cardinal Levada of The New York Times article on the Murphy case.

The Cardinal’s statement in no way criticizes the paper for writing on the Murphy case, but rather criticizes the article for lack of “balance” and “fairness.” It is certainly proper for the media to cover all aspects of the sexual-abuse scandal, but it is also proper for a reader to criticize a newspaper’s article for lack of “balance” and “fairness.”

Unfortunately, the media often portray any challenge to the fairness of any media attacks against the Pope as a protest against any media coverage of the entire subject or any coverage of sexual abuse in the church.

In treating the current accusations, the media all too often completely forget and fail to mention the Pope’s brutally frank letter to the Irish people, his strong support of the U.S. bishops’ new policies against sexual abuse, his meetings with victims of abuse and other steps taken by him to stop abuse.

— Peter Anderson, Mercer Island

Who is the ‘we’?

I understand state AG Rob McKenna’s predictable talking points espoused in his “con” position. [“Sections of new law violate the Constitution,” Opinion, April 4.]

UW law professor Stewart Jay’s reference to long-standing constitutional precedent and the law was substantive and most helpful. His comments on proper vetting and forums were also on point.

But what I don’t get in McKenna’s piece is: Who is the “We” in the “We are also concerned”? It apparently did not include the governor, members of the Legislature and other state officers.

The attorney general mentions his duty per his oath of office. His oath of office also requires him to abide by RCW 43.10.030; to wit: “The attorney general shall … consult with and advise the governor, members of the Legislature and other state officers and when requested, give written opinions upon all constitutional or legal questions relating to the duties of such officers.”

Seems clear and appropriate to me; it appears this did not happen.

So, who is the “we” and why? Also, why did McKenna not do his duty per RCW 43.10.030?

I can answer those questions, but it would have been best had the attorney general been upfront and chosen to address this highly questionable aspect of his actions.

His actions were transparent, purely partisan and constituted a violation of his oath of office. I would encourage him to correct my assessment of his questionable, unilateral initiative and fully disclose the untold portion of his story.

— Dave Stromquist, Tacoma

Law school professor’s conclusion laughable

The commentary by Stewart Jay, UW Law School professor, argued “New health-reform law is definitely constitutional.”

His capacity for fair judgment was discredited by his laughable conclusion that, “the attorneys general … are asking unelected judges to stop a program that has been fully aired in the political process.” On the contrary, the esteemed speaker of the House, while encouraging favorable votes, said the content of the bill will be learned after it is passed.

His sense of validation for things “fully aired in the political process” should actually offer support for state AG Rob McKenna’s position of responsibility for conducting the public’s legal affairs, having endured very public exposure and endorsement of election processes.

Finally, I have to wonder what is so feared from pursuit of a court decision over the health-reform law’s validity if the supporters are so confident of its legality.

— Bruce Martin, Bainbridge Island

Jay shouldn’t rely on precedent; McKenna moved by politics

Regarding the companion opinions of state AG Rob McKenna and law professor Stewart Jay, I have a problem with each.

Since precedent means nothing to the current Supreme Court majority, Jay is wrong to rely on 70 years of precedent.

McKenna is being disingenuous in claiming that he is bound to bring an action where there is an arguable violation of the Constitution. If that were true, he would have long ago brought charges against Bush administration war criminals and perjurers because the impact of their acts on Washington state were substantial.

McKenna is simply motivated by politics. That is even clearer when one looks at the Washington State constitution and statutes that dictate the authorities of executive branch officers and the attorney general.

— George Robison, Gig Harbor

Legislation unconstitutional, socialist ploy

After seeing the billions of dollars in fraud and waste entailed in Medicaid and Medicare, it is unfathomable how anyone can believe giving the federal government more control over health care will solve any problem.

Government is unable to run anything efficiently, especially a federal government; socialist governments are even more inefficient and wasteful.

State Attorney General Robert McKenna should be applauded for his objections to the health-care bill’s unconstitutional edict that everyone is required to buy health insurance.

He might prevail on this one point, but it does not address the main objection: The entire legislation is unconstitutional. It is an attempt by President Obama and others of his liking — both Republican and Democrat — to make this country socialist. We must reject this health-care “fix” in its entirety, not just one objectionable provision.

— Bud Shasteen, Seattle

Next time, I’m voting Green

I am not a Republican or a Democrat, I am an independent voter. I vote every election not for parties, but for issues.

When the government starts to tell me I must buy something or pay a fine, I wonder: Is this still the United States?

I have lived here for 51 years. I served six years in the military; I am a Korean War veteran and have a purple heart.

To tell me if I don’t have insurance, I’ll be fined and put in jail — that is not American.

