Amounts to ‘copy-catism’

Editor, The Times:

Tacoma already has a Dale Chihuly “glass house” [“Grand plan to remake Seattle Center fizzling,” page one, March 19]. Trying to out-Chihuly Tacoma is copy-catism, redundant and unimaginative.

Seattle and Tacoma have competed since their foundings, but we should take a regional view instead of merely competing and build something new — not another version of what our region already has.

As to open space, Seattle Center now has magnificent open spaces — the fountain, the skatepark, the peace and sculpture gardens bordering Denny and Broad streets, the covered walkways, the splendid new theater commons and the many quaint and lovely walkways into the Center.

We use Seattle Center often. [Taking] the grandchildren on the monorail, watching Seattle U. basketball at KeyArena, eating at surrounding restaurants, going to fundraisers at Fisher Pavilion and watching “Book-it” Theater with our book club. At every event — all after dark — the center has sparkling lights, is filled with people and we feel festive and safe.

— Gail Brilling, Woodinville and Merrily Applewhite, Seattle

It is fun, it is free and it is what a park should be

Perhaps the biggest drawing card Seattle Center has is the fountain. On a warm — sometimes on a not-so-warm day — people congregate and watch as children and family members try to dodge the fountain and often fail. Almost all the players get soaked to the spectators enjoyment.

It is fun, it is free and this is what a park should be! A park where the public participates and watches is the ideal entertainment for a great many people. This is the kind of thing that makes a park interesting and beloved.

The Chihuly exhibit is of interest, of course, but it is not necessarily for everyone. The museum would be built at great cost. The light will shine brightly through the bent, twisted and multicolored glass, but how many times a year would a family pay to look at it?

The museum would be a bad investment and we should find something that interests children. Whatever interests children invariably interest parents and usually the general public. It should be free — or almost free!

— Florence Evans, Normandy Park

Can’t promote private business on public land

Regarding the proposal to build a museum to, by and for Dale Chihuly at Seattle Center: Seattle residents can agree to disagree about how schlocky, kitsch and banal Chihuly’s work is and whether the Northwest isn’t saturated with his industrial “art” that comes off his assembly line like so many Toyotas.

However, the compelling issue is whether our public parks are going to be used to promote a private enterprise. Regardless of the rent the city might receive from Chihuly, the biggest benefits will accrue to Chihuly himself in the form of publicity and sales.

If we’re going to lease public park land to a private business, we might as well auction it off to all comers and see if we can make some real money.

— Don Glickstein, Seattle

Keep the Fun Forest fun

Seattle doesn’t need a Chihuly building at Seattle Center. There are already so many glass museums throughout the country that it has gotten to be an “old hat” — and the one we have in Tacoma has next to no appeal at all. Really, does any glass museum attract a broad group of visitors?

I was born and raised in Seattle since 1956. The best use by far of Seattle Center’s Fun Forest area is for rides. The only reason people stopped going is because the prices got so expensive — $5 for a three-minute ride and not many families can afford that.

Just look at the lines of people that have driven an hour to the Puyallup Fair for rides — all income groups and a large age-span, 5- to 50-year-olds at least, are there.

Kids need a place to experience the thrill of a ride. So, at least for now, why not put new rides back in place and spend a little money subsidizing them to keep it affordable. It’ll also help much-needed vendor sales in the food court. Promote the idea through media and schools and sell books of tickets at area stores like they do for the Puyallup Fair.

At least give it a try for a year until the economy picks up. The space is ready to go and who knows, maybe even the permits [for the rides] are still current?

— Cathy Schmidt, Issaquah

Sen. Rosa Franklin sets the record straight

I would like to correct the record regarding The Times’ editorial, “Time for Democrats to widen the fold,” Opinion, March 18].

First and foremost, my presentation of Senate Bill 6250 was in no way “a case of horse-trading for a vote,” as the editorial implied. That should be clear to anyone familiar with my votes on the budget — both before and after I presented the bill.

