Giving states control of roadless areas
Re: “Forest roadless rule reversed,” May 6 news story.
The reversal of the federal “roadless rule” by the Bush administration should be best thing that the so-called environmentalists have heard. Now the local environmentalists can work with the Colorado state government on forest issues, rather than the federal government, which is 2,000 miles away.
I have lived here, for the most part, for 50 years. I do not care what happens in the Everglades; I do not care what happens to the environment in Southern California. They are clogged up with concrete, asphalt and people anyway. Let the people who live in those states decide over the next 18 months what they want to happen to their forests. If they want to make money or see their local views and nature destroyed by roads, oil drilling and gravel pits, that is their decision.
It breaks my heart when I travel the 255 miles along Interstate 70 to Denver. Million-dollar mansions on the ridgetops. The line of ski areas one after another for 50 miles.
Interstate 25, when it was the Valley Highway, was once the only four-lane highway in the state. The so-called environmentalists can now drive it for a couple of miles to stand on the steps of the Capitol Building with speakers, placards, petitions and grievances – for the Colorado environment.
Think locally for the state you love to be in.
Gary McMurtrey, Grand Junction
—————————————-
Women’s rights vs. men’s rights
Re: “Reproduction laws and inequality of the sexes,” May 11 Open Forum.
Letter-writer Earl S. Fibish, in his response to Reggie Rivers’ column, states what he views are inequalities of the sexes. Some of his points are valid, but not for the reasons he states. Others are plain silly.
Valid point: Women aren’t eligible for the draft. This is the main reason why women could not get the Equal Rights Amendment put in the Constitution. Men could not imagine having women fighting next to them in the trenches, and used this as an argument against giving them equal rights. Because once equal rights are guaranteed, women will have to be drafted.
Silly point: Women deliberately impregnate themselves. I’d like to see that. If a man engages in relations with a woman, he must be just as willing as she is to suffer the lifelong consequences of pregnancy. Child support payments pale against the years spent taking care and raising another human being. She is still paying a heavier price than you are. If you don’t want to risk child support, don’t have sexual relations.
Nebulous point: abortion. If a man doesn’t want his child to be aborted, maybe he shouldn’t have relations with a woman who believes in abortion. It boils down to this: Know the person you are involved with. If they don’t share your values, don’t create a child. This involves not having sexual relations with just anyone. Then you can avoid all those horrid “poor me” consequences.
Michelle Maani, Nipomo, Calif.
—————————————-
Skeletons in public officials’ closets
Re: “Secret life of mayor stuns Spokane residents,” May 8 news story.
In 20 years of military service and two years as a defense contractor, my personal experience has been that the worst bigots in our society are usually the ones with the most skeletons in their closet. Admittedly, I was surprised that a man – Spokane (Wash.) Mayor James E. West – who was so anti-gay rights could be so hypocritical while being gay himself, but what really disturbs me is the fact that he has been accused of having sex with boys and young men for the last 25 years.
I suppose a psychologist would tell us that his vitriolic anti-gay civil rights campaign was a cover for his illegal activities. Who would suspect he would be breaking the law in such a heinous way?
But that leads me to wonder what we would find if we checked into the background of the local leaders of anti-gay activity. I would personally like to know what would drive someone to champion an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning civil rights to an entire group of people simply because you don’t agree with their lifestyle. Or maybe the background of someone who would start an organization whose sole purpose seems to be to drive their own religious agenda at the expense of the majority of Americans who don’t agree with them.
Neal Lincoln, Denver
—————————————-
Transparent elections
Re: “An election system that voters can trust,” May 10 editorial.
I read with interest your editorial on state election reforms. In reading it, I was struck by the fact that everyone from the Colorado legislature to The Denver Post seems satisfied that we’ll have elections in 2006 and 2008 that we apparently cannot trust. (Legislation was passed this week to require verifiable paper trails to back up electronic voting machines by 2010.) I can’t think of a greater responsibility for our elected officials than conducting fair and transparent elections. Our current elected officials apparently feel it’s OK to elect the next Colorado governor, U.S. president and U.S. senator in elections that don’t meet those standards.
Marc Schuler, Denver
—————————————-
Criticizing government
Re: “The laws that weren’t,” May 10 Ed Quillen column.
Columnist Ed Quillen criticizes the state legislature for bills it didn’t create. He mixes these imaginary bills with real bills (for which he creates false names and false motivations) and uses them all as an excuse to demean the state legislature for promoting a nanny state.
I’m all for criticizing government when it needs it. And satire is a worthy tool. But if you can’t find something real worth criticizing in state government without making things up entirely, maybe you should start turning your satire against some of the very real problems in the national government.
Jeanne Kalvar, Longmont
—————————————-
Driving in Colorado
Having just moved back to Colorado after living in a large Western state where driving is an art form, or at least a huge part of the culture (OK, it was California; don’t throw a pie at me), I want to say a few things: It’s OK to pull into the intersection on a left turn after the green arrow goes off and it’s just a green light. Slightly less annoying but due an honorable mention: moving to the left lane to allow for a merging car (think two-lane Interstate 25) is not only courteous but in the interest of each driver’s safety. And, this is to whoever is in charge of road signs on interstates (again, think I-25), my commendations for the large “Move to the right except to pass” signs. However, isn’t it a little incongruous, nonsensical and inconsistent on the same stretch of road to have signs that say “55 minimum speed in left lane” when the speed limit is 75?
John Scott Towle, Larkspur
—————————————-
Hiding debatable legislation in unrelated bills
Re: “$82 billion more OK’d for global war on terror,” May 11 news story.
The U.S. Senate passed on Tuesday, on a 100-0 vote, an act allowing emergency appropriations and funding for the Iraq war. All well and good. But the Senate attached a rider to the same bill, The Real ID Act, which effectively mandates the creation of a national ID card.
In essence, it requires all states that wish to continue to receive federal funding, and incidentally, to allow its citizens to continue to travel on airlines, to reformat their driver’s licenses to a national standard, to make all of the personal information on the card machine readable, and to submit all of that information to a national database.
Our leaders have subverted the political process yet again to attach a bill that deserves its own serious national debate and intense scrutiny to another piece of patriotic legislation funding our soldiers in Iraq, a bill that would have been political suicide for a senator to vote against, regardless of the amendments.
The time is long past for the government to implement laws forbidding the attachment of non-related legislation to bills under consideration. Each and every bill voted on by our leaders should be judged on its own merits.
If a bill deserves to stand, it deserves to stand on it’s own.
Michael Long, Superior
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
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.
