The Seattle Times: Northwest Voices

Fort Hood rampage: A dozen soldiers dead

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:02:45 PST

Don’t be so quick to blame Muslim community

Editor, The Times:

A U.S. serviceman went berserk and killed at least a dozen fellow service members, and then was killed himself [“Shooting suspect faced deployment, wanted out,” page one, Nov. 6].

This unthinkable act wreaks havoc on the wounded, the families, co-workers, teachers, leaders and friends of the deceased, and those who, if they did not sustain physical wounds, still suffer every other type of war wound.

Our collective hearts are broken, just as they would be if one of our own family members burst into our home, and shot up all the cousins and grandparents.

At first reaction, some might want to place the blame right there, selecting the easy target on which to direct their outrage.

Since the man’s Arabic name suggests he is a Muslim, it’s possible that American Muslims may again become targets for those who rage against irrational acts, like this horrible mass killing.

As a Muslim, I sink in dismay to think of the burden we must bear when we are again asked to prove the negative — that we Americans and Islams do support such vile actions, instead we condemn them just like you do.

— Leslie Sinclair, Seattle

Wrapping up the election: most results are in

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:03:37 PST

R-71 support did not stop at Cascades

As an avid supporter of Referendum 71, and a resident of Eastern Washington, I have to point out that a majority of support for R-71 also stopped at South Puget Sound, not just at the Cascades [“Gay-rights support stops at Cascades,” page one, Nov. 5].

Traditionally, Southwestern Washington is as conservative as — or even more conservative than — Eastern Washington. We even had politician Tom Foley for many years.

The article should have paid more attention to Vancouver in Clark County. Even their neighbor, Portland, can’t influence their vote to support equal rights for all of our fellow citizens, regardless of sexual orientation.

— Mary Janelle Foucault, Ellensburg

Initiative 1033 surely over; Eyman probably not

Well, Initiative 1033 has bit the dust [“Eyman’s tax initiative loses,” News, Nov. 4].

It struck me that we have been dealing with one initiative after another. This is costing the state a lot of money, both to place it on the ballot, then to include it in public voting guides.

Tim Eyman has been making a living off the backs of the average taxpayer in this state for far too long.

I believe he should be declared “persona non grata,” and provided with a police escort out of the state.

Let him take his initiative machine to a state that would appreciate him, such as Idaho.

— Gordon Ridgeway, Bothell

Race for mayor: Winner separated by only a few hundred votes

Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly spent $90 million of his own money to capture the race in New York City [“GOP sweeps N.J., Virginia,” News, Nov. 4]. Do we really want to complain that Joe Mallahan is just too poor to become mayor of Seattle [“Candidates too close for comfort,” page one, Nov. 5]?

Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed is apparently troubled by the law allowing ballots to be received after 8 p.m. on Election Night. He chooses to focus on this aspect of the campaign for mayor of Seattle, rather than the ability of one campaign to outspend another by an enormous margin.

The McGinn campaign volunteers were making calls throughout the days leading up to the closing of the polls.

The Mallahan campaign may have been hampered by the network failure of T-Mobile, and the inability of their paid staff to respond to crisis on Election Day.

This failure marks a stark contrast to the grass-roots organization and commitment to government for the people of Seattle that Mike McGinn will bring to City Hall if he does win.

— Bill Levinger, Kennewick

Turnover on Seattle School Board

I am very disappointed at the insulting tone toward board member Mary Bass in The Seattle Times editorial regarding changes to the School Board [“Stakes high for Seattle School Board newbies,” Opinion, editorial, Nov. 5].

The editorial opined that the third time was apparently the charm, because voters tired of believing Bass’ good intentions would amount to anything voted her out.

The phrase “third time is the charm” refers to repeated attempts to do something that failed previously. Bass was voted in by the voters two times. Are the writers implying that somebody, or some group, has wanted her out for the last two terms and has been trying to get rid of her?

Why the rude tone and the lack of any recognition of the hard work, care and accessibility that has been the hallmark of Bass?

Bass worked hard; she voted on her beliefs rather than the party line. She was often unsuccessful because other directors merely voted to support the administration, rather than on the merits of the issue, as Bass did. She was one of the first and only directors to keep community office hours until the public demanded that others do the same.

Please show some respect to a generous and smart person who has dedicated her time to the children of this district.

— Gordon Macdougall, Seattle

Week in review

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:57:27 PST

The H1N1 infomercial: Health care got you down?

Frustrated with trying to get your H1N1 vaccination? Health-care issues got you down [“Sneezes put health fears in mind, study says,” News, Nov. 4]? Then you’ll be happy to learn there is a way to access free, quality health care. There are even several options to choose from:

Option One: Be elected to serve in the U.S. Congress or serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Option Two: Be a member of the military.

Option Three: Reside in a state or federal prison

Option Four: Reside at Guantánamo Bay [“Despite shortages, detainees at Gitmo to get flu vaccines,” News, Nov. 2].

Please note: Remaining U.S. citizens do not quality for access to affordable health care, and good luck in your quest for the elusive H1N1 vaccine.

— Sandra K. White, Woodinville

Airport security: Recent escape prompts questions

I seem to remember a short time ago a stolen car chase that ended with the suspect running away after entering the Sea-Tac parking garage. Now another wanted individual has escaped all the so-called tight security at Sea-Tac again [“Fugitive eludes police at airport,” NWWednesday, Nov. 4].

This event, coupled with the two Northwest Airlines pilots who overshot their destination, and did not respond to calls from the air traffic control tower [“Wayward pilots lose their licenses,” page one, Oct. 28], makes me wonder about the safety of our airports.

Regarding the pilots, I heard nothing about fighters being scrambled for possible interception.

And regarding the man who fled Sea-Tac, how could this possibly happen?

Do airport officials really expect the public to let this go unnoticed? I would call for a complete investigation into how this happened, and how this man was able to escape so easily.

Is it just our airport, or are all airports so easy to run from? I expect answers from Port Police Chief Colleen Wilson.

— Patrick Boatsman, Lake Forest Park

Accolades for Starbucks’ business goals?

I was interested to read that Starbucks was voted “Most Ethical Company” by the European coffee industry [“Tired of Nobel news? Starbucks also wins accolades in Europe,” Seattletimes.com, Business, Nov. 9].

