Author: The Seattle Times: Northwest Voices

More than 8,000 in state foster-care system

Helping Washington’s foster children is a year-round labor of love

May is National Foster Care Month and it has prompted me to reflect on my experiences with the child-welfare system.

Growing up the youngest of seven children in a struggling, working-class family in Seattle’s Beacon Hill neighborhood, money was in short supply, but we always had room for another child, be it a cousin or neighborhood youngster. The motto was: “We take care of children.”

Before I had my own children, I became a foster parent. I took in 10 teenagers. They filled my home with love and joy.

More than 8,000 children and youth —through no fault of their own —are in Washington’s foster-care system. The state provides training and guidance for foster parents and comprehensive support for foster children whether they are in the courtroom, in a classroom or “aging out” of the system. However, the real heroes are the foster, relative and adoptive parents.

Foster parents take care of our children during difficult times. They complement the Legislature’s ongoing efforts to provide stability and support for families and children. I encourage more people to step forward.

— Sen. Claudia Kauffman, Kent

‘United we stand, divided we fall’

This is a response to “My history is part of your history” [Leonard Pitts column, Opinion, May 16].

Although blacks may have suffered the most, not counting holocaust victims exterminated in Europe, many of us have ancestors who suffered some level of oppression at some time in history before coming to the United States.

The hard truth should be uttered, but it should include the whole truth. Part of history is always ignored. I refer to the fact that slavery was not “invented” here in America. It was “ended” here. Slavery was the way of the world for several centuries before our country was ever dreamed of, starting in 1400s by Spain and Portugal.

Yet in less than a century after this country was born, we “ended” slavery and for one fundamental reason: There were simply more white people against it than for it. It could not have been any other way because majority ruled and still does.

Despite what Pitts wrote, I believe the United States is itself and not composed of other nations and cultures. It is composed of people who left behind those other nations and cultures for a better life here. We all came from elsewhere in our lineage, but now we should get back to unity.

— Clark Chase, Monroe

Can’t afford another ‘accountability’ manager

This is a response to “Changes at state ferries to target waste” [NWThursday, May 13].

The efforts “aimed at addressing waste and the lack of accountability” at Washington State Ferries is a typical, bureaucratic response to the problem. The story tells of “hiring a deputy ferries director to hold managers more accountable” to fix problems in the state ferry system. In the private sector, which helps pay the state’s bills, every manager at every level is continually held accountable for his or her actions.

Businesses do not need and cannot afford another manager to accomplish their goals. Neither does Washington State Ferries.

— Ted Nelson, Federal Way

Neither a ‘white on brown’ nor a ‘minority’ issue

Editor, The Times:

I am very surprised and worried that apparently only minority organizations have formed a coalition to address the recent episode of Seattle police officers using what appears to be undue force on a Latino man, as well as invoking race to denigrate him [“Group wants cops in video fired,” NWWednesday, May 19].

This episode would have been as egregious for all these reasons had the prone, defenseless and innocent suspect been white. This is not just an incident of “white on brown” or a “minority” issue. This kind of behavior on the part of our police force against our citizens should concern us all regardless of our race or ethnicity.

Let’s hear from the churches and other organizations in our community to speak out against racial profiling and to expect more fair and professional behavior from Seattle police.

— Patricia Fong, Seattle

Two-year moratorium, plus best-practices requirements

Following the recent disaster off the coast of Louisiana, opponents of offshore drilling have gained support. Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray have sponsored a bill that would impose a ban on drilling. [“Ban Pacific drilling,” Opinion, May 16.]

This is a questionable approach. It is inevitable that we would drill for oil. Once we face that reality, we could focus our energy on the real issue —ensuring that when drilling occurs, it is done as safely as possible.

As an alternative to a ban, I propose a two-year moratorium on offshore drilling. During the moratorium, oil companies that wish to drill will fund a “best practices” study that determines the state of the art in safe drilling practice.

