Online-only letters

Gregoire's donors

Gov. supports voter interests

Editor, The Times:

The Seattle Times article, "When Gregoire won, so did her donors" [Times, page one, June 24] unfairly and inaccurately casts the incumbent governor as a panderer to her interest-group donors.

The article fails to account for Gov. Christine Gregoire's strong commitment to issues despite the fact that the promoters of these issues, such as environment and health care, have not been among her major contributors.

[Times reporter] Ralph Thomas would be hard-pressed to explain her environmentally and economically savvy approach to renewable energy, her leadership on climate-change and green-job bills and her consistent support of affordable health care. .

The Times article flips the usual interpretation of emphatic support by education workers, unions, doctors and environmentalists. The fact that large and reputable groups have donated funds to Gregoire's campaign speaks to her success as governor and proves that she has retained a wide range of support.

Health care, education, the economy and the environment are of the utmost concern for Washington voters. Gregoire represents all of these interests, and if re-elected, will continue to safeguard the interests of Washington voters.

— Angie Lyons, Arlington

Campaign support no surprise

Issues surrounding the environment, related economic development and health care — interests that are generally funded by voters and local organizations — have never appeared to be issues in which private interests and campaign contributions prevail. Ralph Thomas' article, "When Gregoire won, so did her donors" comes as a shock, since allegations that the interests of her donors are the interests she most fervently promotes are wholly untrue.

Gov. Christine Gregoire clearly has an established record of promoting the interests of her voters and all of Washington. She addresses both economic concerns and environmental concerns in her plans to create more green-collar jobs. She has been hugely supportive of renewable energy and has helped enact policy to reduce pollutants that cause global warming. However, environmental groups are not among her chief financial supporters.

Gregoire's attention to the environment is clearly in response to the interest of the voters and due to her own personal commitment. Washington demands a progressive leader with a strong handle on vital issues. Gregoire has demonstrated knowledge and concern for issues concerning the environment, which, in turn, make her a prime candidate for election and now re-election.

It comes as no surprise then that her approach to Washington politics has garnered her a wide range of support by a variety of local interests.

— Ava Phisuthikul, Shoreline

Iraq War

U.S. must keep its word

As military officers, we took on the mission and risk of helping the Iraqi people. We made sacrifices, as did the soldiers and Marines we led. So it is alarming to us to find now that nearly 5 million of those same Iraqi people have become displaced, more than 2 million of whom live as refugees in neighboring countries. According to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, this represents the highest percentage of people seeking asylum worldwide.

It appears that rather than rescue them from a desperate situation, we have merely altered the form of their predicament. Today, there are about 750,000 Iraqi refugees living in Jordan. They are not permitted to work, and so they either live on dwindling savings or subject themselves to shameless exploitation, working for a fraction of an appropriate salary.

Medical care is scarce and frequently cost-prohibitive. Housing is difficult to come by. Only recently has Jordan allowed Iraqi children to attend schools, but the policy shift means little because there are simply not enough school seats or teachers to handle the sudden influx of students. Iraqi children must often work to help their families stave off destitution, and young girls are frequently compelled by desperation into a life of prostitution.

Many Iraqis living in Jordan have had no choice but to overstay their visas, and so they live as fugitives from the law, perpetually fearful that they, and their families, will be forcibly sent back to Iraq where death most certainly awaits them.

With the price tag for hosting refugees climbing into the billions, and with little financial assistance from the international community, Jordan is anxious to see them go. To compound this dreary scenario, Iraqis are discovering that there is nowhere else for them to go. Virtually no Western countries are willing to resettle more than a pittance of refugees.

We find it disappointing that the United States, our country, which staked our lives on saving the Iraqi people, is among the worst performers in this crisis. What is further disheartening to us is that many of these applicants at one time risked their own lives to aid our military forces in Iraq.

As service members, we view our nation's role in the world as a leader. We joined the military to be leaders ourselves and to fight for just causes. But we can hardly claim righteousness when the very people we went to liberate find themselves imprisoned in such dire circumstances — circumstance that we helped create — and then refuse to offer them further support. Millions need our help, and they need it now.

With the highly unstable security situation lingering in Iraq, they cannot go home. With the dire conditions in Jordan and other countries hosting refugees, they cannot stay where they are for long. And with the fact that 63 percent of refugees hold college degrees, making them invaluable to the reconstruction effort, we feel it is imperative to safeguard them while Iraq climbs back to her feet. The most substantial way we can do that is to provide meaningful financial assistance.

The United States pledged its support to the Iraqi people and sacrificed the lives and health of many service members to give it. We believe the honorable thing to do is keep our word. If the United States wishes to remain a leader in the world by virtue of both strength and humanity, it must not forsake its promises.

— Luis Carlos Montalván, retired U.S. Army captain, Brooklyn, N.Y., and Tyler Boudreau, former U.S. Marine captain, Newton, Mass.

Small high schools

Portland making progress

Every high-school teacher and principal watches proudly as graduates receive their diplomas ["Small-school experiment doesn't live up to hopes," Times, Local News, June 23]. And we privately wonder: Did I reach out to every child? What will I do next year to prepare every kid to walk across that stage so that no one is left behind?