This award seems more of a tip of the hat than actual accomplishment to Starbucks in light of their decision to make all espresso drinks in the UK and Ireland from fair-trade coffee by 2010.

The fact is, that while the company’s claims of being the largest single-purchaser of fair-trade coffee are true, as the largest direct retailer involved in the purchasing end-of-coffee production, Starbucks is not living up to the responsibilities this position implies.

The organization advertises that it buys 10 percent of the world’s fair-trade coffee exports, yet with only 4 percent of coffee on the world market certified as fair trade, this point of pride is really only a drop in the bucket compared with the potential.

So the question must be asked: Is Starbucks’ interest in fair trade based on a desire to improve the lives of impoverished producers in the commodities market, or as a statistic to increase advertising effectiveness in a consumer market growing more aware of living conditions in countries producing our retail goods?

— Alexander Knox, Seattle

Health care and Afghanistan: a nation divided

There seem to be two large segments in America today [“President campaigns in New Jersey,” News, Nov. 2].

Each of them trusts our government in one area, and distrusts it in another. One trusts the government to run our health-care system, but distrusts it to fight wars and occupy other countries. The other trusts the government to fight wars and occupy other nations, but distrusts it to run human services like health care.

It is possible to distrust our government totally, like the survivalists who live off the power grid, don’t register for the draft or pay taxes, and don’t take advantage of medical care unless they can pay with cash.

You could also totally trust the government to run health care and to run military occupations, both without question.

However, most people seem to belong to one of these two former groups.

It is frightening that vast numbers of our fellow Americans want the president to write a blank check for thousands of more boots on the ground in Afghanistan.

We already have 68,000 troops there, plus another 70,000 mercenaries and contractors.

It seems right for Americans to demand congressional debates on the size of the health-care budget, by discussing who is to pay for it and what services will be provided.

But what is wrong when most of these same Americans clamor to have their national debt increased without limit, with no clear knowledge of the mission for where the debt is to be used, how to accomplish it, and who will pay for it?

— Cliff Godwin, Seattle

Atheist bus signs appearing around Seattle

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:55:29 PST

Advertisements a waste of time, money

Editor, The Times:

I was deeply offended and disturbed when I recently spotted several Metro buses displaying a paid advertisement sponsored by the Freedom From Religion Foundation [“Atheist group to meet in Seattle,” NWWednesday, Nov. 4].

A blaming Santa Claus attracts the eye, and the banner reads, “Yes, Virginia...there is no God.”

This is a perversion of the original 1897 newspaper reply by Francis P. Church to 8-year-old Virginia, who inquired as to the reality of Santa. Part of that original essay read, “No Santa Claus! Thank God he lives!”

How ironic the FFRF is choosing to cite a cherished article actually referring to God.

I don’t know how many thousand dollars have been spent on this senseless advertising plastered on more than 100 buses.

If FFRF valued humans, that money could have been used to serve less-fortunate members of our community. Only $1.92 supplies a Thanksgiving dinner at Union Gospel Mission, and $2 provides a pair of new socks for a street kid at New Horizons Ministries.

Oh wait, those agencies I mentioned that care about and help people are Christian organizations.

I feel sorry for the FFRF selfishly deciding to waste money and provoke discord by sponsoring this completely unnecessary, cruel advertisement campaign.

— Carol J. Lundemo, Seattle

Carbon pawprints worse than carbon footprints?

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:50:59 PST

Let’s have fewer children, not canines

I found it oddly jarring The Seattle Times would publish a long article on the eco-footprint of large dogs and how dangerous these animals are to the planet’s safety, yet make no mention of the eco-footprint of each child born [“Dog’s eco-footprint a Hummer, study says,” NWMonday, Nov. 2].

Children live far longer than the 12 to 14 years of a large dog, and my children certainly have already consumed more than our 4- and 50-pound dogs.

Also, our children have reproduced. So now for our two children, we have three grandchildren. An acquaintance with seven children, now has 47 grandchildren.

If we really want to get to the heart of eco-footprints and problems with the environment, let’s start telling it like it is.

The largest problem we have on the planet is the number of people.

We need to educate people to have two or fewer children. This is the crux of the problem.

Let’s quit shilly-shallying about and blaming world problems on large dogs or even on Hummers. The real problem is the number of people on the planet, and our refusal to even mention controlling our population’s growth by encouraging and rewarding small families.

— Ruth Williamson-Kirkland, Lake Forest Park

Warren Buffett: a man worth more than his collections

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:49:30 PST

Editorial skipped over the free-enterprise system

It is deeply disturbing, but not surprising, the editorial board of Seattle’s only newspaper does not understand the basic underpinnings of the free enterprise and capitalist system: freedom [“Warren Buffett: Collector extraordinaire,” Opinion, editorial, Nov. 6].

The editorial seemed to distinguish between the Bill Gates-type entrepreneurs who start companies from investor-entrepreneurs such as Warren Buffett. Buffett has been one of the most successful entrepreneurs by investing in companies, and doing what he could to help them grow.

Just go to any research source and add up the number of jobs from companies Buffett has invested in to see what he has added to the American economy. The profits created by this growth in jobs goes to buy land, buildings, equipment, raw materials and the like, which go to make products and services free people can purchase on their own free will.

Altogether this improves our standard of living. The mere act of him announcing the purchase of the Burlington Northern Sante Fe railroad created wealth for individuals, pension funds to support individuals’ retirements and so on.

This resulted from Burlington’s stock price increase, which did what capitalism does: It takes from no one, does not diminish anyone’s wealth, and creates wealth out of thin air, so to speak.

That is why the U.S. is the most advanced, innovative and wealthiest country ever known to mankind.

— Theodore M. Wight, Seattle

He’s done wonders for American capitalism

The Times editorial completely missed the point about Warren Buffett.

His company is basically a well-run mutual fund for investors. He has always emphasized good management, independence of the individual companies and, more importantly, long-term results rather than the quick buck that sends a company into bankruptcy.

There are many companies that would be much better off under his stewardship. The editorial seemed to undervalue what his company brings to American capitalism.

By the way, is it just coincidence that the companies mentioned are all successful over the long term?