Once the moratorium is lifted, companies funding the best-practices document may be granted offshore drilling leases if they agree to meet the following conditions before drilling:

• All drilling activities would adhere to best practices and to predetermined fines for failure.
• Companies would create a detailed, federally approved disaster-mitigation plan. Resources identified in the plan would have to be maintained for immediate availability in the event of a disaster.
• Companies would be subject to a predetermined fine schedule for spills based on the volume and impact of the spill, as well as the company’s safety record.

This plan would ensure that drilling is carried out at the highest level of safety, creates an incentive for companies to avoid spills and ensures that when spills do occur, an effective and timely response would be made.

— Nathan Le, Issaquah

Money over morals

The Seattle City Council’s boycott of Arizona is both wrong and hypocritical [“Who are we to judge Arizona?” Danny Westneat column, NWWednesday, May 19].

The Seattle Municipal Code states the city will not discriminate in employment because of political ideology, yet it does just that with its boycott of Arizona. By leaving room to renew the city’s traffic camera contract with American Traffic Solutions, the City Council proved that money is more important than whatever morals the council members might have.

The Seattle resolution is that immigration reform is best handled at the federal level, though nothing in the Constitution prohibits state enforcement. This is odd, after the city defied both state law and the Bill of Rights by banning guns on city property, infringing on a right that is found in the state constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

Perhaps the council should consider a boycott of California as well, since it has had similar laws for many years.

I had hoped the City Council would have better things to do with taxpayer money than such childish gestures. I will be spending my money elsewhere —someday in Arizona.

— John O’Brien, DuPont

Boycott in lunacy

Why are some people up in arms about asking suspected undocumented immigrants for identification? I have no problem with it.

Every time we board an airplane, not only are we asked for government-issued identification but we are scanned and searched.

California and Washington boycotting Arizona is lunacy.

— Jorge del Campo, Camano Island

City Council’s decision ignores public opinion

An unofficial poll conducted by Q13 FOX shows 88 percent of Washingtonians surveyed agree with Arizona. The latest Gallup Poll shows nearly 70 percent of all Americans agree with Arizona. I count myself among the majority.

Everyone has their panties in a wad over what could happen —racial profiling —while ignoring the fact that illegal immigration is happening.

I wonder if anyone actually read the new Arizona law. It specifically prohibits racial profiling.

— Larry Brown, Seattle

Virtue and character needed for diversity

I was dismayed to learn the Seattle City Council voted to boycott Arizona.

This does not help bring us together —it divides us. Most of us agree diversity is positive, but it also requires virtue and character. Skin color or national origin alone mean nothing without virtue and character.

It is not the color of a person’s skin that has added to America’s greatness. It is the content of their character that adds to America’s greatness. I cannot walk in the shoes of Arizonans and endure what they endure, and I do not think our City Council could either. It has better things to do.

— John Payseno, Seattle

May the best tanker win

If Boeing wins the U.S. Air Force’s tanker contract, it would mean 11,000 jobs at the company’s local manufacturing facilities, as [“Gregoire, Murray boost Boeing in tanker bid,” Seattletimes.com, May 10] mentioned. However, the story did not explain how European aerospace giant Airbus is attempting to steal the contract and the jobs by submitting an illegally subsidized tanker aircraft.

Obviously, local workers care deeply about this injustice. But it is a national issue as well. As President Obama launches a campaign against corporate greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street, voters are watching to see if he applies the same principles to other areas of government.

In particular, voters would be outraged if an Obama Pentagon outsources a $35 billion defense contract to a company —Airbus —that has financed its bid with $5 billion in illegal subsidies, according to a final World Trade Organization ruling. Corporate accountability should apply to Pentagon contracts as well as Wall Street derivatives.

President Obama promised French President Nicolas Sarkozy that the tanker competition would be fair and transparent. However, there could be no fair competition as long as Airbus is bidding an illegally subsidized tanker. The Pentagon should discount launch aid subsidies from Airbus’ bid and let the best tanker win.

— Don Brunell, Association of Washington Business president, Olympia

A slaughter of innocence

“The inevitable blowback of war” [Opinion, May 17] equates the loss of civilians in Pakistan with the foiled attempt of the Times Square car bomber, inferring that both are acts of terrorism.

