A signature, like a vote, is private

I want to thank Judge Benjamin Settle for the courage to stop the release of names of people who signed Referendum 71 ["R-71 signatures kept private," page one, Sept. 11].
Even though I did not sign this one, as a private citizen I think of these petitions as a vote. In signing them, people are essentially voting for or against an issue.

In this country we keep our votes anonymous. If these names are released, everyone will be averse to ever signing a petition again for fear of retribution by the opponents of it.
I hope Settle has the intelligence to make this temporary injunction permanent.

-- John Hed, Covington

Retribution is not free speech; signatures shouldn't be disclosed

The threat of publicly releasing Referndum 71 signatures defines what's wrong with today's political discourse: self-interest.

I signed the petition not because I am against anybody, but because I believe in equality of opportunity rather than equality of result. I am 41, never married and sexually abstinent -- not for lack of interest or desire but because of belief and conviction.

That said, I get no break on my health care for living a sexually risk-free life, nor do I enjoy the benefits of married couples or those living in domestic partnership. Equality of result would have me fight for those "rights." Equality of opportunity informs me I will have those benefits, too, someday, should I marry the woman of my dreams.

I signed knowing someone might use my signature against me without knowing me or asking why. Disappointing for sure, but this is still America where we are free to take sides, free to speak up and free to love our neighbors when the dust clears.

I disagree with releasing R-71 names and making them public. Not because I am afraid, but because hatred, anger, retribution and political expediency should never be masked under the guise of free speech.

-- Justin Kawabori, Redmond

Signing a referendum also supports direct democracy

As a teacher of Washington-state history I want to explain that not all the people who signed the petition to put Referendum 71 on the ballot oppose extending domestic-partnership rights.

I teach my students about the initiative and referendum process in my class, and we discuss what they will need to consider when they are asked to sign one.

What a citizen is agreeing to is that they want to have that issue come to a statewide vote. In this case, we may have people who signed it because they like direct democracy and believe citizens should be able to vote on as many laws as possible. Or people may have signed it because they believe a statewide vote will get rid of the law, or people may have signed it because they believe a statewide vote will keep the law.

My point is the assumption that all the people who signed it did so for the same reason is not true.

-- Todd Beuke, Sequim

A loving home, a life among discrimination

I will be voting to approve Referendum 71 to provide legal protections for couples and families like mine.

My same-sex wife -- we were married in Canada -- and I are raising two children. Our son is a special-needs child, and our daughter is an honor student who will be a high-school junior this year.

My wife and I co-own our home, have combined bank accounts and live as a married couple in every way. Our household of two kids, two cats, two fish and a yellow lab is a busy one, filled with love and laughter, joy and tears and is deserving of all of the protections and respect of any other.

I am a Metro transit operator, and my wife is an administrative registered nurse with a company providing assisted-living services. We abide by all of the laws of this state and country, pay our taxes and are responsible members of our community.

Despite this, when I was injured at work recently and opened a Labor and Industries claim, I was told my claim would be filed as single with no dependents and that I would be receiving a reduced benefit.

Not only are my wife and I being discriminated against in this instance but our children are as well. Please join me in making Washington a state that protects and respects all of its citizens.

-- Nancy Suppe, Bothell

Let couples that stand a chance be married

I have managed to be married and divorced three times before turning 45. Thankfully, I knew I wasn't good parent material so I avoided advancing that defective gene set. I've also managed to stay unmarried for 20 years and counting.

I am completely offended with the notion that extended rights for domestic partnerships is in any way a threat to me, any marriage I ever had or any marriage anyone else has had or may have.

I want to support and defend any couple that has the courage, commitment and optimism to get married. If their church doesn't have an issue marrying same-sex partners, why should I? As for the state, it's a civil-rights issue. Nothing more, nothing less!

My marriages should not be defended. They failed. I favor marriages that stand a chance.

Can we wake up with civility, humanity and basic human rights and see Referendum 71 for what it is?

-- Sandy Person, Redmond

For the love of families, support extended partnership rights

Thanks for your editorial in support of all Washington families ["Basic fairness, equality for Washington families," editorial, Sept. 2].

To voters who would deny me and my family equal rights, I'm not afraid to let you know who I am.

My partner and I met when we were Peace Corps volunteers 23 years ago. We've traveled the world together. We've cared for each other in illness, in job loss, in moves across the country. We've stood by each other when each of our fathers passed away. Our lives are about love, joy, laughing, dark chocolate and being good stewards of this world.

In our child-raising years, we've become part of communities that include gay and straight parents. We sit side by side at our kids' talent shows -- beaming with equal pride. We share advice and tips on the latest phase in our kids' development. We go to our jobs or are looking for work. As a community we've come together to support each other in our greatest losses and unite for our shared concerns. What is gained by discriminating against any family?

For the love of all families, support equality. Now that it appears destined for the ballot, vote yes on Referendum 71.

-- Cathie Bachy, Seattle

Washington is a place of equality

Editor, The Times:

I was elated to read your editorial ["Basic fairness, equality for Washington families," Opinion, Sept. 2] encouraging voters to approve Referendum 71, upholding the domestic-partnership law, when it comes to the ballot this fall.

The Washington I know is a place where people of all different races, backgrounds, creeds and, yes, sexual orientations can live together in respect, tolerance and equality. It is on those values I hope voters will base their decision on Ref. 71.

This November, voters will face one question: Should this law be approved? I hope voters will also ask themselves another question: Should someone be allowed to commit themselves to someone they love? Truly, that's all this issue asks, and there's only one, simple answer.

Yes, I am a gay man. But I reject the notion that I am intrinsically inferior to others because of this. I hope voters will, too, by turning out to approve Referendum 71.

-- Tucker Cholvin, Snohomish

Keep the conversation in the realm of executive responsibilities

King County executive candidates Dow Constantine and Susan Hutchison have weighed in on marriage benefits for same-sex partners. Now what?

This illustrates how far off base we have drifted in how we choose our elected officials and why they seem so incompetent when in office. Voters and the press continue to ask questions and probe positions that, while interesting, are irrelevant to officials' jobs.

The current example of Referendum 71 and King County executive shows how we drift in how we choose our executive. What does Ref. 71 have to do with overseeing Metro transit and managing the aspects of the county that person is responsible for? Nothing.

Why don't we get back to basics, and see how they are qualified for the job, not how they feel about social and political issues that are out of the scope of their jobs? While it may satisfy our curiosity to know how they feel about same-sex marriage, health-care reform or other popular debates, it obfuscates how competent they will be at the everyday tasks of their jobs.

That suitability will affect us directly. Valuing how they feel about Ref. 71 and other issues is exactly why Mayor Greg Nickels is being booted: He expended more effort toward posturing on global climate change and provided incompetent direct response to the snowfall in Seattle when that was the climate change he should have focused on.

King County executive hopefuls should be focusing on their executive skills, not political skills. Otherwise it's just another snow job.

-- Bob Johnson, Mercer Island

For referendum signers, no special protection

The attempts to block the release of petition-signer information by the backers of Referendum 71 ["Foes sue to block Referendum 71; backers can't hide donors' names," NWFriday, Aug. 28] reminds me of a sketch from 1977's crude "The Kentucky Fried Movie."

The sketch has a daredevil wearing a fire suit, helmet and gloves walk up to a group of black men, yell the "n-word" at the top of his lungs and then run for his life.

The difference is that Ref. 71's heroes want to replace the protective suit with blindfolds for the rest of us. The notion that the despicable and malicious nature of their speech entitles the signers' to special protections from public censure is an absurd and disturbing perversion of the First Amendment.

-- Jonathan Kallay, Seattle

Ref. 71 could be an infectious change

I predict Referendum 71 is going to become a big deal and a defining moment in the history of gay rights.

People have been choked by Proposition 8 in California passing. People have learned. This won't happen again. It will be the beginning of a "Yes, we can" movement that is much bigger than the gay movement, a movement of "Yes, we can take care of our society and our people, no matter who they are."

It will go well beyond Washington state.

-- Emma Le Du, Seattle

Dig deeper in coverage of mayor's race

Editor, The Times:

The all-too-predictable coverage of our candidates for mayor and primary opponents, Mike McGinn and Joe Mallahan, by The Seattle Times and other media outlets is very disappointing.

The majority of the coverage ignores the specific ideas from each candidate and paints them as an environmentalist lawyer determined to stop the tunnel -- McGinn -- and a T-Mobile executive who wants to simply restore efficient government services -- Mallahan.
Neither depiction is false, but the coverage rarely digs deeper. Let me give it a try.

I know Mallahan, for example, wants to leverage funds to expand units for low-income families. I know he wants to eliminate the head tax for small businesses, reduce consultant contracts by 25 percent to yield tens of millions in savings for the city. He wants to expedite hiring of police officers to save millions more and help protect he city. I know he wants to fully reinstate and expand the gang unit, eliminate the Mercer Street Project and ensure wealthy developers bear more of the cost burden.

I know McGinn is interested in funding a private-public partnership to create Seattle High School scholarships; he wants to build a citywide fiber-optic network for Internet use; he wants to focus on Metro's plans for Rapid Ride lines and an electric-trolley bus system that potentially will improve traffic dramatically, and at a fraction of the cost of light rail.
How do I know this? Because I've participated at events for both McGinn and Mallahan, asked them questions personally, and I have actually taken the time to read their Web sites in depth, where their ideas are laid out. Have you?

Even The Times' own profiles of both candidates focus less on these ideas and issues and more on surface stuff like their personalities, families and background.

Let's dig deeper. I encourage The Times and all media outlets to really press McGinn and Mallahan on how they will achieve some of the ideas I've laid out above -- taken directly from their Web sites -- in order for the city to make the best, most-informed choice this November.

-- Paul West, Seattle

New mayor will need leadership, not government, experience

I am tired of hearing that the new mayor will spend the first six months looking for a coffee shop and the bathroom.

Your assumption that it takes "government experience" to lead is wrong ["Voters' message is clear: Show us something new," Opinion, editorial, Aug. 23]. It takes "leadership experience" to lead. Maybe we have a patriot stepping up to lead us.
I'm a disappointed voter, not a "cranky voter."

-- Thomas P. Wise, Seattle

Unions endorse, but do they know what they're doing?

All the big unions in Seattle endorsed the incumbent for mayor in the primary election. Mayor Greg Nickels lost and so did the unions. There is a good reason why Seattle politicians go after the union endorsement.

Seattle is one of the few cities left in the country with a union density higher than the national average.

Yet Seattle unions are sticking to the old dogs. Now that their favorite lost the primary, they are running around their halls trying to figure out whom to endorse now. Sticking to the old politicians only reinforces the negative perception most people have of unions: that they are corrupt, outdated and embedded in a romanticized past that barely resembles their present, much less their future.

This should be the question unions should ask of themselves: What about our future? Their future is not in endorsing politicians that play lip service to favoring unions. A politician who creates union jobs yet does nothing while the cost of living increases on those same workers, who does nothing as expensive condominiums replace less expensive apartments, who stands by as the homeless wither in our streets, is not a friend of working people and should not be a friend of the unions.

-- Russell B. Jacobs, Seattle

Message to Seattle pols: Don't mess with voters

The long-held view that Seattle voters simply refuse to get tough with their elective officials, no matter how much they dislike them or disagree with their policies, has finally been consigned to dustbin status.

Last week's primary results sent a resounding message to local officeholders -- voters do pay attention to your words and deeds, and if you screw up or ignore their wishes, there are electoral consequences.

Soon-to-be former Mayor Greg Nickels both screwed up (snowstorm response) and defied Seattle's wishes (waterfront tunnel). As a result, voters unceremoniously gave him the boot while humiliating his political clones, Jan Drago and Jordan Royer, in the process.

Now watch Seattle's political and economic establishment, which sorely wants the tunnel, close ranks behind the pro-tunnel candidate, Joe Mallahan. It is normal for the establishment-backed candidate for mayor to win handily like Paul Schell in 1997 and Nickels in 2005.

But Mike McGinn's first-place primary finish proves tunnel opposition still resonates among voters who had overwhelmingly rejected the tunnel option in their 2007 advisory vote.

Candidates who run against the will of Seattle's voters -- at long last -- will do so at their own peril.

-- Russell Scheidelman, Seattle

PCO candidates vital to public involvement

I question Kate Riley's column ["End free ballot ride for parties," Opinion, Aug. 28] in which she questions public balloting for precinct committee officers (PCOs).

What does she propose instead? Should the parties elect them at caucuses? Who attends caucuses? One percent of the people, maybe?

Having PCO candidates on the primary-election ballot gives the general public their one opportunity to choose party officials. Is there not a public interest here?

Take it away, and the parties would be even less accountable than they already are.

-- John Carlin, Edmonds

Parties cut budgets while taking tax dollars for operations

Kate Riley's column exposes the hypocrisy of Washington's Republican and Democratic parties, which demand an election system that favors the perpetuation of party apparatus -- as long as the taxpayers fund it.

It is unbelievable that we effectively give the King County major parties $2.4 million every two years to fund their private precinct committee officer elections, while police, prosecutors, courts and other essential county-government services face repeated cuts.

As a commissioner for a small park district on Vashon Island, we are forced to pay King County a substantial part of our budget every two years to fund unopposed commissioner elections. These costs are determined based on the number of jurisdictions on the ballot and the cost of the election itself. It is unacceptable that we ultimately have less money to support kids playing in parks because the major political parties get their elections for free, and the costs are shifted to everyone else.

But this is not the only area where our major parties have perpetuated their own existence through public funding of party activities.

Our Legislature employs partisan staff that represent the interests of the Democrats or the Republicans, rather than the interests of the public.

At taxpayer expense, these partisan staff are given generous salaries, provided with office space and more. At the same time the Legislature in Olympia is cutting basic public education, it is maintaining its own party structure on the public dollar. This is the same Olympia, by the way, that provides free access to the ballot for its own parties while those same parties sue us in federal court for not giving them enough.

It is increasingly clear that George Washington's warnings against party politics were right. Reflecting our current broken political system, Washington warned that political parties "distract the public councils, and enfeeble the public administration agitate the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; [and] kindle the animosity of one against another." Sound familiar?

Following George Washington's advice, it is time for our Washington to remove all party apparatus from the state and county dole. It is clear the political parties are not working for us.

-- David Hackett, Vashon Island

Ban bags, don't just tax them

Many people, my wife and I included, would strongly support banning plastic bags but voted against the ill-conceived measure we were offered in Referendum 1.

A ban would require shoppers to bring or buy reusable bags or otherwise carry purchases in their arms.

Longer checkout times and ugly checkout disputes in our view seemed destined to ultimately doom needed regulation. In any case, this loss should not be interpreted to mean that Seattle voters want to continue using disposable plastic or paper bags or wouldn't adopt a more sensible regulation.

-- Charles and Wendy Ordine, Seattle

Poor marketing may have lost bag campaign

Seattle missed the marketing and terminology boat with pitching a bag "tax."

I just got back from Austria and Germany and found that when you grab a plastic bag there, you have to pay for it. That changes people's habits in a hurry.

It's not a tax, it's the cost of doing business or "cleaning up the bag mess."

Just require all bags to cost 25 cents as a cleanup fee, and you'll be surprised how many folks starting bringing their own.

-- Andrew Nemethy, Adamant, Vt.

Bass an advocate for students, true public education

The Seattle Times' editorial, "Voters vet leaders for Seattle schools," [Opinion, Aug. 20] was yet another shot in the crusade of your editorial writers to privatize public education.

Mary Bass is doing what she was asked to do, such as advocate for students and families many people in our corporate never-never land want to test and standardize out of existence. Even if the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle has given up on Bass, many black folks in Seattle and elsewhere gave up on the Urban League back before Bass was even born. E. Franklin Frazier had their leadership style pegged more than half a century ago.

So Kay Smith-Blum can raise funds? Big deal. It's a criminal absurdity that public schools even have to fundraise in an era when the so-called private sector is busy selling us on the conviction that the public purse should be used to bail out banking thieves and military speculators.

And it is definitely a mark of the crisis in education, public or private, that such a shameless con game continues to drive the discussion connected to education reform or anything else in society.

-- Michael Hureaux, Seattle

Editorial does not speak for community that knows Bass best

Your assessment of Seattle School Board member Mary Bass was flawed, not based on fact and certainly does not speak for us in District 5.

Even if the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle wrote Bass off, that is not sufficient evidence for you to give such a negative report. What does The Seattle Times know about her?

Mary Bass has an impeccable record in the community she serves, and her accessibility to those she serves is a plus in any language. Everyone in every venue would appreciate the kind of hands-on availability she offers to hear the concerns and issues of the people.

We are more than faceless voices to her. Your attempt to malign such a capable person is overshadowed by the good she does on a daily basis. Her impact and accomplishments can be viewed on her Web site, www.marybass.com.

Bass will retain her seat on the School Board because the district needs her wisdom and commitment.

-- Naomi Donovan, Seattle

Nickels cut funding that was empowering Seattleites

Editor, The Times:

I was disappointed to read Danny Westneat ["Seattle likes debate, not action," NWSunday, column, Aug. 23] parroting the tired refrain of the Greg Nickels administration: You need to choose between engaging citizens and getting something done. History shows this is a false choice.

Norm Rice involved 3,000 citizens in his education summit, paving the way for the Families and Education Levy. He then empowered 30,000 citizens in a bottom-up neighborhood planning effort that, under the Paul Schell administration, resulted in voter-approved bond and levy measures for 27 new and improved libraries, 13 new and expanded community centers and 100 new and enhanced parks. Schell tripled the size of the Neighborhood Matching Fund, a program that has empowered tens of thousands of residents to implement more than 4,000 community self-help projects.

And what has the Nickels administration accomplished? As Tim Ceis says, "This isn't supposed to be a participatory democracy." So it killed the bottom-up planning program and made deep cuts to the Neighborhood Matching Fund. Nickels' administration opposed the successful citizen-initiated parks levy.

True, Nickels did get new fire stations along with huge cost overruns. He secured a new streetcar for Paul Allen while reducing bus service for existing riders. It took seven years to reach an agreement on the waterfront tunnel precisely because Nickels tried to impose his own solution; Nickels' failure to listen to the people may mean this project will never be built.

It is telling that the politician who focused on his own legacy being more than "footprints in the sand" left the rest of us stranded in the snow. I hope our next mayor will understand that Seattle's active citizens are its greatest strength.

-- Jim Diers, Vashon [Editor's note: Diers, former director of the Department of Neighborhoods, was fired by Nickels.]

A 'B' for snow, a 'B' for understanding what Seattle wants

Greg Nickels deserves a "B" grade for his understanding of and comments about the voters who favored other candidates in the primary.

-- Russ Baker, Federal Way

Nickels did more for Seattle than it knows

Mayor Greg Nickels has long done the right thing regardless of political expediency. He was one of the first elected leaders in the country to support President Obama, at a time when it was risky.

He led a national movement to stand up to the Bush administration on global warming. Out of fundamental decency, Seattle provided health benefits for domestic partners of city employees. He finally brought a viable public-transit system to our city. And our dangerous and blighted waterfront freeway will be replaced, reconnecting the people of Seattle on foot and bicycle with our tremendous God-given natural asset, our waterfront. Our city will be greener, more livable and even more beautiful.

The people in Seattle (or the few who voted in this primary) have spoken, and Nickels will not be the second Seattle mayor in history to be elected to a third term ["Nickels all but finished," page one, Aug. 21].

I have known Nickels for 14 years, and I can say this for sure: Whether you agree with him or not on issues (and yes, he is human just like the rest of us), Nickels' integrity, love for this city and leadership are unassailable.

I thank him for his service and will miss him as our mayor.

-- Manrita Sidhu, Seattle

Nickels couldn't manage the nuts and bolts

Danny Westneat ignores a major reason that Seattle voters decided to toss out Mayor Greg Nickels: nuts and bolts.

Certainly, some folks perceived Nickels as a strongman and wanted a return to process in decision making. But many others, including me, think he just didn't manage the city very well.

The 2008 snowstorm and its self-congratulatory "B" grade indicate Nickels was badly out of touch.

But I also think of the mayor when I get jarred by potholes, read about stupid actions by city departments, try to find a parking place I can afford, learn about yet another bureaucratic barrier to business, wonder why city employment levels and pay are not reigned in and ask myself why Seattle is more friendly to misbehaving drunks in Pioneer Square than to citizens who pay taxes and want to enjoy the place with their families.

Was Nickels too corporate? Hardly. He has worked his entire professional life in government. It's about time Seattle has a mayor who can manage the nuts and bolts of the city. I think someone with experience in the private sector has an excellent shot at doing a better job.

-- Phillip Johnson, Seattle

Forward-looking mayor paid the price for progress

Danny Westneat's column on why Seattle didn't vote for Mayor Greg Nickels was so great that I have decided to save it as a clipping, but unfortunately, as with some of his other fine columns, he came to the table too late.

Nickels has actually been a fine mayor for Seattle, and he deserves a lot more credit for what he has done than discredit over what he didn't do during two weeks in December.
It is possible to both love Seattle and to seek change when change is for the better -- such as gentrifying South Lake Union and adding streetcars and light-rail trains with their attendant transit-oriented development.

The current mayor had plenty of vision to look beyond repairing potholes, and he paid the price for it. As Westneat correctly said, what we will get for it is endless dithering for yet more time on the tunnel question.

As I have argued many times lately on the Seattle Transit Blog, all of this second-guessing elected leaders leads to an inefficient use of democracy as a weapon and risks being saddled with an electorate unwilling to trust and leaders unwilling to lead for fear of being closed down.

Nickels served as a punching bag in this election and got beaten by it unfairly in my view, showing flaws in a primary process that is more about ego than anything else.
I think a fine way to honor his leadership would be to let him retain a seat on the Sound Transit board so his voice can continue to be heard. I do not have any confidence that the two candidates in November have anywhere near the current mayor's breadth of leadership on transportation issues for Seattle.

Mike McGinn is a one-issue candidate who will plunge the city only to yet more turmoil over the tunnel-vs.-street-option replacement for the viaduct, and in the meantime, nothing will get done and prices will rise.

-- Tim Whittome, Issaquah

Nickels stood above the crowd

I didn't vote for Mayor Greg Nickels the first term, but he has brought home the bacon on transportation issues and does not deserve the eye-rolling commentaries and citizen complainers. Yes, I didn't like the snow either. Big deal.

Now one candidate for mayor seeks to undo half that critical progress of the last two terms and kill the Alaskan Way tunnel.

I think Danny Westneat's Aug. 23 column nailed it. Nitpick if you want, but Nickels turned out way above the crowd. He got something done. Unusual.

Now, are we going to revert to type and start "Doin' The Seattle"? Yuk!

Please don't, people.

-- Don Bell, Seattle

Low voter turnout the true disappointment of primaries

According to the most-recent election data, only 24 percent of registered Seattle voters bothered to vote in the primary election. How pathetic is that?

All of the constant whining one hears on the streets and on talk radio, in editorials in our local papers and blabbed in blogs represents only one quarter of the potential voting public.

Seattle residents should be ashamed of themselves for being so cavalier about this city's future and the issues that will make an enormous difference in the day-to-day lives of its citizens, such as the viaduct replacement and consumer taxes.

Unless you bothered to exert the extreme effort of mailing in your absentee ballot, please refrain from polluting our air with your complaints and opinions regarding the direction of this city -- one of the finest in the country, no thanks to you.

-- Brent Stavig, Seattle

Times editorial elitist and patronizing

The Seattle Times published an editorial headlined, "Partisans Move On" [Opinion, Aug. 19]. Since I live near Lynnwood, I have absolutely no dog in this hunt as it were. But after reading this rather pointed editorial, it appears the editorial board of The Times not only has its collective nose out of joint, but also must be at a right angle to its face.

I'm not sure whether the board believes the peasant masses of Seattle to be stupid or foolish or both. How dare Seattleites disregard the editorial board's collective wisdom and guidance and act on their own?

As I said earlier, I don't care who the folks in Seattle elect for dogcatcher much less mayor. However, I find the attitude of The Times editorial board to be both patronizing and elitist.

-- Phil Bate, Lynnwood

Seattle needs a mayor who can build that tunnel

There may be reason to be against the way the tunnel situation has played out, but the tunnel is the right answer, and it needs a mayor that knows how to do it properly.

-- Hugh Coleman, Kelso

Vote against Ref. 1 a vote against liberal agenda

Editor, The Times:

It's the same strategy. Just like the right-wing attack on President Obama isn't really about health care, the vote against a tax on plastic bags was really a vote against the liberal agenda, specifically environmentalism in Seattle.

It's what the Republicans will call a backlash against that liberal agenda.

But really it's cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's just more dangerous Republican misinformation on how to reduce our waste and pass on the goal of a better place to our kids. The only goal Seattle Republicans have is winning the next election, at any cost.

Republicans seem to believe global warming and other environmental dangers don't exist anyway. There's no real reason to be environmentally conscious in the minds of the Republicans.

-- Doug Morrison, Seattle

Bag tax failed because it wasn't evenly applied

I take offense at Brady Montz's assertion ["City voters don't buy shopping bag charge," News, Aug. 19] that Referendum 1 failed because big business spent more than the Green Bag Campaign 5-to-1.

My friends and I voted against the 20-cent bag tax because it was arbitrary and discriminatory. Some businesses, but not all, had to pay the 20-cent bag tax. Grocery stores, food banks and convenience stores had to pay. Large mega-stores like Target, Sears, Fred Meyer and Macy's were exempt.

The tax would save us from all those non-biodegradable plastic bags but would also tax all those biodegradable paper bags. If the green-bag supporters want a law that will pass then they should outlaw all plastic bags, leaving only paper and reusable bags as alternatives.

Do not write a law, like the one that failed, penalizing only certain businesses and service organizations assisting the poor.

-- Suzanne M. Banchero, Seattle

Despite failed tax, quit plastic bags cold turkey

Many voters felt the plastic bag fee was too nanny-ish. Understandable, but still, the environmental problem remains.

Here's an idea. Judging from the massive sums they spent to defeat this measure, the plastic producers clearly expected plastic-bag sales to take a huge dive if the fee was approved.

Let's all see if we can make that happen anyway by resolutely swearing off plastic bags at the grocery. Cold turkey.

Let's develop a culture in which those who regularly use plastic grocery bags are assumed to be either self-absorbed people like those who talk too loudly on their cellphones or people for whom reusable bags are genuinely beyond their means.

We can roll our eyes at the former and empathize with the latter. But for ourselves, let's do what's right, even without the official prompt. The inconvenience will be minimal.

After all, if you've got a life, plastic bags can't be a very big part of it.

-- William R. Andersen, Seattle

Executive race was simply a popularity contest

Editor, The Times:

It's official: Most voters in King County are morons.

We know this because Susan Hutchison came in first in the primary for King County executive ["Former TV anchor to face off against council veteran," page one, Aug. 19].
Here's what most of her voters said to themselves: "Oh, I recognize her name and saw her on TV a lot. Therefore she should run our county government!"

Meanwhile, folks who are actually qualified got few votes by comparison. Pitiful.

-- Matthew J. Barry, Issaquah

In most candidates, a dearth of relevant experience

In the end, I voted. But only for two candidates and the referendum. Why?

Because nearly all of the candidates failed to provide evidence that they were qualified for the job. We know they love Seattle, King County, Washington, the USA., Mother Earth and the Universe.

But did any of the candidates have relevant experience? Apparently not -- otherwise, they would have said so, right? And why waste our time promising they'll solve our economic woes or fulfill any other absurd claims all by themselves? If elected, they'll work with others, negotiating and compromising, right? Isn't that what politics is all about in a democracy?

Since the candidates didn't provide qualifications, precious little relevant experience and nothing but empty promises, here's my suggestion for future voter pamphlets: Let a special election committee draft a blanket statement that covers all the things you have in common -- piety, patriotism, familial devotion and love of apple pie -- together with critiques of how badly it's going, overblown generalities about what candidates will accomplish and declarations that only candidates can save us from disaster.

That can go in the front of the pamphlet, where we can ignore it. Then tell us your actual qualifications.

-- Paul J. Smith, Seattle

With long-term tunnel vision, easy to see it's a poor choice

The Seattle Times' tunnel vision regarding the anti-tunnel vote is extremely shortsighted.
According to The Times' editorial, "A wounded mayor" [Opinion, Aug. 19]: "McGinn's solution, surface transportation, will jam our streets and overwhelm the freeway."

In addition to the short-term consequences of tunnel construction, the long-term global-warming consequences have been ignored. Hopefully our country will admit to the threat of global warming before it is too late for our children and grandchildren to correct the damage we have done.

If we decide to be responsible adults, the tunnel will be obsolete by the time it is finished or shortly thereafter. It is time we stop subsidizing single-occupant fossil-fueled traffic.

The money wasted on a tunnel would be better invested in a first-class bus-rapid-transit system.