— Bruce W. Cooley, Puyallup

Obama drama: The president's most popular headlines

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:48:07 PST

Iran celebrates 30th anniversary of U.S. Embassy seize

On Nov. 4 the Iranian government held anti-American rallies to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran [“Protests illustrate split in Iran,” News, Nov. 5].

This annual celebration remembers fondly not just the embassy takeover, but also the taking of 53 American hostages. They do this while chanting, “Death to Satan!”

Recently President Obama declared the U.S. does not interfere in Iran’s internal affairs. So when hundreds of thousands of Iranians came out to rightfully protest this despicable event, the U.S. missed a huge opportunity to parlay this into something meaningful in nuclear discussions with Iran, in part because our president wants open dialogue with the Iranian regime.

All while the White House clearly enjoys meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, such as Honduras.

When Honduras removed Manuel Zelaya from power after it was found that he was attempting to rig a vote that would have removed presidential term limits, the White House offered harsh rebukes to Honduras. President Obama urged and later virtually ordered Honduras — a sovereign government — to reinstate Zelaya.

No one can reasonably tell me this style of governing is any better than the inept style of the previous White House occupant. To me, this is truly Bush-league.

— John Avery, Bellevue

Calling for an end to nuclear weapons

With President Obama’s recent win of the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, many have been left wondering whether he actually deserved to win [“A less-than-flattering view of Obama’s foreign policy,” Opinion, Charles Krauthammer syndicated column, Oct. 17].

The stated reason for his win was his avowed intention of achieving global nuclear disarmament. Although Obama recanted some, and declared that disarmament was an immense goal that may indeed take longer than his life to come to realization, he has at least acknowledged that there is a problem in dealing with nuclear weapons. He also admitted there is a problem with the policy of deterrence, and that the best policy is to rid the world of them and their menace.

So I enjoin you, the citizens, to voice your support for President Obama’s policy of disarmament by writing letters or e-mails to him and his myriad staff, be they demanding, congratulating or condescending.

This will ensure officials are aware of the extent that people wish to see the end of nuclear weapons and the specter of nuclear war.

Let it be known that we do not feel that nuclear weapons protect us or that we would be a weaker nation without them. Contrarily, the nuclear weapons, power plants, uranium mines and radioactive wastes involved court death for the life of the whole planet.

— Kevin Carr, Seattle

Republicans blocking global warming bill?

Recently, Sen. Barbara Boxer voted a climate bill out of committee despite a boycott by the Republicans on the committee [“GOP aims to block bill on global warming,” News, Nov. 1].

A committee rule requires at least two minority members be present if any amendments are allowed, so the bill had to be reported out of committee with no amendments. The purpose of the rule is to ensure that the majority party does not call unannounced meetings to modify and pass legislation without sufficient notification to the minority party.

It was an abuse of the rule for the Republicans to try and use it to prevent action by boycotting a well-publicized meeting. Boxer’s action was unusual because such extreme obstructionism, as the Republicans are now showing, is rare in our history.

Despite President Obama’s futile attempts to reach out to Republicans, it is clear the Republicans are not concerned with trying to reach reasonable agreement to deal with our serious national problems, but seek only political advantage by obstructing all action, hoping this will make the Democratic majority seem ineffectual.

— Joseph H. Hendrickson, Des Moines

Limbaugh weighs in

I see that Rush Limbaugh has ratcheted up his criticisms and insults of President Obama [“Limbaugh says Obama is ‘in over his head,’” News, Nov. 2].

Let’s not forget that for eight years Limbaugh was the head cheerleader for the George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove gang, and we all know where that got us. We have one horribly unnecessary war, one necessary war executed with gross incompetence, an economy deep in the toilet.

In searching for the right words to describe Limbaugh’s soundness of judgment, the phrase Looney Tunes is one that comes to mind.

— Dave Richards, Bainbridge

Honoring a lost hero: Officer Timothy Brenton

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:48:36 PST

Turning tragedy into a positive outcome

Editor, The Times:

On Oct. 31, a childhood friend of mine was murdered. Seattle Police Officer Timothy Brenton was shot to death, and his partner, Officer Britt Sweeney, was injured in a senseless act of violence [“Threat to cops made 9 days before slaying,” page one, Nov. 5].

The community is outraged and mournful. But instead of allowing this event to become a tragic distraction in our busy lives, we need to turn our distress into a call for action, to reflect on the work that officers do, and to support them and their families on a daily basis.

We talk about supporting our troops overseas, of the horrors they witness, and create assistance programs for them after their tours of duty. What we tend to forget is that we have heroes in uniform on our own front lines, within our communities.

They face horrors, hostility, fears and life-threatening situations every day — for years, for careers — so that we don’t have to, and they usually do it without recognition in a society that has historically prided itself in rebelling against authority in any form.

Imagine a shift in these officers’ shoes: First on the scene to a multiple-vehicle accident, or to a gang-related fatality, perhaps overworked or missing holidays with their children. Then maybe you will feel grateful that these men and women have chosen to do it for you, so you can rest safely in your bed tonight.

They deserve our appreciation, respect and compassion, and they deserve it every day, not just following a horrific event such as Officer Brenton’s death.

Take a moment, regularly, to appreciate our officers.

Support them with a thank you, a yes vote in a ballot box to increase their resources, a cup of coffee, or especially a smile. Look them in the eyes and smile, just as you would to your doctor, your child’s teacher, your neighborhood firefighter.

Make a difference in the lives of law-enforcement officers. They give their lives making a difference in ours.

— Nicole Setunsky, Tacoma

Election 2009: Many races still undecided

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:53:43 PST

Life, liberty and my pursuit of happiness are collectively hosed

On a very sad day — the day after Election Day — my senses were further accosted by The Seattle Times article that “No God” bus ads begin this week [“Atheist group to meet in Seattle,” NWWednesday, Nov. 4].

The Freedom From Religion Foundation convention hits town on Friday, and I feel as if the whole thing was planned around Tuesday’s election.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness still mean a lot to a lot of people.

Life: Why would a candidate try to disqualify an opponent for King County executive based on her view that life is more precious than anything? There is nothing in the job description addressing any issue so personal as one’s view on abortion.

Liberty: Initiative 1033 would have reduced taxes, but it failed to gain the necessary support. More taxes mean less freedom.

