Should the U.S. open the ANWR to development?
Re: “Is it time to tap the Arctic National Refuge’s riches?” May 1 Perspective articles.
Bob Osmundson, retired manager for Chevron, states that Sen. Ken Salazar voted against the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling and oil development because he did not have all the facts (“YES: We need the oil soon”). Salazar voted against the oil industry because he not only had the facts but also understands the issue.
The debate rages on about how much oil will actually be delivered through the pipeline to the lower 48 states and for how long. However, there is no debate that this is yet another Band-Aid and finite fix.
The debate should not be based on the extremist arguments of the fear of running out of oil or the emotion of destroying all the critters in the Garden of Eden. But before we severely and certainly negatively impact the unique ecosystems of the Serengetti of the New World, we ought to look for a balanced approach. This approach must include a political will to enforce a meaningful national conservation policy, a policy that includes heavy reliance and tax breaks for renewable energy and holding the automobile industry accountable for fuel economy standards for SUVS and other gas guzzlers that passenger cars are required to meet.
Carmi McLean, Lakewood
…
I read both views on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and came to two conclusions. When I read Bob Osmundson’s view, I concluded that he wanted to give us information that we could process in order to come to an informed decision concerning the refuge. When I read Tim Hogan’s view (“NO: Let the refuge stand”), I concluded that he wanted us to feel enraged that the pristine wilderness was being eviscerated.
Osmundson took the time to give us background information and mentioned sources such as the U.S. Geological Survey in an effort to validate his opinion. Hogan spent the majority of his article appealing to our emotions and painting a horrifying picture of apocalyptic destruction.
Over the years, I have heard much from both sides of this controversial issue. Careful inspection of the map provided by The Denver Post at the bottom accompanying these articles gives the reader the best insight into the whole matter. Of the millions of acres set aside for the refuge, according to my interpretation of the map, very little is available for drilling. In fact, only 2,000 of the 19.6 million acres are available for drilling. Facts should outweigh emotion, and environmentally sensitive drilling should commence whenever feasible.
Thor Johnson, Arvada
…
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ecosystem is one of the last pristine wilderness areas remaining on earth and must be left intact. Ninety-five percent of the coastal plain is open to drilling; Americans are against drilling the refuge; yet conservatives and Big Oil continue to force the issue.
The Arctic Refuge ecosystem is not a vast wasteland, as some would have us believe. How arrogant they are to say the great bears and creatures of the arctic are not worthy of our protection!
Big Oil, subsidized by our government in spite of record profits, tells us it can “explore for energy” without harming the environment. Balderdash!
Powerful lobbyists and powerful politicians are preying on our emotions when gas prices are at an all-time high. There was no mandate to destroy the environment. We need to hold our elected officials accountable and bring conservation to the forefront of the discussion.
Dave and Marla Showalter, Arvada
…
Bob Osmundson stated that drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could result in an estimated 9 million to 16 billion barrels of oil. That sounds like a lot, and one would think that it could go a long way in alleviating our fossil-fuel troubles. However, in the opposing article, Tim Hogan stated that the oil gained from drilling in ANWR would sustain the U.S. for a little over one year.
I believe it is time to ask ourselves what will happen after we have used up that year’s supply of oil. Where will we be drilling next – in Rocky Mountain National Park, perhaps? And what about the year after that?
We should expand on the technology that currently exists to give us more hybrid vehicles (pickups, SUVs, as well as family cars) at more affordable prices for consumers. Fossil fuels are finite. We are going to run out of these fuels someday (probably sooner than we think), so we should prepare for the inevitable now. It would seem wiser to turn our efforts toward more development of renewable energy sources.
It is time for Sen. Wayne Allard, who voted to allow exploration and development of the ANWR, to be asking what his great-grandchildren will be doing for energy.
Jean Mortensen, Denver
…
In his April 27 press conference, President Bush said, in reference to his proposal to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for energy development, that the refuge contains more than 19 million acres (including the 8.7 million acres of designated wilderness). Although accurate, until now only 1.5 million acres of the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, specifically set aside for further analysis by Congress in 1980, have been considered for energy development.
Recently, House majority leader Tom DeLay was quoted as saying that it’s about the precedent, with respect to developing the Arctic Refuge. Granted, opening the refuge would set an enormous precedent with respect to public lands policy. Did the president misspeak, or is all of the refuge now under consideration for industrial development?
These two statements speak volumes about this administration’s stewardship of the public’s land. They could have said it more concisely, though: “Fire Sale.”