-- Bob Jeffers-Schroder, Seattle

Avoiding political storm with mail-in ballots

I would like to thank King County for instituting mail voting and giving me back so much time. I voted the day my ballot arrived, and therefore could hang up on robo-calls, fast-forward through campaign commercials, skip reading all The Seattle Times stories about the candidates and the election and change the subject when friends brought up the election.

And of course, walking to the mailbox is much faster than driving to my old polling place and actually engaging in a communal event of civic engagement.

-- Silvia Ceravolo, Seattle

Bag vote hijacked by well-funded opponents

Thank you Seattle for once again proving that big money buys politics. With fliers, ads and phone calls flooding the residents of this "enlightened" city, how can anyone possibly say defeating the bag tax was the public's will?

If the proponents and opposition had been evenly funded, one could claim it was the public's will. But the way it was done proves otherwise. The poor didn't win -- the chemical industry did. Everyone else lost.

What a bunch of suckers we are!

-- Jack M. Pedigo, Seattle

Like in health-care reform, public is the loser in bag-tax defeat

They've done it again. In voting down the bag tax, people have allowed themselves to be duped by disinformation, lies and distortions, becoming stooges for the oil and chemical industries and not realizing they already pay for plastic bags directly and indirectly in many ways.

The same thing has happened with health-care reform, with people allowing themselves to become pawns of the insurance companies out to protect their profits at the expense of us all.

Some undoubtedly just hate the president and will do anything to bring him down. Either way, they're working against themselves.

And in voting for Mr. Anti-Tunnel, Mike McGinn, they're jeopardizing the chance of a lifetime to make Seattle one of the magnificent waterfront cities in the world.

What a shame it all is.

-- Tim Walsh, Seattle

Before a bag fee, provide incentives to recycle instead

Editor, The Times:

I find it interesting that Seattle wants to impose plastic-bag fees, yet there has been absolutely no push for deposits for plastic or glass bottles or for soda and beer cans.

Over the past three years, I have recycled more than 82,000 aluminum cans, of which more than 75,000 I have personally removed from the roadsides here in South King County, primarily in the Renton and Maple Valley areas.

What really bothers me is the fact I have left behind approximately 6,000 glass bottles and well more than 12,000 to 13,000 plastic bottles during this time frame.

Keep in mind that deposits are required for all of these items in Idaho, Oregon, California and other states and as a direct result you have far less litter.

Cash refunds would guarantee much cleaner roadside areas, and at the same time, provide those in need with additional and needed income.

Why are we spending our tax dollars cleaning up our roads? At 5 cents a can and bottle, if I had recycled everything I've mentioned, I would have made around $5,000.

-- Ron Freese, Renton

If bags are so bad, why don't we ban them?

I don't live in Seattle, so I don't get to vote on the proposed bag fee/tax. I do work at a retail store in Seattle, however.

I am quite confused at the idea of charging a fee as a disincentive to use bags. If the bags are so bad, ban them. If they don't warrant a ban, put the community's resources to use elsewhere.

It may technically be a "fee," but it sure feels like a terribly regressive "tax."
On the other hand, I'd gladly fork over a dollar or more per bag if it meant the streets would be properly cleared of snow and ice in the winter.

-- Shaun Anthony, Renton

Complicating grocery transactions an effective plan

Peter Nickerson and Randy Rucker's assessment ["Bag tax would be a lot of hassle with little environmental impact," Opinion, guest column, Aug. 5] of the proposed bag tax misses a few points.

Yes, it's great most Seattleites don't litter, but that does not lead to the conclusion that there is no bag scourge. Any plastic that becomes waste is a scourge. Those who are trying to connect the dots between consumer behavior and increased waste plastic know this.

I agree that "the tax will solve no environmental problem" and will "complicate a million grocery transactions in the city daily." That's the point.

Waste-management problems may be best addressed by means of consumer inconvenience. If consumers can embrace recycling their newspapers, glass bottles and aluminum cans, providing for our own grocery-bagging needs should be an easy next step.

Look around you. See any scarcity of backpacks, canvas bags and other reusable bags? I still agree with their conclusion that if we want to improve the environment via taxation there are better choices.

Another way to get people's attention is to stop offering them bagging service. Make an announcement. Pick a day. Let them squirm a few days, and they'll pick up a bagging habit faster than a cockroach escaping a glaring light bulb.

-- Marcella Van Oel, Seattle

Making change by shifting attitudes

I'm a big fan of the plastic-bag tax. Why? Because it will eliminate a reflexive waste of resources. Currently, the automatic assumption at most stores is that you want your items bagged.

Buy a single pencil? It goes in a bag. Yes, you can decline the bag, and I do.

But I've got to be fast! One second of distraction and I've got another annoying plastic bag. I want to flip the assumption around, and I believe the bag tax will do that.

I'd love the conversation to flip from me saying, "Ack! No bags!" to the cashier saying, "Do you wish to purchase bags today?"

Shifts in attitude do matter. Let's move to a society in which the least wasteful option is the norm, rather than the exception. The bag tax may not be the biggest step or the most meaningful step, but it is the next step.

We have to walk before we can run. Though I suppose we could bike or bus. Whatever transit mode you choose, remember your reusable bags!

Vote yes on Seattle Referendum 1.

-- Karen Crisalli Winter, Seattle

Automated campaign calls just too 'phony'

Automated phone calls to promote political candidates are doing just the opposite as far as this voter is concerned. It shows the candidate cares only about numbers, not individuals; has little if any initiative or imagination; has poor economic training; and possesses no sense in making more than one "robot call" while only multiplying the inconvenience.

In other words, such efforts are not only annoying and impersonal but "phony."

-- Bill Wippel, Normandy Park

An inconvenience, a lost vote

When will political candidates understand that for many of us, myself included, a phone call from a candidate's campaign immediately puts that office-seeker on the do-not-vote-for list?

We get all the info we need from personal observations and from newspapers, mailings, the Internet and attending forums. A phone call is just a rude irritation that interrupts what I am doing and that takes up my time to either hang up from or to delete from my voice mail. The only exception is when the candidate is on the line live.

I'm on the do-not-call list, and my phone number is unlisted and unpublished.

Unfortunately, politicians are allowed to disrespect this choice. Their choice to do that will cost them a lot of votes.

-- Carolyn Walden, Seattle

Lawsuit reveals a candidate not up for the job

Since she decided to run for King County executive, Susan Hutchison has been remarkably quiet. She has not been proactive in getting her agenda before the voters. In fact, quite the opposite has been true. She continues to do well in the polls due to name recognition and her refusal to say for what she stands.

Hutchison did not want the records unsealed from her discrimination lawsuit. One can see why. The records show her to be mean-spirited. She lies about others. She is unable or unwilling to accept factual information and she sees herself as a perpetual victim.

When her ratings fell and she was demoted, she claimed discrimination. When she was not allowed time off over a holiday, she claimed she was sick. When she was caught on vacation with her family and was given days off without pay, she claimed to have made a remarkable recovery and complained about the consequence levied on her because of her behavior. She thought she was treated unfairly.

She lied about her manager, going so far as to call the mother of an intern to warn her about the man. She claimed he had drug problems and was a sexual predator. These were lies.

Is this woman really someone we want to lead our county?

The county deserves leadership that is transparent and effective. Hutchison would provide neither.

-- Carol Barber, Kent

Why newspapers matter

The Seattle Times has shown why newspapers are immensely important to our society by suing for -- and winning -- the release of court documents related to King County executive candidate Susan Hutchison's failed discrimination suit ["Judge unseals records, calls court openness vital," news, Aug. 8].

The release couldn't have come at a better time for this voter, as I filled in my primary ballot this weekend. The records provided by the court have gone a long way toward shaping my mind on Hutchison, and there can be no doubt as to whether we'd have seen those documents without the Times: No blogger would have sued and been able to win the release of those records in such a timely manner.

-- Andrew Smith, Seattle

Don't stop with tax, ban plastic bags entirely

Peter Nickerson and Randy Rucker ["Bag tax would be a lot of hassle with little environmental impact," Opinion, guest column, August 5] just don't get it.

Every piece of plastic we make will be on this planet for the rest of time. Plastic does not biodegrade quickly. It can only be transformed into something that is not plastic by burning it, which opens a whole host of environmental consequences.

Yes, most Seattleites collect their plastic bags for recycling. However, plastic bags cannot truly be recycled. Most of Seattle's plastic bags end up shipped to China where they are burned. This is not recycling.

As for their claim that marine mammals are not being harmed by plastic bags, Nickerson and Rucker need to spend some time reading about the Pacific Gyre ["Giant vortex of floating trash swirling in Pacific," CloseUp, August 4], where billions of pieces of plastic refuse are collecting into a mass estimated to be twice the size of Texas.

We have no idea what the repercussions of this garbage patch are going to be. It may not be killing the mammals yet, but it is already killing birds and turtles.

I wish we weren't voting on a bag fee either. I wish plastic bags had just been banned.

-- Kimberly Christensen, Seattle

On my bike ride, 11 bags are proof of plastic problem

Peter Nickerson and Randy Rucker must live in a parallel universe inhabited only by economists. Which Seattle do they stroll the streets and parks of in order to declare there isn't a plastic-bag litter problem? Not the same Seattle in which I just completed a bike ride on the trail down to Golden Gardens Park -- I counted 11 plastic bags along the way.

Maybe 11 isn't sufficient to constitute the litter problem Rucker and Nickerson dismiss. One can argue the bag tax both ways, but please don't tell me there isn't any plastic-bag litter.

I invite them to come out to Ballard from Montana and help pick up the trash -- since it doesn't exist, it should be easy.

-- Eric Lucas, Ballard

Basic economics backs up bag fee

In regard to the article, "Would city's bag charge be fee or tax? Depends on which way you lean" [page one, August 4], an important point seems to be missing from the debate about whether to charge consumers for plastic bags: They are already charged!

However, the price is hidden, rolled into the cost of everything consumers buy at the store. Basic economic principles indicate that such hidden costs should be put out into the open so consumers are confronted with the costs in each transaction and can better adjust their purchasing behavior.

Additionally, basic economic principles indicate the price of a plastic bag should reflect any costs not covered in the purchase price of the bag -- such as the cost to remove plastic bags from city streets.

Whether called a fee or a tax, I support Referendum 1 because it incorporates these principles.

-- Mark Daniel, Seattle

Rove would be pleased at some liberals' opposition to bag tax

How I wish I could have a beer with Karl Rove and talk to him about the great Seattle bag-fee debate. He must be happier than he's been in nine months.

He has a whole new group of allies now -- Jan Drago, Danny Westneat, the people at Central Area Motivation Program and all the other mush-minded liberals who are lining up to support the plastics industry.

It's brilliant, really. Rove understands that, unlike the neocons, liberals have never been able to think beyond next week. You can pillage and poison the entire world as long as you don't cause any minor inconvenience to one of their pet constituencies, like the poor.
Combine this with a few dittohead talking points, and you have a bright future for the corporate rape of the world.

Rove must be kicking himself for not having thought of this strategy himself.

-- James Freudiger, Seattle

Ban telephone books, not grocery bags

Seattle should ban telephone books instead of grocery bags. When was the last time anyone used a phone book? And yet they pile up everywhere.

-- Kris Sundberg, Mercer Island

Nickels' tenure not all about mistakes

Editor, The Times:

Mayor Greg Nickels' challengers should be careful of exploiting his frank admissions ["Will vote signal a call for change?" page one, August 2] of having made "some mistakes" in his almost eight years in office, conveniently forgetting the many remarkable positive programs he spearheaded.

Community leaders must make a lot of tough decisions, often under great pressure. No matter how thoughtful and dedicated, even the best leaders are bound to make some mistakes. More important than making mistakes is whether we learned from them.

Nickels surely has done a lot of learning. Those aspiring to become our next mayor are well advised not to harp on the few mistakes made by him. It is easy for challengers to criticize the incumbent. Let them show us how they will do a better job.

-- Wolfgang Mack, Seattle

Nickels disregards safety, pushes personal initiatives

Is Seattle safer now than in 2002? Absolutely not. Since April, I am aware of at least eight break-ins in my Seward Park neighborhood -- two of them at my home and another at my son's home while my granddaughter occupied a bedroom.

Before 2002, I was not aware of any break-ins in Seward Park. The tragedy of the South Seattle woman killed by an intruder ["South Park anxious after fatal home break-in," NWThursday, July 23] underlines that Mayor Greg Nickels is not working to protect the citizens of Seattle.

I think the citizens of Seattle have had enough of Nickels' style of city management. Instead of supporting an adequate police force, he advocates projects to make Seattle green with more trees.

Instead of supporting increased police protection, he maintains an inept transportation manager on his staff. Instead of working for a safer Seattle, "his Honor" spends his time tying up traffic with his numerous bicycle trails for the use of bicyclists who disobey traffic laws and who gather illegally in mass to obstruct traffic with no legal consequences.

Nickels works only for his self-serving initiatives at the expense of initiatives to support the safety and well-being of Seattle citizens. Personally, I'm tired of paying millions for nickel management.

-- Ruben F. Owen, Seattle

McGinn's tunnel opposition is right on the money

Candidate Mike McGinn's opposition to the Seattle waterfront tunnel ["McGinn: 'He's the guy who's against the tunnel,'." page one, July 22] is right on the money and right on time. Let's not be taken in by another trendy marketing campaign.

We are all being railroaded into a plan that might well be the biggest marketing sham in recent Seattle history. First, the $4.2 billion price tag cannot be taken seriously; real costs will work out to be vastly greater, likely double or possibly even more.

Highly unstable subterranean soils are right in the tunnel's pathway, which is moreover immediately adjacent to tidal zones. Potential seismic activity like what damaged the existing viaduct -- raises risks even higher.

Second, that the tunnel idea is even on the table -- at the very time we are in unprecedented state budget and economic crisis -- speaks volumes about the utter indifference of 13 proponents to the real suffering many Seattle families are now enduring. And let's not forget the totality of state budgetary shortfall is not yet even known.

A vastly more sensible and less expensive approach is a replacement of the existing viaduct with a kinder, gentler greener design that nonetheless utilizes the existing footprint, as proposed by the Balanced Needs Concept.

McGinn is right as rain to put the Alaskan Way Viaduct issue as the central focus of his mayoral campaign.

-- Ross R. Atkinson, Mountlake Terrace

Carr has record of success, deserved endorsement

As a former Seattle police officer and detective, former chair of the city's Ethics and Elections Commission, current City Council member and chair of the Council's Public Safety Committee, I've had many firsthand experiences with Seattle city attorneys.

Tom Carr does an outstanding job as city attorney, ethically representing citizens and working diligently to protect taxpayers while finding humane and safe alternatives to incarceration. His innovative and highly effective approach to criminal justice slashed auto-theft rates by 60 percent, reduced jail bookings by 38 percent and made our neighborhoods safer.

Yet he knows we must do even more because he understands the critical importance of public safety. Carr's track record has earned him the highest rating from the Municipal League.

The Seattle Times overlooked Carr's overall job performance and experience in its endorsement of his opponent ["Pete Holmes for Seattle attorney," Opinion, editorial, August 3].

Regrettably, The Times allowed one issue to cloud its judgment, failing to recognize the complex and sophisticated nature of this critical position in city government. Tom Carr is the best candidate, and that's why the majority of my City Council colleagues have endorsed his re-election.

-- Tim Burgess, Seattle City Council member, Seattle

The Times endorses a candidate with no prosecuting experience

We at the Seattle Police Officer's Guild are concerned and disappointed to see The Times' endorsement of Pete Holmes for city attorney. Whether the Times editorial board likes it or not, experience as a prosecutor is critical, since about half of the position's activities have to do with criminal prosecution.

This sort of experience has a direct impact on public safety and our ability to protect the public from potentially dangerous members of society. Holmes has no experience as a prosecutor.

Only one of the candidates for city attorney has that experience, and that is who we endorse: The man who has been successfully filling this critical role in city government for the past eight years.

We endorse Tom Carr as city attorney.

-- Sgt. Rich O'Neill, Seattle Police Officer's Guild president, Seattle

Ellington's protection of children is not a first

Your endorsement of Judge Anne Ellington ["Re-elect Ellington to state appeals court," Opinion, editorial, August 3] praising her opinion that children in initial truancy proceedings are entitled to an attorney mistakenly said, "No other state offers such a right."

In fact, the right to counsel for children in truancy proceedings is not a novel or unique idea. For example, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Alabama and Nevada address truancy in Child in Need of Services, or CHINS, proceedings in which children are entitled to counsel.

Minnesota handles truancy as a CHINS matter, and the court must appoint a public defender before any out-of-home placement can be ordered. Wisconsin has a similar rule.

Arizona addresses truancy in its incorrigibility statute, and children have a right to counsel.

Oregon does not lock up children for truancy, although a parent may be cited if a child does not attend school.

Washington is in the unusual position of incarcerating children for not going to school, allowing prosecution of a child for truancy followed by a contempt proceeding. What the Court of Appeals did, with two other judges joining the unanimous opinion written by Ellington, was to recognize the due process right to a lawyer to protect children in hearings that affect their constitutional rights to liberty, privacy and education.

-- Robert C. Boruchowitz, Seattle

Common sense needed in school closures

I am the candidate not mentioned in the endorsement article ["For Seattle School Board," Opinion, editorial, August 3] regarding the School Board race in District 5, and it is time I speak for myself.

Some dismiss me as just being against school closures, but the work of the group for reopening TT Minor Elementary School includes a vision for an International School Program supported by many in the area. The TT Minor reference area -- not large or gerrymandered -- has the highest birth rate of any reference area in the Central Area cluster, and the fastest-growing number of children under the age of 5 of any reference area in the entire Seattle School District.

Therefore, if we really want neighborhood schools that are embraced by parents, the community must be included in deciding what type of program in places like TT Minor would make sense.

Unless all communities are empowered to advocate for their schools and programs, wonderful neighborhood school choices will be realized for some neighborhoods and not for others. I believe all the candidates, especially the challengers, have ambitious ideas for our schools.

The difference is that I will insist on your help to hold all the elected officials responsible for ensuring the Central District and all neighborhoods are proud of their schools and programs.

I will insist that parents and communities are included in the process of designing the programs and schools that all neighborhoods deserve. School assignments must make sense. We have to come together for the sake of our children, our families and our communities.

My candidacy is about all communities being treated fairly and equitably. Common sense can be applied to data.

-- Joanna Cullen, Seattle

Green candidates sure send lots of campaign mail

With the primary election in full swing, we in Seattle once more are getting bombarded with candidates' green credentials -- written on mounds of literature mailed to us and placed on our doorsteps. See any contradiction?

Yes, campaign literature is integral to our electoral process, but can't we get a little smarter about it? Making the literature smaller -- I like postcard size -- and more recyclable come to mind as a start.

Or perhaps just put it all on a Kindle?

-- Beverly Marcus, Seattle

Hutchison slammed by biased Times

In the finest tradition of The National Enquirer, The Seattle Times has taken the muckraking hatchet to Susan Hutchison ["Hutchison to fight unsealing records," NWThursday, July 16]. Not content with merely making inquires, The Times has used its Opinion page to slam her ["Open up, Hutchison," Opinion, editorial, July 17]. The contents of her successful lawsuit against KIRO-TV were sealed by a judge. How dare he?

Hutchison has headed a $100 million foundation for the past six years yet is still referred to by The Times as a "former news anchor." KIRO-TV, still smarting from their loss, says they have no problem unsealing the record. How kind of them. Anything that would help, right?

The Times might be better served to investigate the stalking tactics of Dow Constantine showing up at Hutchison rallies ["Rivals show up at Hutchison news conference," NWThursday, July 2].

But then, that's what I love about the media --they are so objective.

-- Denny Andrews, Bellevue

The Times practicing yellow journalism against Hutchison

This is yellow journalism at its best! Expect nothing more and certainly nothing less from The Times. I believe you have hit a new low regarding the candidacy of Hutchison, with your attempts to find out the details of a sealed, settled private lawsuit between her and her former employer. If ever there was a more blatant attempt to discredit a candidate, I'd like to hear about it.

Shame on you, The Seattle Times, for seeking out what you know to be unproven allegations about a candidate on the eve of an election and then inevitably printing them as fact. Is it your job to create news or to report news? Have you delved into the backgrounds of all the other candidates to such detail, or is it just because this is a conservative?

Your lack of integrity is astounding, but then when you are the only daily newspaper in town, you must believe you can do and say anything. What type of journalistic standard do you hold yourself to?

-- Dave Herrington, Edmonds

Constantine is a green leader

Let's face it: On the issues, the Democratic candidates for King County executive are very similar. However, even though I can't yet vote, I can tell that Dow Constantine is the best candidate because of his experience and passion.

As a member of the state Legislature and the County Council, Dow Constantine has been a leader on environmental and mass transit policies, introducing the first climate-change legislation in the state and championing light-rail expansion. He was a primary supporter of last year's Sound Transit 2 expansion package.

To me, the most important thing about Constantine is that he sincerely cares about these issues. I have gotten a chance to meet some of the other candidates for county executive, but while they seemed to be in the race for political gain, it has always been clear to me that Constantine is in it for the people of King County.

As a high-school student, the decisions being made right now will affect my life far into the future, and I know he will make the right ones. I hope you join me in supporting Constantine for King County executive in the primary election Aug. 18.

-- Alex Jonlin, Seattle

Phillips' greenprint will create jobs

Hearing candidates running for King County executive say that cutting program X will solve all our problems is insulting to voters' intelligence.

Everyone must not forget that the county's unemployment rate has more than doubled since last year and people are hurting. As a local undergraduate facing the reality of a tough job market, it is refreshing to hear about King County Councilman Larry Phillips' greenprint plan ["Larry Phillips, Dow Constantine woo enviro vote," seattletimes.com, Politics Northwest, June 25], which would create good-paying green jobs that cannot be outsourced.

Phillips is talking about hiring thousands of our region's talented architects, engineers and other professionals to build on the foundation that Link Light Rail is starting and make the place we all call home a greener but still thriving county.

I am appalled at the path the debate is going and hope that those who wish to lead this county out of the mess it's in to follow Phillips' lead and start developing creative and substantive proposals instead of simple sound bites and partisan politics. Voters frankly deserve better in an election that most chose to be nonpartisan.

-- Adam Tanga, Kent

Hoffman is a welcome new face

In response to Danny Westneat's column ["Taking on McDermott: crazy, right?" NWSunday, June 28] about U.S. House candidate Bill Hoffman -- yahoo!

At last, a Democratic opponent to Rep. Jim McDermott. Hoffman is correct that McDermott only appears unbeatable because no one has run against him. Hoffman is also correct that McDermott has gotten stale and aloof from his district. In the more than 20 years McDermott has "represented" me, he has never even bothered to send a congressional newsletter -- the only communication I ever got from McDermott was a fund plea for his crazy lawsuit.

His latest clueless move to fund the Rainier Club ["Seattle elite private club in line for $250,000 federal earmark," page one, June 22] is the last straw. McDermott is the Democrat's biggest advertisement for why term limits would be a good idea.

-- Laura Kennedy Gould, Seattle

Convicted assessor's backing only throws candidate in doubt

Former King County Assessor Scott Noble has endorsed his chief deputy, Rich Medved, to become his successor ["Scott Noble's parting endorsement," seattletimes.com, Politics Northwest, June 26].

What is the value of an endorsement from a man whose judgment is so impaired he not only drives drunk the wrong way on the freeway, but he fails to resign from a position of public trust for six months after he is caught driving drunk -- and only resigns because he is forced to by law?

This causes me to question my original inclination to vote for Noble's deputy.

-- Greg Bartholomew, Seattle

Software is not infallible; Janet Way deserves to refile for election

King County Elections should put Janet Way on the ballot ["Candidate deadline missed; glitch cited," NWTuesday, June 9]. She attempted to file over the Web, but King County software refused to permit payment. Others familiar with the procedure tried unsuccessfully to help.

Way intended to file. She had a good credit card. However, the software did not work. She should be allowed to file now.

Elections officials said they couldn't find a problem and that the filing process worked for more than 400 candidates.

First, this position is naive. Having used and written software in my job for 30 years, I can point to several instances where good, well-tested software that had run for hundreds, even thousands, of cases failed when it should have run.

The filing software takes the inputs from the calling computer, puts it in a database, matches against other databases and then writes a final report. An error in any step in this complex process would cause rejection.

Honest software developers will admit there is no such thing as demonstrably bug-free software. Successful use of the filing software on 400 cases doesn't show there are no bugs but that there are no frequently occurring bugs.

Second, any failure should be investigated -- not merely dismissed -- in order to identify the cause and fix it. Failure to investigate this software problem is irresponsible.

-- Chris Eggen, Shoreline

Skeptical of a miracle

Being an election worker, I can attest that Sam Reed's proposal to start counting ballots the day before and change the drop-dead date to election simply will not work ["Make ballots due by Election Day," Editorial, Feb. 17].

When I was working for the election department, I noted we were caught up with our work the day before the election. Most people, for reasons I do not know, vote on Election Day. Counting ballots earlier simply will not help. I repeat, it will not work.

Second, the post office is swamped on Election Day with absentee ballots. The rule requiring the post office to do a miracle on Election Day simply will not work. Sure, maybe in Oregon 132 ballots arrived late, but this number was the difference in a certain governor's election.

Simply put, keep it the way it is. It works.

-- Martin Nix, Seattle

Ranked choice rakes in confusion and costs

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) creates confusion, misinformation and disenfranchisement ["Save ranked-choice vote," Editorial, Feb. 16]. And, it saves neither money nor time.

Having many candidates for each office creates confusion. Most voters don't have time to research multiple candidates or become properly informed of the experience and plans of so many candidates.

Misinformation, or lack of information, from the media makes the job of voters more difficult. The lack of substantive reporting by any media outlet during elections is appalling. Often, newspapers report, if anything, insignificant details about candidates' positions or comments. TV and radio stations didn't even cover Pierce County.

Many voters were disenfranchised by the fact that they didn't know enough about all the candidates. For example, more than 30,000 voters didn't mark a second or third choice for the county executive race. In other words, voters who marked a second and third choice decided the election over those who didn't know enough to make an informed choice. The executive race was decided by just over 4,000 votes.

Finally, RCV doesn't save anything. Pierce County had a primary without county offices. Also, Pierce County's ballot was separate, doubling everything, including printing, counting and labor costs. Huge software costs to calculate RCV were incurred too.
Ranked Choice Voting doesn't work!

-- Stephen Neufeld, Steilacoom

Security and reliability at stake

The Legislature is considering a bill to authorize the secretary of state to implement Internet voting for military and overseas voters. The bill provides no effective oversight over the Secretary of State's Office, nor does it require input from technical experts.

Implementing Internet voting is not just a policy issue, it is also a very complex, technical issue.

Numerous studies by leading computer scientists have warned of the difficulties of creating a secure Internet-voting system. Evaluating the security, privacy, accuracy and reliability of a voting system as potentially dangerous as Internet voting should not be left to the discretion of one person, particularly a nontechnical person.

Before the bill goes to the floor of either chamber, it should be amended to require a panel of computer-security experts from Washington universities, appointed by the Legislature (not the secretary of state), to evaluate and approve any Internet-voting system before it may be implemented.

We owe it to our military and overseas voters to protect the integrity and privacy of their votes.

-- Ellen Theisen, Port Ludlow

Opening the door to partisan leverage

The contest for King County elections director is not actually nonpartisan at all. Though four of the candidates have never run for any public office as partisan candidates, two have run for public office as Republicans.

You might recall the Lori Sotelo attempt at voter disenfranchisement in 2005, featuring perjury and illegal modification of voter registration challenge forms. King County Councilmember David Irons and state Sen. Pam Roach are running to make this the official policy of the King County Elections Department.

If either are to win, we can look forward to officially recognized attempts to make low-wage voters give up a day's pay to defend their franchise. Signature-matching programs will be modified to throw out as many ballots as possible, and it is likely that the policy of three attempts at voter contact in the event of mismatches will be eliminated on the grounds of expense. There is ample precedent for this: Florida Republicans threw voters off the rolls if there was an 80 percent match between their names and a list of felons. Not good news at all for people named Jones or Smith in non-affluent Zip codes.

The current Republican leadership is committed to the notion that voting is not actually a citizenship right and duty, but a carnival kewpie-doll prize you can only win by getting past all the barriers they put in your way. Honest Republicans who disagree, such as our own John McKay, who refused to pursue bogus cases of "voter fraud," were summarily fired as U.S. attorneys.

As Paul Weyrich famously said, "Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome -- good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

-- Martha Koester, Seattle

They're not over, yet

What wasn't mentioned in the story about the impending King County election manager's race is that state legislators' fundraising will be hamstrung ["King County elections-chief job may see lots of candidates," Politics, Nov. 20].