The U.S. military does not intentionally target civilians. This, however, was the intent of the Times Square bomber and those responsible for the 9/11 slaughter. There is a huge, gaping moral chasm separating these admittedly tragic events.

Blurring the ethical boundaries between a deliberate slaughter of innocents —or an attempt —and an unintended loss of civilian lives is, frankly, vile.

— Gregg Rice, Seattle

Tax reform would make room for more jobs

I agree with The Times’ evaluation of Norm Dicks’ congressional performance [“Stormin’ Norm as a deficit hawk,” Opinion, May 17].

Indeed, “for the good of the entire state, he has been an ally across topics, jurisdictions and party lines.” But the suggestion that “he now must become a deficit hawk” seems Reaganesque. The federal deficit is a concern, but recovery from the current recession and restoration of employment outweigh a balanced budget.

A healthy economy and tax reform would create a balanced budget. Tax reform in the form of a state income tax is imminent in Washington and expiration of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is imminent in Washington, D.C. Both would allow the government to invest in jobs.

The concern for epic deficits is about a decade late. The federal budget was balanced when former President George W. Bush entered office. His administration ignored fiscal responsibility in an attempt to “starve the beast.” The conservative economic theory is that if the government is broken, it cannot govern. The results of this policy are now painfully evident off the Louisiana shore.

— Bill Taylor, Renton

Let’s get our own house in order first

Hopefully I am not the only person, in Washington who is embarrassed and concerned by the actions of the Seattle City Council [“City Council backs Arizona boycott,” News, May 18].

To boycott another state for wanting to enforce a federal and state law is amazing. This is not a liberal or conservative issue. There is a current law that deals with illegal immigrants.

I understand that we live in a liberal city, in a liberal county and in a liberal state. What I do not understand is the lack of support of one state to another on this issue.

This has become a political issue rather than one concerning enforcement of the laws of the land. We do not need the opinion of the City Council unless it is based on a true interpretation of the current law.

People in our state should not be upset when our city, county or state officials continue to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce. (We seem to have these frequently in Washington.) This state, along with Oregon and California, have enough on their plates without telling another state what they should do. Let’s get our own house in order and then — and only then — could we give direction to another state.

— Bill Heimkes, Seattle

We are all immigrants

“City Council backs Arizona boycott” [News, May 18] simply shows the constant discrimination against other races, which has been a constant characteristic of history.

It is incredible that the state of Arizona actually passed such a law. We have just made an incredible accomplishment: Electing an African American man as our president should have set an alarm in the Arizona government.

People seem to forget that we are all immigrants in some way shape or form. This goes against every non-bullying and non-discriminating class held in schools as well as public boycotts, organizations and strikes.

If that law holds, then there is no doubt that every person would be wrongly accused of being an illegal immigrant. We may as well detain every single person in the United States.

— Jessica Tran, Seattle

Do unto Arizona as you would do unto Washington

The Golden Rule, “do unto others as you would like them to do unto yourself,” came to mind following the Seattle City Council’s decision to boycott Arizona.

I strongly urge the City Council to reverse that decision or potentially risk creating justification for another city or state boycotting Seattle or Washington’s businesses and conventions. We are the United States. We need to not pass judgment on our brother and sister states, but support each other economically despite our differences.

Yesterday’s action could start us down a road to a place where Starbucks coffee is not available at the Phoenix airport, Microsoft products are not welcome in Arizona government offices or Arizona employees select Southwest Airlines over Alaska Airlines for travel.

Washington has too much to lose through taking this negative action. Summer is on the horizon and we want the people of Arizona to travel to Seattle for vacations and conventions. Let’s not give them a reason to go somewhere else.

— Gregory Kovsky, Redmond

Preserve the American way of life

Maybe it’s time for illegal immigrants to get it straight: Arizona is not part of Mexico.

When marching and demonstrating, why is the Mexican flag carried? We have our U.S. flag; if you want to be an American, carry it.

