Author: The Seattle Times: Northwest Voices

Majority still supports reform

Editor, The Times:

There are few certainties in life — in the U.S. in particular — but they include death, taxes and that our health-care system is seriously ill. The Times’ editorial encouraging that health-care reform be put on hold is exactly what we don’t need now [“Health-care reform should be set aside,” Opinion, Feb. 24].

President Barack Obama was elected partly because he was one of the few candidates willing to tackle health-care reform in a serious manner. Your conclusion that the people don’t want it rings hollow. An article in The Times on the same day as the editorial shows that 81 percent [of Americans back new insurance “exchanges”] and 72 percent of back [a requirement that businesses offer health insurance for their full-time employees] included in the Senate health-care bill.

If health-care reform is put on hold now, it could easily be another decade or more — that is how long it has been since the last serious attempt under former President Clinton — before we have leaders with the tenacity to tackle such a huge problem.

Sure, there are problems in the House and Senate versions already passed, but every small step could help some of those suffering under our current inadequate system. We need to keep pressure on our dysfunctional Congress and encourage it to do what is best for the country and not what is best for the individual politician.

— Raymond S. Wilson, Bellevue

Forcing legislation is condescending, elitist

The editorial “Health-care reform should be set aside” was surprisingly refreshing. It was pleasantly unexpected to see such deference to the will of the people instead of the usual “Those ignorant voters will get health care whether they want it or not” and condescending elitism so prevalent in certain political corners.

The assessment that “maybe they should want it but they have other priorities now” was both pragmatic and uniquely American. I also enjoyed the pungent quip that only a “political infant” believes that “a big new federal program will cut spending and rein in waste and fraud.”

— Howard Mannella, Issaquah

Stop delaying, time for reform is now

I’m afraid The Times just put out the most irresponsible and cowardly editorial I’ve seen in years. According to it, we should halt health-care reform because the Democrats lost in Massachusetts, which — in the newspaper’s interpretation — translates to: “Americans don’t want it.”

The editorial also says we should halt health-care reform because The Times thinks it’s not all it should be at this point in time. You have got to be kidding! The rest of the newspaper staff must be cringing under their desks in embarrassment. Shall we now put reform off for another 30 years?

The state of the reform so far may not be all The Times wants it to be, but hey, the negotiations are still on the table last time I looked. It is not the time to throw in the towel and revisit this in the future. We know darn well that to put it off now would mean at least another decade before it is revisited.

We have been that irresponsible for far too long. The time is now. We have come too far and made too much progress to give it all up now. Stand up and be brave, this is not the time to hide our heads in the sand!

— Jeanne Amundsen, Edmonds

Instead of taking step back, add public option

On one hand, I believe reform that moves us in the desired direction and makes room for future enhancements is better than no reform at all. On the other hand, there are elements of reform now missing that are essential. The public option is one such element.

I find it curious that the “Cornhusker Kickback” which benefits Nebraska at the expense of taxpayers from other states was canceled, yet the Joe Lieberman concession — which eliminates the public option — was not. The public option will be an extremely important cost-control element for any health care reform.

I submit that the Lieberman concession must be canceled as well. But where is the political will to make this happen? Starting over at this point will do nothing but delay reform for another generation. This is unacceptable. A reform bill with a few warts is better than no bill at all.

— Phil Hooks, Seattle

Simplification will avoid damaging current system

For months the press has nicknamed health-care reform “Obamacare” but the Obama administration has never offered even an outline of a plan.

Now with the Obama administration’s plan revealed, we find it a polished-up Senate plan, but so vague the Congressional Budget Office was not able to score the costs. Isn’t this just like putting lipstick on a pig?

Financial reviews of all the proposed plans estimate their true cost at or above the government estimates, which would be in line with every other government program that we financially endure in the U.S. today.

We see the financial future of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid heading over the cliff into bankruptcy. I say let’s not screw up our current health-care insurance and health-care system and risk bankruptcy there too!

If Congress simply mandates cross-state purchasing of health insurance, pre-existing condition pools and some minor limits to medical-liability payouts, premiums would decrease and care would increase. There would be no need for this superstructure of government health bureaucracies and all the costs that go with the scenario.

Remember, politicos said these bills would reduce costs. However, across the country, we are all seeing huge insurance premium increases so the insurance companies can be ready to deal with the proposed government regulations already passed in Congress.

— Jim Henderson, Walla Walla

Stall hurts Microsoft, regional business

For more than a decade, the state of Washington, King County and cities surrounding Lake Washington have been forging plans for the replacement of the 520 bridge [“City tries to alter 520 bridge plan,” page one, Feb. 24]. In the meantime, residents of the surrounding communities — particularly the employees of two out of the three largest employers in King County: Microsoft and UW — have less than patiently suffered through these additional years of gridlock. Both on the bridge literally and in the worst of political terms figuratively.

Action has taken too long. Yet last year, that long-awaited action came closer on the horizon. The number of employers and organizations that have come together to support these plans says it is time to initiate this action now.

However, newly sworn-in Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn now sees it as his place to selfishly spend $250,000 the city cannot afford to turn back the clock and restart the process. This would result in much larger expenses to taxpayers and affect the future productivity of the economy in the region. The mayor should be focusing on moving our economy forward, rather than what is obviously most evident: using his new political power to exercise the narrow agenda of the organization he led for years before his new career.

Seattle City Hall should take note when Microsoft says “let’s move” with a [full-page ad in The Seattle Times] of vehicles driving eastbound on 520. Microsoft not only means moving forward on the 520 bridge replacement, it also means that if this continues to drag onward, that they would fully encourage their more than 5,000 employees, their families, its consumer spending and the corresponding tax revenues to move out of Seattle. The company would find new and more viable communities elsewhere to expand their future business and employment. Boeing should be a lesson to the political leaders in our region.