Greg Scott, Evergreen
President’s approval rating
Re: “Bush’s goals too ambitious,” May 1 David Broder column.
David Broder asserts that President Bush’s approval rating is tanking because he has overreached with his second-term goals. It’s not that Bush is reaching too far with issues such as Social Security. It’s that he’s reaching for the wrong things. I don’t think Americans would mind a far-sighted agenda if it addressed such things as global climate change, renewable energy and the budget deficit.
In addition, the president’s reach doesn’t extend far enough into the country. After re-election, he promised to reach out to the 49 percent who voted against him. Instead, people who disagree with him are expelled from his town meetings while he continues reaching out to the oil and coal industries, the religious right and other powerful and moneyed groups.
I think President Bush’s approval rating has dropped because he is showing no real leadership on many domestic issues that Americans are feeling – rising health care costs, spiraling energy costs, a rollback of many important domestic programs while more money is poured into Iraq. The president and his advisers seem to have insulated themselves from anything they find disagreeable.
In his latest news conference, Bush said he won’t govern based on public opinion polls that show the majority of Americans disagreeing with some of his positions. Nobody’s asking him to govern by polls, but he shouldn’t ignore them, either. We might be trying to tell him something.
Mary Becker, Golden
The effect of charters on Colorado school districts
Re: “Charters dent public schools; Lure pulls thousands of students,” May 1 news story.
Your article on charter schools makes it sound like they all lure students by offering computers, trips and other perks. While some charter schools may do this, others offer something much more appealing: a great education. At the best charters, parent-elected boards offer high-quality schooling mercifully free from bureaucratic bumbling. District administrators cannot afflict charter students with inept principals or burned-out teachers, as so often happens in conventional schools.
While charters do siphon off dollars that normally flow to districts, these innovative schools have accomplished something that nothing else has done: force public schools to improve. Competition works.
My son attended Boulder’s first charter school. Summit Middle School’s success – it is one of 29 middle schools designated a National Blue Ribbon School – demonstrates what a well-run public school can accomplish. The Boulder Valley School District, which opposed Summit every step of the way, responded to this challenge by improving the education in every other district middle school. This, to my mind, is well worth whatever money Summit costs.
Monopolies, be they airlines or the public school system, always resist competition. That’s why most school boards, education administrators and teacher unions fight so desperately against charter schools.
Jeff Bradley, Boulder
…
Your article on charter schools substitutes purposefully the “effect” – loss of students – for the “cause” – the failure of the public schools to educate despite increased tax dollars and a lack of real reforms.
The failure of public schools has created the charter schools and voucher movement. Marketing to get students back is an effect of the public schools failure in parents eyes – not the cause of the public schools’ problems. Instead of the public schools selling “new, improved, different (without a difference),” getting better results in educating would be a better strategy (rather than just whining for more money, which has not been a solution).
The Post has moved its editorial position to the news page – in this case to the front page, above the fold. Positioning and omission of content – confusing cause and effect – creates questions of journalistic ethics and honesty.
Jim Schwartz, Centennial
…
Besides draining students and money from struggling public school districts, there is a less publicized negative side to charter schools.
In our district, Boulder Valley, middle-class families with the time to apply to and provide their own transportation to charters are fleeing public schools, taking their fundraising and volunteer abilities with them, leaving poorer students behind. The result is re-segregation by income and race, and exacerbation of low CSAP scores in that school, making it then even less attractive to those able to make the charter-school choice.
In my son’s neighborhood elementary school, undertrained and overburdened teachers caused us to try a new charter middle school that promised smaller classes and challenging academics. Despite hours of research into our decision, we made a disastrous mistake. Bullying was rampant, discipline was nonexistent, and a hidden religious agenda became apparent. Favoritism towards children of volunteer board and committee members was obvious, and complaining parents were ignored or retaliated against.
While competition from charters may jog rigid public school bureaucracies to improve their one-size-fits-all approach, there is no evidence so far to support improved academic performance in charters, and it is not the panacea for our public school ills.
L. Benson, Broomfield
…
The Post’s article says that charter schools are “forcing some principals and board members to consider something new: How to compete for students.” And this is supposed to be a bad thing? No, this is exactly what parents of public education students have wanted for a long time.
Cindy Staudt, Westminster
…
The headline “Charters dent public schools” failed to describe the main point of your excellent article: that charters schools’ competitive challenge is forcing traditional public schools to better serve their students, and that traditional public schools are taking on that challenge. The headline also supports the common misconception that charters are not also public schools, which of course they are. A more accurate headline would have been, “Public charters making district-run schools more competitive.”