In my day, we studied the United States in U.S. history. If we wanted to study about Mexico, we signed up for other classes.

If we wanted to learn to speak Spanish, we took language classes.

I think it is time to side with those of us who have worked hard and saved so we could live comfortably and have a comfortable retirement. We love our country and do not need our language and traditions changed.

— Pat Gee, Federal Way

Arizona has a big problem

I wonder why the Seattle City Council is not boycotting Mexico instead of Arizona. Mexico is the real problem, failing to take care of its citizens.

I just returned from two months in Arizona and am quite sure the average Northwest resident does not have a clue about the problems Arizona faces.

There were weekly reports on the news of “drop houses” close to where I stayed. An average of 150 illegal immigrants would be brought to a home — usually no more than a three-bedroom — and kept there until they could pay for their shipment to other states. Washington was a popular destination.

In Arizona, the Walmart fliers are written in Spanish — despite the fact that Arizona residents had voted a few years back to have English as the state’s official language.

A job-finding spot on one of the news programs was interviewing people looking for work. One woman with a college degree said she was unable to find work, as speaking Spanish fluently was often required.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has specifically stated that no one would be stopped unless some infraction of the law is obvious. It seems totally unfair that illegal immigrants demanding their rights — hospitalization, education, etc. — are listened to more than the majority of legal citizens who are put down for asking that U.S. and Arizona laws by abided by.

— Bernice Malone, Mukilteo

No reason for boycott

Boycotting a state is immature thinking. A boycott hurts the hardworking, legal citizens for doing the right thing.

Arizona is the only state with the backbone to abide by the rules of the Constitution regarding illegal citizens — and now it is being chastised by other U.S. cities.

The term racial profiling is a dramatic and trendy diversion to doing the right thing when moving into our country. All are welcome to the United States, but there are requirements for all who decide to enjoy what is here. Asking to see the paperwork that implies a newcomer is doing what is correct is no different from showing a passport upon entering another country or a legal driver’s license for a traffic violation.

When undocumented newcomers could collect Social Security, receive free medical care, enjoy education and even receive unemployment plus many more U.S. benefits without following the rules that are in our Constitution, there is no reason to support a boycott.

— Gail Hoover, Redmond

The Bush legacy

This is a response to “Stirring the pot,” Pacific Northwest magazine, May 16.

Viewing some of the signs shown: What freedoms have been taken away? What are the new taxes that have taken effect? What about the deficit that George W. Bush left?

Bush gave the rich nearly $10 billion in tax cuts and started two wars. The war in Afghanistan cost $70 billion — and we left it to start a war in Iraq, which caused more than 100,000 Iraqi civilian casualties.

Where were the demonstrations about the mess the Bush administration left behind?

— Anne & Bill Dillon, Kent

Carender late to the game

Where was Keli Carender when the Bush administration started a horrendous pre-emptive war without paying for it?

Where was her outrage when it was spending $1 billion a month for the occupation of Iraq —much of it in bundles of cash — to out-of-control “defense” contractors?

In my book, war profiteering is treasonous. I wonder what Carender thinks about the new U.S. embassy in Baghdad, also courtesy of the Bush administration, which is larger than Vatican City and built at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.

Of course, all of this happened in conjunction with tax cuts and deregulation. Populism could be a wonderful thing, but when it is based on ignorance or willful disregard for the facts, it is frightening.

— Nancy Anderson, Seattle

Do your homework

The tea-party movement exemplifies the United States —land of the free, home of the protester. But if you are going to protest, at least do your homework.

The hyperbole from this group makes for good sound bites, but much of its logic baffles the mind. Taking statements of national tea-party movement leaders and using them as facts to form your own opinion would likely come back to haunt you. While the movement claims to have no organized leadership there are, in fact, a few high-profile figures who are using this movement to further their own political agenda and careers.

We are in our current financial mess not because of high taxes, but because of poor decisions made by previous administrations. The first, allowing deregulated mega-financial institutions to gamble, practically risk-free, with our money. The second, maneuvering us into two extremely expensive wars.