— Kurt Westman, Seattle

Delayed action is timeless

Certain members of the quagmire that’s called Washington state politics are trying to alter an already approved plan for a new 520 bridge. This type of action is nothing new for this city and state.

In 1961, people were concerned about the pollution and noise of the new freeway. They proposed a lid to be added over the freeway where businesses and apartments could be built. Downtown interests were also concerned about the loss of parking spaces and the increase in traffic. The governor in 1961, Albert Rosellini, and then-mayor of Seattle, Gordon Clinton, were unwilling to delay the project — it also was over 10 years in the making. I’m glad to see Gov. Chris Gregoire taking a similar stand.

Too bad the current mayor is a political huckster who can’t even work with his own City Council. It doesn’t matter one iota to these people that it would cost additional millions to change the already approved design and delay the project another two years. We need to get moving on the project, there has been enough debate.

— Kenneth Aitchison, Redmond

Continued study pointless, delays repeal

Is anyone asking our military commanders exactly what it is they want to study for the next year concerning the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” [“Top brass appear split on resolving ‘don’t ask,’.” News, Feb. 24]?

There have already been three studies done on the subject under former administrations that have been shelved. What are they going to study now? How gay and lesbian service members cut their nails? How many drive a certain model of automobile? Or is it which shoe they tie first in the morning?

The Pentagon already admits that there are approximately 64,000 gay and lesbian Americans serving in the armed forces. Is being able to tell the truth going to cause us to lose the wars we are involved in? If there are going to be negative effects on unit cohesion, perhaps those who are negatively impacted should be allowed to leave, instead of forcing those who are doing their job to leave.

Come on senators and generals, your homophobia is showing. It seems like you not only want gays to stay in the closet, but that you can’t even face your own truth.

— Bill Dubay, Seattle

Lack of health care accrues costs exponentially

Editor, The Times:

I agree that the “charmed” quality of life is at risk in Washington state but for very different reasons than The Seattle Times [“Legislators should focus on cuts before taxes,” Opinion, Feb. 21].

There is nothing charming about 100,000 people becoming uninsured overnight. There is nothing charming about temporarily disabled Washingtonians not getting the treatment they need to get healthy and back to work. There is nothing charming about hospital costs and insurance premiums going up because people have lost access to preventive care.

Washington state is not in this situation because of decisions made in Olympia. We are in this situation because of an unprecedented economic recession. And the proposals made by The Seattle Times for closing the budget gap will simply not get us there.

Without new revenue sources, programs like General Assistance-Unemployable and Basic Health will be eliminated and we’ll all pay exponentially. Simply put, Washington cannot afford to eliminate basic health care. We can, however, afford to eliminate tax loopholes and pay small tax increases. These measures are a small price to pay.

— Rebecca Kavoussi, Seattle

Taxing out-of-state visitors

I was intrigued by the idea of paring special-interest tax breaks to boost the state’s budget as outlined in Jim Brunner’s piece “$500M in tax breaks targeted” [News, Feb. 24]. I think the notion of adopting a plan for out-of-state visitors to apply for a tax rebate makes sense.

As a tourist in B.C. Canada, I have successfully used their system of recouping the GST — goods and services tax — and also occasionally declined to apply for it and let my taxes benefit my Canadian neighbors. This seems to me a more appropriate strategy to add to the state’s coffers than removing the voter-approved car-tax break that would cripple the automotive industry’s efforts to stay afloat and hurt consumers as well.

Ultimately, I think the Senate’s plan for increased scrutiny concerning any tax break is needed — along with a proposed end date. Whether it serves the public’s best interest is imperative and must be firmly applied so that the outcome is fair as well as lucrative for the state. With “$50 billion a biennium worth of state tax breaks on the books,” surely there must be a way to bridge the Democratic and Republican standoff and reallocate some of these funds for the good of all.

— Jaime Seibert, Seattle

Taxes hurt poor, do little to plug gap

Why are we considering revenue proposals that will only increase inequities between Washington’s rich and poor citizens? [“Olympia’s tax plans: How they’d affect you,” page one, Feb. 24]. According to the D.C.-based Tax Foundation, Washington is already one of the top-10 states for combined state and local sales taxes (third highest), gasoline taxes (also third highest) and cigarette taxes (eighth highest).

The governor’s incomplete answer to the state’s $2.8 billion budget shortfall does not even raise enough revenue to prevent further severe cuts to necessary state-funded services like education. Democratic leaders have made statements that they would like to see higher revenue-proposals — $900 million or so — which is still far short of what is needed to balance the state budget.

State leaders talk a good game about reforming our tax system, but only in the offseason. We cannot try to cut our way out of this problem, especially when those cuts continue to tear away the social-safety net.

Washington’s regressive revenue system unfairly burdens the working class by taxing consumption rather than income. Instead of placing a greater tax burden on those struggling most in this economy — as current Olympia proposals surely would — let’s focus on progressive reforms to make our revenue structure more reliable and fairer to all citizens.

— Sam Whiting, Seattle

Burning fat through taxes

Moving here from California was a shock: $5-$10 more for bottom-shelf liquor, $6 for cigarettes. But why?

Five years later I have adapted. I now recognize I am a sinner and hence pay a higher tax on my “vices.” There has been a multi-decade movement to eliminate smoking in the United States, and while I applaud its motives, I believe it’s time that another demographic faced this same tax discrimination: fat people.

Heart disease now kills more people than lung cancer and although the two can be linked, the 67 percent of Americans who are overweight or obese certainly contribute to the statistics.

All I’m saying is, if cigarette [taxes] are going up another dollar, why couldn’t the cost of Dorito’s and Hungry Man TV dinners go up the same amount? I’m sure taxing the vices of the overweight could bring in more than the $86 million increase expected from cigarette revenue.

If the government is claiming to look out for our health in its efforts to wean our bad habits, why can’t we kick the butt and the gut?