In both cases, I voted against the budget that the majority of my colleagues supported because I feel that a general sales tax makes an already regressive tax system worse.

Second, no one “allowed” me to offer an income-tax proposal. The fact is that I have sponsored legislation to create a state income tax every year since 2003 — when the Gates Commission first recommended it. I will continue to further this dialogue for as long as it takes because I believe restructuring our system of taxation is in the best interest of our state.

In this case, I was asked to present an amended version of my original bill in an effort to continue the dialogue at the legislative level in order to create more open discussion for planning to help address a more fair and sustainable budget.

An income tax is only one in a series of needed changes recommended by the Gates Commission. I have sponsored bills for all of them and have consistently advocated for passage. Should The Times wish to talk to me instead of demonizing me and my colleagues, I am open for a conversation now and have always been.

The Times’ dismissive characterization of my efforts to propose an income tax serves no one — least of all its readers. Washingtonians need an open dialogue and honest discussion, not a competition of who can sound the most derisive.

I would like to request The Times’ assistance in helping to educate Washingtonians about our tax structure. This is what is needed: unfettered, unbiased information.

— Sen. Rosa Franklin. D-South Tacoma

Do the math: Sen. Tom is increasing taxes

While Rodney Tom, D-Medina, should be commended for not voting for the increased sales tax, it should be noted that he, as a member of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, has voted for eight out of eight [tax] measures since Feb. 15 — totaling more than $1 billion in new taxes or fees over the next 10 years.

Noteworthy as well, Sen. Tom has voted 19 out of 21 times to increase taxes or fees over the next 10 years to the mighty tune of $9.2 billion! This is not making “structural-spending changes” nor reducing “the footprint of government” as suggested in The Times’ editorial.

These tax and fee increases are outrageous! Beware, the huge tax-increase amendments have not even come up for a vote in the Senate and might possibly appear in the dark of night or on Sunday when no one is looking.

— Teresa Holland, Seattle

What would Jesus do?

Yay for the nuns! [“Nuns’ support for health-care bill shows church split, Seattletimes.com, March 17]. They’re following the path less traveled in pursuit of clear conscience.

Sister Simone Campbell in an NPR interview said “our perspective is it promotes life by giving 30 million people in our country access to health care when we know that 45,000 people die every year because they don’t have access to health care.”

We are the people who work day in day out with people who don’t have health insurance, with people who can’t get care and with people who are suffering because of the injustice within our system. And for us, the mandate — what we see as the mandate of Jesus in the gospel — is to respond to people in need.

These nuns have asked the question all Christians must ask: What would Jesus do? They’ve not covered their ears, constricted their hearts or shied away when the answer came back loud and clear. You go, Sisters!

— Darcy Wright, Gig Harbor

Baby steps toward ‘historic vote’

“Hurling toward historic vote” [page one, March 19] was the headline in Friday’s Seattle Times. It is bad enough that Seattle has been stuck with a daily newspaper that is much more conservative than the city’s population — The Times endorsed George W. Bush, periodically proclaims “the merits” of doing away with the inheritance tax and condemns the health-care package — but can’t The Times at least separate reporting from editorial opinion?

Are we really “hurling?” This is a health-care debate that has been raging in this country for the past year — to the point that most people are sick to death of hearing about the issue. “Hurling” makes it sound like it has all happened so fast — a view surely held only by insurance-company profiteers and the legislators they have purchased.

Ask the 46 million Americans who live — and die — without health insurance whether the passage of health reform is coming at a blistering pace.

The proper headline should have been: “Finally a vote on health care.”

— Travis Penn, Seattle

Calls to legalize drugs after deaths in Mexico

Editor, The Times:

Another round of brutal murders fueled by the drug trade in Mexico, and The Seattle Times sticks its head farther in the sand, claiming that “the wealthy consumers of illicit goods, drug-abusing Americans are complicit in these deaths” [“A war close to home,” Opinion, March 16).