Pursuit: Be happy as a heterosexual, and be happy as a homosexual. Expanding approval and tax support for a system that is not sustainable should not be on a voter’s ballot.

So I lost. I lost on every issue, and now there are buses on my streets that say “No God.”

The saddest part of all, is that my neighbors in the Puget Sound don’t see what I see as the danger in their choices.

— Pam Schmoll, Bellevue

Mixed emotions with election results

With the exception of out-of-touch Nick Licata winning re-election [“Four take commanding leads,” News, Nov. 4], I was extremely elated with the election results.

Dow Constantine soundly trounced right-wing Republican Susan Hutchison, and Tim Eyman loses again.

Eyman blamed outspending by his opponents. Well, Eyman, guess you should have used those campaign donations for TV ads instead of pocketing them.

I am mostly elated that Referendum 71 looks like it will pass, although I am equally saddened and disappointed that it wins by such a narrow margin.

I really thought Washington was a state of tolerance and acceptance of different lifestyles, but I guess too many people are reluctant to relinquish their attitudes. Thank heavens there were enough of us to send a strong message that we do not tolerate anti-gay-rights activists here.

Washington can now remain a state where all are welcome and treated equally.

— Holly Homan, Seattle

Hoping R-71’s lead holds

Rarely a day goes by that one newspaper or another does not have an article about someone who is suing a diocese of the Catholic Church for pedophilia by a priest [“Clergy sex abuse alleged,” NWWednesday, Nov. 4].

Yet this religious institution, which protected and transferred these priests from church to church, has the gall to take a public stand against the human rights of people to marry and have legal rights because they are of the same sex.

I cite the public campaign launched by the Catholic Church in California in 2008 and Maine in 2009 [“GOP picks up governor seats; Maine tosses gay-marriage law,” page one, Nov. 4] in opposition to a very basic human right — the right to be a family.

I am proud of the way many Washingtonians voted on Referendum 71, and hope the lead holds.

— Susan David, Kirkland

Close political races = significant opposition

The election is over. Thank goodness. At least the political ads aimed at two-digit IQ levels have ended.

But alas, the barrage of explanations about why results were askew from expectations is just beginning [“Big victory stuns challenger in race for city attorney,” NWThursday, Nov. 5].

Losers will read all sorts of fascinations into their failures. Worse yet, the winners and their pundits will claim they were elected by a landslide, or that people have overwhelmingly spoken.

Let me remind all that even President Obama was elected by a mere 7 percent with the rest being divided.

Effectively and unfortunately, political leader philosophy interprets this to mean you can ignore the remainder of the populace until the next election period.

We need to have a rubber stamp with the word “idiot” engraved on it to identify the foreheads of these people. No wonder so many citizens are so angry.

And what ever happened to what’s best for the country, or representing all of the people?

Foolish thinking I guess. Now where did I put that rubber stamp?

— Albert Chukitus, Kirkland

Seattle gun ban hits parks, playgrounds

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:50:03 PST

Strongly supporting Mayor Nickels

I read in The Seattle Times that city parks and playgrounds will be prohibiting firearms in these locations [“NRA, others take aim at Seattle gun ban,” NWThursday, Oct. 29], no matter if the carrier has a concealed-weapons permit or not.

I strongly support and applaud this action.

The last thing I want to do is take a grandchild to a Seattle playground and worry about someone else nearby who might have a concealed weapon ready to be fired.

If a weapon carrier thinks he or she needs a firearm for self protection at a playground, park or sports field, then that person should stay away from such facilities.

He or she should not be exposing innocent children to the chance of being shot by an enemy of the carrier, or even shot by the carrier.

People close to my family have been shot by stray gunfire. They were not the target of the gunfire, but they are dead nevertheless, and their families and friends will suffer forever.

The NRA should not be afraid of Mayor Greg Nickels’ rule setting a precedent.

The precedent was set in the Old West when saloon keepers and preachers insisted firearms be kept out of their places of business and churches. Certainly, in the social order of things, parks, playgrounds and sports fields fall between saloons and churches.

Places for children and our youth didn’t much exist in the Old West, but the common-sense banning of firearms in sensitive public places did.

Those same bans should be maintained today.

— Hamilton K. Pyles, Point Roberts

Cracking down on teen prostitution

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:50:47 PST

But what about those supporting the industry?

Thank you for publishing the article “Children rescued in prostitution sting” [NWTuesday, Oct. 27].

I worked with young people for many years, and I think it’s about time this issue was addressed. I’m glad there have been several recent Seattle Times articles that bring to the attention of the public that there is a problem.

However, what is lacking from this article is what is happening to the men who financially support child prostitution.

We live in a supply-and-demand system; there would not be underage prostitutes if there were not a demand for them.

In Washington state it is a felony to have sex with someone under the age of 16. Yet in Seattle, men who are picked up with underage prostitutes are sentenced the same as those found with adult prostitutes — a gross misdemeanor. Where is the deterrent?

In our capitalistic society, the power belongs to the consumer. It is time for our local government to say all children deserve protection.

— Michelle Kelly, Seattle

Election 2009: results, thoughts and concerns

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:06:38 PST

A very satisfied mail-in voter

Editor, The Times:

I had to laugh reading Bruce Ramsey’s column in the Nov. 3 Seattle Times [“Ballot-Counting Day,” Opinion].

I guess it’s all about perspectives, and here’s mine: I once lived in a state where we couldn’t get absentee ballots unless we were going to be physically out of the state on Election Day. My children were too young and too impatient to wait the hour or so it took to vote, so my neighbor would stay with the kids while I went. I always managed to get there just before closing time.

By the time I got to the polling station, there were always long lines, about 40 or so folks in front of me. Unlike columnist Ramsey, I had no sweet, orange-haired lady. The poll workers were always different, and woe to you if you happened to forget your voter-registration card. I was tired, I was cranky, and standing in line for up to an hour waiting was not my version of wonderful.

I hated election days and sometimes, if some emergency happened at work, I had to work late and didn’t get to vote. Thus, my voting record was spotty, depending on how much energy I had and who was up for election.

When I moved to Washington, and found out I could vote by mail, I was in seventh heaven.

Now I have time to focus, concentrate and take my time. I don’t worry about a long line of voters waiting behind me. I vote, get it done by Election Day and life is good. I have time to ensure my vote went to the person I felt would do the best job.

