Letters to the editor

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

REAFFIRMING PREFERENCE

Race and ethnicity: Unequal treatment was fairly rejected

We welcome letters of 200 words or fewer. Include your full name, address and telephone number for verification. Letters become the property of The Times and may be edited for publication.

Editor, The Times:

The Legislature is considering a change in state law that would effectively repeal voter-approved Initiative 200 by allowing school officials to consider race and ethnicity when deciding who will be allowed to attend public colleges and universities ("Bills would let race be factor in college admissions again," Times, page one, Jan. 22).

Repeal of I-200 means some students will be denied a chance to attend a public college or university because admissions officials decided their skin is the wrong color, while other applicants would be given special consideration for the same reason.

I-200 became law in 1998 with 58 percent of the vote. Voters established a clear principle: The government should not grant or deny benefits to citizens based on race or ethnicity, and that race should not be a factor in college admissions. Repeal opens a painful and divisive debate over the influence of race in setting government policy, a debate the people of Washington settled five years ago.

Contrary to what opponents predicted, minority enrollment did not drop dramatically after I-200 passed. In its Michigan law-school decision, the Supreme Court affirmed that state laws like I-200 are constitutional.

Repealing I-200 would weaken Washington's civil-rights law and permit the unequal treatment of public college and university applicants because they happen to be of different races. That is bad public policy.

Paul Guppy, research director, Washington Policy Center, Bellevue

Proportion in good measure

The Times article about the legislative proposal to permit racial preferences in university admissions for the purpose of promoting diversity left me wondering what the sponsors think an ideally diverse campus should look like.

A conventional definition of diversity would imply that the student body should reflect the state's population. But it is not only African Americans and Hispanics who are underrepresented at the University of Washington relative to the state's population. Caucasians are also underrepresented, while Asians are overrepresented. Caucasians comprise 72 percent of the state's 18- and 19-year-olds, but only 56 percent of a recent freshman class. Asians, on the other hand, comprise 6.5 percent of the same age-group, but 28 percent of the freshman class.

In other words, the only way the UW could accurately reflect the diversity of the state's ethnic composition would be to reduce Asian enrollment by three-quarters, and to admit a lot more Caucasians and a few from other minorities. I hope this is not what this proposal's sponsors have in mind.

But if the diversity goal is something other than for the campus to reflect the state's population, it would be interesting to learn what that goal might be.

Stefan Sharkansky, Seattle

No gray in the palette

To Gov. Gary Locke, Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, and others (who support amending I-200):

1) What part of the 60-percent voter-approved initiative do you still not understand?

2) What is your motivation for change when current college admissions are equal to or ahead of pre-I-200 numbers? (It seems to be working quite well and, in the process, is starting to break down damaging perceptions.)

3) Why are you wasting our tax dollars tampering with a voter mandate — is your job not to represent the voters' directives?

Please redirect your efforts and my money to something that needs fixing.

Randy Hansen, Seattle

ADVERTISING RAGE

Pitching a fit response

Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie has some gall to complain about two 30-second videos comparing George Bush to Hitler in the Move-On.org "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest ("Anti-Bush ad contest enrages Republicans," News, Jan. 12).

In 2002, the Republican Party ran TV ads comparing Georgia's Democratic Sen. Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden. The awful truth that Cleland lost both his legs and one of his arms as a soldier in Vietnam did not impinge upon the conscience of the Republicans.

In 2003, Grover Norquist compared the estate tax to the Holocaust. Norquist is chair of the Reagan Legacy Project and a close adviser to George Bush's political maven, Karl Rove.

MoveOn.org apologized for the disgusting comparison two of its contestants made. I am waiting for Gillespie to show responsibility for the comparable actions of much more prominent Republicans.

John Shaw, Seattle

GETTING TRACTION

In the grip of a storm

This month, Western Washington was paralyzed by a series of snowstorms, schools and businesses were closed and all-but-essential services shut down. This was no more than a small taste of what Washington residents east of the Cascades live with from November to March of each year.

This should show us how ludicrous the idea is to ban studded snow tires from public roads. It may be acceptable for Seattle to shut down for a week every few years for a snowstorm, but you cannot shut down Eastern Washington for months each winter.

Studded snow tires are an important tool that many residents use to drive safely on ice-covered roadways. Many of us have careers and must take to the roads regardless of the weather. Teachers, emergency personnel and others must make it to work on ice-covered roadways. Their lives and the lives of others will be at risk without studded snow tires to keep them safely on the roadway.

The only prudent and safe way to travel in the winter is to purchase studded snow tires. These tires may place additional wear on the roads. This wear is acceptable as it prevents tragedy, saves lives and prevents millions of dollars in property damage.

It's now your choice to not use studded snow tires. Remember the snowstorms of 2004, avert tragedy, don't make the mistake of banning studded snow tires for the entire state, taking away our choice to protect the safety of our families and yours.

Jim Oatey, Orondo

Business opportunity: Seeking partner

My understanding is that the state of Washington spent nearly $3.5 billion (that's right, with a "b") of taxpayer money to secure 850 jobs at Boeing ("What the state promised Boeing," Business & Technology, Jan. 21). That is $4,117,647.06 per job over 20 years, or $205,882.35 per year per job.

I run a small distribution company in Auburn. We employ five people. That is 0.58 percent of Boeing's 850 jobs. Can I get Gov. Locke to give me some tax breaks if I agree to continue running my business here? Please forward the applications.

I calculate .0058 X 3,500,000,000 = $20,300,000. Admittedly, there is a little rounding here, but I would even take a discount for time if the state would pay me cash.

William Turnbull, Seattle

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company