Alex Cranberg, Denver
The writer is chairman for the Alliance for Choice in Education Foundation.
Rise and fall of Lake Powell
Re: “Powell’s fall bares canyon’s glory,” May 1 news story.
Open the floodgates and drain Lake Powell. How can any thinking person support dollars over that kind of beauty? The lake will fill with sediment in time. All dams will become waterfalls in time. The Colorado is the most silt-laden river of size in the United States. There are those who would suggest dredging out the lake, but that is hardly an option when you consider the canyon topography. Also, that kind of expense would far outweigh any hydroelectric, flood control, irrigation or consumption benefit.
In the late 1950s and early ’60s, there were some very sharp engineers who warned the Bureau of Reclamation of the potential problems associated with constructing Glen Canyon Dam. Unfortunately, money talked and reason walked. Remember, it took a long time for that lake to fill when population was not a problem.
Doug Duncan, Aurora
What constitutes news?
Re: “Jilted man still vows to marry runaway bride,” May 3 news story.
The now infamous runaway bride story has reached national news attention and made the morning-show circuits. Why?
This is, as it turns out, a classic case of cold feet before a very large wedding, complicated by the bride to be calling in with a false kidnapping excuse. What she did was wrong but not newsworthy – except in the local town paper, and not front-page news at that. Shame on the media for shunning their true job and manufacturing “events.” Whatever happened to the relentless reporters?
Two questions should be asked every day by all the media:
1. Where is Osama bin Laden, and why after the tragedy of Sept. 11 was he not pursued relentlessly, having good intelligence of where he was?
2. And what went on in the energy conference prior to Sept. 11 that President Bush still won’t reveal?
Joe Hall, Estes Park
Judiciary under fire
Re: “Why not recall judges?” May 1 John Andrews column.
John Andrews writes that “judges who violate their oath should be subject to voter recall.”
Now who can argue with that statement? But what constitutes a violation of oath? I suspect that the oath of office essentially consists of pledging to protect and defend the constitutions of the state of Colorado and the United States. Does “activism” in defending and protecting these constitutions constitute a violation of the oath?
Andrews admits that “A judge’s job isn’t to obey majorities, it is to protect minorities. Judges are supposed to follow principles, not polls. True enough.” Wrong! A Colorado’s judge’s job is to first maintain the constitutions of Colorado and the U.S. and secondly apply the law in court, not protect minorities and follow principles. If the judges did act to protect “minorities” and follow “principles,” they indeed would be guilty of exactly what Andrews accuses them of.
Republicans supposedly defend the principle of “states’ rights” and are opposed to “activist” judges. But in the Terri Schiavo case, they quickly sought out “activist” federal judges to overturn the rulings of several Florida judges who were correctly applying Florida statutes. Fortunately, these “activist” federal judges refused to interfere in the established proceedings of Florida law.
We don’t need easier methods of recalling judges. We also don’t need Republican hypocrisy.
Kenneth C. Beaudrie, Denver
TO THE POINT: Short takes from readers
President Bush’s recent news conference omitted three items that are of the most critical interest to Americans. They are health care, health care and health care. Yes, Social Security is important, but people are not dying while awaiting a solution.
Virginia L. Wielgot, Aurora
It seems that our president and secretary of state are convinced that John Bolton, U.N. ambassador nominee, is a very capable individual. He should be given a job – one that does not require that he interacts with people.
Mark Hendrickson, Highlands Ranch
I can’t seem to figure it out how people who call themselves Christians can hate Focus on the Family’s James Dobson so much. I presume they read the same Bible. If they do, they should see that God, in fact, does call homosexuality an abomination. God does love the homosexual, but the homosexual acts are an abomination to Him. Where’s the problem?
Wes Piippo, Arvada
The Post, in its May 3 editorial “U.S. jails, prisons overflowing,” seems puzzled that people are being incarcerated “even as crime rates fall.”
Would it not be more logical to note that crime rates have fallen because more criminals are in jail?
David Bosserman, Phoenix
To have your comments printed in To the Point, please send letters of no more than 40 words to openforum@denverpost.com (no attachments, please) or 1560 Broadway, Denver, 80202. Writers are limited to one letter per month.
TO REACH OPINION EDITORS
Phone: 303-820-1331
Fax: 303-820-1502
E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 1560 Broadway, Denver, 80202 or PO Box 1709, Denver, 80201
Letters guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 200 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address and day and evening phone numbers. Letters may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.