I haven’t missed an election in years, and my children, now grown, have always voted absentee as well. Please don’t denigrate another system of voting that gives voting for others a nice, pleasant, positive experience. Voting itself is the real thing.

— Jean Bolton, Kent

Backlashes to Boeing decision to head east

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:55:02 PST

State may continue to lose employers, workers

The guest commentary from SPEEA’s Ray Goforth regarding Boeing’s decision to locate a 787 production line in South Carolina [“Shortsighted S.C. decision bad for Boeing shareholders,” Opinion, Nov. 3], represented nice rhetoric from an unelected union boss who is not an engineer, and has never worked at Boeing.

However, it ignores the real issue driving employers and workers away from Washington, which is the corrupt system of compulsory unionism that exists here.

While the policies of Washington clearly benefit the union bosses and politicians they support, these polices are not good for employers or employees in this state.

Instead of treating workers like a commodity from which they are entitled to receive financial tribute, unions in right-to-work states such as South Carolina actually have to earn their members, and treat them like valued customers if they want to retain their business.

Real employee free choice makes unions accountable, which unfortunately most union bosses see as a threat to their preferred business model.

I value my 23 years as a Boeing engineer, but I wouldn’t take a job in this state today.

Until Washington embraces real employee free choice, it’s inevitable that this state will continue to lose employers and workers to right-to-work states like South Carolina.

— Michael R. Butcher, Issaquah

It’s 1970s Pittsburgh all over again

Boeing’s decision to build in South Carolina is an unfortunate, but sound, business decision [“Harsh new reality,” page one, Nov. 1], brought about by an unrealistic union, and evidenced by deciding to strike while many people were losing jobs.

Growing up in Pittsburgh in the 1970s, I witnessed this same irresponsibility that killed my city’s steel industry.

The union appears to have an antagonistic attitude toward management and an unrealistic grasp of the economy. IAM general vice president Rich Michalski stated he doesn’t trust the Boeing company, but that the machinists are going to build the best airplanes.

Driving a wedge between workers and management, when management needs to increase shareholders’ wealth and has other options, is a losing proposition.

It’s 1970s Pittsburgh all over again, and if the unions fail to work with management, high-paying jobs are gone forever. The blame game is irrelevant.

— Kurt Houser, Poulsbo

Union ignored obvious signs

Regarding the Nov. 1 article, “Boeing may feel chill from miffed Murray” [News], Sen. Patty Murray should be equally miffed with the Machinists union for ignoring obvious signs of Boeing’s discontent.

Did union officials really think waiting until Oct. 21 to offer a no-strike agreement was reasonable?

Delaying that offer only served to reinforce Boeing’s concerns, and demonstrated how entrenched the union is in protecting the status quo.

— Stephani Mar, Bainbridge

Initiative 1033: confidently rejected

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:57:44 PST

I-1033 lost because of Eyman, not opposition

The people of Washington didn’t vote against Tim Eyman’s latest Initiative 1033 because the opposing campaign spent more [“Eyman’s tax initiative loses,” News, Nov. 4].

In my opinion, they voted it down because they understood it was a bad law, and they are sick of Eyman. Personally, I am very tired of his incessant initiatives, and the bombastic and narcissistic approach he takes to getting them passed.

If you want to help govern this state, run for a seat in the bloody Legislature.

Eyman’s main whine with I-1033 was about the Legislature raising taxes. So? It is a fact that the Legislature may need to increase taxes. If demands for services the state of Washington provides don’t decrease, and current tax revenues do not rebound, raising taxes will be a necessity.

We don’t need Eyman to save us from this; we need him to quit wasting election dollars on self-serving, narrow-minded, unnecessary attempts at lawmaking.

— Matt Andrews, Seattle

Middle East peace talks

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:52:49 PST

Clinton should demand Israel honors international law

On Oct. 31, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed Israel was making unprecedented concessions by agreeing to slow down its construction of illegal settlements, built on illegally annexed Palestinian land [“Palestinian leader rejects Israeli plan,” News, Nov. 1].

On the morning of Nov. 2, Israeli bulldozers demolished two Palestinian homes in Jerusalem, and damaged a third in the process.

Before the home demolitions, Israeli police evicted the two Palestinian families, including elderly members who had lived there since before the creation of the state of Israel, after tossing their belongings out in the street.

One resident was hospitalized, and 20 more became homeless. Sadly, such crimes are not unprecedented, and clearly Israel is not slowing down its campaign of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians from illegally annexed East Jerusalem.

What would truly be an unprecedented departure from this pattern of condoning and encouraging illegality, is for Clinton, herself a lawyer, to start with demanding that Israel abide by international law.

— Nada Elia, Redmond

Israelis, Palestinians don’t like our meddling

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on for far too long.

The differences between the two groups are deep, and no amount of political pressure, especially from a government that is currently resented in much of the Middle East, is going to fix anything in a timely manner.

Dividing the region into two separate states isn’t a perfect solution, but it seems pretty obvious that after so many years of violence, physical separation is the only way to improve security in the region.

Plus, recent polls show the majority of Israelis and Palestinians still support the two-state solution.

The United States must tread carefully, and encourage other nations to support its agenda in mediating this peace process. Too often we are fooled, as a public, into believing we are helping underdeveloped nations and oppressed people, when really the focus is on economic and militaristic control abroad.

The Middle East doesn’t like this meddling — and understandably so. Thus an attempt to remain objective, and keep economic policy out of it, could well facilitate a much smoother transition.

— Steven J. Funcke, Bellingham

Referendum 71: expected to be approved

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:00:04 PST

Race to expand gay rights still close

I didn’t expect Referendum 71 to pass [“R-71 winning in King County, slightly ahead statewide,” Seattletimes.com, Politics, Nov. 3].

Not because the majority of Washingtonians’ were against it, but because the majority who were for it wouldn’t be voting.

The preachers and practitioners of hate and intolerance will surely celebrate the fact they were able to rally their followers into being willing participants to discrimination.

Personally, I don’t believe that’s something to celebrate. And it’s certainly not something to be proud of.

— Marty Zupan, Seattle

Deep devotion, mutual respect are only qualifications

Some gay and lesbian people are saying Referendum 71 passed because the voters accept their sexuality [“‘Everything but marriage’ backers smelling victory,” page one, Nov. 4]. Those opposed to the referendum said that it was anti-marriage, and would start to disintegrate what holds society together.