Next election, I will vote the Green Party. It is a protest vote. Other people have different views than me and that is fine. I do not like somebody telling me if I do not do something, I’m going to get fined.

This is still the United States the last time I checked.

— John Perazzo Sr., North Bend

Hidden racism in the census?

I am very disturbed that our government is perpetuating racism by distinguishing citizens based on differences in race, language spoken, income and other differences to divide us as Americans. [“Census Day important for Latinos,” Opinion, April 4.]

This is either done out of ignorance or designed to promote a consensus that we are not the same and therefore not equal. Casual observation of our society would indicate that we are truly a melting pot and that most Americans are not racist.

Look at the results on “American Idol,” for example. It is obvious most Americans are fair-minded. I propose that if we truly want to stamp out all feelings of difference based upon race, that we remove race as a criteria for anything.

I have to believe that some of our political leaders believe promoting racism under the guise of fairness is to their political benefit. This saddens me, but I believe that the American spirit will overcome all obstacles.

— John Finnila, Renton

Health-care lawsuit motivated by politics

Editor, The Times:

Regarding the state Attorney General Rob McKenna story [“Suit puts spotlight on AG’s politics,” page one, April 1], it is hard to find credibility in the assertion that the anti-health-care lawsuit is not motivated by politics.

Regardless of political affiliation, both ordinary and professional courtesy would seem to call for consultation with Gov. Chris Gregoire— a former AG herself — before joining the suit.

I believe McKenna is the “very good lawyer” he says he is, so it was likely not legal reasoning that prompted him to join a suit most legal experts think has little chance of success. It is disappointing; the decision seems to challenge his usual centrist demeanor.

— Michael Tronquet, Seattle

We’ve lost faith in McKenna

My wife and I are lifelong Democrats who nevertheless voted for Rob McKenna in 2004 and 2008.

We saw qualities in him that seemed to elevate him above the usual partisan squabbling. Indeed, we thought he might one day make a fine governor.

All that has changed.

We are angry that McKenna has chosen his present course of action. We will never vote for him again. I would be surprised if there isn’t a sizable number of other Democrats who feel the same way we do.

— Dave & Mary Richards, Bainbridge Island

From a conservative’s perspective: AG’s lawsuit disappointing

As a conservative, I find state Attorney General Rob McKenna’s joining of the lawsuit by Republican Attorneys General to be disappointing.

It is not just that the lawsuit is, on its face, frivolous and literally does not pass the laugh test; it is because if McKenna objects to the bill as a private citizen, he is free to oppose it any legal way he wants. However, he isn’t opposing it as a private citizen —he’s spending public money on a personal partisan agenda.

That is against the Washington state constitution and the Revised Code of Washington. There is indeed an unconstitutional power grab for political reasons at the heart of this lawsuit. It isn’t by the U.S. Congress.

— Hal O’Brien, Kent

Focus should be on policies that actually help students

The editorial [“State needs to prep for Race to the Top,” Opinion, April 1] and so many like it across the country are asking the wrong question.

Rather than asking how to “win” Race to the Top (RTTT) funding, they should be asking which policies actually help children. Continuing to publish such editorials, especially without any counterbalance or even critical examination of policies, is very disappointing.

The demands to get RTTT funds are quite controversial and teachers, unions and citizens are rightly suspicious of them all.

Merit pay based on student test scores? This has repeatedly been shown to be a bad idea.

Charter schools? Likewise, they have been shown to not be any better and are undermining public schools by siphoning funds away.

School turnarounds? Sounds nice, but what this means in RTTT is just like with No Child Left Behind — it is punitive and largely so for poor schools.

National standards? The common core standards being pushed are driven largely from for-profit companies and are heavily criticized by educators.

Washington should put its time and effort into real educational reform.

— Demian Godon, Seattle

Keep Washington waters clean; alternatives are plentiful

As a Washingtonian, I am outraged at President Obama’s offshore-drilling announcement. [“Obama wants to open part of Alaska coast to oil drilling,” Page One, Mar. 31.]

Our treasured waterways are quintessential to our state’s identity and allure. Tourism is the third-largest industry in Washington state. Drilling endangers tourism as well as commercial and recreational fishing, which employ more than 4 million people around the country.

We simply cannot afford to put our oceans under the gun.

There is no need to threaten our beaches, wildlife and tourism with oil spills and pollution when we have much better solutions for ending our reliance on fossil fuels — putting cleaner cars on the road today that will dramatically cut oil consumption; shifting to plug-in cars powered by the wind and the sun that use little to no oil and investing more in public transportation.

