Evergreen trees carry more value
A March 7 story reported on The Columbian’s Facebook contest, “Contest entrants say it’s no contest: Our fair city is the place to be.” The winner of the ode “to our fair city” listed evergreen trees as one of most liked attributes of Vancouver USA. Unfortunately, the landscape architects of a number of our recent and planned building projects focus on using deciduous trees instead of our local evergreens. Be it a strip mall, a big-box store, the Southwest Washington Medical Center or Evergreen Public Schools’ new bioscience high school, taking down our big trees seems to be a priority and replacing them with deciduous trees that do not reflect the timber heritage of the area.
Inserting multistory buildings into residential areas without a balance of big trees detracts from the neighborhood, the Pacific Northwest ambiance and the biodiversity of Vancouver USA. The city manager and Clark County planners need to review/update landscape guidelines for Vancouver USA.
Patrick Estenes
Vancouver
Local bridge agendas conflict
Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, and his co-signers had an interesting opinion column, “Citizens urged to make voices heard on CRC,” in the March 6 Columbian about the Interstate 5 bridge. As with all of the blather over the years and analysis/design expenses well over a million dollars with nothing more than piles of paper accomplished, one glaring fact is continually ignored.
This bridge project is not subject to all the personal agendas foisted on it. This bridge project is a part of the interstate highway system. Therefore, the logical answer is to build an expressway from approximately Lombard Street to state Route 500 with a separate bridge immediately adjacent upstream to the existing bridges. This will serve the interstate highway system and the “locals” can pursue their conflicting agendas, at their expense.
George Young
Vancouver
Let’s change Portland’s name
Since the controversial conversation over “The Couv” has settled down, let’s go to the city of Portland. As you geography people know, there is a Portland city in Maine. I almost got my baggage tagged to that city flying back from Miami. OK, Portland, how about “The Port” or “The Land” or “Rivport.” I think where I live I will lobby to call it “The Fish,” aka Salmon Creek.
Robert Kerr
Vancouver
Obama is violating his oath
Our country is being shaken to its core by a president who rejects its foundation, “The Rule of Law,” by not supporting and defending the Constitution for which he swore an oath. Barack Obama has ignored the rulings of judges in the lifting of the moratorium on oil drilling in the Gulf Coast and the unconstitutionality of Obamacare. He and his lackey Attorney General Eric Holder refused to prosecute acts of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. Now Obama and Holder say they will not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. Whether or not one agrees with the act there is legislative action, “The Rule of Law,” that should be followed.
President Obama is picking and choosing which laws or court decisions he will obey. By his actions the president is violating Article II Section I of our Constitution, his oath or affirmation to the presidency.
Terry G. Popravak
Vancouver
Obama’s leadership is appreciated
I, like many in this country, am concerned about the future of Social Security. It’s time for the president to remind and inform the American people that the Social Security Trust Fund is not related to the national debt and, therefore, does not contribute to the current deficit. It’s important for President Obama to state this fact to the American people at every opportunity. It is my feeling that many Americans are not aware of this and that some politicians are taking advantage of this lack of awareness. I also feel the president should strongly support the removal of the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes in order to ensure the solvency of this fund for future generations.
I appreciate President Obama’s leadership at a time when our country was left in dire straits by the previous administration and hope that he will heed the voice of Americans who depend on the health and stability of Social Security.
Juanita P. Greenway
Yacolt
Budget cuts for all
There has been a lot of talk about balancing federal, state and local budgets. Everyone is in agreement that something has to be done. Our country is broke. Yet whenever cuts are announced, if it pertains to a certain interest group they are outraged. How can they cut from this or that? Everyone has to be subjected to cuts until our country’s finances heal. The days of entitlements for everyone are over.
Just look at what is going on in Madison, Wis. Public employees are outraged that the gravy train is over. Why should the private sector fund their retirement and medical? It has to stop. This scene in Wisconsin will be repeated throughout our country.
Pertaining to the situation in Madison, whenever levies are proposed for education, all you hear is “it’s about our children,” yet when the cuts were announced, teachers called in sick. Great example for the children. Bottom line, they showed it is all about the money and their benefits.
Curt Ross
Washougal
Unions have brought many advances
When one in three American families included union members, there were more family-wage jobs available. There were manufacturing jobs in the U.S. It was not until the union busting began under President Reagan that this picture changed.
This is not a matter of public unions vs. private wages. Public employees’ wages and pension benefits were significantly less than private-sector wages and benefits … until they were allowed to unionize.
This is about business reducing workers’ wages and benefits in order to improve their bottom line.
When we abolish the unions, we could also lose: child labor laws, the eight-hour work day, paid overtime, compensation if you are hurt on the job, unemployment insurance, the guaranteed minimum wage, workplace safety, pensions, health care insurance, vacations, sick leave, holidays, guarantees on nondiscrimination in the workplace, and leave for maternity or family health emergencies. These benefits were all achieved by unions.
This loss probably won’t happen immediately, but it will happen … employers will only invest as much as they have to in order to obtain the services they need. With jobs going overseas there are more people and fewer jobs giving the employer the advantage in determining compensation and working conditions.
Sandra Cole
Vancouver