Gays and lesbians should not get special or equal treatment because of their sexuality, just as heterosexuals should not get special or equal treatment because of their sexuality. It is absurd to imply that sex or sexuality of any kind holds society together.

In reality, what may be more likely to hold society together is the close bonding and mutual devotion between people, and marriage is often a good representation of that.

Research has shown that dedicated and devoted couples are healthier, happier and more productive in society, so it makes sense for society to honor and support them if only on the basis of cost savings.

My wife and I have been married almost 47 years, and it seems to us that couples who have a declared and demonstrated devotion to each other should be equally honored and supported by society irrespective of any other qualifications.

— Michael Kysar, Bellevue

Seattle mayor undetermined: Mallahan or McGinn?

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:56:28 PST

Late night robo calls despicable

I can’t believe I got a stupid robo call from the Mike McGinn campaign at 9:12 p.m. on Election Day [“Less than 1,000 votes separate McGinn, Mallahan,” page one, Nov. 4].

If possible, I would retract my mail-in vote for him right now. This is reprehensible behavior on McGinn’s campaign.

This whole robo-call thing has to stop. And if it means refusing to vote for any candidate who does this in the future, this is what I will have to do.

— Paul Litwin, Seattle

The Salish Sea: new official name for Puget Sound

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:47:12 PST

Adding a little poetry to our lives

Editor, the Times:

I’m delighted to learn the Salish Sea might have a place in the lexicon of Washington state names [“Salish Sea added to our watery lexicon,” NWSaturday, Oct. 31].

The name has been used by some, more or less officially, since the late 1980s, and likely by many others before that.

I first heard the name a few years ago when the Aqua Chautauqua group made its way from Port Townsend up to Bellingham and down to Whidbey Island, sailing the Salish Sea.

Ah, the poetry in that lovely name.

Puget Sound clunks compared to Salish Sea. And with all else going on right now, we can use a little poetry in our lives.

— Molly Larson Cook, Coupeville

What’s in a name? Just turn your map sideways for a new perspective

I’d love to show you a map you have never seen.

On the bottom is the vastness of the Pacific Ocean. In the middle is a wide berth of water, we call Juan. To the left, a huge island we call Vancouver, on the right a peninsula and mountain range we named Olympic. Beyond these landforms are waters we name Georgia and Puget. Intermingled are gems of islands, shorelines and river deltas. At the top of the map are mountains, mountains and mountains.

True, the Salish Sea is a fabricated name. It references our hosts —and for some, ourselves and our ancestors — who are collectively referred to as the Coast Salish Indian tribes.

History and reality are obviously more complex, as the mental concept of a Salish Sea is a recent construct, and the people who lived along its shores were not always friendly to one another, to put it mildly.

Still, that is a long way from saying it is an empty, politically correct gesture, and a very long way from the idiocy of suggesting Starbucks Sea. It is also far from the idiocy of suggesting that since our elected officials voted for it, they somehow are goofing off, and not paying attention to important things.

Do you really think the U.S. Board of Geographic Names is a full-time entity, where people get paid just to sit around and name things?

When you look at the world from a different perspective, even if by just turning a map sideways, you see something you may have never observed: A vast inland sea, and yet this vast inland sea lacks a name.

I’m not sure if Salish is it’s name, but then again I’m not sure whether Juan, Vancouver, Olympic, Puget, Georgia, or any of the others are its name, either.

Whatever you call it, please just respect and bless our beautiful world.

— Steve Walker, Bellingham

Health care: bills, reform and the public option

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:38:55 PST

Editorial lacked substance

I read with interest The Seattle Times editorial on Nov. 2 titled “Health-care reform, a good prognosis” [Opinion], but must take exception to most of what was said and lack of substance.

The editorial board apparently wish to convince readers everything with the proposed legislation is just fine. It isn’t, and it is poor journalism to lead readers to believe the contrary.

The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial titled “The Worst Bill Ever” regarding the same issue. It deals with the issues in the proposed legislation that are truly worth worrying about, including the fact we probably can’t afford it.

It is lazy to laud Rep. Jay Inslee and Sen. Maria Cantwell about their contribution, when the reality is the legislation as a whole will result in a tax increase for everyone.

We need people on Capitol Hill who are concerned about the country, and not their party. We could also use some journalism with some substance.

— Dennis Dickert, Kenmore

Problem is government, not private insurers

Matthew McBrady’s guest commentary regarding health care has it all wrong that the public option is the answer to providing low-cost universal medical insurance [“Insurance companies and the public option,” Opinion, Nov. 2].

The problem has been the government, not the private insurers and the market they serve. The overconsumption McBrady describes in part has been caused by the government allowing businesses to pay for their employees’ medical insurance as part of a deal to freeze wages during World War II.

This third-party pay scheme never ended, but instead grew. And until now because of overconsumption, premiums have dramatically increased.

The same dilemma confronts Medicare, which according to its board of trustees will become insolvent in 2017. In this case, Medicare has experienced overconsumption and massive examples of fraudulent billing.

The answer to the issue of universal medical coverage at an affordable price is to re-establish the direct connection between the consumer and medical providers with high-deductible health savings accounts, and an insurance market that offers the consumer a wide variety of choices, not government regulated.

Those people who are poor should be financially assisted by the government to pay for either the deductibles or the premiums.

— Bob Dorse, Seattle

New plans for Afghanistan: Obama, McChrystal deliberate

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:40:45 PST

Commitment to war should be shared by everyone

The talk now is that the Obama administration is about to increase the military commitment in Afghanistan, and some of the generals are talking about a 30- year commitment there [“Obama briefing assesses war-worn armed services,” News, Oct. 31].

Since Congress has a history of allowing a president to have his own way in matters of waging war, it seems likely he will get what he wants. But some consideration needs to be given to how this will affect our brave troops.

At the present time, most of the fighting is done by the poor kids who were unable to find a job in order for them and their families to survive.

I have talked with soldiers who tell about having served as many as seven tours in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Doesn’t fairness demand this commitment to the wars be shared by the entire spectrum of American society?

I think it is time for such a commitment, and the only way it will happen is by reinstating the draft.