Portland Public Schools does a good job graduating mainstream kids from typical households. As the Oregon Department of Education reports, nearly eight out of 10 of those students graduate on time. Where our Portland schools — and others across Oregon — struggle is with those students who need help overcoming the challenges in their lives.

We know who these students are. We know the hurdles they face. We can help them and their families overcome some of the obstacles that keep them from succeeding, but schools can't do it alone.

This is not a hopeless task: I've seen students make it with the right support, even in the face of poverty, broken homes, violence and other terrible challenges.

And as our students walk across the stage, we in the Roosevelt community know that hundreds of hands guided them here.

They are the hands of volunteers in our schools, who tutored students and helped them apply to college and find scholarships. Others connected us with businesses, alumni and foundations, provided mentoring, internships and social services.

All these hands helped our students — and it shows in our results.

In the past two years, we've seen double-digit gains in reading and math, a dramatic decrease in serious student discipline issues and a shift in expectations: Students no longer simply hope to graduate high school, but now plan to attend college.

There is still so far to go, and Roosevelt is not unique. Students from all over Portland, Ore., deserve a chance to succeed. We'll only get there by joining hands, hearts and minds as we build the next Portland bridge, the bridge to the future for our youth. This bridge has a strong foundation, but needs some additional engineering.

— Deborah Peterson, Roosevelt Campus principal, Portland, Ore.

Oil and Iraq

Mission accomplished

In light of the offshore drilling debate, last Thursday's article from The New York Times, "Deals with Iraq are set to bring oil giants back" [News, June 19] is clear evidence that the Bush administration is accomplishing its ultimate objective in Iraq.

Despite the scant coverage, it is impossible to underscore the significance of these deals — the first for Western companies since Saddam Hussein nationalized Iraq's oil reserves 36 years ago.

Make no mistake about it: This is a strong indicator that the Bush administration, contrary to its rhetoric, went to war in Iraq, not because of connections to al-Qaida or weapons of mass destruction, but for the oil reserves.

The most disconcerting aspect of these deals is that "big oil" will likely be reliant on U.S. troops — and taxpayers — to guard its drilling operations, extending the current occupation indefinitely.

If this becomes the case, then the $12 billion-a-month occupation is just one huge subsidy for big oil.

Is there any doubt at this point who attended Vice President Dick Cheney's secret energy policy meetings in 2001? I think not.

The question Americans ought be asking now is: Why did the Bush administration ignore the August 2001 intelligence reports?

Mission accomplished, indeed.

— C. David Divelbiss, Seattle

Exxon Valdez case

Ruling puts power into wrong hands

Exxon Mobil Corp. has been fighting the courts since 1989 for damages caused by the Exxon Valdez spill that will never be completely cleaned up ["Court slashes judgment in Exxon Valdez disaster," Times, News, June 25]. The court dropped the damages from $2.5 billion to $500 million, ruling that what Exxon had chosen to pay is enough.

The Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to make this judgment. It gives too much power to the Supreme Court and to the president. The case was unprecedented and should have been left to Congress and the American people to decide.

Furthermore, the lack of responsibility we are allowing big oil companies should give pause to everyone in deciding whether or not we should allow offshore drilling. Exxon violated the law and caused the Exxon Valdez disaster — it was not a freak accident. Who's to say it couldn't happen again with an offshore oil platform?

With this ruling, oil companies get to decide for themselves what their damages are simply based on what they want to pay out.

It's definitely something to think about in the coming election, as the next president has some decisions to make in regards to offshore drilling and who gets to sit on the Supreme Court with all of Bush's appointments.

— David Snell, Maple Valley

Impeachment

Times kudos

I was glad to see someone at least mention impeachment in the newspaper ["Ask all of us: What happened?," Times, Local News, June 25]. It seems to me that the same lame excuses are used to say why we shouldn't try to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney and that no newspaper is standing up to say the real truth — that impeachment is imperative!

It amazes me that with the overwhelming reports and evidence, the attitude is, "We knew that!" Well, if we all know it, why are these guys still sitting pretty with no impeachment in sight? What do "we the people" have to do to get justice?

— Zenda Boss-Hall, Clyde Hill

Hold Bush accountable

It is imperative that respectable journalists do in-depth reports on each and every article of impeachment introduced by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich. If these articles of impeachment quietly die in the judiciary committee and go without any in-depth investigation, then these crimes become acceptable behavior for America's leaders.

If the Bush administration is not held to account for authority overstepped, laws undermined, rule of law flouted and torture codified, what's to stop the next president or the next from following suit?

To allow Bush to go virtually unchallenged in any significant and legal way is to allow a foundation of corruption and despotism to be laid at the feet of every administration here after, establishing an absolutely flawless model for sidestepping accountability and practicing unchecked and unfettered powers.

Impeachment is vital on so many levels, it is a much-needed civics lesson and a consciousness-raising necessity. Bush is far from a lame duck at this point, and impeachment now may be instrumental in preventing Bush from launching another illegal, pre-emptive and baseless war.

— Cheryl Abraham, Wauna