Sen. Pam Roach has until mid-December to solicit campaign contributions, then state law will prohibit her and any other legislator from soliciting contributions until the 2009 Legislature adjourns, which is long after the Feb. 3 special election.

Times reporter Kevin Ervin is right about the peculiarity of the timing of the February special election. Common sense and common courtesy would have been to hold a primary in August and the top two vote getters are placed on the November ballot.

But, that's not what Toby Nixon, the architect of the charter amendment, wanted. Nixon wants to make it as difficult as possible for incumbent legislators to run, so that he and other right-wingers can have a better shot at winning.

When all is said and done, there will be at least a dozen candidates filing, because they realize the winner may need to get only 25 to 30 percent of the total votes cast in order to win. The winner will serve until Dec. 31, 2011.

You can remove the political labels from the ballot, but you can't remove the political motives of the candidates.

-- Steven Kendall, Seattle

A wonderful day

As I worked the polls on Nov. 4, a lot of the voters talked about how sad it was that this connection to the community would no longer be. Absentee voters still like to deposit their ballots at the polling place.

Teachers brought students thru the polling place to observe the vote and cast their absentees in front of their students. Mothers and fathers came with their first-time-voter teenagers. Families let their younger children place their ballot in the scanner. A couple of men said this would be their last time to cast a ballot as they only had six months to live.

A 91-year-old woman walking with a cane, a blind man using the audio to vote, toddlers playing on the gym floor as their mom or dad voted, keys were lost and found and poll workers shared their food as the day grew long.

There were those with tattoos, piercings, bright-colored hair and dogs.

It was a wonderful day in this wonderful country we call America.

-- Bev Read, Lake Forest Park

Proposition 8: not an act of fear

Gregory Turner's claim in Sunday's Seattle Times that gay couples consistently exhibit a higher level of fidelity and responsibility in marriage than their heterosexual fellow citizens has absolutely no factual basis ["Fear and oppression also won on Election Night," guest columnist, Nov. 9].

Marriage has always been a religious union between a man and a woman and voting to keep it that way is not a political act of fear. It is not the responsibility of state or federal agencies to legally recognize marriages of same-sex couples, nor should it be.

-- Gene Davis, Lake Forest Park

Not a civil-rights issue

I am pleasantly surprised of the recent passing of Proposition 8, not because I want gay marriage banned, but rather, it defies the liberal claim that the country wants to move left of center.

The fact is a liberal state like California passed a proposition that would ban gay marriage -- a measure that was ultimately decided by minorities who voted for Sen. Barack Obama. It is good to know that minorities who voted yes on Proposition 8 didn't see gay marriage as a civil-rights issue, because it isn't. Liberals claim that civil rights for gays is the same struggle as civil rights for all minorities.

Wrong.

It's not the same struggle. Gays were never enslaved in this country. Gays always had the right to vote and assemble. Gays have always had opportunities to meet up with each other and form marital-like unions. Seeking the privilege to marry -- something which they already have, provided that it's to someone of the opposite sex -- is not the same as being completely blocked from marrying, or from marital rights.

Gay marriage is a narrowly privatized solution for basic supports such as medical insurance and pension plans. Surprisingly, a majority of liberal Democrats oppose gay marriage. Part of the radical homosexual agenda is to silence its critics. As a strong proponent of free speech, I'm not going to restrain myself from commenting on legitimate issues facing our nation.

-- James Lee, Lake Forest Park

Change hasn't come for everyone

Fifty years ago, racial discrimination was still legal in many states. Some states, like Washington, had civil-rights laws. Many others did not. Civil-rights legislation was going nowhere in Congress. A black person was a second-class citizen back then. Racial prejudice was still quite acceptable and even fashionable. Around that time a young senator from Massachusetts [Former President John F. Kennedy Jr.] was promising a more-just society.

The scourge of bigotry has not gone away. It has only moved elsewhere within our society. Gay, lesbian and transgender persons are the current fashionable targets. Some states have civil-rights laws that cover us. Most do not. Congress is unable to do anything. Prejudice against people like us is still accepted as the results of anti-gay ballot measures from California, Arizona and Florida have shown. Now a young senator from Illinois promises a more-just society. We'll see.

Forgive me for my restrained joy over the election results. It still feels like the bad old days to me.

-- Erick Spencer, Seattle

There is hope

Wednesday morning, The Seattle Times mentioned Barack's Obama's appeal to African Americans and a coalition of younger and disaffected voters, as well as the economy and the Iraq war.

Although I fully support Obama for all of those reasons, that is not why I voted for him. I voted for Obama because he gives hope to equality for gay and lesbian Americans as well as everyone else. And what I heard in his acceptance speech was that he proclaimed victory not only for African Americans, Latinos and whites, but equality for Native Americans and Asians, gays and lesbians and disabled and non-disabled. He
truly stood up to his promise for a better, more-equal America.

Though discrimination reared its ugly head in initiatives passed in Arizona, California and Florida, we defeated the homophobia of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's and Sen. John McCain's campaigns.

What Obama's win meant to me was hope for a better tomorrow when I will gain the same rights and liberties as my heterosexual neighbors.

-- Benjamin Barrett, Seattle

A civil-rights setback

As a lesbian, watching the 2008 elections, I felt sad to see Proposition 8 [gay-marriage ban] pass with the California voters. This is a setback in civil rights, maintaining inequality, as heterosexuals are preserved with privilege and power and the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] community continues to be marginalized.

The campaign for Proposition 8 was based on fear and intolerance. The arguments we heard from Proposition 8 proponents were basically the same arguments we heard from people opposing interracial marriage.

It is ironic that these pious, religious conservatives want to "protect" their children, yet are the first to bring up sexuality.

For me, as I would guess many heterosexuals would agree, marriage is so much more than sexuality.

Marriage is a lifetime commitment to love, honor and be faithful to one's partner. The formal ceremony is a time of celebration and declaration of love in the presence of friends, family and community.

Just like heterosexuals, I am a mother, have an extended family and am an active member in my community and church. My stand to legalize gay marriage is asking for my community to recognize my partner as my spouse. This includes my partner being included in family functions, social functions at work and inclusion in the community as a couple. We are asking to have the same rights heterosexual couples have.

-- Coral Blankinship, Mountlake Terrace

Whatever happened to separation of church and state?

Today, while so proud that we have put President-elect Barack Obama into the highest office, I am also incredibly disappointed at how evident it is that we still have so far to go.

It is true that this is a historic election. We overwhelmingly voted in our first black President, but we also voted a felon into Senate. We've prevented the possible right to refuse distribution of birth control by not defining a "person" at fertilization, but denied thousands of "unwanted" children placements in loving homes (straight unmarried couples and sufficient singles also adopt and foster kids, Arkansas.)

We told 18,000 couples, who just celebrated the happiest day of their lives that they don't count and their love and happiness is not constitutional.

How do we, in this great nation, fight to keep guns in the homes of complete strangers and then allow someone to tell us who is worthy enough to be legally recognized as a married couple?

How can we elect to the presidency a man whose parents would've been committing a crime just 50 years ago by merely drinking out of the same water fountain and then tell Ellen DeGeneres and Portia di Rossi, "Sorry, that marriage certificate that you happily and tearfully signed, isn't worth Lehman Brothers stock"?

How can people be that threatened by same-sex marriages? How can the marriage of two people you don't even know lesson the value that you give your own? And is one man-one woman really the end all and be all when divorce rates are at 50 percent?

If you can answer any of my questions without mentioning God or religion, I would like to hear you out; if not, you're violating the separation of church and state. I would further argue that, especially in the case of the recent legislation passed in California and Arkansas, we are not a nation abiding by the spirit that we have "unalienable rights" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

I just hope that it does not take this country another 50 years to recognize all people as equal in the eyes of our state and national governments.

Don't get me wrong, I cried and am still crying buckets of joyful tears for our president-elect. I just wish things had gone differently elsewhere.

-- Amy H, Seattle

Don't forget where we came from

I dropped off my absentee ballot at my polling station. I love taking it straight to the kind people who dedicate their day to ensure that ethical voting practices are enforced and to ensure there's a smiling individual -- from the neighborhood present to answer questions.

This is the last year of poll booths in Washington state. I had no idea until today that this community gathering of passionate, caring individuals will soon be a thing of the past.

Even though I spend as little as three minutes to ensure my ballot ends up in the proper location, I thrive on that little bit of neighborly spirit, the familiar smell of elementary schools or the buzz of certain congregational meeting centers.

Walking out of the Phinney Ridge Lutheran Church [on Election Day] made me sad. What this departing trend represents in a society driven more by text-message communication than handwritten sentiments gives me pause about the direction and future of community.

I am going to miss the kind, elderly generation who show up to work with fresh baked goods and a sense of purpose of their civic duty. How often do we take the opportunity to talk with and learn from our wisest and eldest generation? The disconnect from them is growing even more extreme.

I started out the day canvassing in Wallingford for the Democratic Headquarters. Along one of the streets of our targeted area, a women in her 60s began attacking one of the volunteers. She raised her voice, pointed at each one of us and said, "I hate your generation and what you represent." She claimed that in her attempts to take her little dog into grocery stores and coffee shops that she has been discriminated against and has become a victim of our rigidity and obsessive need to follow rules.

Although her claims were obtuse and her attacks generalized, I couldn't help but try to understand her from her perspective. I felt bad that she'd experienced something so discriminating that she felt the need to attack us and carry such hatred in her heart. All I could tell her was, "I love your passion, but not your hatred." This woman's feelings were legitimately hurt.

I wondered how many other elderly folks had been driven to feel this way by any sort of disconnect inspired by "my generation." How do they feel about us now that the rich tradition of voting with community has faded into the private spaces of our individual homes? I just hope, in the future, after the loss of our public-voting tradition has dampened, we remember the wonderful people who delightfully welcomed us into their voting domain and find a way to include them in our daily version -- whatever that may be.

-- Erinn Hale, Seattle

Obama's redistribution plan:
Don't kill the pig

Redistribution of wealth is a key element in Sen. Barack Obama's vision of change. It has been met with enthusiastic support by many Americans. Unfortunately, the redistribution concept is based more on an irrational hatred of those who have "too much" than on any likelihood that the lives of the recipients will be improved.

Russians tell the following story which bears an uncanny relevance to Obama's program.

Ivan, a poor Russian peasant, was working in his plot of land when he came across a vodka bottle. He picked it up and out jumped a genie.

"Ivan," said the genie, "you have found the magic vodka bottle so you are entitled to one wish. Tell me your wish and I will make it come true."

Ivan thought a while and said, "My neighbor Pavel has a pig but I don't have any pigs."

"So you want me to give you a pig?" asked the genie.

"No," said Ivan. "I want you to kill Pavel's pig."

-- Arlene Heath, Seattle

Don't let America be McCain's sixth loss

So Charles Krauthammer is supporting Sen. John McCain over Sen. Barack Obama ["Obama's associations are indeed relevant," syndicated column, Oct. 12].

Well, borrowing from the immortal Gomer Pyle, "sur-prise, sur-prise." Krauthammer would support a block of wood over Obama and he would concoct a quasi-plausible rationale listing the wonderfulness of wood: A nice-sized chunk of wood would be better than Obama in a fight and the chunk wouldn't say anything to upset the stock market in these trying times.

A couple of factors easily cancel Krauthammer's endorsement. For one thing, the intelligence gap: Obama graduated Magna cum Laude from the Harvard Law School whereas McCain was ranked 894th out of a graduating class of 899 at the U.S. Naval Academy. If McCain hadn't been blessed with a father and grandfather who were both four-star admirals he wouldn't have graduated at all.

Then there's the fact that as a pilot he lost five aircrafts. I don't think it would be easy to find any other pilot with that kind of record. Methinks pappy and grandpappy's statuses helped keep McCain flying. Not all those losses were held to be McCain's fault but the pattern is pretty obvious.

It doesn't seem wise to turn over the helm of our ship of state to such a risky driver.

America shouldn't be McCain's sixth loss.

-- Bob Wojtyna, Woodinville

Reichert or Burner:
one in a million

I agree with Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner on most issues more than I do with Rep. Dave Reichert, but I'm voting for Reichert.

Back when President George W. Bush had high ratings, Reichert stood up to him on the [Terri] Schiavo [case], stem-cell research and other high-profile issues. That shows integrity and courage that matters more than whether he has a D or an R next to his name.

But the main reason I'm voting for Reichert is because he brings unique and valuable experience to Congress. Most of the members of Congress are lawyers or career politicians, along with a few business people and veterans.

Reichert's decades as sheriff brings wisdom (and adult supervision) to the hysteria regarding how to handle terrorism.

Burner would be just another freshman.

Burner is obviously very smart and hardworking and I'd be glad to vote for her under other circumstances.

We are fortunate to have two good choices in Reichert and Burner. But where Burner would be a very good choice, Reichert is one in a million.

-- Greg Lovern, Bellevue

I don't like any of you

Dear 2008 election candidates:

Some citizens are thankful that the election is almost here and the campaigning can stop.

I have a different view; I am very worried about what you will do after the election.

Over the past 22 months I have watched, listened to and read countless political ads that look like they were created by the same PR company. Uniformly, these ads have taken quotes of the opponent out of context, distorted the truth, told partial truths and made or implied promises that are impossible to keep.

You all said, "I approved this message." It is sad that our elected leaders have subordinated their personal integrity and honesty in order to win an election, and the so-called agents of change who are challenging are behaving the same way.

While I am tempted to point out the most egregious of your lies and distortions, I won't because there isn't enough space in the whole of The Times to contain them.

There was a time I admired and respected elected leaders as accomplished people of the highest integrity. This was somewhat naive on my part, but I had confidence and respect for those leaders.

Now I see trainees with manufactured resumes, imaginary accomplishments and, worst of all, no real integrity that can be seen. I voted for some of you but I am not happy about it.

-- Ted Leech, Woodinville

JFK and the Catholic Vote

In September, 1960, in his famous address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, John F. Kennedy said, "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the president -- should he be Catholic -- how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote." It has been generally agreed that that speech was the key that unlocked the door to the presidency for Catholics (at least for one of them).

Forty-seven years later, the Catholic Church is indeed telling Catholics how to vote. Was JFK lying? Or is the Church telling us that he was wrong?

I write as a former Catholic. I left the Church for good after the pedophile scandal. Even the scandal itself didn't drive me out, because one of the greatest strengths of the Catholic Church is forgiveness, and I saw the pedophile scandal as an opportunity for me to give back to the Church a little of the forgiveness it had always held out to me.

Wrong in one thing does not mean wrong in all, but by the Church's own rules, forgiveness requires contrition and penance, "a firm purpose of amendment." Instead of that, I saw the Church digging in, getting leaner and meaner, writing off American and European liberals; telling people how to vote. I hold the Catholic Church partially responsible for all of the disasters of George Bush's second term, for four years of casualties in Iraq, American and Iraqi.

Abortion has been a hot-button political issue for a long time, but from the 1970s through the 1990s, whenever the American Catholic Church gave us direction on voting, it acknowledged that other issues were important too, issues of war and peace, social and economic justice. In every election cycle, it seemed that one party was consistently right on economic and social justice, the other on abortion, a split that left the ultimate choice up to the individual conscience. The Church claims to base its decisions on eternal verities; what among the eternal verities has altered since the 1970s? At what point did God change His mind?

This is my plea to my former fellows: Don't let the Church tell you how to vote. Ask yourself a couple of questions: Has the Catholic Church demonstrated a fundamental understanding on issues of human sexuality and reproduction? Or, alternatively, has it occurred to you that if the bishops had had children of their own, they would have handled the pedophiles very, very differently? Is the Church's position on abortion exactly what you would expect as the product of some 60 generations of (arguably) celibate men with a deep mistrust of women's decision-making ability?

The Church has every right to support anti-abortion activists in appropriate ways. Everyone with a strong position on this issue has a right, maybe a duty, to advocate their position -- civilly. But when it publicly denies sacraments to politicians, when it casts the shadow of grave sin over its parishioners for the way they cast their secret ballot, the Catholic Church crosses a very important line, the line that has always separated church and state in this country.

That's when his Church makes a liar of JFK.

-- Jack McCarthy, Everett

Remove your fist

Bellevue government has been raking in millions of dollars from the development of downtown through enhanced property taxes and other income from utilities and money spent by the thousands of employees working in the new buildings. Bellevue should have ample income in the general fund to pay for the parks with no trouble at all ["Bellevue Parks, Yes!," editorial, Oct. 10].

Bellevue has become like Seattle, King County and the state of Washington; it just never seems to get enough money from the taxpayers.

It wants to stick its fist deeper into our pockets. I urge a NO vote on the Bellevue parks levy.

Let the city learn to manage with a limited budget just as we taxpayers have to.

-- Karl Wahl, Bellevue

AP Photo / Amy Sancetta

Charod Barton, 12, of Akron, Ohio, cheers on Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., at a rally in the Canton Memorial Civic Center in Canton, Ohio on Monday.

It's happening

Editor, The Times:

What will a Sen. Barack Obama victory mean?

To me, a 66-year-old black man, it will be a testament that things are changing for the better in this country. It will give meaning to the American dream and proclamations of a free and equal society. That all men and women can truly be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. It will mean a new deck that contains fewer race cards is placed on the table.

African Americans will simply be Americans. Most will feel a new sense of pride in who they are and how, as a people, they have overcome and risen to equal status with all other Americans. They will feel they actually have a stake in the success and future of this country and will want to have a greater role.

Eventually, they will see the erosion of feeling victimized by the white power structure and society, replaced by the attitude that the future is in their hands and that they can create and dictate their own destiny.

It won't happen for everyone, nor will it be overnight, but for a significant segment of the population it will happen.

I feel fortunate to have witnessed this evolution, which I always wished for but thought would never happen in my lifetime.

The next generation's lives will be filled with much more positives than mine. Hopefully, they will take advantage of what has been presented to them.

-- James Watkins, Redmond

We need an upgrade

As Nov. 4 quickly approaches, I grow increasingly uncertain of the final presidential verdict, despite the polls.
Why? Because my Word document still insists on underlining Sen. Barack Obama's name as incorrect.

Perhaps that little red, squiggly line speaks volumes about a reluctance to accept change, no matter how universally beneficial.

I am voting for Obama not to fight a centuries-old injustice or to be on the right side of history. No, my vote is much more selfish: I am voting for the Illinois senator to fight an eight-year injustice and make sure we are on the right side of our future.

Our country deserves the change only Obama can deliver. He is the personification of the American dream, and I believe his election will ensure that this precious dream will be preserved for us all.

After our new president addresses our dire economic needs, I also look forward to a new lexicon for my Word program.

-- Richard O'Brien, Washougal

Two important points
ignored in story

Your critique of Sen. John McCain's health-care plan neglected to mention two salient facts for the case where the employer discontinues paying health-insurance premiums for their employees ["Calculating what McCain's health plan would do," Nation and World, Oct. 24].

First, employees can decide to opt for less-expensive coverage, particularly if they are given the opportunity to choose from the much larger pool of insurance providers McCain is calling for.

The employer would also be able to give each worker most, if not all, of the $12,000 saved by eliminating their insurance premiums.

-- Bill Hirt, Bellevue

Liberty and chaos

Some see America as a temple to enlighten the world: "The brightest light in the sky."

Others see it as a tool to dominate the less-well-armed: "The biggest dog in the yard."

Some see America as a place where the government guarantees freedom and opportunity to all.

Others see it as a steppingstone to self-enrichment and personal wealth.

Some believe the Constitution, and the courage defend it, are all the "Homeland Security" we need.

Others believe "Homeland Security" means unlimited surveillance: "A camera at every crossroad." "Let no wire go untapped." "Create a national ID card." "Build a fence."

The last three decades have seen some huge changes in the heart and soul of this nation.

Some cheer. Others weep.

Some believe dissent is liberty. Others see it as rebellion.

Some believe both: "Liberty" is borne on the battle between "chaos" and "doctrine."

The victory of either will be Liberty's demise.

The question in this election is not: "What kind of America do we want?"

The question is: "What kind of Americans will we be when we get it?"

Define "Liberty" and you define "America."

-- James Moffat, Lynnwood

Eyman's initiative
is worth a shot

The state and federal government had 50 years to solve the Puget Sound area's serious traffic problems ["Federal transportation officials say Eyman's initiative could be costly to state," News, Oct. 25]. They saw the congestion, lost work hours, frustration and host of other problems coming and to this day still struggle for workable solutions.

What makes them think we should even listen to the same government that allowed the current financial meltdown and economic calamity?

The government lacks the leadership and vision to solve the traffic crisis.

I say we take matters in our owns hands and pass Initiative 985. We have to try something.

-- Bob Hoyden, Renton

You're not the boss of me

The idea of two federal officials (Daniel Mathis and Richard Krochalis) threatening to withhold moneys for opening up the HOV [High Occupancy Vehicle] lanes during nonpeak hours should irritate enough people to gain passage of Initiative 985.

Mind you, I don't think it should pass.

I certainly won't vote for it. It creates more danger for our drivers. Go to California, and drive the HOV lanes during nonpeak hours. Then tell me that California's elected officials allowed that threat to work.

There are other states that have done the same thing. We paid for the lanes, and the federal government has no business trying to tell us how to run them. Tell Paula Hammond to research things like this with other entities that have them. Do not go to the federal government and ask if it's OK for us to govern ourselves.

-- Ron Highfill, Lacey

Opening up carpool lanes
is a bad idea

The $224 million that I-985 would spend is to open up existing carpool lanes to single drivers during "nonpeak" hours. The initiative defines nonpeak hours as all times except for the fixed hours of 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays only.

Opening up these lanes to single drivers is a bad idea at any time. During congested hours, carpool lanes reduce traveler delay by allowing vehicles with more people in them to move faster. During noncongested hours, traffic is moving freely in all lanes and there is no impact on congestion because there is no congestion.

Congested hours are different from route to route, vary from week to week, and occur outside the fixed hours in the initiative. Opening up these lanes would result in losing carpool lanes on some routes during congested hours, increasing total traveler delay.

I-985 allocates $224 million to implement the change, which would not only be wasted, but would in fact increase traveler delay. Washington voters should reject this bad idea.

-- Peter Smith, Normandy Park

Saudi Arabia
is rich enough

Tim Eyman's citizen petition to open HOV lanes to single-occupancy vehicles will be struck down by the federal government.

These are high-occupancy-vehicle lanes for buses, carpools and van pools. These were built to increase the capacity of freeways and to haul more people per hour.

Opening the lanes to SOVs [Single Occupancy Vehicles] would defeat these purposes, and only create more traffic accidents, air pollution and waste fuel.

The initiative also bundles traffic-light timing and roadside assistance, which is already being done.

Tim Eyman doesn't want to understand, there is a war over oil in the Middle East, and his persistent attempts to sabotage transit is only keeping the U.S. and Puget Sound more dependent on foreign oil.

Energy conservation and development of alternative-fuel buses is one of the major reasons for
development of a bus-express system. Like it or not, bus riders pay taxes also. His initiative will get the buses off schedule.

Gasoline cars are more expensive to drive and own than riding the bus. Eyman is doing a lot of damage to the local economy, and this will only help make the King of Saudia Arabia richer and us poorer.

-- Martin Nix, Seattle

Proposition 1 / light-rail expansion: Just do it

I am rather disappointed The Seattle Times does not have enough wisdom to see the need for expanding the Sound Transit light-rail system ["Reject Proposition 1's tax for light-rail expansion," editorial, Sept. 28].
We desperately need it and the arguments against it are weak:

"It won't relieve congestion." That is true, but Los Angeles built highways all over the place and they have some of the worst congestion in the country. Building more highways just makes more traffic. Nothing is going to make the congestion go away.

"It costs too much." Compared to what? What is the cost of building several more traffic lanes through Seattle? All of the options are going to be very, very expensive.

"It will take too long to build the new system." Again, does anyone really think that we could build more highways any faster?

So let's get realistic about rail transit. It is one component in a transportation system that we need. Rail is immune to traffic jams and will function even when the buses are stuck in the snow. Nearly every major city in the world relies on rail to provide the basis for their transportation system. So let's stop debating the need for rail and get serious about building it.

Once we get the system up and running we will wonder how we managed to get along for so long without it.

--Gary Maxwell, Lynnwood

So right, yet so wrong

Kudos to you on your recent endorsements. I totally agree with the endorsements of Sam Reed and Rob McKenna as they have a track of proven records year after year ["Rob McKenna for attorney general," editorial, Oct. 21; "Sam Reed should be re-elected," editorial, Oct. 20]. They have been very effective in their respective positions through their high level of integrity and community relations.

In terms of The Times' endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, it seems to be too biased and far-fetched to digest ["Rossi for governor," editorial, Oct. 19].

Rossi has been in oblivion since 2004 election and resurfaced very recently by his BIAW [Business Industry Association of Washington] allies and the leaderless state Republican Party touting his past glory as the state senator.

It is surprising that a premium newspaper like The Seattle Times overlooked his inexperience, ignorance and insincerity, which have been very clearly reflected in all his recent debates with Gov. Christine Gregoire.

His views on global warming are the latest example of his lack of knowledge and adaptability to changes and modern-day living for a greener world.

Just two days after being endorsed by your paper, he realized the severity of economic crisis on a national level and suggested that if elected he would have to postpone many of his key programs. This reflects his lack of self confidence.

-- Debu Dash, Seattle

Family planning depends on
choosing the right governor

Those who support gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor identify his fiscal conservatism as a key asset. Yet, Rossi's proposed tax cuts and road-building plan would more than double the projected $3.2 billion state-budget deficit. Only this week did he finally acknowledge such promises were untenable.

Meanwhile, in focusing so narrowly on Rossi's fiscal policies, voters are overlooking his extreme views on social issues. As a state senator, he voted against requiring drug-insurance plans to cover contraceptives.

He pushed to fund an abstinence-only sex-education program while voting against funding for low-income family-planning services. And he favors allowing pharmacists to refuse to sell FDA [Federal Drug Administration]-approved emergency contraception.

Unlike Rossi, Gov. Christine Gregoire recognizes the importance of a good family-planning policy.

Family planning reduces teen pregnancy, prevents abortions and lets people decide when and whether to have children. Gregoire has worked to provide age-appropriate, medically accurate information to students and funding for family-planning services to low-income families, services like those offered by Planned Parenthood.

Gregoire supports rules that require pharmacies to dispense emergency contraception. We need a forward-thinking governor, not one like Rossi with his regressive health-care policies.

-- Rejean Idzerda, Lake Forest Park

Correct your bias
in lieutenant governor's race

I was appalled by the blatant conservative bias in your profile of the lieutenant governor race this Sunday ["Quietly vying for the No. 2 spot," News, Oct. 26]. You gave ample description of Republican candidate Marcia McCraw's background, qualifications and motivations for running for the office. You even took the liberty of letting her describe herself as highly organized.

Glancing over her associations with the father of dial-a-porn, and her DUI [Driving Under the Influence], you spent lavish space instead on her divorce and her skimpy resume.

On the other hand, you skewered current Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, devoting paragraph after paragraph to inflated controversies, the most recent from 10 years ago. You gave no mention to his long career in the Senate or the fact that he is the longest-serving current lieutenant governor. You went as far as to survey the marijuana lobby on his anti-drug focus, which can hardly be called fair reporting.

As a sophomore in high school, I am proud of the work that our lieutenant governor has done to get the anti-drug message out to students. He makes it fun and engaging for students. I am extremely disappointed in The Times' bias and hope that it is corrected in the future.

-- Tucker Cholvin, Snohomish

Bellevue parks levy
not the top priority

I love Bellevue and how well-kept it is. It is always a joy to spend time walking through the streets and parks around there.

What I don't understand is how they can even be thinking about spending so much money on buying land and creating more parks when our economy is in such a questionable state ["Bellevue Parks, Yes!," editorial, Oct. 10].

Instead of focusing on beautifying Bellevue, it seems like it would be much more of a priority to make sure that the city is doing well economically.

Just the other day The Seattle Times was talking about how Bellevue has had to stop many building projects because of the economic crisis, and now here we are again, spending money that could be used more wisely.

It's not that I do not enjoy the new parks; it's just that there are so many more important projects that we could be putting our money into, especially in this critical time.

-- Erin Oostra, Mill Creek

Keep them new

If you wonder how important the park levy is for Bellevue, think of these noteworthy parks in notable cities: Grant Park in Chicago, Forest Park in St Louis, Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. These are well-designed, unique parks that are old. They look and feel old. In visiting, I have often thought what a beautiful place these parks must have been ["Bellevue Parks, Yes!," editorial, Oct. 10].

Compare that to the Bellevue parks. Look at Kelsey Creek Farm: Here you have an old homestead farm with its animals and two barns, yet it is beautiful, clean and well-maintained.