— Savannah Willow, Seattle

Taxing businesses

I’m angry and saddened by recent ads sponsored by some businesses opposing business tax proposals and saying that we just need to “reduce the size of government.”

Under current law, many companies are not required to pay Washington’s Business and Occupation tax even though they do a significant amount of business in the state. According to the Washington State Budget and Policy Center, the Senate budget released Tuesday would provide a more reasonable standard of determining which businesses operating in Washington are liable for B&O taxes, generating about $73 million in the current biennium.

The Senate budget also would make $838 million in cuts, severely gutting our health, education and environmental infrastructure. These cuts come on top of the $3.6 billion eliminated last year. Last year’s cuts will result in thousands of Washingtonians finding higher education unaffordable, tens of thousands of working families losing their health insurance and larger class sizes for kids in our public schools.

Unemployment has hit my family hard, but we do our part to preserve critical human services. Businesses should do theirs too. Please, legislators, share the responsibility with businesses and don’t cave to their demands. While you’re at it, institute a state income tax and reform our regressive tax system.

— Barbara Ramey, Kirkland

Don’t balance budget on farmers’ backs

I am a wheat farmer and farm some of the land that my great-grandfather homesteaded in the 1800s. My grandfather farmed it, my father farmed it and I have farmed it for about 40 years.

Our legislators are working to balance our state’s budget. One proposal is to remove our sales tax exemption on diesel fuel that we use in farm equipment — fortunately, I think that fuel you use in your car will still be exempt from sales tax. Another proposal is a B&O tax on farmers. This is probably kind of like what is included in the invoice from my attorney.

Several years ago, the wheat I produced was selling at a price that ensured me a profit. Today, the economy is poor and the wheat price is below my cost of production. Unlike some products, we can’t just add new costs to our wheat price. If our costs go up, we just lose more and that can’t go on very long.

I don’t envy our legislators’ difficult job, but making my industry worse isn’t going to feed hungry people and it will probably be detrimental to our state in the not-too-distant future.

— Nat Webb, Walla Walla

Simple solution: cut across the board

The budget deficit appears to be somewhere near 5 percent, which should be easy to overcome with no tax increases.

During times like this, the successful company where I worked would use a very simple and effective method: Every organization in the company would be asked to cut its budget by 5 percent, with no reduction in products and services. Managers who said they could not do it would be replaced by managers who could and it worked!

— Andrejs Zamelis, Burien

Although a future investment, system is inequitable

I agree in principle with the leaders of the state’s community-college system about how sufficient funding for the system is an investment that will improve the state’s future unemployment statistics [“Higher education can stimulate a quicker economic recovery,” Opinion, Feb. 20].

They comment that our system is one of the most efficient in the country. That’s no wonder because the work is done on the backs of numerous part-time workers, many of whom receive no benefits. Much of the clerical work is done by so-called “thousand hour” people who don’t get benefits.

More than half the teaching is done by part-time instructors who outnumber the full-time instructors by more than 2-to-1. The part-timers’ workload is limited to 66 percent by the unions who labor under the delusion that by so doing, most of the jobs will one day be converted to tenured positions. It hasn’t happened in 40 years. It has only gotten worse as the State Board of Education has seen part-time labor as a cheap way to do business.

As a result, most of the state’s thousands of part-time instructors have to teach at more than one college. That, incidentally, makes the community-college system one of the state’s least green employers as it forces multiple commutes each day and makes it impossible to use public transport — for several years I commuted 400 miles each week.

So while the leaders of the college system are preaching about lowering unemployment, they preside over an inequitable system that has been termed “part-time apartheid.”

— Walter Marquardt, ESL instructor at Highline and Seattle Central Community Colleges, Seattle

Desecrates peace, serenity of wilderness

I get it that the “adjustment” in federal gun laws to allow carrying loaded weapons into national parks was passed to make the law consistent across the land [“Federal law allows visitors to carry guns in national parks,” News, Feb. 22]. And I get it that most people who might bring guns won’t bring them. But a few people will brandish them just to make a statement.

I know that there is a powerful gun lobby and that the vast majority of legal gun owners are trained and responsible citizens. But I also know that a law prohibiting loaded weapons would not prevent punks and psychotics from packing one in Cougar Rock Campground at Mount Rainier.

What I don’t get is the “why.” Why the need to carry at Paradise? What’s the reason for a loaded pistol in the Hoh River Campground? My wife and I have camped in these places for more than 40 years and never have we witnessed a situation where a weapon was even remotely needed.

But what I do get is that a Colt .357-caliber Magnum beside the coffee pot in the next campsite at White River will alarm me and my family. Our wilderness experience will be ruined by anxiety and concern that the people next to us are armed. Seeing a hiker with a holstered sidearm on the trail to Panorama Point ruins the environment that we went to Mount Rainier to experience.

Guns are city concerns and have no place in the pristine wilderness that the national parks were established to preserve. I am not happy about this last refuge of peace, solitude and safety being violated by the presence of firearms and it seems to me that the national parks ought to be the place where citizens can go and be free of the worry of loaded weapons.

— Paul Heins, Redmond

First, get your house in order

In response to the article about the local ad campaign to attract lapsed Catholics [“Ads aim to bring lapsed Catholics back to the fold,” NWThursday, Feb. 18], I see little prospect for success. I served as a Catholic priest for 15 years and my current wedding ministry has brought me into contact with hundreds of inactive Catholics.

Why have so many Catholics —32 percent according to the Pew Report — left their church, including many who were raised in devout Catholic homes and attended years of Catholic school? In 1968, Pope Paul VI ignored his own hand-picked commission of theologians, doctors and laypeople and condemned artificial birth control.

And so began 40 years of bad teaching on stem cells, fertility, a return to a married clergy, ordination of women, disingenuous acceptance of gay unions, opposition to condoms — even in AIDS-riddled Africa — and a retreat from the collegial vision of the church enunciated by Vatican Council II.