— Phil Heft, Kent

Spending money on farming, local operatives

The U.S. should withdraw the majority of its armed forces from Afghanistan, immediately. Instead, money should be spent to train and recruit local staff for our embassy and as local operatives.

Through our U.S. Department of Agriculture staff in Kabul, a purchase program could be undertaken to buy the poppy farmers’ production direct from the farmers who actually work the land, not absentee landowners.

This gives us a network, automatically, in those areas where trouble is brewing.

Through our U.S. Department of State, we must initiate infrastructure projects to build roads, schools and clinics, as well as to offer training in alternative crops and modern agricultural techniques to poor farmers.

No purchases can be made from middlemen, as this is the criminal element we must eliminate.

The price paid must be higher than what the farmer received in previous years, and those farmers can then be nuanced into production of other products, primarily for local markets.

The raw opium can be processed for free distribution to those addicted, but traders must be prosecuted and punished, aggressively.

The CIA can train the Pashtun to handle the subversive elements themselves much more effectively than trying to defeat them, and to impose our wills, militarily.

We must declare victory now, and change the focus of our effort.

—Terry Losh, Bothell

Response to Lance Dickie

I was afraid The Seattle Times would be the first to skewer President Obama for being brutally candid [“It’s time for straight talk about the war in Afghanistan,” Opinion, Oct. 30]. I don’t disagree with columnist Lance Dickie’s point, but I do question the neglect of more fundamental issues.

Unfortunately, Afghanistan is only a symptom of a grossly irrational U.S. foreign policy. That foreign policy is unconditional support for Israel. U.S. support for the crimes of Israel against the Palestinians is a primary root of terrorism. Israel’s rising violence against Palestinians now accelerates to war crimes and genocide as defined by international law. There is serious coverage of this issue in the Israeli press. There is none in the U.S. press.

This policy is the primary reason we are bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel and its U.S. supporters now urge a criminal U.S. attack on Iran. The cost of this folly is devastating our military and our economy.

The U.S. and Israel continue to believe they can kill their way to victory over terrorists. It is now abundantly clear U.S.-Israel policies create terrorists faster than we can kill them.

When countries make egregious blunders, as have the U.S. and Israel, they have to pay for them. We cannot avoid the punishment of humiliating military withdrawal. If we try to avoid it, we will needlessly sacrifice even more American lives. To our discredit, we appear willing to do that.

This is what we must do for the sake of America, Israel and the rest of the world.

First, the U.S. must withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq as expeditiously and as painlessly as possible.

Second, the U.S. should completely withdraw its support for Israel until it resolves conflict with the Palestinians. We will be amazed at how quickly both sides get serious about peace talks.

It won’t be easy, but it won’t be hopeless as it now is.

— Malcolm D. McPhee, Sequim

Remembering slain Seattle officer

Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:01:33 PST

Those who risk their lives, every day

Editor, The Times:

I will never claim I can relate to what police officers go through on a daily basis, but I do claim to realize I will never understand, as I have not walked in their shoes [“‘Coldblooded killing’ of officer,” page one, Nov. 2].

As an administrative support specialist with the Portland Police Bureau, I won’t walk in their shoes because I don’t have what it takes to survive the emotional and physical trauma it can create.

I can’t imagine a world without police officers.

We can take them for granted because people like the officers who risked their lives in Seattle are willing to accept the risk inherent in law enforcement. They are willing to wear the uniform, and do a job that makes them targets for the kind of people we don’t want to deal with.

Our world would be less dependable and our lives less tranquil if people like those brave men and women weren’t there when we called. Saying thank you hardly seems adequate, but it is worth saying, and worth remembering.

Thank you for giving your life to save ours.

— Deborah Monk, Portland, Ore.

Police deserve respect, admiration

I am simply appalled by the shooting death of Officer Timothy Brenton on Oct. 31.

The person responsible is a coward.

For no good reason, someone chose to commit a most dishonorable act. I don’t care about his or her history, or if they grew up poor, for they no longer have my sympathies.

The killer deserves nothing but the brunt of justice coming down like a revelation.

To those who still look at police officers with disdain, maybe this incident will finally make everyone see just what these brave men and women face every day.

Perhaps this will make everyone appreciate them for what they do. Perhaps everyone will finally give police officers the respect they richly deserve.

— Taiji Tamura, Shoreline

But what about all the other lives lost?

This is a very difficult letter to write, as I do not in any way want to diminish the terrible sacrifice to the community and his family by the recent shooting death of a police officer.

However, I am very disturbed by how easily the police force and community have rallied for this life in a way I have not seen them rally for the other lives lost to violence in our community.

At what other recent murder have you seen such a quick and numerically significant police response? At what other death did you get the mayor and police chief at a press conference solemnly promising every available resource was being pulled and redirected to respond to such an outrage? At what other murder victim’s funeral cortege have you seen such large numbers of police, fire and ambulance drivers paying respect?

While I am happy the community chooses to celebrate this fallen servant of us all, I do think we need to rethink our response in the context of asking ourselves why some lives seem so much more important to us than others.

— J. O’Leary, Seattle

H1N1 vaccination shortage

Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:51:53 PST

Availability is the real epidemic

In regards to the H1N1 vaccination [“Thousands turn out for swine-flu vaccine,” NWSunday, Nov. 1], nevermind how much I may want to get inoculated, how much doctors and scientists insist I should, or how safe it is. Nevermind national emergency.

If it’s not available, all the want and justification in the world isn’t going to make it happen. Not for those in the risk categories. Not for those who aren’t in the risk categories.

That’s what is most likely to be remembered not only about H1N1, but about our ability to deal with medical emergencies in this country.

In the midst of that reality, insurance companies are trivial and irrelevant to the discussion or consideration of health care.

Are they listening in the other Washington — Washington, D.C.?

— Mike Moore, Kent

Conflicting headlines: Whom should we believe?

I was amused by the editorial “A call for calm on the swine-flu front” [Opinion, Oct. 31], in light of yet another blaring front-page headline on the same day, “Swine-flu vaccine: Shortage is severe.”

I can’t decide whether The Times’ editorial writers don’t read the rest of the paper, or the editors fan the flames to sell papers.