The Bellevue parks are an extension of our backyards. They are where our kids play ball, where our families have picnics and where we often hold special events, like weddings.

The Bellevue parks levy will allow Bellevue to continue to maintain its parks as it has done over the past 50 years due to previous park levies. Our current park levy is running out. Without continued funding we'll have limited maintenance and growth. We'll find it hard to keep up the high standard of maintenance that we now expect, or to preserve the few green spaces left in our rapidly growing city.

-- Lynne Robinson, Bellevue

Don't undermine your beliefs

Anyone who is paying any attention for the past eight years realizes that the negative economic indicators (unemployment, financial-market crisis, energy cost, revenue shortfalls) are the result of the failed Republican policies in Washington, D.C., not Gov. Christine Gregoire as gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's ads incorrectly claim ["Rossi for governor," Times, editorial, Oct. 19].

These policies have forced states to find ways to fund essential services. Gregoire has done an excellent job considering all the reductions in federal funding to the states. Spending money on children's health care, higher teacher pay and market-salary adjustments to state-employee salaries is not throwing money away. It is investing in the people of this great state, which we all benefit from.

Claiming that Gregoire had her chance and blew it -- justifying somehow that Rossi deserves a try -- is insane. While he tries to change his stripes from Republican to GOP to get elected, he still believes these same failed ideas.

If you believe in change enough to vote for Sen. Barack Obama, then don't undermine that belief by voting for Rossi.

Let's see what Gregoire can do with a Democrat in the White House.

-- Michael Barr, Sammamish

We're almost there

It is not surprising that the Building Industry Association of Washington is supporting gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor. Both are anti-worker and anti-government regulation ["BIAW, Rossi's biggest backer, explains what it wants," Politics, Oct. 17].

Several years ago when building houses was a booming business, my husband and I spent weekends driving around to the new neighborhoods that were going up, looking to buy a home. We were quite surprised and puzzled to note that the workers did not speak English; it seemed that low-wage, nonunion, imported labor was being used at these work sites. We wondered why builders did not employ local-union carpenters.

It appears that the members of the BIAW are not supportive of strengthening communities by paying good family wages. I'm sure they love Rossi's idea of cutting the minimum wage.

The home-building contractors that the group represents have been part of this mortgage mess consuming our country. They became wealthy by overbuilding, and building homes that most working-class people could not afford. The BIAW has acknowledged that it wants fewer environmental regulations. Sound familiar?

Please re-elect Gov. Christine Gregoire, rather than return our state to the policies of President George W. Bush just as we are finally ridding ourselves of him.

-- Judy Bumbarger-Enright, Vancouver

Consider this

Recently, there has been much talk about the "Bradley effect" mentioned in your story ["Are white voters telling the truth?" Nation and World, Aug. 18].

Many people believe that because of the Bradley effect, Sen. Barack Obama will take a 4- to 8-point hit on Nov. 4 in relation to the current polls.

While this may happen, I firmly believe that this election will be unique in that there will be a surge of people under the age of 24 voting. This surge has not been considered in the polls and this will easily offset any casualties to Obama's votes because of the Bradley effect.

In 2000, how many kids did you see walking around wearing former Vice President Al Gore T-shirts? In 2004, how many songs and displays of art were made of Sen. John Kerry?

I think this newfound enthusiasm from the younger citizens in America will help carry Obama to victory this election year.

-- Jeff Bellesiles, Seattle

And the paranoia begins

It seems that Sen. John McCain's road to victory in the upcoming election gets narrower and narrower as the days go by ("The last dash -- and what it tells us," Politics & Government," Oct. 26]. After pulling out of Michigan a couple of weeks ago (without telling Gov. Sarah Palin) he has basically put all of his political eggs in one basket -- Pennsylvania.

Although many of the polls today have Sen. Barack Obama leading by as many as 10 percentage points, I'm still not getting the feeling that the election is safe for him. After hearing about the "Bradley effect," I can't help but wonder how much of a role race will play when people fill out their ballots.

Living in Seattle, racism isn't a very big issue. I know that this isn't the way people think everywhere in the U.S.

I guess we'll find out soon enough whether or not I'm just being paranoid.

-- Brett Cates, Seattle

Practice what you preach

Sen. John McCain likes to liken himself to former President Teddy Roosevelt.
However, Roosevelt was an advocate of inheritance taxes. He was concerned about the dangers to the American republic posed by concentrated wealth and power.

Former President Lincoln and Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt also supported an inheritance tax. They felt without such a tax America would move from democracy toward aristocracy.

In other words, three great presidents felt it was important to "spread the wealth" in America.

I recently saw figures stating that the top 1 percent of Americans have close to 40 percent of the wealth. A much greater difference, I'm sure, than when presidents Lincoln and the two Roosevelts expressed their concerns.

Sen. Barack Obama plans to cut taxes for lower-income people and raise them for those with higher incomes. In other words, he plans to spread the wealth. If McCain is truly a supporter of Teddy Roosevelt, he should congratulate Obama, but apparently feels it is more important to continually ridicule and mock Obama's plan.

So much for "country first."

-- Harry McAlister, Tacoma

America is a country, not a business

Has anyone at The Times noticed that Sen. John McCain has been telling us that he will not raise taxes and at the same time, he endorses taxing, for the first time, employer-provided health-care benefits.

As a card-carrying member of the "middle class," I resent what is, in effect, an attack on my financial health and safety. McCain's proposed programs clearly benefit lenders buying discounted mortgages at face value. The programs also benefit insurance companies and those employers too cheap and too greedy to provide health care for their workers while decreasing the tax burden of the wealthiest of Americans.

Nothing is trickling down here, the wealth is not spreading, it is leaving us and going to those who have more.

McCain has been running against what he tries to portray as Sen. Barack Obama's personality but his own campaign and proposed programs speak volumes about his own.

His campaign has been deceitful about taxes, among other things. If this reflects his personality, it does not speak well of him.

-- Marc DeMartini, Seattle

The good old days

Won't it be nice when the election, with its disparaging political ads, is finally over and we once again can give our undivided attention to an overload of erectile-dysfunction pitches filling the vacuum.

--Thomas Frey, Kingston

Think before you vote

King County voters don't realize the repercussions their votes have on their fellow citizens. A story written by Kyung M. Song in early October explained that as the state's voters approved a flat rate in motor-vehicle tax in 1999, they eliminated a dedicated fund for vital services to the most vulnerable. ["Public-health agencies end up on critical list," Local News, Oct. 7.]

In addition to voting out the automobile-tab tax, a proposal to restrict property tax at 1 percent was approved in 2001. With a $93.4 million budget deficit for 2009, health and human services face huge cuts at a time when they are needed the most.

Voters need to look at the long-term effects of their decisions. If property taxes had grown with inflation between 2002 and 2008, King County would have an additional $35 million for the general fund budget and we wouldn't be facing the deficit we are in now.

With that money, we wouldn't need to make cuts to services that bring security or reduce poverty, and we would have a better economy.

When services are cut, homelessness will grow along with crime. And disease control and many other services thousands of people depend on will disappear. The only solution is to raise the taxes and look toward the future.

-- N. Bronte Neel, Seattle

Let's be real

I have always had a sincere respect for Charles Krauthammer. He has generally presented a reasoned and conservative argument in his column, without ranting and raving like his far-right colleagues. However, I fail to see much real value in his arguments against Sen. Barack Obama ["Obama, not McCain is playing the race card," syndicated columnist, Oct. 19].

"A foreign-policy novice"? Yet Krauthammer has consistently supported "foreign-policy novice" President George W. Bush's leadfooted, inexplicable foreign-policy bumbles.

At least Sen. Barack Obama has the self-awareness to choose a running mate who is perhaps the best foreign-policy adviser in the Senate, while Bush surrounded himself with neocons and isolationists who helped drag us into this lonely, useless war in Iraq.

As for the surge: Yes, it worked. It bought us more time, but not victory. The surge was intended to buy time and it succeeded. Where is Krauthammer's advice on what to do, long term, about Iraq? Where is Sen. John McCain's advice?

And, lest you think me starry-eyed over an Obama presidency, these "conservative ship-jumpers" are comfortable about jumping ship because they don't have to jump very far.

Their support for Obama is more like a jump back to the middle, away from the far fringes where the GOP has allowed itself to go over the last decade or more.

-- Toni Cross, Seattle

With a wet finger in the air

I have appreciated reading the different views espoused by Charles Krauthammer in past weeks, but I am sorry he hasn't "seen the light" like many of his other Republican constituents.

His misconstrued conclusions are frightening. Who do I want answering that proverbial phone at 3 a.m.?

Certainly not the man who acts on "instinct" alone to identify aggressors. A man he says "who doesn't have to consult his advisers."

In my opinion, Sen. John McCain put his so-called wet finger in the air and chose Gov. Sarah Palin -- a profoundly inappropriate choice as running mate for these perilous times.

For this lack of sound judgment, I believe Krauthammer needs to reconsider and rethink his conclusions about McCain, as so many respected Republicans have done in recent weeks. These Republicans are the ones I believe are thinking deeply of all the problems and possible consequences of this election. They are the ones who are putting their country first.

-- Margaret Keeler, Kirkland

Hang up the phone

Now that Charles Krauthammer has brought up that old, fear-inducing phrase, "Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.," I have just two words for him: Gov. Sarah Palin. I won't bother responding to a single other issue because it is enough to know that Sen McCain was willing to make an entirely cynical, political choice in order to win the race.

Luckily, it has backfired.

Even if McCain is the best person in the universe to answer the phone at 3 a.m., his age and health suggest he is willing to risk the country with one of the most unqualified candidates he could have chosen.

If Krauthammer doesn't want to risk that phone call on "a man who's been cramming on these issues for the last year," how about risking America on someone who knows nothing about the position of vice president, thinks real Americans are only people like her and Todd [Palin's husband], has no awareness of the tremendous medical value of fruit-fly research, and is willing to use her high-school, mean-girl charisma to present her opinions.

-- Harriet Husbands, Seattle

Allow me the freedom

I am tired of all the lies being spread about "death with dignity" (Initiative 1000) ["Death with dignity: approve I-1000," editorial, Oct. 5].

This measure simply allows doctors to prescribe medication for those terminally ill, competent adults who choose to end their lives earlier than the six months predicted by two examining physicians.

No assault on the disabled, no euthanasia, no "slippery slope" to some nefarious deeds.

I want this freedom to make my own medical decisions when my time comes.

-- Anne Thureson, Renton

Don't forget
An off-leash dog area for Queen Anne and Magnolia will be developed with $140,000 if Proposition 2 passes ["Seattle voters will decide fate of $146 million parks levy," Politics & Government, Oct. 23].

The Times' list of Seattle parks levy projects failed to include these two critically needed and long-awaited projects that will satisfy the needs of thousands of Queen Anne and Magnolia dog owners.

-- Sharon LeVine, Seattle

What have they done for us lately?
While everyone supports better parks for Seattle, now is not the time to pass a new $146 million property-tax levy.

According to the Seattle Parks Web site, only about 70 of the 100 projects promised in the year 2000 pro-parks levy have been completed. Only about 15 projects were completed last year, so there is still about a two-year backlog of unfinished projects at the average and current rate of completion.

Seattle Parks and Recreation should complete the projects that we were promised, and give the citizens a full account of what was accomplished compared with what was promised, before we commit to more.
I personally am still waiting for the $441,600 Green Lake shade garden, which the Web site says will be complete in "Summer, 2007." When I see it complete, then I will support a new parks levy.

-- Jeff Howard, Seattle

Thomas James Hurst / The Seattle Times

Democratic 8th Congressional District challenger Darcy Burner listens as incumbent Republican Rep. Dave Reichert responds to a question during their recent debate at the Meydenbauer Center in Bellevue.

Check the transcript

Editor, The Times:

So a U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert campaign spokeswoman charges that Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner was untruthful when, during a discussion on the economy, Burner stated that she has an economics degree, rather than saying she had a degree in computer science with an emphasis on economics ["Darcy Burner's claims of a Harvard econ degree an exaggeration," page one, Oct. 22].

When I was a student at the University of Washington, it was possible for students in the School of Fisheries to study wildlife science or food science without taking any fisheries courses, or study fisheries with an emphasis on wildlife or food science.

Regardless of what the student studied, their diploma was titled a "fisheries degree."
When a student who studied exclusively in the food-science program complained about receiving a fisheries degree, a faculty member said, "Any idiot can read a transcript. You studied food science, and have a right to represent your degree as a food-science degree."

Burner's campaign clearly lists her degree as being in computer science and economics and the economics credits are in her transcript. I doubt if the Reichert campaign spokeswoman who has difficulty reading Darcy's college transcript is "any idiot," but she obviously believes the voters in the 8th District are complete idiots.

-- Rob Nielsen, Seattle

Be straight with us

We need to have confidence that our lawmakers have integrity and can be counted on to tell us the truth as we face serious economic and political unrest in the world.

I went to a debate where I understood Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner say she had a degree in economics. I felt like she was telling me, "trust me, I have the academic expertise we need right now to lead the way through this economic crisis."

I attended a meeting in Bonney Lake where she said she "worked her way through college to earn an economics degree." Now we learn that her degree is in computer science and she took five classes in economics.

At the very least, she has inflated her credentials and deliberately misled us into believing she had a specific level of expertise to help us as we desperately fight for our own personal economic survival.

She has not only been deceptive, she has preyed upon our fears of an uncertain economic future when we are at our most vulnerable.

-- Kathy Holt, Mercer Island

Give us a break

Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner minored in economics at Harvard, and because she called that a "degree" in a speech, The Seattle Times deems that worthy of a front-page headline?

Please give us all a break.

-- Aaron Thomas, Seattle

Clarification, please

I hope you will have the grace and conscience to correct your misrepresentation of Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner's educational achievements.

Perhaps it was not clear to you when you wrote your piece that Harvard does not award a "minor" or a joint degree.

Their description of a dual degree as a "XXX with a specialty in xxx" is mere semantics.

The fact remains that Burner's thesis met the rigorous standards of two academic departments at one of the most highly respected schools in our country. To impugn this accomplishment implies a bias on your part and undermines your paper's reputation for objective reporting.

-- Susan Beverly, Newcastle

Millions want it

As a young salesman years ago, I was cautioned by a sales-veteran about prospects and clients who heard what they wanted to hear, and not what you actually said. So it seems is the problem with Robert Johnston in his recent letter ["Change you can't invest in," Times, Northwest Voices, Oct 23].

He has fallen for the tired old Republican line of Sen. Barack Obama's "huge-spending programs, tax increases on business and massive transfers of wealth," when Obama is actually proposing a tax cut for 95 percent of the population, not giving certain businesses, such as oil companies, further tax cuts (as Sen. John McCain would do), and trying to ensure that all sections of our population are equally represented.

Of course the majority of the heads of major corporations are opposed to Obama, as he wants to curtail the insanely extravagant salaries, perks and bonuses they receive, even as their companies are laying off employees.

As for making our country into a socialist state, what does Johnston think Medicare, Social Security and the graduated income tax are? These are the foundations of our form of social democracy, and I imagine Johnston will gladly accept his Medicare benefits and Social-Security payments, as millions of our other citizens do.

To answer Johnston's question: Yes, Obama is exactly the change millions of us want.

-- Ken Kreps, Puyallup

Be progressive

Thanks for Andrew Garber's story comparing Gov. Christine Gregoire and gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi on the environment ["Where Gregoire, Rossi stand on environmental issues," page one, Oct. 22].

Rossi implies that Gregoire's actions have been costly economically. In fact, she has led on a range of programs that will help, not hurt, pocketbooks. She passed the clean-car bill, which will save drivers at the gas pump; she signed generous tax incentives to help consumers pay for solar power; she passed high-efficiency standards that lower electric bills.

By encouraging solar and wind energy in Washington, she fostered new industries and jobs. By diversifying our energy sources, we are buffered from fluctuations in gas and coal markets. She prioritizes education and training for green jobs.

Rossi offers nothing to help working people while fighting climate change or dealing with traffic. His transportation plan would fail to relieve congestion, reduce pollution and provides no alternatives. It would keep us dependent on dirty and expensive oil for generations to come.

This state also uses a lot of coal power for electricity and might need to rely more on fossil fuels as we grow if we don't act now. He ignores energy efficiency -- the cheapest, quickest source of energy, which can lower energy bills while employing thousands of new workers.

Comprehensive programs and proper planning will help this state create jobs and prevent the worst of the climate crisis.

Rossi has voted against studying, planning for or taking action on climate change, which is a shortsighted, expensive point of view that would hurt Washington.

-- Kathleen Ridihalgh, Seattle

A growing force

In a recent Seattle Times story, columnist Jerry Large cites revealing statistics from a recent study that breaks down the complex political demographic within the Asian and Pacific Islander community ["Growing clout of Asian Americans," Local News, Oct. 13].

Large offers some advice for campaign strategists about the Asian-American community, which is one of the fastest-growing groups to potentially affect the outcome of the presidential campaign in several swing states. APIAs [Asian Pacific Islanders] have clout and are a growing force in the land of politics.

While some politicians have yet to fully realize the political strength of APIAs, Gov. Christine Gregoire has always acknowledged the contributions of our community. Since elected as governor, Gregoire has worked with us in the APIA community to make sure that all residents in Washington have access to quality and accessible health care by reducing language and cultural barriers so that individuals and their families, especially our elders can navigate the health-care system.

Gregoire recognizes that Asian Americans are not comprised of one lump ethnicity, but that we are made up of various and distinct groups.

As governor, Gregoire recognizes that the APIA community faces challenges with our K-12 and higher-education system. That is why Gregoire has been an outspoken leader in addressing student-achievement gaps, ensuring that education research includes the disaggregation of student data, attending to the needs of English-language-learning students and increasing financial support to give more APIA students access to college.

APIA voters are not only poised to play a pivotal role but take part in potentially deciding who wins in this gubernatorial race.

Gregoire understands that APIAs are diverse with varied views and she is effective in reaching out to our community.

Now is the time to assert our political force and deliver the APIA vote to victory for Gregoire.

-- Livia Lam, Seattle

Political guts
The Seattle Times hit the nail on the head by endorsing gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for being a tough budgeter and being able to sell a lean, smart budget. ["Rossi for governor," editorial, Oct. 17.]

Right now the biggest issue facing our state, just like the rest of the country, is the economic crisis. We are now in a recession and as a sales-tax-dependent state, we are going to be greatly impacted by these tough economic times.

That's why we need somebody in Olympia with a red pen who will stand up to the Legislature and unions. Rossi has political guts, and that's exactly what we need to bring balance to Olympia.

Difficult times brings the need for solid leadership. This newspaper chronicled the work of Rossi during the tough times of 2003. What he did there was nothing short of amazing. It's time to give him the promotion to governor.

-- Sharon Sweo, Bellevue

Be consistent

Gov. Christine Gregoire has done a very good job as governor. She has been nationally recognized as heading one of the best-run state governments in the country.

I also believe there is an undervalued additional reason to vote for her. It seems very likely that we will have not only a Democratic national government, but one tasked with rebuilding a nearly destroyed national economy.

We need to have leadership that coordinates with the new Democratic national leadership and policies, which will include stimulus for infrastructure and investment in jobs in a new alternative-energy economy.

We have innovators at University of Washington who are potential national leaders in these areas. They will have the chance to shine when governed by Gregoire, who has already earned national recognition for leadership and knowledge both about economic potentials in leadership around climate change and energy-independence technologies. We need the political will to capitalize on a time for great potential.

Gregoire would be an influential partner with the national agenda for change. Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi would claim he could be, but lacks both the right philosophy and the influence to help Washington state.

In times where a major response is needed to huge economic challenges, we need our state to team up with the national leadership.

If you vote for Barack Obama, it makes great economic sense for our state to vote for Gregoire.

-- Kathryn Munson, Seattle

Don't fall for magic tax mathematics

I'm voting for Gov. Christine Gregoire despite your predictable endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi and Gregoire's disappointing campaign.

Both your editorial and much of Gregoire's advertising ignore her enviable list of accomplishments, ranging from early-childhood-education initiatives to Puget Sound cleanup. You also overlook Rossi's impossible promises (an eight-lane alternative for less than the proposed six-lane Highway 520 bridge replacement), just as you ignored Gregoire's fiscally responsible opposition to Mayor Greg Nickels' insanely expensive Seattle-tunnel proposal.

Although I wish Gregoire had focused more on her brilliant first-term record in this campaign, I can understand Gregoire's impatience with Rossi's magic tax mathematics. I just hope your own tax myopia doesn't condemn Washington state to four years of our own version of President George W. Bush.

-- Peter Holmes, Seattle

Look at the EU
I disagree with The Times' recommendation of Republican U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert over Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner, in particular because of the issue of trade ["Dave Reichert, Jay Inslee, Rick Larsen in the 8th, 1st and 2nd congressional districts," editorial, Oct. 12].

The choices are not only "free trade" or "no trade," as this piece seems to indicate. Questions of how to include labor and environmental standards in trade agreements are valuable, perhaps essential, for fair and equitable trade agreements.

Many other countries and regions -- notably, the European Union -- include many more restrictions on commerce to protect workers, consumers and the environment, and their trade balance is better than ours.

Call it fair trade or call it managed trade. I will support anything but a blanket endorsement for all trade agreements that come down the pipeline. That is what Burner, for one, is doing. We need more of such perspectives in Congress.

-- Stephanie Celt, Seattle

Jim Bates / The Seattle Times

Volunteers at the Seattle campaign office work phone banks to support the campaigns of Gov. Christine Gregoire and Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama.

Get over it

Editor, The Times:

To any Washingtonians or others out there who plan to vote for Sen. John McCain because Sen. Barack Obama is a person of color, I want to say to you, "get over it." This election is about our future.
It is about becoming a nation that can lead versus a nation that will continue to decline. We are a falling nation.

Look around; read some international press.

I don't think very many Americans understand how bad things really are here. Europeans, Canadians and many Asians are so much better off than we are right now. Our health care and financial systems are failing, our transportation systems are decades behind what Europe and Asia have in place, and the list goes on.

Obama is the true leader. He has vision, foresight, youth, intelligence and judgment that America desperately needs right now. He believes that government should provide fiscal responsibility, oversight and regulation, basic infrastructure, guidelines for education and an investment in youth, health care and alternative sources of energy. These are things that make nations great and McCain barely talks about them.

Obama is not a socialist or a terrorist. He is an American. There is too much at stake to be worrying about the color of his skin and we as voters cannot afford to be so selfish right now. It is not about us or our petty beliefs. It is about the survival of our nation.

-- Debra Smoller, Lynnwood

We are the change

Since volunteering at the Washington Democrats' Campaign for Change on Mercer Street, I've begun to truly understand the depth of Sen. Barack Obama's poignant, "We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek."

During the past two months, I worked alongside a man who gave up his one free day a week to volunteer. I made phone calls beside a mother who was recently laid off; she and her husband are now reconsidering having a second child because of the economy. I worked with professionals during their lunch hours, students between classes, seniors, singles, couples and volunteers from every ethnic group.

I helped a woman in her 80s wheel her walker through the front door to volunteer for the first time in her life. I saw a mentally disabled man file paperwork and watched children amuse themselves while their father did data entry.

A woman brought in a sheet cake to celebrate her birthday with us and another walked in asking, in limited English, if she could help make calls to Spanish-speaking voters. All volunteers.

I get it now. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

-- Susan Nunnery, Seattle

You decide

The Republicans are in a state about the "spreading the wealth" comment made by Sen. Barack Obama. I thought the whole point of past tax breaks for the wealthy was to benefit us all -- trickle-down economics.

High-income folks would invest in factories and employment would go up. So how'd that work? Now we're bailing out billionaires running our financial institutions. Apparently, those benefits are supposed to trickle down, too.

When politicians talk taxes, they conveniently exclude Social Security taxes. How else do you say that 40 percent of workers don't pay taxes? Did you know that when Reagan slashed top income-tax rates in the 1980s, Social Security taxes on wages and self-employment income nearly doubled? In theory, this was going to provide huge surpluses to cover baby-boomer retirements.

But somehow the nearly $3 trillion excess is gone, and we still have a $10 trillion debt. What Republicans have done here is use Social Security taxes so the wealthy can enjoy huge tax cuts.

The share of income held by the top 1 percent is as large as it was in 1928. Americans have the highest income inequality in the world, and over the past 20 to 30 years the disparity has increased.

If you like where this is going, by all means vote Republican. "Consolidate the wealth" versus "spread the wealth." You decide.

-- Carolyn Kriegel, Stanwood

Time for recess

As an 18-year-old high-school student, this is the first election I will be able to vote and I find it astounding at the amount of money Sen. Barack Obama has gained for advertising.

As Obama nears closer and closer to breaking the advertisement-spending record, it disgusts me that both parties continue to spend so much money on negative campaigning. I find negative campaigning to do nothing more than turn me away from the candidates. It's a sickening display of childish banter that one would expect from elementary school kids, not the men who will be running our country.

Especially in the case of Sen. John McCain, when Obama has practically won the presidency. The smart thing for the Republican Party would be to start putting more money into their senator and governor races.

-- Matt Berry, Seattle

Seriously?

I can't believe you are giving front-page photo coverage to Ralph Nader and his message that there is no difference between the political parties ["Nader in Seattle: U.S. run by Wall Street 'crooks'," Politics & Government, Oct. 21].

This is the man responsible for putting President George W. Bush in the White House, where he has trashed America, destroyed our stature in the world and used his cronies to rend the fundamental fabric of our society.

Anyone who thinks it would have been the same if former Vice President Al Gore had run the country for the past eight years is pathologically out of touch with reality. Nader doesn't deserve to have his picture on your front page.

-- Greg Bartholomew, Seattle

Be informed

Thank you for "Attack ads distort deal Gregoire rejected on Casinos," [News, Oct. 19], which I have read and reread out of a wish to be a well-informed voter. I appreciate this comprehensive reporting since gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's campaign has made this issue prominent.

What's especially helpful is learning that there was widespread bipartisan support for rejecting revenue sharing with the tribes. Call me naive, but I have to admit dismay to learn that Gov. Christine Gregoire's management of this matter has been distorted for political ends. The way this issue has diverted attention from relevant issues also dismays me.

Accepting distortions in campaigns undermines the quality of our civic life. I hope voters will take the time to get informed and reject what is false and misleading not only in this matter but in all matters related to the election. I hope your newspaper and other sources will continue to aid voters who responsibly search out the facts. If we voters do our homework, maybe someday campaigners will give up distorting the truth.

Wouldn't that be something?

-- Constance Voget, Seattle

Hand in hand

Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi does not believe climate change is real -- just like the BIAW [Business Industry Association of Washington]. You cannot be a leader on climate change if you don't believe the problem is real ["Clashing views on climate change," page one, Oct. 22].

Rossi believes building roads is the answer -- just like the BIAW. Every objective evaluator of his transportation plan has labeled it a farce that is neither economically viable nor physically possible.

Rossi voted against the environment two-thirds of the time, just like he votes with the BIAW 99 percent of the time.

What do you think he will do as governor: protect the environment or follow the right-wing anti-environment group that is paying $7 million to buy the election?

Groups like Washington Conservation Voters don't just endorse Democrats, they endorse champions for our environmental protection, regardless of party affiliation. An environmental champion is an elected official who understands that protecting our quality of life and improving our economy go hand-in-hand.

--Ken Lederman, Seattle

Who's your daddy?

The Building Industry Association of Washington [BIAW] has now pumped $7 million into gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's election campaign, with $4 million of that coming this past week ["Rossi's biggest backer explains what it wants," Times, page one, Oct. 17]. What's going on here? Who is Rossi going to be beholden to if he is elected?

It doesn't seem like he'll be terribly responsive to the people, or the real needs of Washington, when his sugar daddy is BIAW.

-- Bruce Barnbaum, Granite Falls

Don't ruin what's been started

A big issue for me is that gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi is anti-choice and anti-birth control.

Population control is extremely crucial for the preservation of our fragile environment. With more people becoming homeless, the risk of unwanted pregnancies increases. We've made a lot of progress since the days of [American birth-control activist] Margaret Sanger. Let's not go back to those days by voting for Rossi.

-- Kim Loftness, Shoreline

He'll build a fish bowl

Gov. Christine Gregoire has been a plucky, well-organized and effective governor, despite her hairbreadth win four years ago, which would have made a lesser person timid.

What has gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi actually done that is positive for our state? What would he do during our next four years? Chop social services, promote his personal extreme-right-wingnut social agenda, and push that absurdly expensive Seattle-waterfront traffic tunnel that would fill up with saltwater as our planet warms up and Puget Sound rises.

-- Chuck Hastings, Federal Way

She added before subtracting

The announcement Tuesday that our state's jobless rate has dropped in the month of September is proof Gov. Christine Gregoire has led our state effectively during tough economic times.