Time and time again I have met with inactive Catholics who simply cannot subscribe to these outmoded teachings and the exclusively male clerical leaders who promulgate them. Add to that the scandal and failure of bishops to discipline flawed priests who sexually abused minors and the difficulty in finding a parish with meaningful preaching and vibrant liturgy.

Although I still love the Catholic Church, like any good host it needs to get its house in order before it invites company in for dinner. I find it unlikely that a slick advertising campaign centered on nostalgia will be effective. Too many central issues remain unresolved. The church must reform itself before it invites disillusioned Catholics to return.

— Patrick Callahan, Seattle

Left the fold because religion a ‘myth’

I was intrigued with the article about lapsed Catholics because I am a lapsed Catholic. But I didn’t leave the Catholic Church because of the sex scandals, the church’s treatment of women or the church’s stance on homosexuality, birth control or abortion. Any one of those would have been reason enough to forswear Catholicism.

I left the Catholic Church when I realized that all religion is mythology. Catholicism — and all Christian offshoots such as Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, pick your faith — are all religions built on myth rather than reality, created when humans could not comprehend their world except through superstition.

The fact that each religion has a written document should be neither surprising nor persuasive. Reading the Bible, the Koran, or the Book of Mormon requires a massive suspension of disbelief. From burning bushes to virgin births to ascensions into heaven, these documents are just as fantastical as the Iliad and the Odyssey. No advertising campaign could ever convince this lapsed Catholic to return.

Rather, each day’s world events reinforce the truth that reality trumps religion, that despite most religions’ perpetual insistence to the contrary, there is no all-loving God looking after us. Look at the world the various religions have created; It is replete with predatory behavior, discrimination against women and homosexuals, violence against unbelievers — or different believers — a sneering hatred of scientific thought and greed.

Such behavior is indicative of a lapsed humanity. Lapsed Catholics should be the least of our concerns.

— John Scannell, Sammamish

Cantwell reigns in corporate recklessness and greed

Editor, The Times:

Kudos to Sen. Maria Cantwell [“Cantwell takes on big finance,” NWMonday, Feb. 22]. She is a voice sorely needed to address the reckless and greedy manipulations of the financial system that led to the worst recession since the Great Depression.

The timid measures now proposed will not do. In particular, it’s obvious the Glass-Steagall Act that separated the activities of investment banks from commercial banks was a mistake to repeal and should be reinstituted.

The Times’ article quotes Peter Wallison at the American Enterprise Institute as contending that no evidence exists that links derivatives to the economic meltdown. This reminded me of the tobacco companies, who for years insisted that there was no evidence linking smoking to cancer.

— Dick Gillett, Seattle

Tea party calls to hang Murray

It is unfortunate that someone has gone so far as to “jokingly” say that we need to hang Sen. Patty Murray [“Murray seeks funds for civility,” Around the Northwest, Feb. 19]. However, it does show just how much she has lost touch with her constituents.

I have written to her many times on matters of broad interest and have realized that she and her staff are busy people dealing with important state matters. The occasional replies were unspecific generalizations — form letters, I suppose — explaining what a great job Sen. Murray was doing. They were more like campaign statements, giving the impression that she really didn’t have time to waste on the little people.

— Marvin Hartshorn, Port Orchard

Tea partyers quick to forget

I hear that an organizer of the local “tea party” — where the woman wanted to hang Sen. Patty Murray — says that some of her partyers aren’t “politically sophisticated” or something. Well this Democrat thinks they’re just plain stupid!

These partygoers must have gotten some “funny mushrooms” into their tea if they can’t remember that the major problems our country is facing right now — two wars, unemployment, Wall Street and banking chicanery, housing market foreclosures and the budget deficit, to name but a few — were all caused by the disastrous policies of their guy: George W. Bush.

If these tea partyers want to use movie analogies, here’s one for them: I want Captain Kirk to swing by in the Enterprise and have Scotty beam the whole nitwit wing of the Republican party onto the moon.

As for the bike shop owner who can’t wait for the Obama administration to be done, well suck it up dude. I waited eight long, ugly years for Bush et al. to get finished with their idiocy. If you still want to enact failed Republican policies after all of the Bush crap in the 2000s, I hope you suffer a lot during the next seven years; just like I did back then.

— Matt Andrews, Seattle

Election campaigns detract from getting work done

The article by Ruth Marcus, “No Senate for bold men,” [Opinion, Feb. 19] pointed out the major challenge Congress faces trying to find solutions to our nation’s problems is partisan politics. She said she is optimistic that the decision by Sen. Evan Bayh to not run for re-election may be a wake-up call for the Senate. I wish I could be as optimistic.

Unfortunately, the partisanship we see in Congress is driven more by the desire to get re-elected than any concern to solve problems and getting re-elected is directly dependent on the huge sums of money needed to wage a campaign. Until we change the way political campaigns are financed, I doubt we will ever again see Congress act in a bipartisan manner.

I was optimistic a few years ago when congress passed the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act. It wasn’t perfect, but it at least set some limits on campaign contributions. Unfortunately, that act was gutted by the U.S. Supreme Court when it ruled that money is a form of free speech. Then, this year, the Supreme Court drove the final ‘nail in the coffin’ of campaign-finance reform with its decision that corporations could spend unlimited sums of money on political campaigns.

We have sold our “democracy” to the highest bidder.

— Mark Riebau, Renton

Story hits home

The headline “Dangerous, mentally ill, and difficult to detain” [page one, Feb. 21] immediately caught my eye because it described my stepson so well.

After a long battle with bipolar disorder, Joe’s life finally spiraled out of control in September 2007. In an act of extreme rage, he shot and killed his mother and then took his own life. Our family had feared for our safety numerous times following threats from Joe. We had tried unsuccessfully to get psychiatric help for him, but our hands were tied because he was over 18 years old and chose instead to self-medicate with street drugs.