Changing our elected leaders, the supposed purpose of the tea-party movement, would change nothing. Our system is corrupt. Until we devise a system that does not rely on contributions —in most cases, legal bribes —to fund elections, we will get what Will Rogers called “the best government money can buy.”

If you do a little more homework, you would find that a U.S. Senate race, for example, costs $12 million on average. Divide that by the number of days in a Senate term, 2,190, and you would find that a U.S. senator must raise more than $6,000 every day he or she is in office in order to run for re-election.

This is accomplished with the help of a friendly lobbyist. Washington, D.C., has more than 17,000 of them. I know — I’m a retired lobbyist.

— John Creed, Seattle

Fix it

This is a response to “McGinn on tunnel: worth it ‘at all costs’?” [page one, May 14].

The city is out of money. The county is out of money. The state is out of money.

How could we afford all the expensive transportation projects being planned?

If you are unemployed, in debt and underwater on your mortgage, you do not rebuild and re-landscape your home — you make do. That is what we need to do with the viaduct.

We need to fix the viaduct, not replace it.

— Connie Knudsen, Ballard

What happened to prevention?

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is beginning to get ridiculous. [“Giant oil plumes found in deep waters,” News, May 16.] It has been almost a month since the Deepwater Horizon, a British Petroleum oil rig, sank into the Gulf of Mexico on April 22, and the oil spill is yet to be contained.

Throughout this last month, BP has effectively done nothing to successfully contain this oil spill. The only thing we can rely on is gross underestimations on the actual amount of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico each day.

Yes, BP has been trying various methods such as drilling relief wells, lowering cofferdams and inserting suction tubes. However, all these methods have never been tested at the depth where the Deepwater Horizon lies. Obviously, none of these methods are working. But has not BP received the message.

Prevention — it is one simple word that could have saved wildlife and millions of dollars in claim fees that need to be paid out to those affected. Couldn’t we just increase our safety standards and protocols? For example, in the United States, only one safety valve is required whereas other countries, such as Brazil require two. This would save millions of dollars in costly cleanup and keep our environment clean.

— William Hwang, Seattle

Murray, Cantwell push bill to ban oil drilling off Washington and Oregon shores

Why are Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell wasting everyone’s time by putting forth a bill to block oil drilling off Washington and Oregon shores? [“Ban sought on Pacific offshore drilling,” NWFriday, May 14.]

My husband has been in the oil business for more than 30 years and says there are no oil reserves off Washington and Oregon shores. Such a ban means nothing.

I also saw a fisherman on last night’s news supporting this legislation because he saw the effect of an oil spill off Washington’s shore a few years ago. That oil spill was from a tanker —not from an offshore well. There are no wells and there never will be.

I suggest our senators do some research before putting forward a needless bill. I know this is an election year and they want to appear proactive. But, in this case, they do not make any sense.

— Jane Bennett, Woodinville

Tunnel a reality

Editor, The Times:

“McGinn on tunnel: worth it ‘at all costs’?’ ” [page one, May 15] leads me to wonder why there is such a big deal being made about potential cost overruns on the tunnel getting built to replace the viaduct.

Let’s face it: Rarely does a huge public-works project stay within budget. The tunnel is a reality.

To help with cost overruns, tolls could be paid by businesses moving goods from one end of the tunnel to the other.

And it is not just Seattle property owners who would benefit from the new tunnel. As the story pointed out, “The state Legislature stipulated overruns will be paid by Seattle-area property owners.”

To me, the “Seattle area” includes people and businesses in Tacoma, Everett and Bellevue, as well as the rest of Pierce, King and Snohomish counties.

I frankly do not see why the federal government should not be asked to foot some of the cost overruns as well. After all, without a free-flowing Highway 99 tunnel, I-5 would be more clogged. That is bad news for the entire region’s business community, including the Eastside.

Something the mayor could be doing instead of battling against the reality of a tunnel would be to craft proposals emphasizing a transit-friendly tunnel and getting the region’s government and business players to commit to significantly improved incentives for citizens to use buses and light rail.