After 97 years of total failure in the “war against private behavior by consenting adults,” it’s long past due that we face reality and admit that it is the prohibitionists who are responsible for the illegal drug trade and its inevitable violence.

All drugs were legal in this country from 1776 to 1913 — the period of our nation’s greatest growth and triumph. Let’s return to our Founding Fathers’ wise counsel and relegalize drugs under reasonable regulation and taxation.

That is the only way to end the violence and put the murderous cartels out of business overnight.

— Brian Templeton, Des Moines

Rachel Corrie’s posthumous trial in Israel

In response to letter writer Iris Langman’s question “what was [Rachel Corrie] doing in Gaza?” [“Blame ISM for Rachel Corrie’s death,” Northwest Voices, March 15], she was there doing what governments around the world failed to do: stop Israel in its violations of international and humanitarian laws.

The Palestinians had requested the U.N. send international observers to help keep them safe from Israeli policies and practices that wantonly kill or maim Palestinians, destroy or steal their property and unravel the fabric of Palestinian life.

The U.S. vetoed that request and in response the International Solidarity Movement was created. Its founders were an Israeli, Neta Golan, a Palestinian academic, Ghassan Andoni, and a Jewish American and Palestinian-American husband and wife, Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf.

Human Rights Watch, in its report “Razing Rafah,” cited Israel’s mass bulldozing of homes in Rafah to be militarily unnecessary — meaning they were war crimes. According to the Nuremberg Principles, every human on the planet has a responsibility to prevent war crimes.

— Linda Frank, Tacoma

Obama carries on many Bush-era policies

Usually I trash what Charles Krauthammer writes, but not this time. His “Hail the rotation of power” [Opinion, March 13] column gave me hope and confidence. The hope is for democracy in America and the confidence is that civil discourse is the only viable means of discussing and then resolving America’s pressing issues.

We have two wars, a spiraling debt, static unemployment and widespread public mistrust of government and its capabilities — these and health care top the agenda facing any administration. That Krauthammer could so fairly portray the current situation and its antecedents inspires hope that reasonable people can openly discuss issues, disagree about their causes and solutions yet stimulate their opposition to think more broadly.

Now think of the rhetoric of neoconservatives and their counterparts. The sloganeering, false premises to their arguments and general intransigence — even when exposed to genuine, countervailing facts —bode dangerously for survival of an open, dynamic democracy — which is what we cherish.

Thank you Krauthammer for crossing the intellectual “aisle” and keeping us aware that perspective, not ideology, helps us all grow in our ability to understand, then resolve doubts and problems.

— Peter Loeb, Sequim

Rethinking gays in the military

I read a headline that Gen. David Petraeus says it’s “Time to rethink gay policy” [News, March 17] and I instantly think: How long are we going to “rethink” it this time? The last line to the short article answers it clearly, as Petraeus says we should wait until Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ “study” on the matter is complete.

The general wants to be sure that ending discrimination doesn’t affect recruitment and the ability of our military to fight. In other words, if it does [affect it] — the “policy” of government-sanctioned discrimination would continue.

I don’t need four stars on my shoulder to know that type of reasoning is evasive and dishonest. I believe the only policy that we should be “rethinking” is whether we will end bigotry — against all soldiers — or won’t we?

These same arguments — and studies — were also made before blacks were allowed to serve with whites in the military. I know, many will say that was different, but explain that to the person who is being discriminated against now.

— Marty Zupan, Seattle

Crackdown on downtown panhandlers

It is not a threat to you or I to be solicited for money — neither panhandlers nor Girl Scouts are holding me by the ankles and shaking the money out of my pockets [“Seattle to shift some bike cops to walking a downtown beat,” NWThursday, March 18].

Councilmember Tim Burgess’ proposed anti-solicitation ordinance interferes with the free speech of anyone who is asking for money. The newest amendment, which would make intimidating conduct mean whatever “compels” a person to give money, is indicative of the nonsensical nature of the entire proposed ordinance.