Our state has added more than 28,000 nonfarm jobs in the past 12 months, an increase of 1 percent in the face of a nationwide decrease of 0.7 percent.

The jobless rate in Washington is 0.3 percent lower than the jobless rate nationwide. These numbers clearly show our state's economy is faring better than the rest of the nation.

Gregoire has been a good steward of our state's economy during a national economic crisis, but gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi and his friends continue to air false and misleading ads that exploit the fear and uncertainty of these tough times.

In one ad they say Gregoire has lost our state 55,700 jobs, but it fails to mention she has added 250,000. In another ad, they cite scary-sounding unemployment figures, but fail to mention our jobless rate is below the national average.

The truth is, Gregoire has served us well. In the middle of this national economic crisis, our state's economy is much stronger than most other states.

-- Fay Feganm, Seattle

Even if it kills me

I will vote "yes" for I-1000, even if it kills me.

-- Leo Shillong, Bellingham

Let them keep their dignity

My dad was diagnosed with colon cancer more than a year ago. When he wasn't improving, the doctor gave him horrifying news that he would die within three months. The hospital informed us that hospice would take over his care. Two nurses visited regularly at home.

Nurse Mickey treated my dad with compassion. If my dad experienced any pain, they took care of it. God blessed our family with my dad's presence for two months. During this time, each of us had a chance to say goodbye. Family members came and shared how my father made a difference. Childhood friends shared how they valued my dad's life-changing friendship.

It was hard to see my dad fade a little each day. Every moment was a precious gift from God. On Oct. 1, my father, Michael, died at 66. I will always remember my dad's never-ending faith in God and others. The hospice care gave my dad a chance to die with dignity. Initiative 1000 takes that dignity away. When we start playing God, we lose the value of human life.

-- Molly Feeney, Sammamish

Support a good system
Your failure to endorse the expansion of light rail is disappointing ["Reject Proposition 1's tax for light-rail expansion," editorial, Sept. 28]. We need better transportation choices as soon as possible. Buses will never move people as well as a separate rail system.

And if we are to address local jobs and greenhouse-gas emissions, we should be looking at the most efficient system possible.

You say we can build separate lanes for buses. Like those on Highway 520 or Interstate 405 that are often stopped during rush hour? We can see now how that will be working in 20 years.

Let's support a good system. It will mean better jobs and increased mobility.
-- Martin Adams, Seattle

Yalonda M. James/Charlotte Observer/MCT

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain reacts to the crowd while taking the stage to speak at a rally in Concord, N.C., on Saturday.

Change you can't invest in

Editor, The Times:

A survey of 751 heads of major corporations by Chief Executive magazine in September found that 80 percent support Sen. John McCain for president. Further, 74 percent said that they fear a Sen. Barack Obama presidency "would be disastrous" for the country while only 19 percent fear McCain becoming president.

These business leaders stated they believe Obama's plans for the economy, including huge-spending programs, tax increases on businesses and massive transfers of wealth "would bankrupt the country within three years if implemented."

Is there a correlation between how the stock market continues to plunge at the same time Obama's poll numbers rise? You bet.

This is one of the reasons those of us on the "right," who have owned, or managed, businesses believe this to be the case. We are very concerned that with Obama at the helm, our 232-year-old society based upon free enterprise and individual responsibility will be inexorably wound down into a managed socialist state.

Who wants to invest in that environment? Wake up America: Is this the "change" you want?

-- Robert Johnston, Camano Island

Powell for president

I am an independent voter who was transfixed by Gen. Colin Powell's speech Sunday on "Meet The Press." However, my fascination was not for Powell's endorsement or for either of the candidates for the presidency.

Instead, my thoughts drifted back to the elections eight years ago. Somehow, the best leader for America escaped us then and now. Powell once again was demonstrating the depth of his character, inclusive validation of his considerations, extensive foundation of his principles, sincere dedication for our country's interests and deep intellectual sagacity.

Every one of his words were perfectly chosen and encouraging in their clearness and purpose. How do we let such leaders slip through our fingers? Powell would have made a great president for America anytime, especially now.

-- Harvey Gillis, Bellevue

Check your sources
So former state Transportation Secretary Doug MacDonald thinks that I-985 will "actually increase congestion." ["Would ballot measure relieve traffic jams or worsen them?," Politics & Government, Oct. 20]. He said, "it's not going to move us forward"

This is from the expert who led the agency that spearheaded and designed the mess we are in now. Somehow having MacDonald sounding off is not very credible in my book.

This measure is at least a positive step toward helping to reduce congestion. It is not an overall solution, in and of itself, but it is not more of the same.

Positive steps were never part of MacDonald's tenure.

-- Phil Bate, Lynnwood

Do it now

Failure to pass Proposition 1 will be a big setback for Seattleites. As the growth continues, so will the gridlock. The cost that critics say is enormous is inaccurate. To postpone this project will be more costly in future -- doubling or tripling the cost due to inflation.

This is exactly what happened in my former Los Angeles residence. After the light-rail and subway were completed, there were proposals to extend it from downtown to the Santa Monica pier but voters turned it down because of the cost and construction noise.

Five years later, due to rapid and continued growth, the gridlock from Westwood to West Los Angeles up to Santa Monica became unbearable. The proposal was then brought back to the table in 2007 and was approved to extend the subway for more than $1 billion. Had they approved this years before, it could have been a lot cheaper and would have been finished by now.

Whether we like it or not, taxes will go up, whoever is running the government. As growth continues, so does the need for more infrastructure and upgrades for basic services. Where will we get the money to pay for this?

If we don't want to raise taxes then we should live like a Third World country.

What we need is to fix the economy, and go back to the American way with decent wages and more jobs.

-- Tom Lasam, Seattle

Where's my laxative?

It was remarkable to learn today that laxative sales go up during a recession "because people are under tremendous stress, and holding themselves back" ["As economy sinks, laxative sales grow, smoking drops," Nation & World, Oct. 19]. That explains the sudden clenching I felt when I read The Times' endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor ["Rossi for governor," Times, editorial, Oct. 19].

Remembering that The Times endorsed President George W. Bush in 2000, I searched The Times' archives and found the following summary statement: "We [The Times] recommend [George W. Bush, Republican, for President] for integrity and civility in office, for a realistic balance between government and commerce, a fair tax policy, and a new, bipartisan era to confront the needs of the nation".

I urge the editors to raise their hands, say, "Oops, my bad" and reconsider their current endorsement.
Rossi's record, grossly negative campaign, questionable fundraising and religious fundamentalism all bear the stench of a Republican brand that has proved itself politically and morally bankrupt (and has rendered many Americans financially bankrupt).

Endorsing Rossi "because he can best be trusted to erase the state's huge projected deficit without raising taxes" reads like your above endorsement for Bush in 2000, especially the part about "a fair tax policy."

Please, don't be fooled again.

-- Ed Leach, Seattle

Keepin' it green

As Puget Sound teeters on the brink of collapse, your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi is nothing short of appalling.

Sure, Rossi says he's green, but he opposes taking the decisive action needed; that's why he's the darling of the BIAW [Building Industry Association of Washington].

Here's an example of what we could expect from a Rossi administration. Back in 2006, Rossi backed Initiative 933 -- an anti-environment, anti-neighborhood measure to force taxpayers to compensate developers who saw their profit margins "damaged" by environmental rules. I-933 was so bad that Gov. Christine Gregoire, all six living former governors and nearly every city council in the state opposed it. So did The Seattle Times, calling it "an expensive hoax on property owners and taxpayers." Mercifully, voters defeated it by about 60-40 percent across the state (and about 67-33 percent in King County.)

It's no coincidence that I-933 was funded by groups now dumping buckets of money into Rossi's campaign, including the BIAW. According to your Oct. 17 story, BIAW PACs [political-action committees] are spending upward of $6 million to elect Rossi and others who would ax environmental protection measures

Let's keep Washington green with Gov. Gregoire.

-- Elsa Bruton, Olympia

You still at work?
When I read The Times' endorsement for gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor, I hoped I would find cogent and convincing reasons to vote for him. Instead, I found myself reading the same stuff that the Rossi campaign has been putting out all year.

What happened?

Did the editorial staff take the day off and have Rossi write his own endorsement?

-- Mark Hudson, Seattle

You fell for it
I am writing to express my disappointment with The Times' endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor. While you are certainly free to support any candidate of your choice, your failure to fully represent Rossi's views in your endorsement do a disservice to your readers and to the citizens of our state.

Your editorial focused entirely on Rossi's proposed economic agenda, and neglected to address his regressive social positions. While I agree that the state's economic woes are of high importance, our next governor will also set the tone for a social agenda of equal magnitude.

Rossi's arch-conservative views include: siding with big business at the expense of our environment, decreasing protections for wildlife and wilderness areas, seeking to overturn Roe v. Wade and restricting access to contraception and medically accurate sex-education information in schools.

He promises to veto marriage-equality legislation should the Legislature approve it, and to roll back the hard-won civil-union rights that gay and lesbian citizens have just recently attained.

The Rossi campaign has cleverly managed to divert attention during election season from his social views.
By ignoring these issues in your endorsement of his candidacy, you've allowed this dishonest campaign strategy to achieve its purpose.

-- Jeff Natter, Seattle

He will take us down
I am a teacher in the Seattle Public Schools. I've taught for 30 years. I am writing to spread the word about gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi. He will take us back to the days when he was in control of the budget and cut the education budget by $1.2 billion. His current campaign calls for huge increases in the transportation budget with no new sources of revenue.

That means he would cut education again.

This state cannot afford to have a governor who sacrifices our children's futures. We need an educated work force to meet the needs of the state's future work force. Washington cannot afford Rossi.

-- Joanie Mass, Seattle

We're on a road to nowhere
I was quite dismayed to see that your editorial board has endorsed gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, as he simply is not qualified. People who vote for him will be voting against their own interests and will be backing big business. Didn't we have enough of that trickle-down theory on the national level these past eight years? We do not need that here in Washington state.

The basis of your endorsement is that he will deal with our state deficit without raising taxes. That is a Republican manner of looking at a financial situation. Look where that has gotten our country.

Taxes not raised on a state level are simply made up by increased homeowner and sales taxes elsewhere. Thinking we do not all need to pay for our fair share of the infrastructures and services is silly.

No matter how "likable" Rossi appears to be, he's a lacky of big business and I for one have had more than enough of that these last eight years.

-- Matt Shaw, Seattle

Let her keep tackling
As Island County Commissioner, I often worked with Gov. Christine Gregoire when she was director of the state Department of Ecology. She did not hesitate to take on the toughest problems facing people of this good state.

Two of the more contentious were water and water rights and Puget Sound water quality. She brought all the players and interested parties together and got them to talk and consider solutions until an agreement could be made. Feelings often overflowed into the discussions but she never wavered in her determination to find an equitable solution. Her leadership and sharp intellect served us all well.

These qualities were shown again when, as our attorney general, she successfully concluded negotiations with the tobacco industry that netted billions from the U.S. I recall saying to the executive director of the Washington State Association of Counties that I thought she was doing a really good job. He countered that "She is the best attorney general we have ever had." And I, too, came to believe that to be true.

As governor she has brought that same leadership and incisive thinking to the highest office in our state. She has tackled the tough jobs and served the people well. I will be proud to vote for her to be returned for a second term.

-- Dwain Colby, Camano Island

No more equal rights

I was crushed, but not surprised, that Dino Rossi won the endorsement of The Seattle Times. I am willing to concede that he could do a good job with the budget, though Gov. Christine Gregoire has proved that she can be tough as well.

I recall it was under her watch that a large deficit was erased. But socially, Rossi does not represent the majority of this state. He has said that he would consider proactively rescinding the domestic-partnership law. He even refused to address the constituency at a gay and lesbian community business meeting.

If he didn't support equal rights based on race or gender I suspect that The Seattle Times would write him off in a nanosecond, regardless of his other positions. It just proves that gay and lesbian people can still be publicly maligned without penalty. The support of the editorial board of Rossi without qualification makes them complicit with Rossi's views.

The editorial mentioned other reasons to vote for Rossi besides the budget issues, but the idea was basically change for change's sake.

I hardly think that changing from Gregoire is analogous to the change from President George W. Bush. I think there are many other reasons to vote for Gregoire, such as education, industry support, minimum wage and the environment.

But The Seattle Times is completely myopic in their approach. Perhaps the editorial should have mentioned some concerns as well.

-- John Sutherland, Seattle

She's doing it better
In your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, you claim that "when he says he'll cut spending, you can believe him." I strongly disagree.

I find it hard to believe anything Rossi has said in this campaign. He hasn't provided one substantive proposal to tackle any of the state's problems, and when it comes to cutting spending, Rossi refuses to pinpoint a single item he would cut. He just says, "I'll balance the budget without raising taxes."

That's an attractive promise to make, but no one should believe him until he explains exactly how he would do it.

Gov. Christine Gregoire has already started to cut spending and has also vowed not to raise taxes.
To save $90 million, Gregoire has ordered state agencies to implement a hiring freeze and to eliminate nonemergency out-of-state travel, equipment purchases and services contracts. In addition, she just announced another $240 million in immediate budget savings.

Combined with the money saved in the rainy-day fund Gregoire created, these actions alone will cut the projected budget deficit in half.

When it comes to balancing the budget, Gregoire is the only candidate we should trust.

-- Alex Hart, Seattle

Jim Bates/The Seattle Times

Dino Rossi speaks during the final gubernatorial debate at Seattle's KING 5 studio Oct. 15.

Thanks, but no thanks
Editor, The Times:

Perhaps your conservative philosophy influences your candidate endorsements ["Rossi for governor," Times, editorial, Oct. 19].

During the recent gubernatorial debate I was impressed with Gov. Christine Gregoire's accomplishments. The Pew Center ranked Washington in the top three states for managing public resources, and Forbes magazine states that Washington is in the top five states for business.

During the debate, gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi repeatedly stated that he had developed the 2003 state budget. The Seattle Times echoes his claim and suggests that, "The Rossi-Locke budget saved the people from increases in major taxes and helped unleash a strong economic rebound."

I might remind you that "no new taxes" is also the philosophy of President George W. Bush's administration which has created the worst recession in the history of our nation. Perhaps the relationship between no-new-taxes and economic rebound is tenuous at best.

Change has been the campaign slogan for both Sen. Barack Obama and Rossi. Obama would like to change the conservative Bush philosophy, and an ever-increasing majority of the country's electorate seems to agree. But Washington state is top-ranked when it comes to management and business. Yet Rossi and The Seattle Times claim "he would bring change to … Olympia."

Thanks, but no thanks.

-- Bill Taylor, Renton

Who is vulnerable?
The 2003 Washington state budget that you praise gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for balancing, cut thousands of low-income children off Children's Health Insurance. Rossi has yet to tell us which "vulnerable populations" he would protect.

Rossi supports allowing pharmacists not to fill prescriptions they disagree with. While Plan B [emergency contraception] may be the most obvious casualty, what happens if a pharmacist disagrees with the way I manage my pain from advanced cancer and will not give me the pain meds I need to function?

Rossi's transportation plan would be a disaster, especially for anyone who lives near the Highway 520 bridge.

As I understand it, Rossi's supporters want to get rid of building regulations, which would mean dirtier streams and probably more loss of natural marsh and swamplands.

While I don't always agree with Gov. Christine Gregoire, she has been and will be a better governor than Rossi will ever be.

-- Jean Colman, Seattle

Unpleasant morning
I received an unpleasant jolt when I opened Sunday's Opinion section and discovered that The Times endorsed Dino Rossi for governor. Apparently the editorial board has bought into his TV commercials offering "change."

If Rossi can be relied on to cut spending by "about 10 percent," as The Times claims is necessary, where will these cuts be made? History shows that when Republicans cut spending, social programs usually fall victim (think Ronald Reagan.) Cutting social programs during terrible economic times will lead to greater problems in the long run.

The Times complained about Gov. Christine Gregoire's increased spending. Where did she spend more? On teachers and home-care workers. This is not a waste of money; it is money well spent.

As a 17-year-old public-school student, I believe my teachers deserve higher pay. The Times said people can believe Rossi. Until he offers specific solutions rather than smarmy attacks, I can't.

-- Cassandra Baker, Seattle

Move forward
Only one day after The Seattle Times reported on the BIAW's [Building Industry Association of Washington's] scandalous multimillion dollar expenditures on his behalf, the newspaper endorsed gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor. BIAW's efforts are blatantly aimed at eliminating regulations protecting the environment.

Gov. Christine Gregoire has shown remarkable leadership and vision on many issues, including investing in our economy and environment for future generations.

Gregoire strongly supports the creation of green jobs and industry in this state, a position that Sen. Barack Obama has made a cornerstone of his economic platform.

Gregoire created the Puget Sound Partnership to save our life-sustaining inland sea, which is beginning to die from the impact of unregulated development.

Gregoire began a program to fight climate change. Washington state's hundreds of miles of coastline and glacier-fed water sources will be especially hard hit.

Rossi shows little interest in addressing these issues. Like many politicians, he professes to care about the environment. However, his platform calls for the weakening of environmental rules and road building in preference to mass transit.

Washingtonians should expect Gregoire's vital and innovative "green" programs to wither under his administration.

The Times recently endorsed Obama saying, "He can get America moving forward again." The re-election of Gregoire is essential to making that a reality for Washington state.

-- E. L. Johnson, Olympia

Remove your head from the sand
The Seattle Times decided to endorse gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor this week, partially based on the fact that the Democrats have been in power for 24 years. It is unfortunate that The Seattle Times is endorsing a candidate who has lied about his stance on education. His children attend private school despite living in a district that has excellent public schooling. As state senator, he wanted to lower state spending despite the clear funding criteria set out in the state constitution to fully fund education.
Rossi refuses to testify in a case that he claims is politically motivated. This sounds vaguely familiar to a case in another state, Alaska, where Gov. Sarah Palin refused to testify in her abuse-of-power investigation. Sticking your head in the sand does not make you guilty, nor does it absolve you.

Can we truly trust Rossi to cut spending when he has his own personal agenda that caters to questionable businesses? No thanks.

-- Chris Santos, Seattle

No divisive baggage, please
Your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi places too much emphasis on the possibility of Rossi achieving a balanced state budget and not enough thought to the divisive baggage Rossi brings with him.

We do not need the division politics that Rossi has endorsed, nor do we need to enhance the power of his friends in the building industry.

Washington state, just like the nation, needs leadership that is pragmatic and unifying -- that is not Rossi.

-- Bob Doyle, Seattle

Go back to your McMansions
I was shocked to pick up my newspaper [Sunday] morning to see that The Times has endorsed Dino Rossi for governor.

Your thinking behind the endorsement reflects a surprising 1980s-like quality.

The assumption is that all government spending is "bad" and all taxes are "bad," and that our state can be run efficiently without that bad ol' government spending.

Government deficits are the ultimate sin.

But here we sit in the 21st century. And I challenge you: Please tell me exactly how Rossi should cut the state budget by 10 percent. Gov. Christine Gregoire has made some very courageous, very overdue investments in schools, transportation and health care.

A state without adequately funded schools will fail. A state with crumbling roads and bridges will fail. A state where health care can't be afforded will fail. A state under Rossi will be all these things -- and will fail.

Rossi and his BIAW [Building Industry Association of Washington] buddies will use their exorbitant tax cuts to continue to rape Washington's natural resources at the expense of us all.

Forget about Washington state joining with other Western states to fight climate change. And just like President George W. Bush and his investment bank/oil company cronies, after Rossi's term is up, they will laugh and retreat to their McMansions while the rest of us are left with a vastly impoverished state.

I am so disappointed that you would endorse this.

-- Isabel D'Ambrosia, Seattle

What planet am I on?
Why on Earth would The Times endorse this deceptive BIAW [Building Industry Association of Washington] mouthpiece for our governor? I am shocked and disappointed that your organization has such low regard for this state's environmental and economic future.

We need Gov. Christine Gregoire's progressive leadership to tackle the serious problems we are facing now, such as education, jobs, global warming and growth management.

-- Melessa Rogers, Burien

You have been duped again
I was disappointed to read your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor. I was even more disturbed as I followed your rationale. You advance a single reason for your support: He has proved he can cut spending. Is that all that counts?

Does his abysmal record on the environment mean nothing to you? Or his undercutting of Washington state education? Or the vicious campaign of half-truths financed by his cronies in the building-trades industry? Or the fact that he is anti-choice to the core?

As an aside, didn't the spending-cutting budget you are referring to have as much to do with the statesmanship of former Gov. Gary Locke as it did the political maneuvering of Rossi? Locke was, after all, the Democratic governor at the time, with a Democratic majority in the Legislature.

I fear you have been seduced by a warm and responsive demeanor, an expressive and well-modulated vocal tone, and the overall sense of reasonableness that oozes from Rossi's pores.

In short, you have been duped. He is a right-wing extremist on the order of another man who duped you in the past, President George W. Bush.

-- Josiah Erickson, Seattle

A fetid global mess
My community and my family have never had a better friend than Gov. Christine Gregoire in the governor's mansion, and are disappointed in The Seattle Times endorsement of her opponent [gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi].

Her office has demonstrated her commitment to protecting our precious water resources twice in my neighborhood. Why? Because we asked, she listened and she connected with our concerns. As a result, a vulnerable aquifer was spared damage from poorly regulated septic systems. Now the water supply will not be ravaged by too many wells abusing water-rights laws.

She recognized that piecemeal issues had big-picture significance for our state. I don't remember any previous governor acting so quickly and effectively over their signature land-use issues, and I can't imagine her current opponent taking the community's side.

This is just one example of Gregoire's path to improve state health and well-being. She has proved her commitment to Washington state's most important assets: its beauty, natural wonders and its healthy and well-educated work force.

After Gov. Hillary Rodham Clinton, it would be Greek tragedy to watch the rest of the country elect good governors on Obama's coattails while we throw out Gregoire, one of the highest regarded women politicians in the country.

After so many years of economic success, why would Washington want to put itself into the hands of Rossi, a candidate who espouses the failed policies of the GOP that have accomplished nothing but a fetid mess on a global scale.

-- Laura Hartman, Snohomish

Just a chimera
Four years ago, The Times endorsed gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor as a game-changer who would "clean out" Olympia and change its "administrative culture" that was supposedly a drag on Washington state's economy.

It was all nonsense.

At the time, we had actually been ranked as the nation's fourth-friendliest business environment. Moreover, Rossi was well-identified with an assortment of right-wing positions disfavored by the majority of Washingtonians your editorial board chose to overlook.

In Gov. Christine Gregoire's first term, Washington managed to make the top five in Forbes.com's "Top States for Business" report (2007) largely based on reduction of red tape, a culture of innovation and a highly educated work force.

In June of 2008, Washington ranked third on the Pew Center [on global climate change] on the states report, just behind Utah and Virginia, for having the best-run state government.

Four years later, The Times' only rationale for changing horses is the presumptive tough stance Rossi would take in dealing with a projected deficit for 2009 and beyond -- a deficit not of Gregoire's making.
And the one example given by your editorial board as to how "tough" Rossi might be? Making state employees (of the third-best-run state) pay the private-sector average of one-third of their health-care insurance instead of the current 12 percent.

In the words of Peggy Lee, "Is that all there is?"

It's clear your board doesn't have Warren Buffett advising them on economic policy matters.

Rossi has not changed at all, and has proved nothing concerning his ability to govern during the past four years that merits your endorsement.

Your recycled fantasy is, as you state, "he would bring change to the culture of Olympia."

Rossi is nothing more than your chimera, and as the saying goes, "that's not change we can believe in."

-- Jay Causey, Mercer Island

Erika Shultz / The Seattle Times

Gov. Christine Gregoire acknowledges the crowd as she arrives at Sen. Joe Biden's appearance at Tacoma's Cheney Stadium Sunday.

Drinking the GOP Kool-Aid
Editor, The Times:
The Times has obviously been drinking the GOP (please don't call it Republican) Kool-Aid ["Dino Rossi for governor," Times, editorial, Oct. 19].

By electing gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, their endorsement suggests, Washingtonians can have everything Rossi says his opponent cannot deliver: a strong economy, good schools, less traffic, lower property taxes, small business growth, sex-offender-free streets and the return of the Sonics.

We needn't worry our heads about trivial issues like stem-cell research, access to contraception or a woman's right to choose, because they have nothing whatsoever to do with the states -- the U.S. Supreme Court has seen to that.

By voting Gov. Christine Gregoire out of office, we can also help the Building Industry Association of Washington's well-funded dream of unencumbered development -- no pesky environmental regulations to bother with.

And to think, we can have all this for free because Rossi will never raise our taxes! I feel better already.
-- Maggie Harada, Woodinville

Misleading and reprehensible
Like other law-enforcement officials around the state, I am outraged and offended by the latest ads in the governor's race.

The ads blaming Gov. Christine Gregoire for 1,300 homeless sex offenders represent some of the most misleading and reprehensible political attacks I have ever seen. In truth, Gregoire has done more to track and hold sex offenders accountable than any other governor during my lifetime. In fact, the number of missing registered sex offenders has dropped by more than 300 during her tenure.

As a legislator, I worked with Gregoire to pass HB 2407 to put in place GPS monitoring for the worst sex offenders. This was just one out of more than 25 sex-offender laws that the governor signed during her first term, and that doesn't even include the creation of Operation Crackdown, a new program to track and punish sex offenders who fail to register.

As a sheriff, I will personally attest to Gregoire's dedication to public safety and tell you that she is the best partner the law-enforcement community has ever had in the governor's office. Those who care about the safety of our communities would be unwise not to re-elect her.
-- John Lovick, Mill Creek

We can't afford more of the same
Four years of failed leadership in Olympia has left our state in a hurting and vulnerable position for these impending economic hard times. We need a leader who looks to the future and makes decisions that will help the state, with a long-term perspective preparing for good economic times and bad.

Gov. Christine Gregoire has done nothing but tax and spend since she's been in office and quite frankly I am very mad. The people of this state can't afford another four years of reckless behavior. Yes she may have given funding in large quantities to more agencies, programs and public works but she did so with the notion that the economy would never slow down. Because of her reckless spending we are now facing the largest budget deficit in state history, $3.2 billion, and if elected again she will raise our taxes to try to fix it.

What we need is gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi and his business skills to make our state government run more efficiently to save much-needed money and resources during these trying times.

Let's face it, we can't afford to pay more taxes, and each of us is buckling down and trying to save money. Isn't it time our government does the same?
-- Ian Peter, Bonney Lake

Just another Bush
The Seattle Times endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi reminds me of a time eight years ago.

You endorsed President George W. Bush, the "compassionate conservative" then.

We have seen how "compassionate" this administration has been.

If elected, Rossi will not raise taxes, but he will gut every program that involves helping other humans that he can get his hands on.

Don't be fooled, this is another Bush-type Republican.
-- Jack Nolan, Shoreline

Not yesterday's trash
I could not believe my eyes when I saw my newspaper endorsing gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi.

Have you forgotten that he is currently under investigation for misuse of [campaign] funds? Have you forgotten that the prime duty of Washington state is to uphold a solid education system? Rossi balanced the budget by cutting the COLA [ cost-of-living allowance] to teachers and forced us to keep teaching classes of 32-36 kids per class. What are you thinking?

Your reasons for not giving Gov. Christine Gregoire a chance to see what she can do in a recession simply stink. "Well, we've had the Democrats in power for too long so now it's time to try a Republican..." "She promised to keep state employees health-care contributions at 12 percent ..." That was before the economic chaos of the past few weeks.

She has proved to be a smart and fair governor and does not deserve to be tossed out like yesterday's trash just because you want to try out a one-shot wonder who promises to balance our budget by cutting education and health care.
--Kathleen Koler, Lake Forest Park

Not again
Are you out of your collective, ever-loving minds?

Hopefully your readers will remember that you endorsed President George W. Bush -- something that should give every Washingtonian pause!
-- Ruth Quiban, Seattle

With his ax to the grind
I was disappointed to see your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor.

I think he's just a reactionary with an ax to grind, despite the carefully-crafted warm and caring facade we see in his ads, with not much to offer besides criticism.

For example, here's what The Bellingham Herald said in a Sunday editorial after holding meetings with Rossi and Gov. Gregoire:

"... Rossi lacked specifics when talking about how he would tackle the future budget deficit. He promised that as governor, he would 'open up the lid on the agencies' and be able to look inside and find cost savings. But despite repeated questions, Rossi could give no examples of what programs or agencies he would cut in order to balance the budget. We were surprised.

"Not only is Rossi familiar with the state's budget from having written the state Senate version in 2003, but he has been running for governor basically full-time since 2004. After he lost that year's close election, it was obvious that he was planning on challenging Gregoire again this year. In all that time you would think he would have thought of some obvious proposals for state programs that could and should be trimmed."

