Public-sector employees defended
As secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 117, I’m responding to a Jan. 3 Columbian editorial, “Privatize services.” Public sector workers have not been coddled or exempted from the recession. On the contrary, throughout Washington, public sector workers and their unions have acted responsibly and made enormous sacrifices, stretching government’s capacity to provide desperately needed services. These sacrifices are unprecedented, and include pay freezes, furloughs, layoffs, increased health and welfare costs, and other economic concessions.
Don’t forget that the economic crisis that, according to the editorial, “has devastated virtually every corner of the private sector economy” is in large part the result of corporate mismanagement in the financial services industry. Myopically driven by the profit motive, financial services corporations took insanely high risks, and we are all paying the price for that today.
Given this, it’s shocking that The Columbian would argue that we ought to place even more reliance on the profit-driven private sector by seeking to privatize government services.
The race to the bottom that results from such an approach involves far too high a risk when we consider the public goods that are at stake: the safety and security of our communities, the education of our children, the preservation of our transportation system and infrastructure, and the public health of our state.
Tracey A. Thompson
Tukwila
New tune but same old dance
There’s been a change in mayors for Vancouver, but the dance goes on. While we won’t hear so much of the ex-mayor’s “America’s Vancouver,” we are assured the new mayor will continue the soft-shoe shuffle with “Vancouver, Washington, U.S. of A.,” if he feels long-winded (Reported Jan. 5, “A pie by any name smells as sweet”). When was ever a politician not feeling windy?
With the logical addition of “Fort” to our name, recognition and revenue would be helped. With the threat of new taxes, the new mayor could drop the name game and really get into the soft-shoe dance with gusto.
Ken Serviss
Vancouver
Bridge-design elements are wasteful
The Columbian reported Jan. 5, “Group proposes system of tolls,” on a local free-market think tank’s proposal that congestion pricing tariffs be imposed on all freeways in the Portland-Vancouver area. This story was unusual for being prominently placed (on the front page) and lacking the dismissive treatment usually given to libertarian ideas. As this newspaper has strenuously editorialized for bridge tolls to finance the Interstate 5 bridge project, it seems obvious such coverage is intended to associate those tolls with the concept of market efficiency.
Don’t be deceived.
The various designs proposed for the I-5 bridge project are all hugely wasteful, with more than 20 percent (nearly $1 billion) of their budgets squandered on travesties such as a Vancouver light rail extension and a bike-footpath undercarriage, which relatively few commuters will ever use. Politicians and planners arrogantly insist such extravagances be financed by imposing tolls and are even willing to sacrifice an adequate number of lanes for vehicular traffic (recently proposed to downsize from 12 to 10) for their sake.
As “congestion prices” for freeways or bridges will be set by government monopolies intolerant of competition from private-sector alternatives, it’s absurd to associate them with anything like pricing in a free market.
John Burke
Vancouver
Schedule runs for good of nation
In response to James Losey’s Jan. 5 letter, “Train schedules are unreasonable,” trains must run on schedules 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They transport mail, food, lumber, coal, vehicles, military supplies and many items we all use every day. One train can keep more than 100 tractor-trailers off the roads, saving us millions of dollars in fuel and making our roads safer with less traffic. Railroads must follow federal laws that require them to sound the horn at training crossings and intersections for our safety. I hope this information will help Losey sleep better at night.
Nancy Mertens
Vancouver
Cheney’s intent misconstrued
Eugene Robinson’s Jan. 4 column, “Cheney’s lies can’t go unchallenged,” is premised upon the bogus notion that he made a New Year’s resolution to ignore Dick Cheney (as if he could), but these particular statements from Cheney required a response. Cheney’s rhetorical statement is not that President Barack Obama is denying a war on terrorism, but that Obama would like to “pretend” these issues do not exist and instead focus on social transformation. Robinson takes Cheney’s statement out of context and far beyond its obvious intent.
When in doubt, Robinson knows he can always return to a familiar theme for his readers: bash Cheney. Robinson’s opinion here is pretty transparent. He knows that Obama has been hurt by the handling of the recent terror attack. Robinson acknowledges the damage but reminds us that we’d be worse off with the “corrosive” Cheney still in charge.
Yes, it is pathetic, Mr. Robinson. As an aside, notice Robinson’s utter contempt for homeless people, dismissing the entire group as “nonsensical” and whose comments are not even worthy of consideration by such an esteemed member of the media elite.
Michael Siebert
Vancouver
Electorate ignored again
This country is headed for chaos.
This last year has clearly shown that we are no longer a nation represented by the ones elected to power.
Because of bumbling by the previous administration, too many Democrats were elected 2008.
Now, by their numbers alone (not by reason and common sense), they are forcing their will onto people who are unwilling to bear the burden they propose.
Soon my first grandchild will be born. I wince as I think of the burden that the monstrosity they are creating will place upon him or her.
There is no way that this government can reach so far into our pockets and produce an efficient system that creates health care that will be better than what we have now.
With the emergence of this monstrous health care bill, it becomes apparent that the only thing our politicians represent is the Democratic Party and their own pet projects.
Whatever the president and his czars declare, Congress blindly jumps to their side.
Politicians, get your heads out of the sand and listen to the electorate. More than 200 years ago, a “tea party” was held for a very good reason. This summer members of Congress scoffed at such an idea. I think it’s an idea again on the verge of reality.
Joe Thielman
Vancouver