— Tom Hundley, Seattle

Our way or the highway

Mayor McGinn is opposed to the tunnel for the sake of being opposed. He has no alternative proposal worthy of consideration.

The mayor is not helping the city of Seattle with his recalcitrance. He should step aside and let progress happen.

— Jon Lehman, Seattle

Tunnel a ‘Seattle’ idea, a Seattle cost

I suspect that the vast amount of traffic on the viaduct is not Seattle traffic. In that regard its replacement could be considered “largely a state project.”

But replacement of the viaduct with a much more expensive and disruptive deep-bore tunnel, with many unknowns, is the choice of people such as former Mayor Greg Nickels, who sought to “connect” Seattle to the waterfront —though, clearly, it has always been connected.

The benefits to be derived by the replacement with a tunnel would accrue to the few industrial and retail owners nearby and residents gaining very small bits of views between those businesses.

The decision to replace the viaduct with a tunnel is certainly the choice of Seattle. Non-Seattle drivers who must pass through the city would much prefer an improved and cheaper, more direct replacement of the viaduct. The city should pay a lot more than just the overruns.

— Spencer Higley, Edmonds

High-school assignments don’t tune into students’ needs

“Garfield makes great music, history at Ellington competition” [NWTuesday, May 11] provides another piece of evidence that Seattle’s music programs offer outstanding opportunities for young musicians.

While most of the attention is placed on high schools, it is also true that Garfield High’s success depends on its feeder school, Washington Middle School (WMS). Garfield High has received abundant streams of incoming musicians each year — until now.

The new neighborhood-based high-school assignment plan would prevent some talented WMS musicians from attending Garfield High due to assignment boundaries. Seattle Public Schools needs to make accommodations to serve the educational needs of these musicians.

As an eighth-grader at WMS, where a large percentage of the population participates in music ensembles, I know from experience that my bandmates are extremely dedicated and hardworking where music is concerned. They have looked forward to playing at Garfield High for years, and are about to be sent down dead ends. Garfield is the only south-end high school that offers music programs at such a high level.

Seattle Public Schools is continually touting its incredible music programs, and have clearly created this plan without realizing the damage it would inflict on said programs. I hope it can create a system that tracks WMS students to Garfield High before the performing-arts programs take a definitive turn for the worse.

— Alice Mar-Abe, Seattle

It’s all ethnic studies

Leonard Pitts Jr.’s column “My history is part of your history” [Opinion, May 16] suggests that Arizona’s new law restricting ethnic studies courses in public schools is too vague to be legally enforceable.

This law, passed at the urging of Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, specifically targets the Hispanic studies program in the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD). Since TUSD has already publicly stated that it would not abandon this highly successful educational program, the law’s actual legality could soon be tested.

Using the law’s wording, a reasonable person could argue that most of the K-12 curriculum that promotes EuroAmerican values and perspectives on history and social change is an ethnic-studies program violating the law, especially as that curriculum largely ignores Native American and other key ethnic aspects of American history.

— James Nason, Professor Emeritus, University of Washington

Our responsibility to speak up

As a community of faith, we are outraged at the racist verbal abuse and physical ill-treatment of a Latino man by two Seattle police officers responding to a recent robbery in the Eastlake area. Compounding our anger is the choice made by KCPQ (Channel 13), a local FOX news affiliate, to hold back the release of the video recording of this incident. [“TV news director quits over videotape,” NWFriday, May 14.]

These are acts of injustice from institutions pledged to serve the public good. Committed to work against racism, we call attention not only to this particular incident, but also to the acts of daily racism that degrade and dehumanize us all.

Institutionalized racism continues because those in power remain apathetic and ignorant because we let them do so. It is our moral responsibility as witnesses to call for accountability and change in systems that perpetuate unconscious and conscious hatred. The silence of racism must be broken.

— Reverends Diane Schmitz and Brooke Rolston, Sacred Action for Racial Justice; an outreach ministry of University Baptist Church, Seattle

President’s departure sign of crisis for public universities

Editor, The Times:

As someone who has spent most of her communications career at two large public universities, I share The Seattle Times’ sadness regarding University of Washington President Mark Emmert’s departure from the institution [“Emmert the rainmaker,” Opinion, April 29].