A person who is “compelled” — or forced — to give money to panhandlers through some real threat of physical harm has reason to turn to law enforcement for help; the current law already addresses the panhandler’s behavior. On the other hand, if I feel “compelled” or forced by my own guilt or compassion to give money, that’s of my own doing, not the panhandler’s.

It is clear that this ordinance is intended to make the poverty and suffering of some of the most vulnerable and visible members of our community less visible and should be rejected.

— Erin Rants, Seattle

Increased pressure on ports following Panama Canal widening

Bruce Ramsey hit the nail on the head in his outline of the challenges facing Puget Sound ports that threaten tens of thousands of good-paying jobs here in the international freight-moving industry [“Puget Sound ports need to get ready for Panama Canal widening,” Opinion, March 17].

Washington’s ports not only generate a lot of jobs in the Puget Sound region, they also provide the state’s huge agricultural sector with efficient access to world markets. But much more needs to be done to position Washington to be competitive in the future — especially creating improvements to our trade and transportation infrastructure.

The state can also help by keeping taxes and fees down. State government taxes and fees — especially as shippers climb out of the recession — will be an increasing factor. Taxes and fees no matter how small add up and create a competitive disadvantage for Puget Sound ports. For example, state-imposed expenses for the standby-rescue tug at Neah Bay and state-approved higher pilotage fees are raising operating costs for shippers using Puget Sound ports.

State officials can protect jobs — from longshoremen to farmers — by keeping taxes and fees down and by making needed highway and rail improvements.

— Capt. Michael Moore, vice president, Pacific Merchant Shipping, Seattle

Drought worries for Eastern Washington farmers

Isn’t the federal government building more irrigation for potato farmers at taxpayer expense really the same as the bailout of GM? [“Water worries,” page one, March 14].

The arguments against the GM bailout — including strong ones by elected representatives from Eastern Washington — were that the problems were foreseeable, that the company should have planned better and that the dollars per job saved were too high.

The depletion of the aquifer was certainly more foreseeable than the U.S. consumers loss of interest in SUVs. Lobbyist Mike Schwisow is quoted in the article as wanting “just to maintain what we have now,” despite the fact that his clients knowingly depleted the aquifer in an unsustainable way.

Has he or former Congressman Sid Morrison calculated the federal tax dollar per job saved for these irrigation projects?

— Jim M. Mayer, Kenmore

Paddy responsible for centuries of conflict in Ireland

Editor, The Times:

I know that Wednesday, St. Patrick’s Day, was a great excuse for most young Americans to go out drinking and have fun — safely, I hope. But in Thursday’s Seattle Times there was a blurb about how St. Patrick introduced Christianity to Ireland [“St. Paddy’s Day,” Newsline, March 18].

Should we really be celebrating the person who may be at the root of centuries of conflict and of thousands of Irish deaths because of arguments over whose “brand” of Christianity is “right?” Isn’t St. Patrick responsible for a great deal of human suffering?

I do not think we should celebrate in his name at all. Instead, let’s celebrate the vernal equinox — it’s just a few days later — when the hours of daylight and darkness are the same, promising longer days to come! We could celebrate the promise of spring and the natural part of the cycle of reproduction. We all enjoy springtime and our young adults can have just as much fun drinking green beer — symbolizing spring’s green leaves.

Think about the traditions which you celebrate blindly and without much thought. Use your reason and logic; Why are you doing this? Look at the results of these traditions and then consider throwing them away and creating new traditions, which do not celebrate prejudice or death.

— Jeff Wedgwood, Issaquah

Oh, go pinch yourself

Concerning The Times’ promotion of “pinching of no-green wearing misanthropes” [“An Irish pub crawl for St. Patrick’s Day”, NWFriday, March 12], a person cannot be called a misanthrope for not wearing green.