— Cara Dolan, Seattle

Think about the children

As a lifelong resident whose family has enjoyed the Seattle Center for generations, I cannot imagine a glass museum replacing the rides and games of the Fun Forest. [“Chihuly plan lauded at forum to discuss Seattle Center space,” NWWednesday, March 31.]

The city should be thinking about providing a facility that caters to fun activities such as skating, bowling, batting cages, arcades, etc. Every child in our family has enjoyed summers at the Fun Forest. I doubt they would have as much fun looking at colored glass.

— Glenn Noller

Seeing the future at the Seattle Center

In 1962 when the Seattle Center was the site of the World’s Fair, I remember walking around on the crowded, hot concrete all day and going home with an awful headache. It was years before I was drawn back.

Recently, I arrived at the Center too early for a program on a Sunday morning. Killing time, I walked everywhere and was surprised by the rich landscape plantings tucked all over the Center. They added magic between the buildings.

It is hard to imagine how drastically things can change in our familiar surroundings. But compare the Seattle skyline now to what it was 30 years ago. Hardly anyone lived downtown then, but look at the massive residential growth within a mile of the Seattle Center now.

Future development will double and triple the number of people living downtown in the next 20 years. In that future, every single bit of green, open space we save or create will assume an importance that we can hardly imagine today.

As Central Park is the heart and lungs of New York City, the Seattle Center could make a huge contribution to our shared well-being. Chances to save green open spaces are so rare and costly in Seattle, let’s save what we can before the concrete closes in.

— Nancy Keith, Seattle

Where’s mine?

I have asked 10 people in my neighborhood if they have received their census forms and not one has received them. [“Census forms due: stand up, be counted,” Opinion, April 1.]

I called the help number and after several minutes dealing with an answering system, a recording said, “If you have not received your forms by April 12, call back.”

I live in a nice senior community of 72 town houses. Perhaps the Census Bureau does not want to count senior citizens or perhaps it is providing jobs for people by not sending out the forms, thus giving opportunity to government-employed census-takers. This is another example of our tax dollars at work.

— Joan McCormick, Auburn

Census help line unhelpful, if not frustrating

I did not receive a 2010 census form. I did try to contact the Census Bureau by using its toll-free number.

After giving information regarding my need for a form, the automated phone system said it needed me to say my census ID number that is on the census form and the envelope.

I did not have that number because I did not receive the form. I was supposed to state “no” at the prompt and I did so, only to have the automated system tell me it could not help me since I did not have the ID number. The call was then ended.

I do not know where else to go from here. I did my civic duty by attempting to get a form. The government’s system has failed.

— Basma O’Neill, Everett

Don’t make same-sex couples ‘pretend’ they’re married

If our country wants to count same-sex couples, it should legalize their relationships —not ask them to pretend they are married when they aren’t..

— John Medlin, Seattle

United States helping Israel break international law

It is imperative that American citizens realize the astronomical $3 billion tax dollars given to Israel —not a needy country —are being used to buy back our armaments, then used to illegally occupy and massacre Palestinians. [“Standing up for Gaza’s people,” Opinion, March 31.]

The United States is complicit in breaking international; aw and it is paramount that the world put pressure on the governments who are abetting this situation, the United States being the worst.

— Kit Kettredge, Quilcene

Palestinians paying the price

We are appalled by the lack of debate within the U.S. Congress regarding its extreme ongoing financial, military, diplomatic and media support of the more than 40-year oppressive occupation by the Israeli armed forces within the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. This issue is the most contentious issue of our time and it deserves our attention.

The Palestinians were not responsible for the Holocaust, but they are paying for it with their lives and their land.

Palestinians face death, terror and violations of human rights on a daily basis. The destruction of their homes and farmland, the confiscation of their land and water, their imprisonment in ghettos, the wanton shooting of Palestinians by the Israeli forces, the imprisonment of thousands of Palestinians —many of them women and children —and the daily humiliations endured by the Palestinian people cry out for justice.

There is a corollary in the history of the Palestinian struggle for justice with that of the Native Americans: enforced displacement, marginalization, confiscation of resources and demonization.

— Barbara & J. Glenn Evans, Seattle

Why Israel should be punished

Abigail Sloan’s letter in The Times asks, “Why punish Israel?” [Opinion, April 1].

We punished Germany when it invaded Poland. The Israelis have no better claim to Palestinian land than Germany had for Polish land.

The argument that Israel was there 2,000 years ago is irrelevant. Ancestors of the Arabs were there before them and after them. All other arguments of the Israelis are equally bogus. The Israelis are the invaders.

She asks, “What about attacks from Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran?” I will ask: What about Israel’s pre-emptive strikes against Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Gaza?