Gregoire has made progress in important areas, achievements the Herald editorial summarized well.
-- Jeffrey Borsecnik, Bellingham

Do unto Washington what Bush has done to you
I am very disappointed with Gov. Christine Gregoire as she has not been sufficiently aggressive against gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi.

She had been doing a fairly good job as governor until the President George W. Bush policies, favored by Rossi, tanked the nation's economy.

Washington, like all other states, have faced predictions of reduced revenues. The government's decision to reduce federal money available to states has also contributed to our current situation.

It is well past time that Gregoire stand up and clearly confront Rossi and his allies about trying to glue her to Bush's coattails. People need to know that Rossi will do unto Washington what Bush has done to the entire country.

And is Rossi really getting a salary from his own foundation? He really is a chronically dubious candidate.
-- Marc DeMartini, Seattle

Rely on the facts
I expected The Seattle Times to endorse gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor. After all, the editorial board has hardly made a secret of their disdain for the estate tax, and while not specifically mentioned Sunday, it truly was the elephant in the room.

What I did not expect to see was such a narrow opinion, seemingly without consideration for the accomplishments, reputation and conduct of the candidates involved.

To gloss over the topic of education with a single reference, "in December 06 Gregoire proposed a new two-year budget -- it was a happy one with raises for teachers," shows either a lack of interest, or a lack of understanding as to how important this issue is to parents across our state.

You would be hard pressed to find a PTA [Parent-Teacher Association] parent who doesn't understand what a friend Gov. Christine Gregoire has been to public education.

To omit any mention of the ongoing investigation led by Attorney General McKenna into the campaign-finance dealings between BIAW and Rossi is puzzling.

But to ignore the controversy surrounding Rossi's false and misleading sex-offender ads, which have infuriated law-enforcement agencies from Snohomish to Spokane, is unbelievable.

While Rossi may be the "best Republican candidate for governor in a long time," he's certainly not the best candidate for governor.

My hope is that the voters of Washington state will rely on facts to make their decision.

If they do, we'll welcome back Gov. Gregoire for another four years.
-- Diane Smith, Bellevue

Be careful what you wish for
The Democratic Party wasn't given power for the last 24 years. The people of Washington state elected Democrats into office. It's what's known as democracy.

Rossi may be the best Republican candidate for governor in a long time, but he isn't the best candidate for governor today.

The budget sets the direction for our state, and I can see why it garnered most of The Times' focus. But we are not simply electing someone who can add and subtract; we are electing a leader.

Governing is about having a social conscience and a vision for education, the environment, health care, transportation and equal rights.

In an interview with The Seattle Times, Rossi said that he is not campaigning on the issue of gay rights or choice ["Transcript of interviews with Gregoire, Rossi on social issues," News, Sept. 10]. Why? Because the majority of Washington disagrees with him. Rossi may not be running on the issues, but he will act on them if elected into office.

Finally, a word of caution: Change isn't good or bad. On the national stage, the last eight years were nothing but bad change followed by worse change. Be careful what you wish for.
-- Mollie Price, Seattle

How's that working out for you?
I am disgusted and appalled, but not especially surprised, by your endorsement of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi for governor.

Gov. Christine Gregoire has done an excellent job and ably represents the people of Washington.

Rossi is a fraud who deceives people into thinking he's a moderate Republican in the Dan Evans mold.

However, Rossi is a doctrinaire President George W. Bush conservative who will not even use the Republican Party label on the ballot, preferring to hide behind the ridiculous redundancy, "GOP Party." He has done this because his research shows that many people don't know what GOP means.

As a part-time worker, I depend on Washington State Basic Health to cover my minimal health-care needs. I am very concerned that Rossi, in his zeal to do the bidding of the BIAW, and cut their taxes, will cut into the Basic Health Plan.

Thanks to Gregoire's hard work, we have finally achieved legislation protecting gay rights. Look for "party party" Rossi to go after gay rights and roll back what we have accomplished.

It's worth noting that The Times endorsed Former President Ronald Reagan in 1980 and in 1984. We are now reaping the harvest of his stupid "free-market" policies. You also endorsed President George W. Bush in 2000.

How's that working out for you?

It's distressing to see you support a man who represents only the most conservative among us and holds liberals and moderates in contempt.

You have been fooled, ladies and gentlemen, and I hope Washington state does not suffer too much as a result of your shoddy judgment.
-- Marc Szeftel, Burien

We are sick of it
We have all listened intently to Sen. Barack Obama in his addresses, speeches and in his presidential debates.

He has a clear unmistakable message: He wants to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans. He wants to cut taxes for small businesses, because small business is the engine that drives the economy that provides jobs for 95 percent of Americans.

He said that all small businesses earning less than $250,000 would not have tax increases. And businesses earning $150,000 or less would get tax cuts. We all heard him over and over again making all of this crystal clear.

Sen. John McCain has either lost his hearing or is plainly telling lies at his meetings. He is telling his constituents Obama is going to "kill" small business, because he is going to raise their taxes, and put them out of business.

It is a shocking state of affairs, that a respectable gentleman like McCain would stoop to this kind of conduct just to get votes.

I am appalled by the negativity and nitpicking of both McCain and his running mate Gov. Sarah Palin.
Why don't they have a good plan for the good of the country?

Stop the lies, stop the nitpicking. We are all sick of it.

Do we want a leader who tells lies to stay popular, or a leader whose word we can trust?
-- Jim McKinley

Please raise taxes
I am a high-income voter whose tax bracket will increase if Sen. Barack Obama's proposals are enacted into law. It is easy to resent paying higher taxes for policies I oppose. But it is even easier to overlook government's successes.

My mother's life was saved because of federal taxes. Two years ago, she was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer. She underwent surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. She remains disease-free.

The research that led to her diagnosis and lifesaving treatment was funded by federal taxpayers. The universities and medical schools that trained her doctors were funded by the taxpayers. The nurses, radiology technicians and pharmacists were able to attend professional school due to federal student loans. Federal money helped to build the chemotherapy clinic. Medicare paid for the lion's share of her treatment and the highway on which she traveled to reach the clinic was federally constructed.

I want similar benefits to be there for my children.

Those of us who have profited the most from America's greatness have a civic responsibility to ensure its fiscal future.

I will vote for Obama/Biden in 2008.
--Dorcas Dobie, Sammamish

Small business makes the world go 'round
As a small-business owner, I am pleased that Sen. Barack Obama will reduce my taxes.

While the future looks good to expand my business, I need extra cash flow these next two years, especially with the banks cutting off credit.

I am sure many other small business are in the same situation. Sen. John McCain's tax plan will benefit large businesses, but will hurt small ones.
-- Robert Hermanson, Lynnwood

Ken Lambert / The Seattle Times

Gov. Christine Gregoire, shown here arriving at a Northwest Harvest event earlier this year, has been battered by ads sponsored by the Building Industry Association of Washington.

Money for something
Editor, The Times:
$6.3 million -- that's a lot of money.

If we spent this on local schools, it would be a real boost for teachers' salaries or doubling the size of libraries.

But this is the amount of money that one group, the Building Industry Association or Washington, is spending to slime the reputation of the incumbent governor.

Strange. I've always viewed Washington state politics as in the same realm as Minnesota or Vermont, not Texas or New Jersey.

But BIAW's role in this gubernatorial election is slimy, nasty and beyond the call.

As the front-page story in Friday's paper indicates ["Rossi's biggest backer explains what it wants," page one, Oct. 17], there have been many unsuccessful attempts at discouraging BIAW in their role as the pitchman for dirty politics. If legislative, executive and legal challenges can't deter BIAW from their dastardly deeds, what can be done?

Clean and publicly-funded elections. Yes, this is an effective solution to BIAW's slime machine.
Here is how it would work: Candidates for public office would have the choice of groveling for dollars from the usual special-interest groups (like BIAW) or tapping into a state fund to finance their campaigns.

If a candidate chooses to run "clean," he/she must commit to not accept any money from any source.

A clean candidate must gather a set number (about 250 for a legislative seat) of commitments from local
constituents, plus a small ($5) contribution.

If in the course of the campaign, the clean candidate's opponent is funded directly or indirectly by special interests, state election officials can level the financial playing field by offering the clean candidate matching funds that mirror the amount given his/her opponent.

This matching-funds feature is slightly different in Maine, Arizona and North Carolina, where clean elections has existed for several years.

In Maine, Arizona and North Carolina, BIAW would be crippled in their attempt to buy elections the way it is trying to do here because special-interest money has been moved from clean-election states to other states.

Think of it from BIAW's perspective: It's not easy to run against a clean candidate who can say: "I'm not bought and paid for. What you get is what you see. I'm running on specific issues not influenced by any outside money or interests."

Publicly funded campaigns work. There is a better way.

Let's dump BIAW's ways of intimidation and demagoguery.
-- Roger Lauen, Bainbridge Island

Think local
This election must be quite a quandary for Washington Democrats, who are vehemently opposed to Sen. John McCain.

Their opposition is, for the most part, due to their belief that McCain will continue the economic policies of President George W. Bush; policies that they claim have resulted in the current economic crisis.

Given this mindset, the choice of whether or not to vote for Gov. Christine Gregoire, under whose leadership this state has amassed a $3.2 billion deficit, would appear to be a no-brainer.

Yet, despite this recent revelation, Democrats are still doing all they can to get Gregoire re-elected, including filing frivolous lawsuits against gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi in order to derail his second successful bid for governor.

Ask any Sen. Barack Obama supporter, and that person will tell you that a vote for Obama is in the best interest of American citizens.

Ironically, what's in the best interest of Washingtonians doesn't appear to be of much concern.
-- Marina Anna Baker, Bremerton

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., left, answers a question from plumber Joe Wurzelbacher in Holland, Ohio, Oct. 12.

Christian, Catholic or vegetarian;
Keep it to yourself
Editor, The Times:
I was wondering if anyone else watching the debate Wednesday evening felt their blood pressure rise when Sen. John McCain began to talk about his anti-abortion stance ["Accusations fly in final debate," Times, page one, Oct. 16].

Since he is not a woman, and could be in a position to influence women all over the nation, I feel it's inappropriate and very disturbing to hear him counsel on how "he will work it out" on finding a family for the child that you or I will carry for nine months.

Like many other individual personal and physical decisions for women and men, I would hope that people who are anti-abortion would keep this to themselves.

I would never begin to pretend that I understand the physical needs of a stranger.

So if you are a Christian, Catholic or vegetarian, these are your beliefs. That's great. Apply your beliefs to your body not mine.

Our bodies are not a shared national resource.

McCain, I am 100 percent certain that should you make it to the oval office, you are not qualified to make decisions about my body.

This is not debatable.
-- Karen Quarre, Woodinville

Freedom in opportunity
I'm writing this letter to ask that you support Sen. John McCain when you vote this year. McCain is what this country needs in a president.

He has the experiences of a lifetime to face reforms we need today. I am sure he will see us through the hardships that are coming our way.

We all must work together to get through the Wall Street bailout and again become a productive nation. It's time to work as a team regardless of the party we support. America has been in crisis for the last few years; we have failed to resolve the issues we face because of party politics and the inability to trust who we are as a nation.

We failed to correct the Social Security crisis, transportation issues and the security of a nation that is at war.

Our children face even more issues related to the failure of Congress to address the need to build a nation that is true to its people and it's history -- not just a community of do-good policies that fail to address the true meaning of reform that unites us.

This is no time to continue playing the blame games and failing to follow up on what needs to be done.

We become a nation that supports a culture of death, that lacks the ability to support the meaning of protecting life.

Our health-care system is more about management of the crisis with respect to access to care rather than treating one's health problems.

Our doctors have been forced to limit how they provide access to care and are more managers of wellness than advocates in treatment. Our education system is divided and only supports the smartest rather than building equality. Our children face a nation at risk that lacks true leadership to resolve the crises we find ourselves in today.

They are being told that it's time not to address the issues, but also to only look for what feels right. Reform is not just about hope or change for the sake changing. To continue on this road is surely going to lead us to no more than a misdirected path of continued failures and hopeless policies.

It's time for reform that brings us together and also respects life and the true meaning of freedom in opportunity.
-- Gregory Lemke, Arlington

Poor Joe
Let me get this straight. An honest and hardworking single parent asks a legitimate question during a campaign rally ["Joe the plumber's story isn't watertight," News, Oct. 17].

It is the telling answer by the candidate that is repeated and analyzed by the other party and affiliated blogs, yet the media swoops down on the man, ridicules him nationwide, publicly reveals his financial affairs and ultimately threatens his job -- all because he believes that hard work should be rewarded, not punished by higher taxes.

A sad day indeed.
--Edda Kuhlmann, Bellevue

Not another maverick, please
The debates are over. Now comes the solemn responsibility of every voter, to elect the next president and vice president of the U.S.

We must consider what we have seen and heard during the campaigns. Sen. Barack Obama has been calm and has presented a cogent message at each debate.

Unfortunately, Sen. John McCain seemed to exhibit a different aspect of his personality at each debate.
My least favorite was the dour man who refused to look at his opponent during one debate. Is that really who we want representing our country?

Or someone who refers to his opponent as "that one"?

Our next president will need to court needed allies that have been repulsed by our foreign policy over the past eight years.

Our next president will need to implement diplomacy to achieve nuclear-proliferation agreements with North Korea and Iran -- tasks at which the current administration continues to fail.

McCain's many faces makes me think he will do whatever it takes to win the election.

My vote is for Obama, who has acted presidential throughout his campaign. The U.S. does not need another "maverick."
-- Robert Lynn, Bellevue

Let's get the full story on ACORN
Shame on the media for printing John McCain's slanderous remarks against ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) without including a fact-check ["Palin criticizes Obama over ACORN, view of America," Politics & Government, Oct. 16].

I've heard of ACORN's good work in helping low-income Americans with housing, and also with political empowerment through voter-registration drives.

And keep in mind that only the government can register people to vote -- not ACORN, not political parties nor any other group.

Granted, the story in The Seattle Times does soften McCains's remarks a bit by referring to these as ". . . hyperbolically raising the threat beyond what the evidence supports."

But the media should have interviewed ACORN for their side of the story.

The group hired workers to help with voter-registration drives. Unfortunately, a few of these hired hands embezzled money from ACORN by falsifying records.

If you own a business and employees embezzle from you by falsifying documents, you are the victim.
Further, ACORN turned these forms into the government as required by law, but alerted the government to the fact that they thought some of the voter-registration forms looked suspicious.

ACORN was helping the government do its job.

I hope ACORN sues McCain for slander.
-- Marjorie Rhodes, Seattle

So much for freedom
We do not need to secure ourselves against terrorists who seek to take away our freedoms. Our country is doing it for us.

Three years ago, Congress approved the renewal of the Patriot Act. So much for habeas corpus, the right to have one's day in court.

Two years ago today, the democratically controlled Congress approved the Military Commissions Act. So much for the Posse Comitatus Act, our right to not have our military used against us.

Without these rights we cannot call ourselves a free country.

As our Founding Fathers knew, the greatest threat to our freedom is our own government.

Conservatives say they want government to quit interfering with our lives and yet they gave the government the right to arrest any American for no reason, label him or her an enemy combatant -- so long habeas corpus.

Liberals declaim the internment camps of WWII and yet they voted for the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act.

I am so ashamed of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act and the detentions at Guantánamo.
Ben Franklin once said "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Elizabeth Franklin, Seattle

We're no tin-pot town
Amid all the clamor surrounding the presidential and gubernatorial campaigns, there's one thing many people seem to have lost sight of: Great damage is done whenever one party controls everything, no matter which party holds the reins.

To anyone who looks at the issue without the filter of partisan hatred, it's a very dangerous thing to hand total control to one ideological group and leave the other out in the cold. That defeats the entire purpose of the check-and-balance system our forefathers put in place, and effectively disenfranchises large segments of the population.

This is not the best way to make government responsive to the needs of the people, especially given the propensity of legislators at all levels to pander to those special-interest groups and individuals who paid to get them elected.

Washington has been controlled by one party for years.

Because of the overwhelming imbalance toward the left in King County, the result is a huge state deficit and some of the highest taxes (and lowest return on those taxes) in the country.

Our state government is out of control and out of touch.

In order to maintain some semblance of representative government and keep the ideological zeal of the party in power in check, we need to make sure that at least one branch of government, whether it be the House, Senate or executive, remains in the hands of the opposition party.

Otherwise, we're no better than those tin-pot dictatorships where people can vote for anyone they like -- as long as it's the guy in power.
-- Winston Rockwell, Kirkland

Go back where you came from
Of course the BIAW-sponsored ads about the casinos are racist ["Spokane Tribe upset about casino ads," Politics & Government, Oct. 10].

I don't understand where the state would have any claim to revenues from a business run by a sovereign nation. One would think the citizens of Washington would be glad the tribes have developed an industry to provide jobs and social services to their member.

Maybe we should just give the land back to the tribes and go back to where we came from?
-- Craig Illman, Seattle

Family-leave insurance is still around
The Seattle Times' Oct. 15 editorial misinterpreted Gov. Christine Gregoire's temporary suspension of family-leave-insurance startup funding ["The Times recommends ... Carlyle, Pettigrew, White in districts 36, 37, 46, Times, editorial].

Legislators funded initial costs for the program, to the tune of $6.2 million in the 2008 supplemental budget.
While development of the computer system needed to administer it has been suspended, the program remains on the books.

In the past week, the governor, House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown have each reiterated their support for finding a funding source outside the general fund and implementing paid family leave. They, like tens of thousands of Washington's families, understand that this program will provide economic relief for middle-class families and give all our children the best start in life.

Given national economic trends, we want an even stronger family-leave plan in the future, with more-comprehensive benefits to ensure working families stay out of poverty during tough economic times. We look forward to working with our colleagues in the coming legislative session to fully fund this crucial program, making Washington a better place to live, work and raise a family.
-- Sen. Karen Keiser, Rep. MaryLou Dickerson

Be consistent
I was thrilled and encouraged by your endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for president ["The endorsement game: how the process works," Editorial column, Sept. 21].

You stated that Obama is "a little young, but brilliant."

You further stated that if he seems "brainy and professorial, that's OK. We need the leader of the free world to think things through, carefully."

And, you contend, that "on numerous issues, from media consolidation to health care, Obama… makes up for a thin resume with integrity, judgment and fresh ideas."

I wholeheartedly agree.

Yet, there is another candidate in Washington who you have overlooked.

That candidate is also "young, but brilliant", and "thinks things through carefully" and "makes up for a thin resume with integrity, judgment and fresh ideas.

I am therefore confused and disappointed that you did not extend your logic and endorse the congressional candidate who possesses the identical qualities as Obama: Darcy Burner for Congress.

Burner is definitely "brilliant. " She has "fresh ideas," and she is also in step with Obama's positions on the war, education, energy and the economy. Burner has proposed a detailed plan for moving the troops out of Iraq, which was part of your rationale for endorsing Obama.

If we truly want change in Washington, we need Burner to work for it. I have no doubt that, if elected, she will do just that.
-- Kathy Rule, Mercer Island

Make up for past mistakes
There are many more compelling arguments to vote for the Seattle Parks levy than The Seattle Times recently had to offer ["Approve Pike Place Market upgrade; reject Seattle Parks levy," editorial, Oct. 7].

This election is the public's chance to tell its government what it wants. By voting yes on Proposition 2, citizens will know that dedicated funding will go to improving their parks.

As Seattle becomes more densely populated we need to make sure we provide the open spaces for reflection, recreation and experiencing nature.

Many neighborhoods in Seattle don't have parks nearby due to the lack of foresight in the old days.

We can only try to make up for that now. Opportunities will be lost if we don't renew the levy. There are many great projects in the levy package that address a wide variety of needs.

Getting a chance to vote on the levy is a chance to decide how important parks and open spaces are to each of us -- and that is a good thing.
-- Bill Farmer, Seattle

We want to change, not charge
Editor, The Times:
Watching former Navy pilot Sen. John McCain's performance Wednesday night reminded me of another military man's failed strategy.

Like George Armstrong Custer's last stand, McCain was firing in all directions during the debate, but wasn't inflicting any collateral damage to his opponent.

Just as the Sioux warriors methodically closed in on Custer, so too, the economy has closed in on McCain.
I imagine the Arizona senator's instinct is to say "charge" in the face of our financial crisis.

The trouble for McCain is, the public is yelling "change."
-- A. L. Cynton, Laguna Beach, Calif.

Peter will hate Paul
Take from Peter to pay Paul.

That's Barack Obama's promise: "If you vote for me, I'll spread the wealth around."

Naturally, it will work -- as long as there are enough Pauls excited about getting Peter's money.

But wait.

What would my husband and I do with $250,000 a year?

We'd invest in Home Depot, its employees and home values by doing much-needed repairs on our home.

We'd also help my retired parents, who've devoted their lives to ministry and service, by restoring their historic home.

The extra money in our pockets would allow us to give more to our nephew's Diabetes Walk and various other charities serving our community.

Don't be fooled. Under a President Barack Obama, the community would receive only 60 cents of each dollar because of the steep tax increase on our $250,000.

I'm frightened that Obama's "pay the people to vote" notion has never been questioned.

If it's patriotic for the government to take from Peter, the Pauls will be happy in the short term.

Eventually, the Peters will have no money left, which results in mediocrity for all.
-- Sarah Viers, Bothell

We should all be plumbers
Things I learned from Sen. John McCain during the last debate:

If you want to earn a quarter of a million dollars, become a plumber.

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., left, answers a question from plumber Joe Wurzelbacher in Holland, Ohio, Oct. 12.

When you get called on rabble-rousing the scared and frustrated masses akin to what the Nazis did during the Depression or the segregationists in the 1960s -- so that Americans lose sleep worrying that some whacko might be incited to try to assassinate our first black presidential candidate -- pout and demand an apology from the very man whose life you've put at risk.
-- Lesley Reed, Vashon

Crotchety does not belong in the White House
As a Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden supporter, I was quite uneasy during the first three debates.

I was afraid that Sen. John McCain was doing a better job of appealing to Middle America.

You see, as a Democrat and Mariner fan, I'm always concerned that presidential politics and sports will not work out in my favor.

The final debate, however, was no contest.

We saw a president vs. a crotchety old man.
-- Ed Rankin, Seattle

Winking all the way
You may have preferred to have a beer with President George W. Bush or go to a hockey game with Gov. Sarah Palin rather than with their opponents.

But didn't we learn something from the last time we elected Mr. Congeniality rather than Mr. Rationality?
We aren't voting for buddies; we are voting for leaders who have the calm and wisdom to get us out of the mess that an unqualified president got us into.

I sometimes think that some people don't realize that the vice president becomes president in the event of incapacity of the president. He/she must be prepared to deal with a world that has never been so complex in terms of global economics, energy needs, wars in the Middle East, nuclear issues, climate change, population growth and resource limits.

We need someone who not only understands the needs of people, but who can gather the best and brightest minds to address those needs, and who will use that expertise to make calm, rational decisions to resolve problems.

If we truly care about our children, we will learn from our past mistake and elect the Obama-Biden team.

Sen. John McCain made a very selfish decision when he chose Palin as his shiny red convertible to show off.

Cute and fun is insufficient.

President Bush's inability has driven us to the edge. Palin's could drive us over. But she would be smiling and winking all the way.
-- Judy Bevington, Lake Forest Park

We know Obama
I am disappointed that The Times chose to publish Charles Krauthammer's "Obama's associations are indeed relevant" [syndicated column, Oct. 12], in which he repeats the lies and distortions surrounding Sen. Barack Obama's connection to Bill Ayers put forth by Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin.

Yes, Ayers was a radical war protester 30+ years before Obama met him. However, no conclusions about Obama's character can be drawn from that fact, given both who Ayers became in the intervening three decades and the context in which Obama met Ayers.

By the mid-1990s when Obama met him, Ayers was a widely respected "distinguished" professor of education who, in 1997, was named "Chicago citizen of the year" for his work on improving public education.
There is no evidence that Obama was aware of who Ayers was back in the 1960s, and it's inconceivable that the subject of Ayers' past ever came up during the board meetings they attended together.

Furthermore, it's important to note that Krauthammer doesn't cast any similar aspersions on the myriad other community and education leaders who knew and worked with Ayers, including Republican philanthropists Walter and Leonore Annenberg.

The Annenberg Challenge project to improve public education was supported by politicians and civic leaders from both parties throughout the Chicago area, as was the Woods Fund anti-poverty project.
That Obama was asked to chair the board of the Annenberg project by a Republican demonstrates

Obama's ability to work across party lines for the common good.

And what about the other faculty members at the public university where Ayers is a professor? Are they, as Krauthammer claims of Obama, "[swimming] easily and without protest" in a "fetid pond?" Should they refuse even to shake hands with their colleague, as Krauthammer claims any decent American would? Only in Republican "Newspeak" (George Orwell, 1984) could community service to improve public education and fight poverty be characterized as evidence of Obama's "expediency," "cynicism and ruthlessness," and "sheer indecency."

The claim that Obama needs to be more "honest and open" about his association with Ayers assumes that something is hidden, yet there's not one shred of evidence that there was anything unsavory about their interactions whatsoever -- nothing even remotely related to Ayers' radical past and nothing that Obama should have any reason to hide. Obama worked with a leading education professional on projects to improve education and reduce poverty.

End of story.
-- Paula Bennett, Seattle

Do they really need approval?
Initiative 1000 would give despondent people no power they do not now have, but would implicate us all in their decision to kill themselves ["How we die: the Oregon experience," page one, Oct. 13].

According to the Washington state Department of Health, "814 Washington State residents died by suicide" in 2005. They evidently did so without interference from the government, politicians and religious leaders against whom the proponents of I-1000 warn us.

Anyone capable of self-administering lethal drugs, as the initiative specifies, is capable of killing himself without a doctor's prescription.

I-1000 would add only one element: our approval.

If the law and the public say suicide is all right, such "legitimacy" may well be the final argument that convinces a sick person to end his life, especially when the prestigious medical profession seems to endorse such a choice.

This initiative offers less than nothing to the sick, but would make us all complicit in despair.

I hope the people of Washington reject it.
-- James O'Callaghan, Maple Valley

It's not all about the money
The Seattle Times has recommended rejection of Initiative 1029 purely on concerns about cost and that a test would frighten immigrants ["Reject I-1029, a proposal to train and license long-term-care workers," Editorial, Oct. 8].

To appreciate the potential benefits of I-1029, one only has to have a loved one in long-term care. Our loved one was accosted and struck in her own room, and knocked down by another resident as the caretaker watched, apparently not knowing what to do.

Current law requires that long-term caregivers obtain only 34 hours of training. Workers can begin employment after an orientation; they have four months to get the remaining 34 hours. I-1029 would require long-term caregivers to obtain 75 hours of mandatory training and passage of a test.

Insufficiently trained persons staff the majority of long-term-care facilities in the state, with approximately 20,000 new long-term-care workers hired annually.

Long-term-care centers are now "holding bins" for persons who cannot speak English and who are ill prepared to meet the complex needs of persons with advanced Alzheimer's disease.

We urge "yes" on I-1029 on Nov. 4.
-- Shirley and Ray Murphy, Edmonds

Follow the money trail
We are the parents of a child with severe developmental and physical disabilities. We rely heavily on hired caregivers to help us care for our son. We've been lucky enough to have family members, friends and people from our community whom we trust and who have provided excellent care. These good people have already gone through adequate training and background checks by the state in order to provide this care.

If Initiative 1029 were to pass, the requirements to become and remain a caregiver for our son would be unnecessarily burdensome. We could ultimately lose these resources and not be able to find replacements that we would trust and have as much confidence in.

And the same is true for families all across our state. For some, these new requirements might actually apply to a disabled child's own parents or an elderly person's own children.

If I-1029 passes, the sponsors of the initiative are the ones who will benefit financially. It is being supported by Washington state's largest labor union, which will get tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to train their own members.

Don't be fooled by the ballot language that would make it appear that you would be voting for our best interests.
-- Evan Purcell and Ellen Norton, Tacoma

Redneck elitism
Editor, The Times:
You've heard of "limousine liberals" and "country-club conservatives?" Now meet America's new elite: rednecks.

Redneck elitism tells you you're better than Sen. Barack Obama because he's from the city and you're from a rural town; he went to Harvard Law and you didn't go to college; he speaks in grammatical sentences and you prefer one-liners; he thinks rationally, you're driven by your gut.

AP Photo/Pool, Charles Dharapak

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., wave to the audience after a presidential debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y., Wednesday.

If you live in mountain or prairie states, you're better than people on the coasts. As a varsity athlete in public school, you know more than a Ph.D. Because you never ventured out of state or visited another country, you're more patriotic that someone who can name five nations contiguous to Iraq, or define the difference between Sunni and Shi'ah. If your evangelical Protestant, you're saved: other religions be damned. You voted for President George W. Bush because he's a guy you could have a beer with. You'll vote for Gov. Sarah Palin because she kills bigger animals than you've ever hunted. You couldn't care less how much she knows about foreign policy.