— Mary Jo Martin, Seattle

R-71 contributions, signatures

Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:50:28 PST

Ruling hits close to home

Why do we see such a scramble by those opposed to Referendum 71 to raise more funds all of a sudden [“Judge declines to suspend rules on R-71 contributions,” NWWednesday, Oct. 28]?

Do we see court cases concerning education reform? Why is the education of our children not as important?

It is a cheap political move. The last-minute attempt to change the rules about campaign contributions by R-71 opponents was ridiculous.

And trying to conceal the names of the donors to protect them from harassment? When was the last time you saw a gay man beating up a heterosexual with a club? Gay bashing is a much more common occurrence than straight bashing.

This is just an attempt to cover up large contributions made by those trying to buy votes.

As a gay teenager, R-71 means so much more to me than a box to be checked on a ballot. R-71 represents hope.

— Annie Hale, Seattle

Stunned by hypocrisy in opposition

I am stunned by the hypocrisy of the reject R-71 campaign [“Anti-Ref. 71 group sues to raise limits on donations,” page one, Oct. 23]. They say domestic partnership is a weighty issue that should not be decided by courts or the Legislature.

It must be put to a vote of the people — the best determiner of law.

Then they go to court to prevent the signatures that put the measure on the ballot from becoming public as required by Washington’s Public Records Act — a law enacted by the voters.

They are also suing to overturn Washington’s law restricting campaign contributions — another law enacted by the voters — so they can accept large last-minute donations.

So, do they care about the will of the people? Only when it suits them.

Opponents of gay rights have called them special rights, and deplored the rulings of judges who make decisions they don’t like. Now they’re asking judges to overturn laws so they don’t have to follow the same rules as everyone else.

Many claim to hold the moral high ground, but their conveniently shifting arguments and tactics reveal a fundamental lack of integrity.

I encourage voters to think twice before doing the bidding of a morally bankrupt campaign.

— Janis Walworth, Bellingham

Equal rights and R-71 opponents

Opponents of Referendum 71 are not merely seeking to overturn equal rights for gay and lesbian families.

With a recent spate of lawsuits, they are now seeking special rights for their donors and their campaign — threatening to eviscerate Washington’s public-disclosure and campaign-finance laws.

Names of every citizen on any referendum or initiative petition are a matter of public record. This keeps our election process accountable to the people. But opponents of Referendum 71 are suing in an attempt to hide their names.

Names of every donor to every campaign are also a matter of public record. Washington citizens deserve to know who is funding the political process. But opponents of Referendum 71 are suing to keep their donors private.

No donor can give more than $5,000 immediately before an election. This prevents well-funded outsiders from influencing the political process. But opponents of Referendum 71 are suing to overturn this campaign-finance law.

While opponents of Referendum 71 seek to deny equal rights for gay and lesbian families, they also seek special rights for their campaign — in contravention of our state’s laws.

— Justin Hellier, Seattle

Court should continue to protect privacy

I support the U.S. Supreme Court order temporarily preventing disclosure of the names of individuals who signed petitions putting Referendum 71 on the ballot. This decision protects the fundamental values of free speech and voter privacy.

Following last year’s defeat of California’s proposed gay-marriage law, opponents of that law — notably the Mormon church — were subjected to vandalism, boycotts, threats and other acts of intimidation.

The release of the Referendum 71 signatures can only have two purposes, neither of them good. It would encourage retaliation against Referendum 71 opponents, and it would also discourage individuals from signing petitions concerning controversial legislation.

This is not a matter of open government. Signatories are acting as private citizens, not government employees, and public-disclosure laws should not apply. It is also not a valid argument to say that since some government employees have access to the signatures, privacy has already been compromised.

Whether by law or custom, confidentiality is already required in many fields, and access by a few does not imply access by everyone.

The Supreme Court’s order should be made permanent, protecting the right of privacy in matters where the dictates of conscience might be overwhelmed by fears of recrimination.

—Stephen Triesch, Shoreline

The current health-care report

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:14:51 PDT

Bill has potential to be worse than worthless

Editor, The Times:

The Senate recently combined the Health Committee and Finance Committee health-care bills into one that includes mandatory insurance and an opt-out public option [“House health-care bill unveiled with fanfare,” News, Oct. 30].

States with conservative politicians who for whatever reason wish to have only private insurance will be allowed to opt out. I feel pity for Americans who live in those states.

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden had offered an amendment allowing Americans to choose their insurance provider, including the public choice, if one doesn’t like their current coverage. If such a provision isn’t included in the health-care reform act placed upon President Obama’s desk, the health-care reform bill will be worse than worthless.

A recent Harvard University study demonstrated that 45,000 people die yearly because they lack insurance. Currently, 45 million people are uninsured. If 18 million will still lack insurance, 18,000 will die annually.

That is immoral.

I would gladly give 8 percent of my income for a public plan. I’d pay 10 percent to include dental coverage.

However, I would rather pay a fine and serve jail time than be forced to pay dishonest private insurance companies money.

— Thomas R. Prince, Seattle

Health-insurance industry not so bad?

The Seattle Times’ hit piece against the health-insurance industry has all the anti-business buzz words, but misses two important points [“Apply antitrust laws to insurance industry,” Opinion, editorial, Oct. 28].

The industry’s antitrust exemption was very limited to allow state regulation of the industry to stay in place. This was a concession to the states, not to the industry, which would prefer consistent rules nationwide. Republican proposals have asked that individuals and businesses be allowed to shop for coverage across state boarders.

The insurance commissions of the various states mandate different coverages and other rules that do not allow all companies to operate in all states.

Also, profits for the health-insurance industry have not been historically greater than other industries. They are not usually near the top, and are constantly attempting to find ways to keep premiums lower in the face of rising medical-treatment prices.

— Jesse B. Jolibois, Lakewood

We must strengthen the middle class

We have a chance to do something right in this country, and the sooner we can make a single-payer plan work, the better our chances will be of surviving in global and U.S. markets [“State’s pioneering ways inform health debate,” Opinion, guest commentary, Oct. 27].

It’s time to make changes that can truly help the masses, and help strengthen our middle class again. If our government fails to work for the people, why do we want to continue to support our government representatives?

Our political leaders need to make every effort to make health-care work for all Americans, because failing to do this truly challenges my faith that we are a government of the people, by the people or for the people.

— Patrick Lockridge, Renton