Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor (January 30, 2004)

Governor's performance is lacking so far

Editor:

I am writing in reply to the Voice's Jan. 9 Speak Up question: "How do you think Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has performed in his first two months in office?"

In the speeches I heard during his campaign, the primary focus was on the wasteful way the current politicians were spending our tax money.

His speeches implied he would cure all the deficits of the state by stopping wasteful spending, which in turn would balance the budget.

He also implied the vehicle tax would be cancelled because the money it would generate would not be needed. In my opinion, all he has achieved is repealing the vehicle tax.

He also implied he would not raise taxes. Instead, he is trying to pass a bond in order not to raise taxes -- a bond which must be paid for by our current citizens as well as by our children and possibly our grandchildren.

As long as we need to pay for what we receive, does it matter whether we call it a bond or a tax?

It also seems to me that his only other achievement is to pass state fiscal responsibilities on to the counties and cities, coupled with a bond in order to balance the state budget.

I am afraid we have chosen the wrong man to lead us out of debt.

K. Dale Bonham
Sleeper Avenue

Mars mission would overload an already busy NASA

Editor:

If I were NASA/Ames and the City of Mountain View, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for funding for the "Man on the Moon" and "Man on Mars" boondoggles. President Bush said nothing about them in his State of the Union address, which he gave only a week after his major policy speech proposing them.

I suspect that this is because these proposals were strongly criticized by both liberals and conservatives, especially after NASA shocked the international scientific community and Congress by announcing that they would no longer have the resources to support the Hubble Space Telescope. I suspect that these missions will be allowed to die quietly, the same fate that met his father's similar proposals. I surely hope so.

NASA's plate already is full. It should be concentrating on a crash program to replace the dangerous and obsolete space shuttle, completing the international space station and flying other missions, particularly those supporting the Hubble telescope and other low orbit scientific missions.

William R. Hitchens
Sunnyview Lane

Mars plan is a boondoggle, smokescreen for Bush

Editor:

Three good responses were given to last week's "Voices Around Town" question, "What do you think about the president's new Mars proposal?"

Mike Walkingstick remarked, "Maybe he should deal with the messes he's made this year on Earth before we go and make a mess on Mars." Renee Crow answered, "I think it's way over the expected budget. It's probably a big misdirection of our federal funds." And Ralph Patrick replied, "I think it's a smoke screen for all his other political troubles. I wish it were real, but I don't think he's being honest about it." High fives to these three citizens.

Although Mountain View, the home of NASA's Ames Research Center, would certainly get a huge economic lift from Bush's multi-billion dollar moon-Mars boondoggle, it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to know that it would be a knockdown blow to the United States' economy. And, we would be sidestepping our responsibility as the world's richest nation to alleviate much global poverty, disease, illiteracy, abuse of human rights, genocide, further damage to the environment and even terrorism.

With humanitarian motivation, political will and a more effective tax structure, the U.S. and the other wealthy, industrialized nations could well overcome most of the humongous problems facing our global community.

You may have seen the sign at the local peace vigil that reads, "Explore Peace on Earth, Let Mars Be." I would like to add, let's grow up in this century and pay our bills and help "peace the world together."

Fred Duperrault
W. Middlefield Road

More details on harmful health effects of wood smoke

Editor:

I wish to applaud the Voice for alerting Mountain View residents to the negative impact of wood smoke on our community in the Jan. 23 story "C'mon Baby, Douse My Fire." As an informed citizen, physician, and parent, I want to go into more depth regarding the health risks associated with wood smoke.

When you inhale wood smoke, you are taking in dioxin, cyanide, formaldehyde and lead. In addition, numerous carcinogens are entering your lungs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that the cancer risk from inhaling wood smoke is 12 times greater than from inhaling a comparable amount of cigarette smoke. Finally, the particulates (extremely small particles your body cannot remove from your lungs) emitted have been shown to increase the risk of fatal heart attack by 31 percent, according to the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Wood smoke comes indoors. It enters your home and your neighbors' homes through vents, under doors and around windows. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District states that indoor levels of wood smoke pollutants can reach up to 70 percent of those found outdoors.

Although EPA-certified wood-burning stoves and fireplace inserts emit less smoke, they still give off a tremendous volume of pollution compared to other forms of heat.

Those most affected are children, asthmatics and the elderly. But any healthy adult can also be impacted in the long term by chronic exposure to carcinogens and particulates, with health effects that may not be seen for years to come.

Think about these facts the next time you light a fire. Those who choose to cut back or eliminate their woodburning are doing themselves, their families and their communities a truly big favor.

Kathy Brady
Sleeper Avenue

Bait and switch tactics in latest plan to save forests

Editor:

Our national forests are an essential national heritage of the American people which is being sacrificed to the greed of the timber industry by Bush and the Republican Congress in return for political support. The justification being used is the proposed improvement of fire safety in the urban/wildland fire areas. This is classic "bait and switch" Bush tactic or what I prefer to call "Fear and Fraud."

With 50 years' of experience in local, state and federal fire protection, I can attest that there is a serious need to reduce the density of combustible brush and trees near developed areas to assist in fire control. However, this program with the bogus title of "Forests with a Future" only serves the greed of the timber industry. It also removes environmental protections, local control of damage to water sources, and protection of fish and animal habitats.

It is predictable that this plan will result in "clear cutting" of trees in areas which present no risk to communities and minimal thinning of trees and brush near developed areas (only enough to maintain "Fear and Fraud").

Robert Burns, Retired Fire Chief
Springer Road

E-mail a friend a link to this story.