Redneck elitism is quaint, nationalistic and dangerous. Hitler's Brown Shirts burned books, beat up Jews and spawned fascism because they were redneck elites. Gov. Sarah Palin links Obama to terrorists. People scream, "Traitor! Kill him!" And she winks.

I guess I'm no elite.

I'll vote for someone smarter, better-educated and more cosmopolitan than I'll ever be: I'm electing the chief executive for a nation in crisis, not a drinking buddy.
--Alfred LaMotte, Steilacoom

Shameful manipulation
As an actively engaged voter, from a home with a variety of political perspectives and voting histories, I watched the presidential debates last night, eager to hear the candidates clarify their positions on key issues ["Accusations fly in final debate," Times, page one, Oct. 16].

Like many other voters in this election, I am repulsed by the finger pointing and hateful rhetoric, which has taken the focus away from the very real issues that matter most to voters.

After the debates, I checked the Web sites of several major news outlets to obtain perspective on the candidates' performances. In so doing, I also looked at the electoral maps, which most major news outlets provide as a view into projected voter trends.

I was amazed to see that Fox News, which purports to provide "fair and balanced coverage," has no updated electoral map. Their map shows results from the past two elections, in 2004 and 2006, but not the current election.

This is not a result of a temporary Web-site malfunction; Fox's electoral map has been disabled since the last debate, when I also checked it.

If Fox News wants to be taken seriously by the general public as a source of unbiased reporting on current events, they will need to be much less obvious in their censorship of information.

Their blatant refusal to inform their viewers about the current state of projected voting trends is not fair, nor is it balanced.

Fox News' failure to provide fair and balanced coverage should be addressed on the front pages of other papers around the country.

The public has a right to know, and journalists have an obligation to cover, Fox's shameful manipulation of the "news" it covers.
-- Bonnie Zinn, Seattle

Was there anybody listening?
I'm an Independent.

But I think I watched a different debate than everyone else last night. Apparently, no one in the post-mortems heard Sen. John McCain say the following when asked about whether he would have a litmus test for a potential Supreme Court nominee: "I would consider anyone in their qualifications. I do not believe that someone who has supported Roe v. Wade would be part of those qualifications. But I certainly would not impose any litmus test."

Sure sounds like a litmus test to me.

And this bit of truly revelatory exposure of the far right's true foreign-relations agenda when asked about Sen. Joseph Biden's qualifications: "He voted against the first Gulf War. He voted against it and, obviously, we had to take Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait or it would've threatened the Middle Eastern world supply."

Supply of what? Freedom?

No, it was oil. The stated reason for "Operation Desert Storm" was supposed to be to preserve the freedom of a sovereign country against an invading aggressor.

At least we know the real truth about why McCain wants us to stay in Iraq and why President George W. Bush invaded it.

Although I staunchly remain a member of neither party, I have no doubt who's not getting my vote.
-- Stephen Salamunovich, Redmond

Thanks a lot, Joe
Hey Joe, last night we heard a lot about you and your dilemma. Sounds like things are starting to look pretty good for you, though, and you are wondering which of these candidates can help you the most.

Yes, America has some problems right now. Much of the former middle class is struggling, health-care costs are out of control; education and educational opportunities are suffering; the financial markets are collapsing, and so is our infrastructure.

But I'm delighted to hear that things are looking up for you and your personal economy.

I'm glad to hear you are earnestly considering which of these candidates is best for you. But I'm saddened to hear you think it might be Sen. John McCain.

I want you and every other undecided voter out there to think about what JFK said:
"And so, my fellow Americans: Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."

This is a great country. It truly is the land of opportunity.

Despite its serious problems, our nation is a great one and we are lucky to live in it. I feel lucky to have been born here, to have the opportunity to live here, to make my living here. America has been very good to me.

I find it increasingly difficult to take seriously people who wrap themselves in our flag, call themselves patriotic, and then moan about paying too much in taxes. You can't have it both ways.

America embraces us. America gives us strong soil to nurture our crops and now some people who call themselves patriots want to go cheap on her -- just when she needs us most.

They're saying, "Hey America. Thanks for the opportunity, thanks for giving me everything I needed, and by the way, sorry to hear about your problems. Good luck with them."

America is in trouble and is in debt.

We are America and are in trouble. Instead of bitching about how much it is costing us as individuals, how about if we all pitch in and come to the aid of the great nation that has done so much for so many.

How about if we all do our part?

Hey Joe, I paid my taxes yesterday. The good news is that I can't believe a poor boy like me, who started with so little, has done so well. The bad news is that I know I will have to pay more next year. I can't wait.

Thank you, America
-- Walter Cougan, Seattle

How did he get this far?
Debate one: Sen. John McCain didn't make eye contact.

Debate two: McCain referred to Sen. Barack Obama as "that one."

Debate three: McCain kept grimacing, frowning and snorting.

Presidential behavior? I don't think so.
-- Don Franks, Burien

Stick with corruption and earmarks
The reason we have been unsuccessful in the war is because by invading Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, we have lent credence to the Arab view that we are out to conquer the Islamic world and steal their oil.

John McCain still believes it was the right thing to do and still wants to win it.

I don't think we can ever be certain that terrorism isn't a danger, but when we give Iraq back its country, there will be less danger.

We have to stop thinking "if you are not for us, you're against us." To do that requires a knowledge of history, understanding of other cultures, ability to see other points of view and tolerance of other religions.
These are strengths of Sen. Barack Obama.

Leave McCain in the Senate where he can fight corruption and earmarks, and work with Democrats as he has promised to do.
-- Robert Wright, Yakima

Make the smart choice
I have known Gov. Christine Gregoire for almost 20 years.

I knew her before she was our state's attorney general or governor.

Through the years I have seen the hardest worker I know.

Gregoire has said that her mom was the hardest worker she knew, but if her mother were still alive, I think she would take her hat off to her daughter.

The love she has and has always had for the state of Washington is truly remarkable. She has always been willing to go the extra mile to get things done. She is extremely honest, ethical and has high values. I feel lucky to have her as a friend. She is truly a caring person with her family and with the issues she holds most dear to her heart, such as education, children and the environment.

I feel Washington has been so fortunate to have her as our governor.

I hope our state is smart enough to elect her for four more years.
-- Sheila Riffe, Olympia

Who are you?
Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi is so full of contradictions. He wants to cut the minimum wage $1.50, cut $500 million from education and supports deregulating our economy and health-care system.

Rossi is now trying to quash a subpoena in a lawsuit filed by Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna regarding campaign-finance violations with the Building Industry Association of Washington ["AG's office clarifies comments regarding BIAW-Rossi lawsuit," news, Oct. 11].

He is charged with "illegally coordinated fundraising," and wants to testify after the election.

Rossi now says he is a supporter of stem-cell research. In his first debate with Gov. Christine Gregoire four years ago, local Seattle and Everett newspapers displayed these quotes: When asked who would lead stem-cell research Rossi said, "California would lead" and that he "didn't want to compete with California, with Washington state dollars." Also, "It's not relevant whether I support it or not, it's already legal," topped by "I don't know enough about the issue to say whether it is ethical."

On Rossi's current transportation plan to solve Highway 520's bridge problems, he has proposed eight lanes for his "bridge to nowhere."
He says he can do it for $1 billion less than the six-lane proposal by Gov. Gregoire. That's a head-scratcher.

Of course, he doesn't say how those extra lanes will access Interstate 5 and surrounding communities, as well as how, and at what cost, the Eastside and Seattle will be affected.

The Joker in the deck is that at a recent local Chamber of Commerce meeting, The Mukilteo Beacon reported Rossi forces are still sobbing that in the last election there were "several hundred ballots that weren't counted," and forgot to mention that those approximately 600 ballots that weren't counted came from King County, where Gov. Gregoire had a 60-40 percent advantage.

Isn't it strange that Republican Rossi, as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, with a Republican majority in the Senate, wasn't able to work in a nonpartisan way to get a fast-tract transportation system in place and, as writer of the 2003 budget, left Gov. Gregoire with a $2.2 billion deficit?
--Max W. Don, Mukilteo

Substance over style
Up until now, Washington's strong economy and Gov. Christine Gregoire's good management have kept our state from the huge budget shortfalls facing many other states. But as the current economic crisis spreads from Wall Street to the rest of the world, we are no longer immune.

Who should we trust to make the tough choices our state will have to make -- gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi or Gov. Christine Gregoire?

The only subject Rossi has been specific about is a transportation plan no one is taking seriously. He claims that he's not running for office on issues like abortion, but his socially conservative values will inevitably influence his decisions about which parts of the budget to fund and which to cut.

Gregoire has created a good business climate and expanded trade for our state, but has also improved children's health care, education and environmental policy (including a real plan for how to clean up Puget Sound).

When budgets need to be trimmed, I trust her more-balanced approach to Washington's needs.
Gregoire is a proven leader with solid accomplishments; Rossi has no real executive experience.

As times get tougher, we will need substance over style. I'll be voting for Gregoire.
-- Linda Norlen, Seattle

Sorry, Jesus
In his Oct. 12 syndicated column ["Obama's associations are indeed relevant," Opinion], Charles Krauthammer maintains that Sen. Barack Obama's association with the radical pastor Reverend Wright and 1960s radical William Ayers reflects the senator's lack of character.

The same argument was of course used in the 1950s during the McCarthy era. Acquaintances and even relatives of communists were considered to be sympathizers who were to be ostracized by society.

But this issue of guilt by association reminds me of an event that happened much further back in history: Once, there was a fellow who traveled with prostitutes, pickpockets and money-changers. He seemed to have the misguided notion that his association with these flawed people might actually help them, and also serve as a positive example to society.

But, according to Krauthhammer's logic, this particular fellow would, like Obama, lack character.

Sorry Jesus, maybe you're not a favorite of conservative Republicans after all.
-- Alex Zedicoff, Seattle

AP Photo/U.S. Dept of Justice

This frame grab provided by the U.S. Department of Justice shows Osama bin Laden in a CNN interview in 1997.

What about bin Laden?
Noteworthy by its near absence from the presidential candidates' debates has been the full panoply of rhetoric that has surrounded President George W. Bush's "war on terror" since its inception.

Of course, foreign policy in general will always constitute, in some measure, an obligatory subject of discussion for high-level U.S. politicians. But aside from vague declarations about "resolve" and some scattershot statements covering the Middle East, U.S.-Russian tensions and nuclear proliferation, for the two presidential candidates it's obvious that economics trumps everything else.

Osama bin Laden continues to occupy his dank South Asian cave, and is still issuing threats, but the U.S. public is most concerned about the bottomless pit of Wall Street right now. As of mid-October, the real and alleged perils of Islamic extremism seem as remote from Americans' everyday concerns as demon rum and the Stamp Act.

It is a monumental change in the political paradigm.

No doubt President Bush can't believe how swiftly the public relations rug was pulled out from under him.

We shall soon see how his successor handles the mess that is "high finance."
-- Frank Goheen, Camas

Two sentences
Obama is Biden his time.
McCain is Palin comparison.
--Beverlie Duff, Kent

Don't vote for the sellouts
While justifiably condemning Sen. John McCain for his fear mongering, E.J. Dionne Jr. believes that Americans should place their trust in Sen. Barack Obama because he offers hope ["Hope is the antidote to economic fear," syndicated columnist, Oct. 10].

Unfortunately, the working-class American was not offered much hope when Obama decided to cast his vote for Wall Street instead of Main Street.

To add insult to injury, the senator also lobbied hard to get his fellow Democrats to follow his example.

Dionne mentions the high cost of health insurance Americans are faced with today but ignores the fact that under Obama's plan, American families would be forced to pay for their children's insurance, regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

A third-party candidate like Ralph Nader recognizes the efficacy of a single-payer health-care plan but Dionne, like so many pundits, apparently refuses to acknowledge that there are other candidates running for president besides a Democrat and a Republican, candidates who have not sold out to the corporate interests like Obama and McCain have.
-- Clifford J. Hutchins, Rochester

No ditsy-bob winkers, please
Do we really want as vice president, or potentially as president, Gov. Sarah Palin, a ditsy-bob winker with a hockey-mom, joe-six-pack mentality, who evidently did not get enough adulation during her pageant days and today uses sex appeal to get what she wants. Do we really want a president whose judgment is so flawed that he would foist on the American people a person like Palin as a potential successor?

Furthermore, do we really want a president whose temperament is one of impatience and bluster, who thinks the answer to all world problems is more troops and more bombs, for however long it takes?

Sen. John McCain has clearly demonstrated his lack of finesse with rash answers and actions that show little concern for what he said two weeks ago, much less an understanding of more distant history.

I have been mostly a Republican for 50 years and have, I'm sorry to say, voted for what have turned out to be some scoundrels and miscreants.

But this year, McCain is too much. He has sold his soul.

I cannot understand how sensible people can endorse this man for the highest office in the land.

Being a [prisoner of war] survivor does not entitle him to be elected. How can one serve with integrity if one has to lie and cajole his way into office?

This year I am voting for Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden, a pair of thoughtful, deliberative and mature politicians. Given the financial mess that they will inherit, they may not accomplish all they hope to, but I hope they will at least restore some credibility, dignity and international respect to the White House and America.
-- Rand Hillier, Poulsbo

Mourning in America
A friend of mine suggested to a mutual Republican acquaintance of ours to accept the inevitability of a Sen. Barack Obama presidency.

He said, "Relax. The sun will still rise on November 4th."

He then proposed that Republicans and Democrats should now be able to return to a more bipartisan, civil coexistence.

I have a different theory:

The strain between the parties is as bad as any time during my lifetime.

From the perspective of a Democrat, this is mainly due to the divisive tactics of [the late Republican National Chairman] Lee Atwater, [Republican political strategist] Karl Rove, Vice President Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush.

I have to presume that from the Republican perspective, there are others to blame, including [former President Bill and Sen. Hillary Rodham] Clinton, [Speaker of the House] Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid and others. However we got here, we are living in extremely divisive times.

And the worse things get for Republicans, the more President Bush proves to be an utter failure as president, the more angry Democrats have become. The angrier we get, the more vicious we are toward Bush and by extension Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin. Furthermore, the more embarrassed Republicans are, the angrier they become. They can only take this abuse for so long.

Now, it seems, many Republicans want Obama to fail as badly as Bush has. They are seething over all of the abuse the Democrats have meted-out over the past six years or so.

The Republicans in Congress seem bound to do all they can to put roadblocks in the way of any Democratic initiatives.

Why? Consider what Republicans have to look forward to.

Imagine an Obama presidency with all of the newly acquired power of the presidency. Consider the possibility of an Obama presidency continuing the trend toward Cheney's unitary executive doctrine.

Perhaps the most powerful example of increased presidential power within the unitary executive doctrine is the use of signing statements that allow the president to choose which laws to obey and ignore. Next, imagine the prospect of a filibuster-proof senate. Picture two or three liberal Supreme Court appointments.

Finally, look at the demographic changes that are rapidly resulting in a growing democratic voting populace.

The Republican sun will not rise for a long, long time.

For Republicans, it is now "mourning in America."
-- Noel Dieterich, Kirkland

Respect what you seek
Sen. John McCain and Gov Sarah Palin proclaim they are the true Americans, and urge us to believe Sen. Barack Obama is "not one of us" and that he consorts with terrorists. They declare themselves the true patriots.

When they incite crowds with this claim and when they use their campaign money to fan hatred, they undermine our fundamental values. They disrespect the offices they seek.

Our country's seal says: "E Pluribus Unum." It is Latin and means "Out of Many, One." It stands for a way of life that embraces all who live here, and calls us to come together to create a country that works for us all.

In this time of crisis, we have a very serious choice to make. I choose E Pluribus Unum. I ask you to do the same. And I ask you to respect the office of president and vice president of the U. S. and hold candidates to the highest standard when you vote this November.
--Anne Stadler, Lake Forest Park

Blue and blind
I just don't get it.

People like Danny Westneat still seem to make this look like a race between Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Barack Obama not Sen. John McCain and Obama ["The female vote," page one column, Oct. 15].
Sure Palin could potentially become president — so could Sen. Joe Biden.

However, I'm so baffled that the female population and people in general don't see she has equal or better experience than Obama in many areas.

Being the governor of Alaska is a top-level executive job. A senator is not a top-level executive position.

Executives and governors have total responsibility for direct control of budgets, hiring and firing of employees, mandating, leading and enforcing real changes for their state or company. As a senator, you can only introduce, influence and vote on your plans/suggestions.

Senators have no real, direct authority to do anything; they are representatives of a larger group.

The general population still doesn't understand that a governor outranks a senator by a considerable margin when it comes to real executive-level experience.

We appear to not only be a blue state, but also a blind state.
-- Jake Justice, Everett

Personality matters
As a first-time voter this year, I know I can speak for many when I say that personality in a candidate does matter ["Christine Gregoire: Smart, intense and struggling to woo voters," news, Oct. 10].

Compared with Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. John McCain seems very intense, just as Gov. Christine Gregoire seems when matched with gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's good sense of humor and laid-back personality.

I know that my vote for governor should be based off their stance in politics and how they plan to help make our state better economically, but if Gregoire wants to get re-elected, especially with young voters, she has to present herself in a more relaxed and comfortable way.

This story mentioned a few times how Gregoire shows her "formal" side when she is in public.

Young voters don't care about relaying the stats if the personality doesn't come with it.

If Gregoire were to act more like she does when she is around her family, she would be a much more likable candidate in this upcoming election.

She would get my vote.
--Jacquelyn Komen, Seattle

Like drawing blood from a rock
Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's latest attack ad features two women sharing their woes over increasing property taxes for citizens living on "fixed incomes." What they fail to capture on camera is the true background behind why this is the case.

Washington state is one of the few remaining in the nation without an income tax. Therefore, money to provide services needs to come from other sources such as sales tax, gas tax, motor-vehicle tax and property tax.

Unfortunately, these are all examples of "regressive taxes," meaning that the lower a person's income, the higher the percentage of income she/he pays in tax.

Income tax, on the other hand, is an example of "progressive tax," which means that the percentage of tax paid increases proportionately to one's income.

Mere mention of instituting an income tax in Washington, however, has become known as political suicide for anyone who dares utter the words.

This results in the phenomenon of the citizens with the lowest incomes providing the broadest base of revenues for the state budget. Anyone with even a few firing brain cells should be able to figure out the answer to that equation.

And each time Tim Eyman [initiative guru] sits down at his keyboard to create his latest example of shortsighted "vomit," the coffers of the state budget creep further into the red zone.

I hope the legislators and citizens of this state will wake up someday and recognize that this cannot continue.

Voting for Rossi, my friends, is not the answer to the problem. In fact, his "solutions" to the budget crisis will only make things worse -- not just for the working class, but for all of us who depend on the working class to bear such a large percentage of the tax burden.

Ever try getting blood from a rock?

Gov. Gregoire's "reckless spending," as Rossi-ites refer, has been for "superficial" things like health care and education for our youth -- investments that will lead to large payoffs in the future if we can be patient.

The best solution is to overhaul the tax structure in our state.
-- Rebecca Resnick, Seattle

Actions speak louder than lies
Much has been written and spoken about truth in advertising during this election cycle.

This makes it hard for voters to know exactly what we can believe and who we can trust. With that as our conflict, perhaps our choices should be based on what each candidate brings to the election in character and experience. If that is the criteria, the only choice is Gov. Christine Gregoire. Her years of public service as our state attorney general and our governor, move her to the top of the list of qualified candidates.

In this, the most important election in my life, I would not consider voting for anyone other than Gregoire.
-- Vincent Lachina, Seattle

Give us someone who cares
The race for governor comes down to this: caring or careless.

Gov. Christine Gregoire has proved she cares for all the residents of this state. No matter their color, socioeconomic status, religion, sexual orientation or age, her vision is simple: serve, protect and instill hope for a better future.

Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi believes catering to business interests and letting capitalism reign free of "government regulation" is the end-all.

Wake up Rossi -- we can only call that careless.

Roll back the minimum wage? Deny equal rights to committed gay couples? Grant more tax breaks to your friends in the building industry? Careless, careless, careless.
-- Michael Wrenn, Seattle

Think of the children
During the past four years, under the leadership of Gov. Christine Gregoire, the state has made wise investments to ensure the well-being of vulnerable children. These include investments in foster care, early learning, reduced class size, health-care coverage and child-nutrition programs. One would never guess this from the distortions about her record that fill our airwaves.

Take foster care, for example. Thousands of children in Washington are placed in foster care each year. For most, this provides needed safety and stability. For a few, it does not.

Gregoire and the Legislature have dramatically increased funding (approximately $198 million) and oversight of foster care to address problems. She has been a leader in Washington and the nation.

When Gregoire took office, Child Protective Services (CPS) investigations were required within 72 hours of a report when a child was at risk of harm. Today, it's 24 hours, and this quick action means fewer children have subsequent referrals to CPS.

The response time for lower-risk cases has also improved. There is much to do, but Gregoire has the knowledge, commitment and focus to keep on track to improve the well-being of all of the children who come to the state's attention.

It is important to understand the facts to determine who will be the best governor for the most vulnerable children in Washington. The Children's Campaign Fund (a nonpartisan PAC dedicated to electing champions for children) has endorsed Gregoire for governor because of her demonstrated leadership, commitment and capacity to protect all children and her proven track record.
-- Marty Jacobs, Seattle

Editorial was a cheap shot
As a Republican voter, I believe The Times' description of state Rep. Maralyn Chase as a "caricature of a liberal Democrat" was a cheap shot ["Snohomish, North King legislative races: experience matters," editorial, Oct. 14].

The Times may object to Rep. Chase's willingness to rock the boat in Rep. Frank Chopp's clubby little world in Olympia, but I find her candor, support for small business and her willingness to work across partisan lines to be refreshing.

She deserves much better than your belittling tut-tutting.
-- Jim DiPeso, Shoreline

You missed the target
Your description of Maralyn Chase as "a caricature of a liberal Democrat" could hardly be further from the truth.

Furthermore, she lives in unincorporated Snohomish County in Esperance, adjoining Edmonds --not in Shoreline. She represents the 32nd Legislative District, of which Shoreline is a major part but only a part.
You have apparently been influenced in your judgment by Shoreline people who favor profit over people.

They seek to develop Shoreline into a Bellevue-like city, adding to their net worth while putting small businesses out of business.

In Olympia, Chase is a pioneer who does great work and tons of research with the legislative initiatives that she promotes, which are mostly for a healthier environment, accountability in government and social responsibility.

You must be listening to her corporate opponents who fight her continually as she works hard to protect and preserve a clean Puget Sound, safe foods and products and the pillars of democracy: trustworthy elections, education, constitutional law and a democratic form of representative government.

Chase is a champion who has led the effort to keep St. Edward State Park from being taken over by private ownership, thereby preserving the biodiversity of this public land.

She is undoubtedly one of the best-informed members of the Legislature. She does her own research and studies the bills, unlike many "electeds" who show up during the legislative session but do little work when not in Olympia.

As a constituent who also works on environmental issues and legislation, I am shocked at your lack of knowledge about this outstanding progressive Democrat.
-- Rebecca Wolfe, Edmonds

Seattle voters can be surprising
The Times apparently forgot how to write an editorial in its Oct. 7 piece urging voters to reject Proposition 2, the parks levy ["Approve Pike Place Market upgrade; reject Seattle Parks levy," editorial, Oct. 7].
Instead of persuasion using compelling facts, your newspaper made assumptions, implying a vote was either/or, [Pike Place] Market or parks, the levy might become permanent and voters won't vote for the levy because of ballot fatigue, overtaxation and the economy.
None of this can be proven or tested.
The Times is presuming to speak for us voters, not providing reasons why we should or should not vote.
Voters need to know that a 16-member oversight committee will carefully review all levy spending. They should know that their tax assessment for parks will decrease, that the levy will complete a critical part of our popular Burke-Gilman Trail and that projects benefit all neighborhoods.
Seattle voters can be surprising; we deeply value tradition and quality of life. Abundant parks are one of our city's unique assets, along with the Market.
When times get tough, people make priorities. Don't arrogantly assume you know what they will be.
--Judy Moise, Seattle

Take it from someone who knows
I am an Oregon doctor who is quoted in The Times article about assisted suicide ["How we die: the Oregon experience," page one, Oct. 13].

As I was characterized as "fiercely" opposed, I feel obligated to share at least one reason (of many more than space permits) for my stance.

In Oregon, the "safeguards" are like a sieve. Although patients are supposed to have mental-health evaluations when indicated, there were no mental-health referrals at all last year — none!

AP Photo/Courtesy Yes on I-1000

In this still frame from a TV advertisement produced by supporters of Washington state's assisted suicide ballot initiative, Nancy Niedzielski, who lost her husband Randy to brain cancer, is shown. The emotionally charged battle over end-of-life decisions has taken to the airwaves as Washington state voters decide whether to allow doctors to prescribe lethal medication to terminally ill patients.

At the same time, a recently published [Oregon Health & Science University] study confirmed that more than 48 percent of study patients seeking assisted suicide last year had either major depression or anxiety. At least three of 18 who actually took their overdoses had major depression, a condition that commonly leads to suicidal thoughts.

It saddens me that these individuals were given overdoses rather than care and treatment for their depression. Whether depressed or not, just hearing the "option" of assisted suicide from their doctors can further a patient's sense of isolation.

Doctors who give this option are encouraging patients to not value themselves and give up hope. This is corruption of our traditional medical ethic that protects patients.

Vote "no" on I-1000.
-- William Toffler, Portland

Change the mood; don't end a life
Great story about Initiative 1000 Monday. You covered many of the contentious points.

You pointed out quite accurately that referral for mental-health evaluation or counseling hardly ever occurs in Oregon, even though studies show that many patients requesting euthanasia are in fact depressed.

Many of them are not tired of living, but tired of living as they are.

With better comfort and treatment for depression, many of them would not be asking for help with suicide.

You stated that in Oregon and under Initiative 1000 "patients who might be suffering from mental illness are supposed to have a psychiatric evaluation." This actually is not true. The initiative says that the physician shall refer the patient for counseling only if he or she believes that the patient "may be suffering from a psychiatric or psychologic disorder or depression causing impaired judgment." The last three words are the crucial ones. If a patient is depressed but capable of making decisions for themselves, as most depressed patients are, then there will be no need to refer.

Patients seeking help with suicide under Initiative 1000 are highly unlikely to first receive treatment for their depression. I suppose that initially, there will be some referrals, but as time goes by, these will cease (as they have in Oregon).

Throughout history, the desire to commit suicide has always been considered de facto impaired judgment, and society has always intervened to prevent suicide whenever possible.

This will now be changed.

As long as a physician thinks the patient can make decisions for himself or herself, Initiative 1000 for the first time makes the decision to commit suicide a rational one, even if the patient is depressed. The initiative further empowers physicians to assist in their depressed patients' suicides.

This doesn't sound like much of a safeguard to me.
-- Doug Trotter, Snohomish

Pays to die, not live
Oregon Health Plan (Medicaid) patients have received health insurance letters informing them that cancer chemotherapy is not covered, but assisted suicide is covered. Advocates of assisted suicide stress choice, but what happens when assisted suicide is your only choice?

Barbara Wagner of Springfield, Ore., received such a letter this summer. The Oregon Health Plan will not pay the cost of surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy for patients with a less than 5 percent expected 5-year-survival -- even when that treatment is intended to prolong life or alter disease progression. However, such patients are eligible to receive comfort care, which in Oregon includes assisted suicide.

The message from Oregon, so aptly stated by Barbara Wagner, is, "We'll pay for you to die, but not pay for you to live." You have the choice.

The New York State Task Force on Life and the Law studied assisted suicide and concluded: "No matter how carefully any guidelines are framed, assisted suicide will be practiced through the prism of social inequality and bias that characterizes the delivery of services in all segments of our society, including health care."

Assisted suicide saves HMOs money.

I-1000 endangers your health. Vote "no."
-- Kenneth Stevens, Sherwood, OR

Do the right thing
I am an Oregon doctor and I would like your readers to know the true cost of I-1000, the assisted-suicide law.

My own patient developed cancer and became depressed, but instead of addressing the issues underlying suicidality, a colleague simply gave him a lethal dose of a medication to end his life.

Washingtonians need to learn the real lesson from Oregon's doctor-assisted-suicide law. Despite all of the so-called "safeguards," there have been numerous instances of inappropriate selection, coercion, botched attempts and active euthanasia that have been documented in the public record.

This, however, is not the worst of it.

The real tragedy in Oregon is that instead of doing the right thing, which is to provide excellent medical care, patient's lives are being cut short by physicians who are ignoring the things that lead to suicidality at the end of life.

