Letters to the Editor

Boeing tanker contract

Scoop and the GAO

Editor, The Times:

I'm happy to see this Government Accountability Office decision ["Boeing tanker 'back in the game,' " Times, page one, June 19].

Of course, had we had a senator or two who cared as much about Washington state tradespeople as old Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson did, Boeing would now be building the tanker, instead of protesting the contract award. So much for lightweights.

— Richard Hartley, Ferndale

The right thing to do

It is only right that this is being reviewed; to give a more expensive contract to Northrop and Airbus was so unfair to begin with. Hopefully the right thing will be done.

— Gary Williams, Signal Hill, Calif.

Halt special interests

I am in complete agreement with the GAO decision. It is time that special-interest groups are stopped from influencing changes to "requests for proposals" without complete opportunity, and understanding by all bidders of all revisions to specification requirements.

I also believe that this contract should have been awarded to Boeing as a result of the GAO decision and that conducting the competition again is uncalled for.

— Frank P. Iannolo, San Diego, Calif.

Time to rebid

I totally agree with the GAO's findings. The program should be rebid. In addition, I do not believe it is in our country's best interest to buy military equipment from a foreign country.

The only reason for considering such an action would be if the product was absolutely not available in the United States.

— Mahlon Hoover, Seattle

A-330 not acceptable

It is about time the government woke up and stopped this disastrous decision by the U.S. Air Force. I cannot imagine having Airbus airplanes refueling the American military. Anyone who thought that Airbus would build a facility in the United States to assemble the A-330 is crazy.

Additionally, the A-330 is a terrible aircraft. It is a fuel hog, a poor performer and does not have the reputation of the 767. It has a 15 percent larger fuel burn than a 777, not to mention the 767. Thanks for making the right decision GAO!

— Lonnie Acree, Seattle

Union help

I hope Boeing is grateful for all the assistance the union members gave Boeing in regards to lobbying and protesting the debacle. Put a few extra dollars in our pension fund, please.

— Don Grinde, Everett

Wait a second Perhaps we're biased

The domestic opposition to a foreign company winning this defense contract makes one wonder whether the procurement process is dishonest to non-North American organizations.

European Aeronautic Defence & Space (EADS) and their partners have consumed precious resources bidding for this contract.

If the American public truly requires only local technology for the armed forces, then let it be stated in the "rules of engagement."

— Eric White, Mountlake Terrace

Payback?

Interesting: It would appear that Boeing has just really "ticked off" the U.S. Air Force from this and future contracts. The payback, oh my!

— Robert Erhardt, Mobile, Ala.

Pregnant elephants

Breeding program endangers pachyderms

In "Elephant's pregnancy raises health concerns" [page one, June 20], zoo curator Nancy Hawkes tries to cloak the zoo's deadly elephant breeding program as somehow being a part of wild elephant conservation. That is not true.

Zoos have no intention of ever releasing any of their baby elephants to the wild, and, since almost 75 percent of Asian elephants born in zoos die before age 8, the elephant gene pool is certainly not being helped either.

Zoos such as Woodland Park believe elephants are lucrative draws that attract visitors who pay admission fees. Baby elephant births result in huge spikes in attendance at the gate. At the same time, zoo elephant populations are declining.

Adults die at roughly half their normal life span from captivity-induced ailments such as arthritis and bone infections, and baby elephants like Hansa die from diseases such as herpesviruses.

Zoos are desperately trying to reverse this trend through their reckless breeding programs.

While they continue to conduct this deadly "pseudo conservation," real wild-elephant conservation efforts continue to suffer from neglect and elephants careen toward extinction in both the wild and in captivity.

— Nancy Farnam, Edmonds

Better to invest in wild Asian elephants

If the Woodland Park Zoo's motivation for trying to get the elephant Chai pregnant is, as they claim, "preserving Asian elephants," then I strongly urge them instead to create a funding program for saving wild-elephant habitats in Asia.

That truly would be the most useful action for preserving Asian elephants, even though they would be thousands of miles away from the zoo's turnstiles.

— David Hancocks, former Woodland Park Zoo director (1976-1984), Victoria, Australia

Talking while driving

More than just phones; many activities distract

Regarding "Hey, you with the phone in your ear" [editorial, June 20], you are correct that talking on the phone as a "distracted driver" should result in a primary offense for a "meet-and-greet with an officer."

However, please acknowledge that drivers are distracted by far more than the targeted offense: talking on a handheld cellphone.

My husband commutes across Highway 520 every day to work and regularly marvels at the sight of distracted drivers: the guy playing a long, wooden flute, the lady holding a salad container and using a fork in the other hand, the person holding and eating cereal with milk in an open bowl, the Montlake driver balancing his laptop on top of the steering wheel, the coffee-lover holding a hot cup of coffee in a lidless mug, the people reading newspapers, the many parents paying more attention to their little back-seat passengers than the road, ladies putting on mascara — the list goes on.

There are many things that drivers should not be doing while operating a vehicle. The hands-free device is a small start to having fewer distracted drivers all around us.

— Allison Rider, Seattle

Some doom relief

Time for an angst break

A hardy thanks to Susan Nielsen ["We need an annual reprieve from the Daily Doom Report," guest commentary, June 19], who brought a refreshing breath of sanity to this region of ultra-environmentalism. Folks around here seem to have some form of religious Mother Jones fervor that sucks the fun out of any day.

Heaven forbid if you choose not to fit a family of five in a Prius or you don't spend hours on mass transit. You fail some rendition of the eco-WASL if you can't recite how many plastic bags can go in the can and which cannot.

Nowadays, the politickers in your neighborhood can report you for not properly sifting your garbage.

I venture that most everyone is concerned about and is doing one act or another to beautify, preserve or protect our surroundings. But can't we just give those who don't wholeheartedly believe that we'll burn up, freeze, blow away, be swallowed up or drown the next day a little respite from the angst?

— Mark Bowers, Issaquah