While the vast majority of public universities in today’s incredibly competitive universe suffer from greatly reduced state appropriations and subsequent calls to stop being elitist while also ceasing any feeding at the public trough, the loss of a master fundraiser, negotiator and visionary such as Emmert is more keenly felt than many students, faculty, alumni and donors might initially realize.

But Emmert’s departure should not surprise anyone. Given the many problems facing most public universities, it has become very difficult to recruit and retain people of his stature to assume university presidencies. It takes one who must be completely and utterly dedicated to the notion of public universities to take on the often thankless tasks of constantly raising money, dealing with athletics problems, absorbing never-ending faculty and student complaints, always needing to explain a university’s reason for existence to state legislators and assuaging sometimes overbearing and overly critical donors and alumni.

Emmert’s leaving should alert public universities and legislators everywhere about the real crises facing something the United States has always considered one of the jewels of our society: a quality public university system.

— Mary Stanik, Minneapolis

Can’t cut work force without cutting higher education

I too commend Mark Emmert; he has been a remarkable leader and true visionary. Yet, I believe The Times reflects some hypocrisy. It slams the Legislature for reducing the University of Washington’s state funding by 33 percent.

While I agree and have stressed that the Legislature has long underfunded higher education, particularly the UW, a key fact is ignored. As the 2010 Legislature worked to plug an $11 billion biennial budget shortfall, The Seattle Times editorial board repeatedly called for us to balance the budget on the backs of state workers. More than 41 percent of our state’s employees are working for our institutions of higher education, which amounts to the lion’s share of state workers. Comparatively, human-service employees make up 33 percent of our work force.

Because of its size, you cannot cut our state work force without cutting higher education — especially as it is completely (and unfortunately) discretionary. These destructive cuts and corresponding increases in students’ tuition will continue until we address our regressive, outmoded tax structure that is unsustainable and overly dependent on the sales tax.

— Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Seattle

Revenge of the TAs

I read in The Daily that the University of Washington plans to fire 447 teaching assistants (TAs) next year as part of their cost-cutting process, and that the teaching assistants are organizing a strike to protest this unfortunate decision. In a school that is already burdened with large classes, I would like Seattle Times reporters to answer the following questions:

• The University raised more than $2.5 billion dollars in a capital campaign. Where has this money gone?
• The top eight officials at the UW make exorbitant salaries. Why don’t they take a 50-percent salary cut to support their TAs?
• Why won’t the state Legislature allow the UW to increase tuition so it could pay for more teachers?

The alumni watching from the outside are very puzzled by the actions of the UW and the state Legislature. If the UW is a teaching institution, why is it not supporting its own teachers and students?

— Glenna Burmer, Seattle

Congress should protect privacy in right to petition

In my civics classes, we learned about the sacredness of the secret ballot, which freed voters to express their opinions privately at the ballot box. [“Support signature privacy,” Opinion, April 28.]

In my mind, signing a petition is a means of casting a vote for consideration on the proposed issue. It should be covered by this same principle.

Secret ballots prevent exposure of one’s political preferences from public scrutiny and political pressures. The current Freedom of Information case exposes opinions on what? Gay rights? Homophobia? Democratic process?

As a voter, I might believe that an issue should be submitted to a vote and I might or I might not be in favor of or against the issue. Signing a petition is a citizen’s constitutional right. Names and addresses are rightly given to allow checking the legitimacy of voting registration —not to provide mailing lists or exposure of signers’ identities. This checking is witnessed and certified, not copied and distributed.

Without specific information from the voter on motivation for signing, those seeking names and addresses could quickly harass the signer for an unknown motive. What counts is not who signs a request for a legal process, but if approved for citizen consideration, the secret ballots of all voters at the polls.

The Supreme Court should protect the secret-voting rights of its citizens, including the right to petition.

— Roger Ferris, Shoreline