I applaud the state House of Representatives in passing two bills that would make it easier to detain dangerous mentally-ill people. After our family suffered this tragedy, I began compiling a list of people whose lives had been taken by such people that includes the Skagit County gunman, among others.

I may soon be adding to my list the victims of Amy Bishop — the professor who shot six faculty members at the University of Alabama. Given what I have read in the paper about her mood swings and out-of-control rages, I would not be surprised if her psychiatric evaluation leads to a diagnosis of bipolar disorder.

I urge the members of the state Senate to pass these bills to make it possible for families to get early help for their mentally ill and potentially violent relatives before tragedy strikes. Compassionate care for the mentally ill and the public’s safety are at stake.

— Anne Kollath, Gig Harbor

Other underlying issues

Sunday’s story about the Legislature’s proposed changes to our state’s Involuntary Treatment Act does not go far enough in examining this very complex issue.

While the proposed changes may help people to get help sooner rather than later, I remain struck by the words of Amnon Schoenfeld, director of mental health, chemical abuse and dependency services for King County, who warns that the current system lacks the bed capacity for the persons being detained now.

This is not the only area where lack of capacity is an issue. Once these persons have been detained and treated as inpatients, they will be discharged back to the community to a public mental-health system that has been underfunded and overutilized for quite some time. Overwhelming caseloads with reduced time to see and respond to clients means that people sometimes do not get the help they need when it is needed. It is not a pretty picture today and will not be better tomorrow as more people leave the hospital.

This shortsighted “solution” provides false assurances of treatment to those with mental illness and of enhanced safety to the community. A fully-funded mental-health system that would offer real care to those who need it and enhanced public safety to the community is a better solution. I encourage our Legislature to tackle this issue and not mislead the community.

— Jonathan R. Beard, Seattle

Mental illness and violence relationship exaggerated

Regardless of how one feels about the House’s unanimous vote to make it easier to detain people with mental illnesses who pose a harm to self or others, The Time’s headline in the Sunday edition is a disservice to your readers and makes the problem of untreated mental illness in our community even worse.

The Institute of Medicine has concluded that the stigmatization of mental illness has gotten worse during the past 50 years because the public greatly exaggerates the magnitude of the relationship between mental illness and violence. Is it any wonder with headlines such as this one? Notably, the online edition of The Times contained a much more accurate headline: “Bills would make it easier to force mentally ill persons into care.”

The stigma surrounding mental illnesses is among the barriers that discourages most people from seeking treatment. Thus, sensational and misleading headlines like this one make the problem of untreated mental illness in our community worse. The public is much less aware that recovery for mental illnesses happens even for people who at one time may have posed a risk of harm to themselves and others.

As a subscriber I seek local news coverage that helps to improve my community. This headline falls far short of the mark.

— Jennifer Stuber, Seattle

Adequate resources exist to provide safe, localized care

Nicole Brodeur’s column highlights some of the real struggles families face when looking for affordable, accessible and high-quality child care [“Child care the way it used to be, NWFriday, Feb. 19]. What the piece didn’t offer was information about the many resources available to help families find the right child-care arrangement for their children.

First, there are nearly 7,600 child-care facilities around the state that we at the Department of Early Learning license and monitor. Our licensers work closely with child-care providers to ensure they offer safe, healthy and nurturing care. To characterize these places as “sanitized” is unfair and inaccurate. State licensing rules are stringent because we have an obligation to ensure child care is safe. These rules don’t, however, stop children from inventing or playing games. The licensed child-care providers I’ve visited offer fun, engaging and creative — sometimes even messy — programs.

Second, parents are not alone in finding quality child care. They can look online with our “Child Care Check” tool to find information about the licensing history of a provider and can find tips and resources for finding and paying for child care or preschool. Parents can also call their local child-care resource and referral agency to get a list of licensed providers who may be a good match considering factors such as price, location and child-care philosophy.

Parents are their children’s first and most important teachers. They can and should decide on the best child-care situation for their families. But they need to know that resources exist to help them in this very important, sometimes daunting task.

— Bette Hyde, director Washington State Department of Early Learning, Olympia

An open letter to Aiesha’s parents

Editor, The Times,

I am sorry about the savage beating that your daughter endured at the hands of her peers in the Metro transit tunnel last week [“Lawyer defends tunnel victim,” NWFriday, Feb. 19]. I am sorry that the Seattle police and the security guards did not come to her aid. Having said that, I would like to ask some important questions and offer you some advice.

Where were you at midnight on May 23 when your daughter assaulted the lady in Edmonds? Do you allow your daughter to roam the streets at night and who is parenting this young lady? Where were you when your daughter assaulted the guard on Rainier Avenue last September?

Stop making this girl out to be a martyr. Your daughter is just like her attackers, she has no regard for the law and has had more than one brush with the law. When she attacked her victim in Edmonds, Aiesha admitted to the police that she struck the victim — Tamie Cox — and stole her purse. In September, she pleaded guilty to attempted second-degree robbery for punching the security guard in the head after he stopped her from shoplifting. Do you see a pattern here!

Mom, you sat with her on the “Good Morning America” show and faced millions of viewers, giving them — and me — the impression that your daughter is an angel. How dare you! You need to call the program managers and apologize to them and to the American public.

The security guards and the Seattle police were negligent in their duty to protect your daughter from her attackers, but tell me, who is going to protect me from your daughter if I am out late at night, minding my own business and walking to my home in Edmonds.

— Brenda Burke, Edmonds

Taxing stabilizes general fund, cleans Puget Sound

The editorial opposing a modest increase to the state’s hazardous-substance tax is misguided [“Cleanup tax is toxic,” Opinion, Feb. 18]. The revenue would go miles to help clean up local pollution.