Like the Poles did, Hamas and Hezbollah justifiably want their country back. Israel is the invader.

Finally, she asks why Obama is publicly humiliating “our most reliable Middle Eastern Ally.” Reliable? Ally in what cause?

I find it appalling that anyone thinks Israel is our ally when it is really a millstone around our neck. U.S. aid to Israel after its invasion of Palestine and continuing tyranny over the quarter it didn’t steal is a vile stain on the United States’ integrity and reputation for justice.

Support of Israel is souring most of the Muslim world against us.

— Spencer Higley, Edmonds

Rainier Vista alternative designed to enhance access

Editor, The Times:

In the interests of making sure the public is fully informed about an important regional transportation project, we are writing because several key pieces of information about Sound Transit’s University of Washington station were missing from “UW pushes for grander, costlier light-rail entrance” [Seattle Times, page one, March 30].

After the UW and Sound Transit agreed in 2008 on the pedestrian overpass solution for campus access, Seattle Department of Transportation officials expressed reservations about the overpass because of its visual impacts, potential to detract from the pedestrian environment, and potential to exacerbate pedestrian and bicycle conflicts at the Burke-Gilman Trail. SDOT recommended City Council conceptual approval of the bridge but asked the UW and Sound Transit to join in a study of alternatives for moving Sound Transit passengers to various parts of the campus. This was not a UW “U-Turn” as the article stated.

Sound Transit, the city of Seattle and the UW analyzed a range of options and narrowed the analysis to the Rainier Vista Plan. This option eliminates the pedestrian overpass, potentially makes it easier for pedestrians and cyclists to access the campus, and can provide for much-needed bus-layover space and new options for solving the train-bus intermodal connection at Husky Stadium.

King County Metro recognizes the bus transit advantages of the Rainier Vista Plan and has applied for a grant to enhance trolley service on a new lowered Northeast Pacific Place. The plan also improves the pedestrian and bicycle continuity to the Montlake Bridge and the proposed Highway 520 trail across Lake Washington.

The cost of this alternative — which is designed to enhance access to the campus and support the regional transportation plan — is higher than originally planned by an estimated $12 million. We are continuing the analysis, including looking for ways to fund the revised plan, acknowledging that the impacts of the prolonged recession and decline of key revenues make it particularly challenging. A decision on whether to proceed with it will need to be made by June. This project is not about “grander” or more “elegant.” It is about finding the best transportation solution for our region.

— Mark Emmert, president, University of Washington

— Joni Earl, CEO, Sound Transit

Lawsuit could take toll on taxpayers’ already snug budgets

In response to Andrew Garber’s “Suit puts spotlight on AG’s politics” [page one, April 1], Washington state residents should be aware of the potential consequences of state Attorney General Rob McKenna’s constitutional challenge.

According to McKenna, Florida AG Bill McCollum will take the lead in trying to negate the recent health-care bill. Washington state’s involvement will be limited to participating in “conference calls” and the “review of briefs,” implying there will be no cost to Washington state residents.

As it now stands, this may not be the case.

As reported by University of Washington law professor Stewart Jay at the Mar. 30 health-care panel held at the campus, McCollum intends to hire outside counsel to represent the various states challenging the validity of the health-care bill. He plans on hiring the law firm he worked for prior to becoming attorney general.

Most law firms do not work for free when representing state interests. As such, when the lawsuit runs its course, various states that entered the lawsuit will eventually have to “pay the fiddler.”

Knowing that thousands and potentially millions of dollars may be spent on the lawsuit, what contribution does McKenna expect the citizens of Washington to pony up? He may be, as he professes, a “very good lawyer,” but I believe he is far from a truthful lawyer. What will taxpayers be paying toward this frivolous lawsuit?

— LeRoy Loiselle, Seattle

Gregoire’s response misses the point

Gov. Chris Gregoire has received numerous letters opposing her negative, hyperpartisan characterization of Washington state AG Rob McKenna’s lawsuit against the federal government over health-care reform.

The governor’s response to her critics simply repeats the mantra from Washington, D.C., and the Democrats who voted for this massive reform. She misses the point people are trying to get across: Specifically, there is broad agreement regarding the need for reform to supply affordable health care for those who are not covered or are under-covered.

However, the solution passed by Congress and signed by President Obama is akin to throwing a life preserver to the drowning and at the same time, mistakenly throwing an anchor to those who are patiently treading water in today’s fragile economy.

Let’s call this reform for what it really is —a European-style, big-government redistribution of wealth, which is a proven formula to steal the liberties of the people by creating an all-knowing nanny state.

— Steven Cheesebrew, Renton