Senate’s inaction on global warming
Re: “Senate rejects emission limits,” June 23 news story.
While it is disappointing that the U.S. Senate failed to take meaningful action to combat the problem of global warming, Coloradans should be pleased that one of our senators, Ken Salazar, did support the proposed McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act. The threats global warming poses to Colorado’s water, land and economy are only too real.
Coloradans support efforts to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to promote clean, renewable energy, as demonstrated by the passage of Amendment 37 last fall. The Climate Stewardship Act would have put this country on a path to confront the challenge of global warming. At the same time, because of its reliance on a market- based cap-and-trade approach to controlling greenhouse gas emissions, it would have done so at little cost to the economy while creating new market opportunities for Colorado’s farmers, ranchers and technological entrepreneurs. Fortunately, the Senate did pass a resolution stating that the problem of global warming is real and that the country needs a mandatory approach to reducing emissions.
For Colorado’s sake, let’s hope the Senate heeds its own advice and takes real action on this problem that will affect all of us for generations to come.
John Stencel, President, Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, Greenwood Village
Columbus Day and the right to protest
Re: “Defending the right to parade,” June 26 editorial.
The Denver City Council just passed a special ordinance aimed specifically at people who protest the Columbus Day Parade. The leaders of our city proudly proclaim this was done in the name of civil liberty.
Hogwash. Since the Columbus Day Parade made its ignoble return to Denver in 2000, the parade has been temporarily blocked twice, for a little over an hour in each incident. In both cases, protesters cooperated with the police to ensure a peaceful protest. Last year, those arrested voluntarily stood up and walked to the line where police were booking the protesters without a police escort. Protest leaders and police commanders stood side by side.
The level of cooperation would make a conviction on any charge, despite the new ordinance, very unlikely. This arrangement also creates a peaceful, orderly event. This protects the protesters, the police, the parade, the spectators and those who live or work near or on the parade route.
“Exercising freedom of expression doesn’t give one the right to muzzle those one disagrees with, a concept the protesters can’t seem to grasp,” pronounced The Denver Post. A delay of one or two hours, while inconvenient, falls far short of “muzzling.” The delay allows everyone, not just the parade, to safely enjoy their rights. The City Council along with the editorial boards of both major papers have chosen to create a straw dog, using overblown rhetoric to claim a need for new rules which are designed to limit the sort of protest organized by Ghandi, Martin Luther King and Cesar Chavez.
Stephen B. Nash, Denver
…
The Post’s editorial makes several significant errors.
First, the eight protesters were not “found not guilty by a panel of judges.” They were, in fact, acquitted by a jury of six Denver citizens, convinced that their principled actions in blocking the parade were, as the jury foreman said, the morally “right thing” to do, as the acts of civil disobedience by earlier civil rights activists were the right thing to do.
Second, it is not a matter of protesters “considering” Columbus a genocidal murderer. That Columbus was a genocidal murderer is a matter of historical fact, no less well-established than Hitler’s status as a genocidal murderer.
Third, as members of the City Council recognized, these new ordinances will not resolve the controversy. The Transform Columbus Day Alliance has offered for 16 years to join in a celebration of Italian culture, asking only that the organizers remove the name Columbus. As long as they continue to “celebrate” a genocidal murderer, the proper response of the city should not be to pass new laws. Rather, it should do the “right thing” by officially condemning that “celebration.”
Mark Cohen, Denver
Tuition rates for family of military members
Re: “Tuition rules left GI’s son in limbo,” June 27 news story.
I was disappointed to read of the plight of Alex Matthews in his attempt to qualify for in-state tuition. Even though his parents are Colorado natives who have paid Colorado income tax during their 23 years in the military, his application for in-state tuition status was summarily rejected by the University of Northern Colorado and his family had trouble getting an answer from Colorado State University. (CSU did eventually agree to give Alex in-state tuition.)
When I went into the Army in 1966 as a dependent of Colorado residents, the law said a young person who entered the military from Colorado with resident status was still qualified for that status when they left the military. Unfortunately, that was changed while I was away and I returned to be told that I was also not eligible for residential tuition status.
After an appeal and a large check to pay the state taxes that I had never been told I owed, I managed to get in-state status on a provisional basis, which required filing paperwork to re-appeal each semester while I was in graduate school at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
I would have hoped that in the 35-plus years since, our state officials would have worked out a way to provide in-state tuition status for the children of Colorado military people. Given all the other sacrifices asked of the military, it seems little enough to ask. In fact, why not extend this status to all military dependents as a way to thank them for the sacrifices?
Peter Faris, Aurora
Community fight over Westminster Wal-Mart
Re: “Wal-Mart foes pack hearing,” June 28 news story.
As a Westminster resident who attended the City Council meeting Monday night along with hundreds of others, I can only hope that by the July 11 meeting, the mayor and council members will have reconsidered their vote regarding the 24-hour Wal-Mart Supercenter at 72nd Avenue and Sheridan Boulevard.
No one denies the need for vast improvements to the corner of 72nd and Sheridan. It is unfortunate that the owner of the current strip mall at that location has neglected the property for years. However, to go against the city’s own revitalization plan for south Westminster and the wishes of the thousands of property owners in that area is not representing the city’s vision or the Westminster taxpayers.
This is a residential neighborhood, and a very pedestrian one at that. What is needed at this intersection is more of a pedestrian-friendly, town-center type of retail development, with small to mid-size stores, offices and restaurants, rather than a vehicle-oriented big-box store. The city of Westminster’s urban renewal revitalization plan for south Westminster calls for just such a neighborhood-feeling commercial area; it does not include super-sized stores.
G.E. Hegg, Westminster
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.