The polluters who manufacture hazardous substances in Washington do real harm to our air and water. In fact, The Times’ darling, the Anacortes refinery — owned by the Texas oil giant Tesoro — is a case in point. It’s facing a new federal lawsuit for failing to test for important air pollutants like sulfur and benzene.

Tesoro argues that a small increase in the tax would put them at a competitive disadvantage, but the company is exaggerating. The tax is applied equally to all petroleum products in Washington and Tesoro’s out-of-state sales go mostly to Oregon, which has no refineries and cannot easily be supplied by California refiners.

An increase in the hazardous-substance tax would help stabilize the general fund in the near term and provide significant funding to clean up Puget Sound over the long term.

— Eric de Place, Sightline Institute senior researcher, Seattle

Would result in job loss

Olympia has proposed tripling the tax collected from the state refineries, but what about the hundreds of good-paying jobs that will be lost if this passes. The refinery near Anacortes will not survive and another in Whatcom County is barely getting by.

It was asked how many jobs this increase would create and the answer was: “70 good-paying street-sweeping jobs.” What about the hundreds of good-paying union jobs that would be lost when the refineries shut down and the net tax revenue to the state will be less than it is today. Therefore, those good-paying street-swiping jobs would never be created!

Don’t think for a moment the refineries won’t shut down. Look at the history. There are only two aluminum smelters left in the state, most mills have shut down and we import our lumber from Canada. The tissue mill in Bellingham shut down and Boeing is building a new plant back East.

So Democrats, why don’t you care about the existing good-paying jobs we already have here?

— Mark Jappert, Blaine

Call oil companies’ bluff

If this is an attempt to get us gasoline buyers to feel sorry for the oil companies, forget it. Tesoro, like all oil companies, made large profits last year and that profit — though still large — has been cut in half. Now they are crying foul over state taxes?

They should be taxed as we should any company doing business in Washington state that might possibly damage our environment. In fact, not selling their product in the state should cause them to be taxed twice as much.

One reason our gasoline is more expensive than the national average is because the refineries in our state don’t sell their products locally. California and Oregon are in deeper debt than Washington because of their inability to tax companies manufacturing products in their state.

Tesoro is lucky to find land and a state willing to let them build a refinery. The cost of moving would lower Tesoro’s profits even more. If the union members want to keep their jobs, maybe they could cut their wages.

— Jim Morris, Renton

Blame Republicans, not Democrats

Hey, from Seattle to Monroe: Wise up to who is doing what to you — hint, it’s not the Democrats [“Monroe to D.C.: wake up!” page one, Feb. 19].

These Obama haters and uninformed whiners from Monroe are getting just what they deserve. Do they think they’re special and the laws of economics don’t affect them? I know — as well as I can sitting here — that they voted for George Bush twice and then wanted McCain and Palin to win in 2008. That’s moronic. It was the Bush administration’s economic decisions that are causing our present recession problems.

It was the Republicans who caused these problems, yet these people still want to blame Democrats and then elect Republicans to solve these same problems that were caused initially by Republicans. It’s a circular firing squad.

Republicans don’t ever really deal in reality, so they just blame liberals and Democrats instinctively — no questions asked. It’s a mindset caused by listening to right-wing hate radio, Fox News and their own self-indoctrinated hatred of liberals and the “liberal agenda.” They can’t stop because, after 50 years of propaganda and mind bending, they are conditioned and programmed to believe that liberals are inherently wrong on everything.

Nevertheless, some [Republicans] are starting to see that it’s their own beliefs that are causing their own downfall. It’s so much harder to look at both sides than it is to see just one side — hating liberals. I’m betting that liberals and our understanding will win against any more hollow rhetoric from Republicans who don’t even know how to study history.

— Doug Morrison, Seattle

What are they whining about?

Seattle Times staff reporters report that Monroe in Snohomish County has a message for the other Washington: “Quit your whining and get it done.” The question is: Get what done? What do the teabaggers want done except to somehow move the Obama family out of the White House?

Isn’t that what their protests are all about? Obama has been trying for a year to “get it done” but he has been opposed by the Republicans in the Congress at virtually every turn. They have voted en bloc to stymie Obama’s every attempt to turn this economy around from the disastrous course set for it by George Bush and his Republican accomplices in Congress.

His health-care initiative, as modest as it is, has been the bete noire for the Republicans. He has received no help form them at all, just die-hard opposition. If Obama recited the “Lord’s Prayer,” he would be met with screams of protest by congressional Republicans and a million teabaggers.

What do they want? Naturally, even after voting against the stimulus and badmouthing it at every opportunity, Republicans in Congress have been calling the administration and begging for their share of the money and then taking credit for it in their respective states by cutting ribbons, etc. It’s sheer hypocrisy!

— Gary Nelson, Bellingham

Clean up buildings and streets, not retail

The article “Seattle’s downtown retail core needs new spark to attract shoppers”[Business, Feb. 19] was very disappointing. It seems the reporters are too close to the problem to recognize what the general public sees.

I have been a King County resident for more than 50 years and have always visited Seattle seven to eight times a year for dinner, shopping or entertainment. A few years ago my wife and I noticed a general decline of the central business core. I am not talking about the retail outlets but rather the deplorable state of cleanliness around downtown. The buildings are unkempt, the streets and public areas are filthy and they have an odor that is unmistakable of its origin.

Also in case The Times’ writers haven’t noticed, Seattle panhandlers are no worse than Bellevue or Redmond’s. The public has long accepted panhandlers as just a part of everyday life. What most citizens do not accept — and what’s driving away downtown shoppers — is an open tolerance and acceptance to roving gangs of young thugs along with the open sale and use of drugs on the streets.

Walking around the city is no longer a pleasant stroll but an exercise in watching your backside. Clean up the retail core and watch what happens!

