Hard to stand up for Hispanic attorney general
Re: “Sen. Salazar’s support of Alberto Gonzales,” March 20 Open Forum.
Letter-writer Roberto Lopez Moreno asks his “liberal gringo friends” to “back off from being so critical of Sen. Ken Salazar’s reluctance to call for … Alberto Gonzales’ resignation.” He cites as “groundbreaking” the appointment of a Hispanic as attorney general.
I agree with only one statement made by Mr. Moreno – I share his sentiments about the pride in witnessing Hispanics appointed to high government offices. Gonzales, however, was the wrong person, not only to be the government’s top law enforcement official, but also to be a poster child for the Hispanic community. An official who willingly sidesteps the U.S. Constitution and sets policies that abridge citizens’ constitutional rights – all to support political policies of this administration – is not someone whom I wish to look up to in the Hispanic community. It is imminently more important to me to maintain our cherished constitutional rights than to share some visceral emotion of having a “brown” or “black” face in the very office that is charged with overseeing justice.
I am a “liberal” Hispanic who cannot and will not come to some self-conciliation over Sen. Salazar’s ardent support for Gonzales. When our attorney general willingly thumbs his nose at Congress, violates the law and abridges our rights, I don’t see a “Hispanic” face – I see someone who doesn’t care about you and me.
Rudy V. Garcia, Golden
Editor’s note: Salazar spoke critically about Gonzales on Tuesday, but refused to call for his resignation.
Failed attempt to ban smoking in casinos
State Sen. Lois Tochtrop, D-Thornton, ought to be ashamed of herself. She voted against the smoking ban in Colorado casinos, arguing that gamblers will hop cheap flights to Las Vegas where smoking is still allowed. Apparently, she’s willing to sacrifice the lives and health of Coloradans, especially casino workers, for a few bucks. Shame, shame, shame.
If Tochtrop doesn’t apologize for her callous attitude to her fellow citizens, the Democrats need to find a replacement for her in the next election.
In the meantime, when are the casino owners in Central City going to wise up and seize the moment? Casinos have done terribly there because Blackhawk is a mile closer to most of the population. Why they haven’t banned smoking in their casinos in hopes of luring non-smoking gamblers is a real mystery.
Tom Schantz, Lyons
In defense of wolf sanctuary in Larimer Co.
Re: “Wolf home hears pawing at door,” March 19 news story.
I was delighted to see your article about WOLF (Wolves Offered Life and Friendship”). I have been involved with the sanctuary community for more than 30 years, as an attorney and as a volunteer. WOLF is a top-notch, bona fide sanctuary, with a perfect safety record. All of the fencing at WOLF meets or exceeds the requirements of the Division of Wildlife and U.S. Department of Agriculture. These animals – most of which had been abused – are shy of people. They have come to trust the dedicated operators and volunteers at WOLF, all of whom have been trained in how to approach and handle the animals.
This is home to the wolves; it is where their dens and their “packs” are. They are not looking to escape. Noise studies done in 1999, when there were 42 animals, proved that the animals could not be heard at the property lines of the sanctuary. The animals do not howl frequently, and I, for one, find the sound magnificent. The neighbors’ concerns are groundless.
Bonnie Mandell-Rice, Broomfield
Making it harder for hospitals to get funding
Re: “Funding rule a threat,” March 14 guest commentary.
The guest commentary by Bruce Schroffel and Patricia Gabow concerning the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) redefinition of public hospitals in order to reduce their ability to receive certain federal funds and Medicaid payments was enlightening. It reminded me of the remarks made by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, testifying about President Bush’s budget in early February. As reported by E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post at the time, Secretary Paulson suggested he would not mind a bit if the Democratic Congress added money to prevent cutbacks in coverage under the children’s health insurance program, which was the subject under discussion. “It just may be that Congress believes that that’s something that should be funded at a higher level,” he said.
I think this CMS proposal (which could deprive Denver Health, the University of Colorado Hospital and 22 other safety-net hospitals in Colorado of $250 million in funding) falls in that category. President Bush’s budget included substantial cuts in some programs in order to continue to fund his high-priority programs (putting a man on Mars, for instance) and to provide room to make permanent the tax cuts for the wealthy. Bush knows that a Democratic Congress will feel compelled to improve those budget numbers for programs which many citizens consider essential, such as continuing to fund programs that take care of the uninsured and the homeless. That way, Congress could be blamed for the resulting deficits; after all, Bush had submitted a budget that was fiscally responsible and could then point to the changes Congress made. And the GOP would have an argument to use in 2008’s election cycle.
Irma and Dick Munz, Denver
Electric cattle prods
Re: “Home on range to home in refuge,” March 16 news story.
A picture is worth a thousand words, and your picture of biologist Dean Vaughan using an electric prod to move bison at the National Bison Range in Montana is a beauty. An electric prod (called a “hot shot” or a “cattle prod”) is an outdated and cruel method to move and direct animals. Cattle prods were even the instrument of choice to intimidate demonstrators during the 1960s civil rights movement in Birmingham, Ala. This instrument of pain does not belong in any livestock manager’s tool kit. Every electric cattle prod should be removed from the National Bison Range, and Vaughan and all the other staff should be required to attend a short course by Dr. Temple Grandin at Colorado State University. Dr. Grandin is an expert on how to properly handle animals without getting them rip-snorting mad. The bison will certainly roam happier on the range.
Gregory Sullivan, Littleton
Workers’ comp bill
Re: “Solution without a problem,” March 15 editorial.
The Post’s editorial gives a short-sighted portrayal of the logic behind House Bill 1008. This bill shifts the burden of proof in workers’ compensation cases for firefighters that contract job-related cancer. The editorial’s premise is based on misleading evidence. The reason why there are few claims filed by firefighters seeking workers’ comp for job-related cancer is cost. A firefighter filing for workers’ comp for job-related cancer will surely be contested. Despite many studies showing that firefighters are two to four times more likely to develop certain types of cancers, current law (which places burden of proof on firefighters) makes it necessary for a firefighter to hire an expert witness to testify in his/her case at a cost of $10,000 to $20,000. These fees are non-recoverable, even if workers’ comp is granted. Evidence in other states suggests that a firefighter who successfully files for workers’ comp for job-related cancer receives on average $10,409, an amount probably less than the cost to fight for the claim.
Workers who contract job-related illnesses should be covered by their workers’ comp plan. Colorado’s sick firefighters should not have to rely on personal health coverage for job-related cancer. HB 1008 gives hardworking firefighters the peace of mind they deserve.
State Rep. Mike Cerbo, Denver
To send a letter
E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 101 W. Colfax Ave., Suite 600, Denver, 80202
Fax: 303-954-1502
To reach us by phone: 303-954-1331
