Letters: “Let’s just wise up and stop this out-of-control system.”
The American auction
The last bid against political patronage is in voters’ hands
Editor, The Times:
“The favor factory,” The Times’ exposé of the insidious influence of special-interest money on our elected officials, summed it up perfectly: “Congressional favors and campaign giving go hand in hand.” That’s a multibillion-dollar problem for taxpayers. And the solution? Let the public - not special interests - pay for elections. It has worked statewide in Maine and Arizona and locally in other states, and the advantages for the average voter and taxpayer has been well-documented.
Yet there are those who oppose this way of financing elections. First, it would cost too much. According to “The favor factory,” earmarks cost the taxpayer $51 billion in 2005. That’s $17 for each man, woman and child. Maine and Arizona fund their elections at about $5 per person. So do the math: It costs voters more than three times what it would cost if the country had public-funded elections and got rid of the earmarks.
Second, voters object that they don’t want their tax money to go to help their candidate’s opponent. Well, the opponent’s supporters are paying for your candidate, so it’s a wash.
Let’s just wise up and stop this out-of-control system.
- Robert Stern, Seattle
The buyers’ premium
It will never happen that Congress will give up earmarks. They are too useful as a bribe to constituents and a reward to campaign contributors. What we can do is keep them under control. Let’s pass the Earmark Reduction Bill.
Right now, earmarks come to more than $50 billion. The Earmark Reduction Bill I propose would cap the amount of earmarks at $20 billion, to be equally divided between Senate and House.
Another provision of the Earmark Reduction Act would allow members of Congress to trade or combine each of their earmarks for whatever purpose, but there would be no year-to-year rollover allowed.
Members of Congress would no longer have a reason to conceal their involvement in earmarks. Earmarks would simply be part of the federal budget.
This proposal seems eminently fair to me, but I predict howls of protest. Still, I have just shown how to save the government $30 billion a year. Not bad for an amateur.
- Robert Meltzer, Kirkland
The hammer price
When either the Green Party or anti-war-coalition groups have taken a delegation to Sen. Patty Murray’s office, we have been told that the reason she does not support cutting off funds for the Iraq war is because she “supports the troops.”
“The favor factory” exposes the shallow rhetoric of “supporting our troops” when the actual legislative action supported by Murray, chair of the Appropriations Committee, includes earmarks such as $4.65 million to the 2002 defense bill for a boat “the Coast Guard did not want” from a company (Guardian Marine) that donated $15,000 to Murray’s campaign.
The troops were still left without sufficient protective armor, so it seems more like “support our campaign contributors” and a good return on the “buy a politician” investment strategy!
Supporting our troops is not accomplished by continuing to send them to die in this immoral and illegal war while lining the pockets of defense-industry campaign contributors. The Times has provided a great public service by uncovering the truth about “earmarks” and their relation to ongoing support for the war.
- Maryrose Asher, secretary, Green Party of Washington State, Vashon Island
Open outcry
When are American taxpayers going to get fed up enough to call a halt to all the unconscionable depredations of our thieving politicians??!!!!!
- Marilynn Van Hise, Tukwila
Going to the polls
We could have been there by now
In endorsing a “no” position on the Roads & Transit plan, The Seattle Times [”Reject Proposition 1,” recommendation, Oct. 14], repeats some of the same arguments made 40 years ago in our region when the rail proposal that was part of Forward Thrust was narrowly defeated because it didn’t achieve the 60 percent required vote.
Back then, it was said we should just wait to see how San Francisco’s rail system turned out before building our own. Many of the same arguments were made against the effectiveness of light rail, as The Times makes in opposing Roads & Transit.
The Forward Thrust transit system was $374 million (1968 dollars), 47 miles, 32 stations with trains averaging 37 miles per hour, with an expanded network of 500 air-conditioned buses. If it had been approved, it would have been up and running today and paid for.
Forty years from now, when our children look back on us, will they see a generation that repeated the same mistake, or one that built the transportation system for our future?
Our transportation system is failing - we all can agree on that. So we need to do something about it and we need to do it now. It will not fix all the problems - but at least it’s a start.
- Jackie Tyler, Lake Stevens
Maintain heading
The Times’ recommendation of Gael Tarleton over Bob Edwards for Port commissioner really concerns me [”For Port commission, Tarleton and Bryant,” endorsement, Oct. 16].
I know nothing about Tarleton, but I know fundraiser people have selfish, personal goals, which are part of their character and job.
My wife and I have had a business relationship with Bob Edwards for more than 25 years. I have never known a person who is more honest, has more integrity and is truly a trustworthy person. With recent articles in The Times regarding “earmarks,” how can anyone have respect or confidence in so many people in political office today? Frankly, it is disgusting.
Maybe the Port Commission does need to “get a message,” but I don’t believe replacing a very intelligent, dedicated, trustworthy person like Bob Edwards is the right solution.
- Jim Kesl, Bellevue
Pull in one direction
The Times endorsed Port Commissioner Alec Fisken’s opponent, citing that “… [Fisken] is often a loner on a board that now requires cohesion.”
To achieve that “cohesion,” Fisken would have had to turn a blind eye to former Port CEO Mic Dinsmore’s extremely questionable “golden parachute,” participated in meetings held behind closed doors and endorsed a cavalier spending of public monies by the Port.
The politician who stands for what is right will almost always be a loner. I always vote for the loner.
With The Times basing its endorsements on the ability to “get along,” is it any wonder King County Executive Ron Sims feared stepping away from the Sound Transit Board and questioning the wisdom of the RTID vote?
- Dick Falkenbury, Seattle
Halfway to school
As a student of Todd Beamer High School in Federal Way, many times I have helped with campaigns for school bonds and levies. The first time I remember waving signs on Pacific Highway and 320th was at 6 a.m., before classes began, when I was in the fourth grade. My mom kept explaining to me that we have to get enough people to vote and then we have to get 60 percent to vote Yes.
Why do school levies have to get 60 percent? The Federal Way School District is one of the most underfunded school districts in the state when compared with Auburn, Tacoma and Kent School districts. Every time we don’t pass a levy or a bond, I might as well kiss my education goodbye.
Budget cuts are so hard for students and teachers! In the 2007 school year, my class could go to the library only one time a week, because there was no librarian to supervise. Where is our state money going? To more important things like sports stadiums.
If we can pass a levy with a fair 50 percent, we can get the funds to support our students to get into grade-A colleges and have every student graduate high school. So on Nov. 6, vote for Amendment EHJR 4204!
- Riley Germanis, Federal Way
Farther from class
Fifty-three percent of the voters in Washington are renters. They own no property, but still get to vote on issues to raise property taxes. That is why these school levies were changed to 60 percent approval. Even with 60 percent, the levy success rate is 98 percent.
We should go back to when it used to be only property owners could vote on money issues. Not only that, but you should be able to vote in any and every county where you own property.
All homes should be taxed the same amount. Why should someone with a view, waterfront or bigger home pay more than anyone else? They don’t use the roads, libraries, schools, parks or any other government-funded agency more than anyone else. When you take from one class of people to give to another, it’s called communism.
- Jack Shubic, Nordland
Gestures of esteem
Hollow, Dalai
It was commendable and encouraging that President Bush chose to defy Chinese objections and award the Dalai Lama the Congressional Gold Medal [”Bush confers medal on Dalai Lama,” News, Oct. 18].
I hope he will further highlight and legitimize the great man’s award by hosting another White House ceremony at which former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, his undersecretary, Paul Wolfowitz, occupation governor L. Paul Bremer, and former CIA Director George Tenet can return theirs.
- David Arntuffus, Shoreline