— Jim Grieger, Redmond

In comparison, McGinn needs to focus on litter

Mayor Mike McGinn wasted the City Council’s time delivering a state-of-the-city address full of ideology but short on ideas and plans [“Seattle Mayor McGinn says … whatever,” Opinion, Feb. 18].

The topics that McGinn did take time to get specific on were his opposition to the tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct and his desire to delay and redesign the new 520 bridge. All this to turn Seattle into the largest pedestrian and bicycle park in the country to placate his green and bicycle club cronies.

Rather than worrying about this, McGinn should be looking in his own backyard and try cleaning up all of the personal pollution generated by the fine citizens of Seattle.

I recently returned to working in Seattle after many years of working from a home office. My office is in the Capitol Hill area — off Pine Street — and I’m appalled at the personal pollution that the people of Seattle create. It seems that the majority of the people in the city, on a daily basis, use the streets and sidewalks as their personal ashtrays, garbage cans and spittoons. It’s a crime and it should be addressed.

Now, before people write me off as a person not used to the city and it’s environment, I’d like to point out that I was raised in and around Manhattan and that I have lived and worked in many cities besides Seattle. The difference was that the leaders and citizens of these other cities weren’t hypocrites, proclaiming their greenness while ignoring their own backyards.

To McGinn and his cronies: Once you’ve taken care of the garbage inside the city, then you can begin to address all of the evils — automobiles — that lurk outside of the city limits.

— Robert Oberlander, Issaquah

Take action before it’s too late

Editor, The Times:

Thomas Friedman’s column about “weird weather” supporting claims of climate change [“Today’s climate-change forecast: weird with a chance of meatheads,” Opinion, Feb. 18] notes the folly of the East Coast blizzard hullabaloo “proving” global warming is a hoax. All that snow is an example of exactly what scientists predict: As global average temperature — the warming that matters — continues to rise, the weather will be more and more “weird.”

This is Seattle’s warmest January and February on record. Globally, we’ve already been experiencing extreme weather of all kinds — heavy rain, flooding, hurricanes, snowstorms, droughts and forest fires. It is costing us and will cost us billions in the future.

Skeptics are trying to confuse the public about climate change. If they succeed, the Earth and its inhabitants will lose. Nothing can be gained by further delay. Sen. Maria Cantwell’s “cap and dividend” bill holds much promise for getting climate-change legislation back on track in the U.S. Senate. Her bill offers an improved framework for pricing carbon and speeding the transition to clean energy, which will create new jobs and help free the U.S. from dependence on foreign oil.

It’s time for the Senate and all of us to wake up and take action before it’s too late.

— Anne Engstrom, Seattle

Clearly a hoax

With the release of the so-called “Climate-Gate” documents, the cat’s out of the bag. Man-made global warming — or whatever you want to call it — is not “science” — its proponents “lost” their data so their results can’t be reproduced.

It’s not even a reasonable “theory” within a historical context — [just look at] the medieval warm period, the Little Ice Age. It’s an ultra left-wing political conspiracy intended to redistribute the wealth of the industrial west — break the back of the middle class — and impose a one-world, Soviet-style command economy and police state on us all.

Restating the deception in “simple language,” talking down to the ignorant peasants, is not going to work. Attempts to ridicule critics into silence — calling us “meatheads” — are not going to work. We peasants aren’t “confused.” The lie is as plain as the nose on Poncho’s face. We aren’t buying into Thomas Friedman’s slick fraud any longer. Stop pretending that if you ignore the truth, it will go away!

— Gerald D. Cline Jr., Seattle

Don’t know who to believe

It pains me to see that Thomas Friedman’s been reduced to the role of a name-calling, partisan hack, concerning the topic of climate change.

I find myself among the group that isn’t sure who or what to believe. Friedman wants a 50-page summary of the climate change “facts” with an appendix of wild claims and errors perpetrated by climate-change skeptics. Why not include the facts behind the skepticism and an appendix of wild claims and errors perpetrated by climate-change advocates?

His selective use of facts is transparent and citing China’s positive example is a bad joke. China might be investing in high-efficiency trains, but it is a leading polluter with no intention of signing a commitment to reduce its greenhouse gases. The Chinese know that would put them at a competitive disadvantage, which is why they want us to sign.

Is our climate changing? Of course. Is human activity part of the cause? Probably. Is human activity the main cause? We don’t know. Is carbon dioxide the only — or principle — gas contributing to climate change? Probably not.

We should continue to conserve, accelerate research on fuel alternatives, increase the use of nuclear power. But we shouldn’t legislate our country into a permanent back seat in global competition with policies like cap and trade.

— Mark Stratton, Bothell

Robs from the poor to feed the rich

The Times proposes that “state workers should share medical costs” [Opinion, Feb. 18] and suggests that employees increase their share of medical bills from 10 to 25 percent — with deductibles increasing from $250 to perhaps $1,000.

Perhaps United Health Care’s CEO, Stephen Hemsley, will agree with your proposal because he would then get a pay increase from his $1.3 million salary. In the past decade, he has received $1.7 billion and certainly could use some of the increased charges you suggest.

You complain that the private sector recognizes the pain of increased medical costs and ask, “Why should we pay more when you don’t have to?”

Access to health care and high costs are the symptoms of our sick health-care system that ranks 33rd in the world. Our government has tried for decades to reform American health care and the opportunity to modify our system is once again being considered in Congress.

The Times’ solution to charge the sick works for Rush Limbaugh, but fails for the 65 million uninsured. Perhaps you should include health-care reform in your next analysis of health-care costs.

— Bill Taylor, Renton

Look at Boeing’s benefit packages

Why doesn’t The Times criticize the Boeing workers’ pay and benefits package? Every time Boeing workers go on strike and get enriched, it costs everybody in the state, including the state workers.

To cover the higher wages and benefits, Boeing must sell its airplanes for more money. To cover that expense, the airlines must raise airfares. While it is obvious that the state’s fliers are directly impacted, when corporate people all across the country fly, they also have to pay more for their tickets. To recover the dollars they raise the prices of their goods for sale to the people of Washington.