The misanthropes are the people who think that it’s fun to pinch other people. As a person of Irish descent, I abhor the tawdry and cheap celebration of a supposed saint that has no relation to actual Irish tradition. A bunch of drunken brawlers — most of whom are not Irish — do no credit to Patrick.

But endorsing schoolyard bullying is a new low. It’s bad enough that on this day each year children have to endure this juvenile version of the inquisition, but do you really want a bunch of drunks running around pinching people?

— Phil Fagerholm, Seattle

Facts show stellar performance

It’s annoying to follow the government and compliant media accounts day after day about the dangerous and unreliable cars made by Toyota [“Looking skyward to unravel Toyota’s woes,” page one, March 17].

In light of the facts, a comparison of complaints by consumers of Ford, GM and Toyota vehicles during the last 10 years shows Toyota the most reliable car by far — based on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data.

In 2000, GM received 12,000 consumer complaints, Ford received 14,000 and Toyota received 2,000. By 2008, complaints on all autos had fallen to below the 2,000 [complaints] level, and although a recent spate of complaints has put Toyota up near 2,000 again, this is where they have always been!

In a recent Consumer Reports auto issue, GM and Ford ranked near the bottom in overall scores for the past three years. While the improvement in very recent American cars must be celebrated, it should be remembered that Toyota now competes with us — we the taxpayer owners of GM. Could there be a possible conflict of interest here in the sudden zeal to tar Toyota?

— Cathie Whitesides, Seattle

Toyota should be more like an episode of ‘CSI’

The failure of Toyota to adequately explain the systemic failures occurring in some of their automobiles is an example of terrible corporate behavior and irresponsibility. The company has consistently been defensive and unwilling to share details of the investigation, insisting the problem is a minor mechanical deficiency.

We have all seen the photographs of the wreckage of an aircraft, painstakingly reassembled on some hangar floor and the dogged determination of the investigators working to determine what caused such devastation. The science of forensics is so de rigueur on TV programs that Toyota executives should watch a few episodes of “CSI” or “House” and learn what the audience is attuned to.

Have they examined the time of day, weather conditions, proximity to high radiation including microwave and aircraft radar, production documentation of components, wiring harnesses, board assembly and the countless minutiae that defines the nature and success or failure of high technology?

Perhaps Toyota’s failure is emblematic of the problems of many corporate entities that simply take the consumer for granted. Marketing and media are not the keys to profitability and reputation.

— Brian Grad, Bremerton

All U.S. priorities ‘economically entwined’

The Times’ editorial titled “Congress must reject health-reform bill” [Opinion, March 16] lacks both coherence and compassion. Jobs are a high priority but so is the war, financial-system reform, environment and health care. We can’t afford to focus on only one of our problems as they are all economically entwined. Some economists, for example, believe a health-care bill will encourage hiring.

The editorial charges the health-care bill will increase health-care spending but expenditures are rising astronomically without a bill. Some now face a 39 percent rise in health-insurance premiums. Private insurance is covering fewer people for more money. The independent Congressional Budget Office states the current bill actually saves money. Editorial fairness would demand a more balanced look at health-care future costs.

I do applaud the acknowledgment of a need for expanded coverage, but an opinion to ignore this benefit and start over is naive and cruel. Starting over means thousands more unnecessary deaths and bankruptcies due to lack of health-care coverage.

— Peter Capell, Seattle

Dealing with current health care as painful as losing kidney

This is the second time The Seattle Times has stated its opposition to the health-reform bill. The first time I was shocked, but now I am just plain sad.

I am a Harvard alumna who recently lost her job as a nursing assistant taking care of the sick and elderly. When I was working, my employer didn’t offer his many employees insurance — it was too expensive!

I can’t afford health insurance on the private market. I don’t have kids and am not pregnant, so I am not eligible for Medicaid. My paychecks go for my rent, food and student-loan payments.