For example, taxpayers have to pay more — through taxes — for the IBM computers they want installed in their children’s schools because IBM personnel have to pay more to fly for business.

The generous health-care package state workers enjoy is partial compensation for lower wages and a strong motivating factor. Providing good insurance coverage is cheaper than giving large pay raises because pay raises have the hidden 7.65 percent added cost of FICA and Medicare taxes the state has to pay — as well as the worker.

— Byron Gilbert, Seattle

Get benefit costs off my back

Responding to Nate Rozeboom’s letter [Northwest Voices, Feb. 16] and agreeing with the Feb. 18 editorial, I’m a county-government retiree, appreciative that I have my frozen retirement and the privilege of having “paying-in-full” retiree’s medical coverage and a Medicare premium.

It troubles me that state employees continue their elitist attitudes in the current economy. Their state employment existence is on the “backs” of the Washington taxpayers. For them to think they are so above those who really slave on frozen wages — scrimping just to survive — and above those who are homeless — including children — because of this turndown, reminds me of the financial executives who get bonus payments from stimulus and bailout funds while others suffer.

The time has come for state — and federal — employees to get real, take off their blinders, stop their infernal whining, suck it up and join the rest of us who are striving to rise out of these desperate days. Maybe the taxpayers will be more supportive of them.

— Marilyn Northrup, East Wenatchee

Welcome ruling, but ban guns as well

It is interesting that “public pressure” saved the right for smokers to pack in and consume their addiction at public parks [“No smoking ban after all,” NWFriday, Feb. 19]. Not being a smoker, I laud Parks Superintendent Timothy Gallagher’s solution of requiring smoker’s to steer clear of non-puffers by at least 25 feet.

It occurs to me that a similar restriction could be placed on those individuals who demand the right to tote guns in and around children play areas. Since guns have a farther range — and are more immediately lethal than cigarette smoke — it might be prudent for Gallagher to set aside special “gun parks” similar to Seattle’s numerous “dog parks.”

This should please the gun-dependent and preserve — if not improve — our murder-rate statistics. In these set-aside areas, gun-packing citizens could frolic and play brandishing their weapons. I assume no leashes would be required.

— David Clifton, Seattle

Unwelcome reversal

Parks Superintendent Timothy Gallagher was right the first time around and shouldn’t have caved in on his position. There’s no getting around it: Smoking is pollution.

If we have the expectation that governments should rid our planet of toxic industrial waste-byproducts, then how are we wrong in similarly expecting them to keep parks clear of smokers when the only difference between these is a matter of degree?

What Chernobyl was on a massive industrial scale, smoking is on a private individual scale — it’s pollution.

— Herb Aldinger, Seattle

Gets technology ‘off the ground’

Charles Krauthammer makes sense when he complains about Obama’s cancellation of manned spaceflight programs [“Obama closes the New Frontier,” Opinion, Feb. 13]. Those who think that NASA is just another government money pit need to think again. Unlike the trillions that Obama is wasting on bailout programs that have neither created jobs nor helped financially strapped homeowners, the space program does have a payback for the American people.

Without the space program, much of the technology that we take for granted wouldn’t exist. At its infancy, much of our technology was simply too expensive and the payoff was too far in the future for private industry to invest in development. Agencies such as NASA provide the seed money to get such technology off the ground — no pun intended. Private industry then refines this technology and reduces the cost to a level that allows the public to benefit from it.

While it is true our economy needs some immediate action, Obama’s nearsighted and scientifically ignorant policies are not only destroying our country’s economic power and our “space superiority,” they are also putting an end to American technological innovation. This may be a fall that our country may never recover from.

— Neil Foster, Renton

Krauthammer is a hypocrite

For decades, Charles Krauthammer has argued for privatization of all sorts of government functions — including the military, schools, health care and Social Security. Yet now that the Obama administration wants to privatize key elements of the space program, Krauthammer is the first to cry foul, calling this decision the end of the “new frontier.”

While it’s clear that Krauthammer loves privatization, it’s also evident that he loves to oppose any and every policy of the Obama administration even more. Here’s a paradigm case where he chooses opposition to Obama over the achievement of one of his own most precious goals.

None of this is a surprise though. Hypocrisy is mother’s milk to Krauthammer.

— David Marshak, Bellingham

Obama’s move is pragmatic

Editor, The Times:

On Tuesday, the president announced $8 billion in loan guarantees and more to come for new nuclear power plants [“Obama backs first new nuke reactor in 30 years,” page one, Feb. 17].

For years, nuclear has been neglected as a viable alternative to our energy fuel mix, mostly as a result of bad publicity and poor policy. Even today, mentioning nuclear to the average American recalls images of mushroom clouds and plant meltdowns at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

In France, nuclear power supplies nearly 80 percent of all electricity consumed. Where we lag is not in terms of technology, but rather, in the laws that govern nuclear power. As an example, for years we have banned the reprocessing of nuclear waste on the grounds of proliferation but experience is proving that denying ourselves reprocessing capabilities does not prevent rogue states from pursuing nuclear weapons.

By re-engaging nuclear power, the president has once again proved he is a pragmatist committed to solving our energy challenges. As Washingtonians with cheap access to clean hydroelectricity, we shouldn’t forget that nearly half of the electricity consumed in the U.S. still comes from coal. Nuclear is not the environmental panacea we all would like, but it’s a viable first step.

— Frank Cabrera, Seattle

No, it’s hypocritical

It takes a lot of audacity to ask Iran to discontinue its nuclear program while Obama plans to build new nuclear power plants! If the shoe were on the other foot, would you do it?

By the way, how about we dump some of that “clean coal” in the West Wing of the White House along with some of the “clean” nuclear waste from these new power plants?

— Rob Moitoza, Seattle