Last year I had a bicycling accident and almost lost my kidney. I didn’t know if a hospital would treat me; they did — though begrudgingly. The fear and shame was as painful as the kidney laceration. The Seattle Times is the public voice of a proud progressive city like Seattle, so how can it support the status quo for health care that is cruel and shameful in its inequality?

— Sirpa H. Nelson, Seattle

Bill would limit access to barbiturates

I take great exception to the op-ed about combating prescription abuse that says it will harm patients in pain [“Bill to combat prescription abuse little benefit to patients in pain,” Opinion, March 17]. It is clear the writers neither understand the problem this bill addresses or the bill itself.

The problem is the over-prescription of barbiturates and other addictive drugs. The bill seeks to educate prescribers to the alternatives to mass over-prescribing — circumstances currently far too common. The bill impinges on treatment of chronic pain in no manner.

There are far too many examples of patients who are not in chronic pain receiving prescriptions for literally hundreds of tablets of OxyContin and hydrocodone for toothaches, pulled muscles, twisted knees and other short-term situations. My daughter was recently offered 30 Vicodin when she had her wisdom teeth pulled and was told there was no “merit badge” for having pills left over.

Gov. Chris Gregoire should sign this bill because many doctors are not educated on the consequences and side effects of barbiturates and do absolutely no follow up on the use of the pills.

— Rose Dennis, Bellevue

No one needs a pound of pot

Editor, The Times:

Now that I see Steve Sarich was abusing the law and being greedy — probably selling for profit — I don’t have as much sympathy for him [“How much medical pot is too much?” page one, March 17]. So it was an illegal operation under the guise of medicine, obviously.

I don’t understand why the amounts people are allowed to have are so large? I don’t smoke anymore, but do you know how much a pound of pot is?

This medical-marijuana business is shady, I believe. They should just make it legal, taxed and regulated at normal stores — for medicine or recreation. No one needs to always have a keg of Budweiser or a fully stocked bar around the house and no one needs a pound of pot.

I am outspoken about a lot of things I don’t like, but I don’t break the laws I wish to see changed. Too bad people were injured in this event and still feel upset about the militarized response. I still hope for the basic laws to be changed.

— Brian Caldwell, Everett

Legalize to avoid more incidents in Mexico and at home

A home invasion and shootout in Kirkland and an American consular official and her husband shot in their car in Mexico with their baby left crying in the back seat [“Danger signs apparent before Mexico attacks,” News, March 16]. What else do we need before we start looking at the economics that fuel the marijuana trade?

Keeping pot illegal just makes it more expensive because you have to pay a lot more to motivate businesspeople to risk jail to sell it to you. All that cash attracts competition that is then expressed through the barrel of a gun. Let’s remember the lessons of Prohibition, which attempted to ban a substance far more damaging to health and society: alcohol.

Let’s change our policies about marijuana and put it on the same footing as alcohol — regulated, taxed and far cheaper — which will take the drug lords out of the business. Repealing Prohibition ended the gang wars in Chicago.

Let’s decriminalize marijuana and end the gun battles in Mexico as well as here at home.

— Mark Nassutti, Kirkland

Gun trafficking to blame

Commenting on the level of drug violence in Juarez, Mexico, The Seattle Times’ editorial board says, “These gruesome tallies are the byproduct of a lethal industry that satisfies U.S. appetites” [“A war close to home,” Opinion, March 16].

The president of Mexico agrees; Felipe Calderón says that little will change as long as the United States continues to make gun purchases so easy. He knows that odds are 9-to-1 that the weapons used in Saturday’s killing of American consulate workers were purchased in the United States.

Now the NRA lobbyists will tell us the problem is that the strict gun-control laws in Mexico leave honest Mexicans defenseless against the criminal element of their society. However, according to a report published in The Seattle Times on Feb. 7, one is more than three times as likely to be murdered in the capital of the United States — where guns are easily accessible to law-abiding citizens — than in Mexico City — where there isn’t easy access.

— Sue Griswold, Mill Creek