This change in our profession -- away from "cure when possible, comfort always, but never harm" -- has me concerned.

This should concern Washington residents as well.

Don't follow Oregon's lead. Vote "no" on I-1000.
-- Charles J. Bentz, Portland

Where are these doctors?
I always thought Martin Sheen was a progressive individual.

For someone who lives in the Malibu Colony, he must be strapped for cash and will say what the going rate will pay.

What kind of doctors is he referring to that will not recognize depression?

Our government may be unskilled. There are no board requirements to be a president or a legislator, but are our doctors just a bunch of schlocks?
-- Leo Shillong, Bellingham

Whose media?
I have written a couple of times to The Times to ask why you keep printing columns by Charles Krauthammer, pointing out his serious lack of judgment and lack of credibility.

This man called for invading most of the Middle East after 9/11, despite no evidence of involvement by the countries he named.

His recent Sunday column ["Obama's associations are indeed relevant," Oct. 12] reeks of hypocrisy as he calls for scrutiny on any questionable character that Sen. Barack Obama has ever encountered, while ignoring the numerous questionable characters with whom Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have been involved.

He said that the national media is the "Obama media," completely ignoring the fact that the media spent weeks discussing remarks, taken out of context, by Reverend Wright, while ignoring Palin's witch-hunting reverend and friendly association with an anti-American secessionist group (to which her husband was a longtime member).

If the media were Obama's, they would point out the hundreds of flip-flops by McCain on major issues and his past associations with questionable groups.

They would point out the hypocrisy of Palin accusing a bipartisan, Republican-dominated committee of being on a witch hunt against her.

The media prints what sells and is owned and controlled by conservatives, not liberals.
-- Roger Burton, Bothell

What side of the fence are you on?
Columnist Charles Krauthammer believes, as do many, that past associations are both relevant and important in judging presidential candidates, referring to recent attacks on Sen. Barack Obama.

Perhaps that is so, but those same worries didn't seem to be nearly as important to conservatives in years 2000 and 2004. As I recall, many of President George W. Bush's backslapping buddies were being censured by their peers, were under investigation, facing criminal charges or headed for the slammer.

Or maybe Bush's being born again and seeing the light made a difference.

Or maybe it is because his name is George W. Bush and not Barack Hussein Obama.

In any event, one's perception of good character seems to depend on which side of the political fence you happen to be standing on.

Hopefully, in these remaining days before elections, the political rhetoric will get back to matters that are meaningful to Republican, Democrat and Independent alike.

God knows, there is plenty to worry about.
-- Don Curtis, Clinton

Don't forget about McCain
I find it so interesting how Charles Krauthammer waxes on about Sen. Obama's associations while completely ignoring the shady associations of Sen. John McCain.

He has completely ignored the unsavory characters that McCain has routinely assisted through endorsements and legislation.

First, there is G. Gordon Liddy, notorious for his role in the Watergate scandal. Liddy served four and a half years in prison for his misdeeds, acknowledged plotting to kill journalist Jack Anderson and, in order to thwart an investigation, Howard Hunt. Without belaboring his numerous unsavory acts, Liddy has donated to the McCain campaign and McCain has been a guest on Liddy's radio show praising his "old friend." McCain even backed Liddy's son's congressional bid in 2000. An unsavory association, wouldn't you agree?

But, let's not stop there.

Second, real-estate developer Donald Diamond, co-chair of McCain's campaign-finance committee and a "close personal friend." McCain has sponsored two bills sought by Diamond that helped the developer gain what The New York Times described as "millions of dollars and thousands of acres of land." There's more, but let's not belabor this association; let's move on the next unsavory character.

Third, Charles Keating of the Keating Five. McCain pressured regulators on behalf of Keating. McCain's intervention allowed Keating to destroy the lives of thousands. After a token prison sentence, Keating was released and allowed to live his life in comfort, enjoying the rewards of all the assets that he transferred to family members so that he had nothing to give in the form or restitution. Apparently, that is the American way -- correction, it is the Republican way.

So, lay all the cards on the table.

McCain is unfit to lead based on his associations, his intellect (limited) and decision-making capabilities (Gov. Sara Palin).

In addition, the McCain campaign has been fanning the flames of hatred and racism in a desperate attempt to claim what he sees as his "rightful place." The last I checked, this was the U.S., and it is shameful to try to divide America.

Time to heed his own words: "Country First."
-- Cynthia Samuel, Clyde Hill

Chris McGrath/Getty Images

A man looks at a shop window plastered with posters of Barack Obama Monday in New York City.

Dems do it, too
Editor, The Times:
I found Danny Westneat's story on Sen. Barack Obama and race in the state of Washington very interesting ["Will Obama's race matter?," Times, page one, Oct. 12].

I would encourage The Times, though, to further explore what I feel is an equally troubling attitude among those on the left toward the Republican ticket.

Whereas many aren't totally surprised to hear of isolated racism in rural parts of our state, I think many put their heads in the sand and ignore the ugly hatred that exists right here in our cities, by educated people who say equally horrible things about Gov. Sarah Palin or Sen. John McCain.

Over the past month I have watched college-educated, successful professionals here in Seattle laugh at Sandra Bernhard's very offensive comments regarding Palin being gang-raped, and ["Saturday Night Live's"] sketch regarding Palin's husband being the father of their daughter's child.

In addition, I was appalled at friends who laughed and said, "that's what they get" upon seeing a home with a McCain sign egged.

If these things were said about Sen. Obama in Seattle, they would not be tolerated. Likewise, they should not be tolerated when said about Gov. Palin or Sen. McCain.

In no way do I condone or excuse the racist remarks made by the people in the story about Sen. Obama, but I am just as concerned about the hatred, disguised as playful fun, levied at the Republican ticket by "refined" people who should honestly know better.

If we are to truly heal as a nation, we need hate speech of all types and from all sides exposed, discussed and dealt with.
-- Hovie Hawk, Seattle

Don't listen to Dale
As a Vietnam veteran, I believe it is necessary for me to comment on my brother veteran Dale's racist diatribe ["Will Obama's race matter?"] concerning candidate Sen. Barack Obama lest anyone assume that either his opinion or attitudes speak for anyone but himself.

I spent a 14-month tour as part of a MACV [Military Assistance Command, Vietnam] advisory team in the Central Highlands of Vietnam between 1968 and 1970. Our unit was composed of Caucasians, African Americans, Latinos and Native Americans across all ranks and functions. We operated and fought as one because there were no other options.

I remember all my comrades-in-arms as good soldiers and Americans, regardless of their ethnic or cultural origins.

I am still proud to have had the privilege to have served with them.

Perhaps Dale had too much free time on this hands.
-- Mike Magnan, Seattle

Listen to this vet
Dale in South Bend said he couldn't believe a veteran would show a "Veterans for Obama" bumper sticker.
Dale, I have a "Veterans for Obama" bumper sticker.

I'm a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (yes, Sen. John McCain's alma mater), a Vietnam veteran with two Bronze Stars, a retired Navy captain with a combined total of 46 years in and with the U.S. military. (My final professional assignment was a Middle East deployment aboard USS WASP as a civilian in 2004.)

President George W. Bush and the Republican Party have misled, mismanaged and taken our country to the brink of ruin.

McCain has been an active participant in this demolition.

The Republicans need to be fired by us and a whole new team should be given an opportunity to undo the damage and maybe, just maybe, get us back on track.

Dale does not speak for all veterans.
-- Mike Cornforth, Port Townsend

Live in peace
Regarding Danny Westneat's story, "Will Obama's Race Matter?," I felt like a pinball bouncing from bumper to bumper, struggling for an understanding of Dale's comments.

I understand that many people won't vote for Sen. Obama because of his race.
Hitler rose to power because he used minorities as scapegoats. For some people today, black skin on a candidate is a way to transfer all your failures to someone else.

And while George W. Bush might have been technically in the Texas Air National Guard, to many of us with Vietnam service, he was a draft-dodger.

But, finally, I really do have some constructive advice for Dale: At his age, I would beg him to let it go. If you want to live out your life in relatively good health, your hate and rage will kill you through heart attack or stroke. Seek out some good anger management.

To me, you are truly what is bad in this country. But because you are a fellow human being put on this Earth to do the best you can, I hope and pray that your rage, frustration, failures and anger can be diminished, and that you can live in peace for the remainder of your time on Earth.
-- Alan Zelt, Kenmore

Turbulent times call for steady leadership
We may call ourselves Democrats and Republicans, but we are Americans first.

I support Barack Obama because turbulent times require steady leadership and national unity.

In order to resolve our economic crisis, balance the federal budget, end the war in Iraq responsibly and keep America safe, we need to change the way Washington, D.C, works. Sen. Obama is promising real change -- not more of the same failed policies of George W. Bush.

Obama supports responsible tax cuts for middle-class Americans and working families. Sen. John McCain is calling for expanded tax cuts for large corporations and the wealthiest Americans -- adding trillions to a record deficit.

Obama understands that a go-it-alone foreign policy makes us less safe. He will work with our allies and use strong and direct diplomacy to take out al-Qaida, contain Iran and end the war in Iraq responsibly.

Obama won't let special interests and their Washington, D.C., lobbyists drown out the voices of regular Americans. He has shown that by building a broad movement of bipartisan support — and that is how he will govern.
-- Michael Mauk, Redmond

Let's fix this country
In the past, the U.S. has been a great country. But greatness is dependent upon the foundation of a large and healthy middle class.

As the Bush administration has eroded the middle class in favor of the wealthy, we have lost our strength within our own borders and in the world. Now we have one last hope to restore this strength, to start the arduous journey toward peace and prosperity. That hope lies with the Democratic party, in the White House, in Congress and in state governments.

The alternative frightens me.

Today's Republicans care only about the wealthy, about power and about winning at all costs.

Much has been made of Sen. Barack Obama's age. Yet, at 47 he is five years older than Theodore Roosevelt when he first took office, two years older than John F. Kennedy when he became president, and only four years younger than Abraham Lincoln when he was elected.

Sen. Obama may not have as many years of experience as Sen. John McCain but he is light years ahead of him in terms of thoughtfulness and wisdom.

In October of 2000, a few weeks before that infamous election, I said to a friend, "If Bush wins the election he will usher in the next Great Depression and a third world war."

Now, in 2008, a few weeks before this election, it is obvious to me that if McCain wins, we will lose all hope of ever regaining our greatness and stature in the world.
-- Patricia McCairen, Point Roberts

Don't fall for it
The headline "McCain defends Obama" [Times, News, Oct. 11] seems to illustrate the new Carl Rove Republican strategy.

Send Gov. Sarah Palin around the country whipping up the faithful with statements that Obama cavorts with terrorists. Then McCain gets to play the hero when he defends Obama from being called an Arab terrorist by another member of the Republican faithful.

Will the American public fall for the bait and switch? Time will tell.
-- Joan Rupp, Seattle

Dream small
Obama is for the "American dream" -- up to $250,000. Then, you're done for.
-- Barbara Atwood, Covington

True lies
In 1952, Democratic presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson said, "I've been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends, that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them."

I guess the names of politicians may change, but the tactics of political parties? Not so much.
-- Don Franks, Burien

Protect your bodies
I appreciated The Times informative line-by-line comparison of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi vs. Gov. Christine Gregoire on the issues "The governor's race: a primer," news, Oct. 12], especially Dino Rossi's position on abortion: "He's not running on the issue and doubts that a bill restricting abortion would ever come before him if he's elected. But he's indicated he would sign such a bill."

Is not the second sentence a non sequitur to the first sentence of this stance?

Ladies, it is your body and Rossi will use his pen to control it, given the chance.
-- Carter Kinnier, Seattle

Not a breed we want
So gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi claims to be a new breed of conservative politician.
After carefully reading "The governor's race: a primer" (Oct. 12), I'd have to say he's more of a wolf in sheep's clothing. $15 billion for wider highways? Great idea, so long as you don't mind stealing $10 billion from education and health care to pay for it.

Trouble with the economy? Get rid of those pesky "unnecessary regulations" and just like Wall Street, our state will be doing fine!

And by the way, did you know that "costly regulations" are one of the primary reasons our health-care costs are through the roof? Better deregulate those insurance companies while we're at it!

The giant mess our country is in today is the result of eight years of exactly this sort of thinking.

The voters of Washington need to ask themselves, "can we afford to turn our state over to a man whose policies are more of the same deregulating, free-market, run-amok foolishness?'
I don't think so.

If nothing else, my pocket book says "No way."
-- Ann Tucker-Gwinn, Seattle

Prioritize expenditures, don't increase taxes
My husband and I are retired with limited monthly income. We are watching the stock market plummet along with Wall Street and mortgage bailouts. Our investments, which we need to supplement our income, have gone down the toilet.

We can't afford more taxes.

Now that the election is near, Gov. Christine Gregoire is worried and responds by saying she is cutting expenses and won't raise taxes. But past actions show us that she will do just the opposite. Don't forget the state gas taxes, along with $500 million dollars of other taxes and fees.

Moreover, in the past she has voiced support for a state income tax.

But again, the election is near, so she is trying to convince us otherwise.

We support gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi because he is experienced in balancing the budget by prioritizing expenditures and not increasing taxes and fees.

Likewise, in the presidential race, we support Sen. John McCain. He will be tireless in stopping wild government and pork-barrel spending.

McCain and Rossi give struggling families and senior citizens hope that there will be money left in our wallets.
-- Lyn Allen, Spokane

Change starts with us
Editor, The Times:
I know every person in this country is concerned with the current state of the economy. I think it's important to also remember the status of the climate and what it implies for all of us. We can combine these two problems to create a better economy, green jobs and a cleaner environment ["Study forecasts 4 million 'green' jobs," Times, Business & Technology, Oct. 2].

PRNewsFoto/MasTec, Inc.

The Wanzek 80-megawatt wind-farm project in Dayton, Wash.

A clean-energy economy will create millions of new green jobs that cannot be outsourced. This is what America desperately needs.

Oil and coal companies have spent millions lobbying and advertising to stop the change to clean energy. I find this disgusting as an American who desperately wants to stop the climate crisis for my children.

It is time we stand up to oil companies and bring attention to the positive alternatives and the ability for us to revitalize our economy with great jobs, clean renewable energy and a healthy climate for our children.
-- Erin Seitz-Wilson, Maple Valley

We're smarter than this
I cannot fathom how we as a nation can be so stupid. We still have not come up with new technologies to free the U.S. from foreign dependency of energy and haven't solved the climate crisis.

It really is a no-brainer.

There could be so many jobs created here with the $600,000 per hour we send out of the country.

Our leaders have to be smarter and demand that this happens.
--Linda Heinz, Snohomish

Waste wood? Duh
An appropriate response to Wednesday's announcement that the city will produce energy from waste wood should elicit both a cheer and a "duh" ["Waste wood to heat downtown Seattle buildings," news, Oct. 8].

It's not a new or an exotic technology, just the employment of a tiny paradigm tweak in the direction of appropriate technology -- a redefinition of what constitutes "waste."

Who knows? Maybe someday we'll get serious and realize that sunlight is power and that rain, like river water, can be used and reused on its way through our homes and cities. Furthermore, rain and sun can be shared with society or simply employed right where they fall with no transmission losses.

Of course, the most elegant and efficient energy-production equivalent is conservation, an art barely addressed in our country.
-- Jeff Collum, Seattle

We don't want more-of-the-same
Clean coal? Drill, baby, drill?

What happened to wind and solar?

I'm a little concerned when listening to the presidential candidates talk about alternative energy.

Wind and solar, two of our cleanest and most viable alternative energy solutions, seem to be getting pushed further down the list in favor of nuclear, clean coal and offshore drilling. This is our clean-energy plan of the future?

While all options need to be explored, the priority needs to be put on clean-energy solutions, not solutions backed by big business and powerful lobbies. We need leaders in business and government who are willing to stand up for what we truly need, and no matter who gets into the White House, millions of Americans will be watching closely to see which green-energy solutions will be rolled out first.

Will it be truly clean energies, or will it be polished-up versions of more-of-the-same?
--Norman Bell, Seattle

What happens when the well runs dry?
Our nation must pay more attention to the environmental damage we are causing.

Global warming is a real issue that is frequently pushed aside. We know where we are going and how we are getting there but we stand by and do nothing.

Why must we keep drilling for more oil? The well will run dry and we will wish we had not destroyed our ozone.

We should be investing in cleaner and more efficient power. Solar power provides an immeasurable energy source and is environmentally friendly. Our cars could run on this energy if only we invested some time and money into it rather than into drilling for more oil.
--Eric Bergen, Bellevue

City losing revenue
So, what The Times editorial board is saying ["Bellevue Parks, yes!," editorial, Oct. 10] is to support our parks levies, when parks like 60 Acres South, purchased in 1968 with voter-approved bonds, are being turned over to a private, for-profit group for 30 years with zero income revenue to the city?

This is The Times' idea of why we should support the parks levy? You will not have my vote!
-- Doug Brusig, Seattle

Maintain Bellevue parks
For more than 50 years, Bellevue has been committed to enhancing and maintaining our city park system. Our beautiful neighborhood and downtown parks create an identity that Bellevue residents are proud of, and it enhances our lives.

As a realtor, I know the value parks and recreation areas bring to cities and neighborhoods. Having the funds available to buy choice property to make available for parks, rather than seeing more development, is what makes Bellevue special.

This levy will complete and enhance existing parks and playing fields, as well as make the development of new parks and natural areas possible.

The Bellevue parks levy continues the work begun in 1988 by the expiring parks levy. This levy is an extension of the other at a much lower cost to taxpayers. The 1988 levy cost an average of 17 cents per $1,000 assessed value, while the 2008 levy will cost an average of 12 cents.

I urge you to vote in favor of this levy to continue the tradition that has made Bellevue known as a "city in a park."
-- June Griffiths, Bellevue

Give caregivers more training
Caregivers help seniors and people with disabilities lead healthy, productive, independent lives ["Reject Initiative 1029," editorial, Oct. 8]. Doing this every day is demanding physically, emotionally and mentally.

I know. I have been successfully doing live-in caregiving for 33 years. Currently, Washington state requires only 34 hours of training to become a caregiver. In contrast, it takes 300 hours of training to become a dog masseur.

Someone who has responsibility for a human life needs -- and deserves -- more time to learn the skills of this work! The more training and support one has, the better caregiver one will become! I-1029 makes this training time a reality and provides the support caregivers need to do excellent work by providing quality care for their clients.

I-1029 also closes a loophole in criminal-background checks that allow people who commit felonies, such as rape, to become caregivers. Vote to pass I-1029, and help people with disabilities live healthy, independent lives and be able to stay in their homes!
-- Lee Fitchett, Seattle

Don't elect election boss
The Leagues of Women Voters of Seattle and King County South urge you to vote against King County Charter Amendment 1 ["King County Charter amendments: substance and popcorn," editorial, Oct. 9].
This amendment adds an elected elections director to King County government for the purpose of running our elections department.
Currently, our elections director is appointed by the county executive and confirmed by the county council. The director is accountable to the elected county executive and can be immediately replaced for poor job performance. The council regularly reviews the elections department performance through oversight and review of the budget.
The King County elections director needs to be a qualified professional administrator with a full understanding of the technical challenges facing the 21st century.
We can see the potential danger of conflict of interest if the person managing our elections is forced to spend time with fundraising and campaigning.
We support keeping an appointed elections director.
-- Denise Smith, Seattle

We want a strong leader
Editor, The Times:

I applaud David Broder's syndicated column, "A campaign without candor" [Opinion, Oct. 9].
Neither presidential candidate is truly willing to come clean in terms of laying out the difficult choices and compromises that are going to have to be made in this country.

Both are promising the continuation of the "American dream" (which has become little more than a myth for many) without admitting that their promise may be very difficult to deliver.

Neither candidate is willing to lay their cards on the table with the electorate and talk about hard choices. It would be too politically risky. But to do so would be an act of great courage and would display, might I say, leadership.
-- Peter Haller, Mill Creek

Jim Watson / AFP/ Getty Images

Republican vice-presidential candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks during a town hall meeting at the Center Court Sports Complex, October 9, 2008 in Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Republicans planning for future
Since syndicated columnist Thomas L. Friedman thought that paying taxes is patriotic, why doesn't he pay more ["Palin's taxing definition of patriotism," syndicated column, Oct. 9]?

If he wants everybody to be patriotic, he should lead by example and pay more.

Friedman also thinks Gov. Sarah Palin is a novice, so I assume he must think Sen. Barack Obama is also a novice. Palin has more experience than Obama. However, I will give him more experience in campaigning.
At least Palin has more knowledge of energy than Obama:

Drilling for oil does not mean that it leaves America dependent upon oil. Drilling for oil means that it will cost less in the future. Drilling for oil means that there will be more chances to discover alternative fuels. Drilling for oil means there will be future oil. Drilling for oil will build the economy and provide more jobs.

Palin's and Sen. John McCain's American future looks better than the alternative. These are better plans than Obama's do-nothing plans.
-- Steve Rhyne, Kirkland

We dodged a GOP bullet
So, wasn't it the Republican Party that was so strongly pushing for the privatization of our Social Security, with our money going directly into the stock market?

Jeez, let's be thankful they didn't get their way on that crazy idea!
-- Paul Harris, Eureka Springs, Ariz.

GOP using hate strategy
Aww, Republicans ya gotta love 'em!

Back in 1987, the late Republican National Chairman Lee Atwater perfected to strategy the creating of a demon with the felon Willie Horton and making fear- and hate-mongering a political tool and weapon ["'The Willie Hortonization of Obama,'" News, Oct. 9].

Since then, a whole cadre of fear mongers have followed, perfecting the strategy and has turned politics into a blood sport.

The master, political strategist Karl Rove, created a legion of followers that now fill Sen. John McCain's campaign staff and are shaping a new demon in the form of 1960s radical William Ayers to go after Sen. Barack Obama.

Scare enough gullible voters into believing Obama is arm and arm with a "domestic terrorist" and the GOP scores another victory. They do it because it has worked in the past and, absent anything to offer by way of solutions to the serious problems this country faces, they bank on it working again.

It may. But then again it may not. Perhaps there are enough intelligent voters to see through this hateful charade, and they will clearly tell the Republican Party that it is a new day in American politics.

The Grand Old Party has become the "Gnarly Old Party," full of arrogant, self-righteous hypocrites fueled by right-wing, hate-radio windbags who throw the word "truth" around like they somehow cornered the market on it, when in reality, they wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit them in the fanny.

An angry, erratic, temperamental old man bouncing from issue to issue proclaiming, "My friends, I know how to do it. I can do it," begs for the answer as to why in 26 years he hasn't been enough of a leader to get "it" done!
-- Jerry Vaughn, Federal Way

Nip hate speech in the bud
Sen. Barack Obama a dangerous candidate?

What is truly dangerous is the anger that is engendered in a partisan and passionate crowd by painting one's opponent as "dangerous" and "not like us." What happened at a Wisconsin rally on Thursday was frightening and bordered on spilling into violence. That is over the top.

While character attacks may please the base, they also appeal to fear, hatred and some deep-down racism, which is, unfortunately, still alive and well in our beloved country.

Rather than offering an incitement to these dangerous feelings, all candidates should denounce this fever and seek to calm the crowds with reasoned arguments for their respective positions. Anyone who shouts violent words in a political rally should be immediately chastened by the candidate at the podium.
-- Martin Deppe, Chicago

Hate vs. hope campaigns
Based on the venom displayed and encouraged at the recent McCain-Palin campaign events, it appears our choice this year is between hate and hope.

How ironic that the Christian right chooses hate.
-- Gail McNiel, Bellevue

Your vote says a lot about you
All the shaking of hands, mesmerizing speeches and kissing of babies to woo a vote are almost over. Soon we will know who will lead our great nation for the next four or eight years and whether or not we will remain great.

The media have done all it can to spoon feed the liberal candidate and come down hard on the conservative. No surprise there.

As a hardworking, blue-collar conservative, I will be voting for Sen. John McCain. This was an easy choice and is not based on gender, color, ethnicity, height, weight or feelings. I have long understood who I vote for says more about who I am and less about the candidate. I cannot -- with a clear conscience and knowing the associations Sen. Barack Obama has, the anti-American teaching he sat under for 20 years, and his extremely liberal voting record -- pull the lever for him. I care too deeply about this country and the next generations.

I believe hard work and honesty still pays off, I believe in strong families, limited taxes and government, I believe that life begins at conception, marriage is between one man and one woman, and in doing well for my neighbor. I believe in tolerance without acceptance or embracing.

If you are a conservative, moderate or independent, then the choice for McCain should be clear. If you are a liberal socialist, then proudly proclaim what you are by voting for Obama. Politicians will be whoever you want them to be in order to get elected, but on Nov. 4 you will be casting a vote that tells more about who you are.

On Nov. 4 we will show who we are or who the media or others have made us. Will our vote confirm or condemn us? God bless America!
-- Dave Douglas, Snohomish

Obama is the future
Sen. John McCain is the past -- an old, tired, out-of-touch white man with few ideas and rapidly eroding integrity.

His negativity and lack of imagination represent all that is fading from the American scene. He should have the grace to retire in a dignified fashion, and cede the future to the next generation of leaders.

Sen. Barack Obama is the future -- young, progressive, biracial and multicultural, he represents everything that America is becoming.
-- Cabbie Glass, Wenatchee

Face the issues
Our country has serious issues, which we must face.

So, where do our politicians go? Lipstick on a pig? What nonsense to distract us from the real issues. We have a declining economy, two wars, terrorists on the march and an incredibly poor international image.

Please spare us the nonsense and get to the issues. I do not care which party you support, but call your representatives, senators and the campaigns and tell them to start discussing how we are going to get this country squared away.
-- John Peick, Bellevue

Double, double, toil and trouble
Mike Reilly of the Eastlake neighborhood is right on with his portrayal of Gov. Sarah Palin with a witches broom ["All in Good Fun?," Local News, Oct. 9], except she should also have on a witches hat and her nose should be growing longer each day from all the lies she is spreading while she campaigns in small-town America.

Some may think she is funny and cute and it's obvious she definitely thinks she is, but from all the negative campaigning and nasty lies she is telling, I consider her anything but funny and cute.

To me, she is the Wicked Witch of the North!
-- Pam Kitchener, Everett

McCain-Palin copy-cat campaign
Sen. Barack Obama spent well over a year running for the Democratic nomination for president on the basis of "change" in order to get this nation back on track.

Nearly everyone agrees that we're dangerously off track, and in need of getting back to our fundamental ideals. Having gained the nomination of his party, he has continued his election campaign based on the idea of "change."

The McCain-Palin ticket has now adopted the idea of change as the heart of its own campaign rhetoric. It now claims to be the vehicle that can bring necessary change to America. The sad --almost tragic -- thing about this is the fact that the McCain-Palin ticket is so devoid of original ideas and strategies for governing this nation that it has been reduced to stealing the concepts -- and even the words -- from its opponents.
-- Bruce Barnbaum, Granite Falls

Candidate coverage slanted

Has your newspaper simply given up on the concept of presenting balanced "news" coverage? Two Times articles -- Thursday's on gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi ["A born salesman tries to close the deal," page one, Oct. 9] and Friday's on Gov. Christine Gregoire ["Smart, intense and struggling to woo voters," page one, Oct. 10] -- show in stark relief your slanted treatment of the candidates.

Just look at the headlines. You might as well have just written "Rossi schmuck" and "Gregoire saint." Neither article has facts regarding the actual accomplishments of the candidates, unless one counts the mention of Gregoire cooking five meals every weekend in order to make sure she could serve dinner to her family every weekday -- saintly stuff, that.

The article on Rossi really only manages to get across the idea that he has been a real-estate salesman and is always smiling, and the article on Gregoire can only manage a succession of excuses as to why she is socially awkward.

Those excuses are effusive in their praise of her cerebral bearing and intellectual qualification for the job -- this, regarding a candidate that has numerous examples of costly managerial miscues during her tenure as the head of the Department of Ecology and attorney general.

Rossi is portrayed as a lightweight who seems to not realize that if he wins the election, he will have to be governor and it might harsh his buzz. For heaven's sake, the man served as a legislator for more than 10 years and played a key role in shaping the budget -- in a bipartisan way -- during very contentious times, but your article makes is sound like he is simply not qualified for the job.
-- David Bennett, Bellevue

Rossi supporters get it
To sum up The Times front-page coverage of gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi and Gov. Christine Gregoire from Thursday and Friday: Rossi is a slick salesman.

On the other hand, Gregoire is incredibly smart, brimming with so many good ideas that many of us can't connect with her. Translation: Rossi supporters just don't get it! And, Gregoire had dinner with her family every night!

Thanks so much -- I think I finally understand everything I need to know about the Washington state gubernatorial race.
-- Milly Kay Baldwin, Sammamish

Try tying Gregoire to Congress, Rossi
It's interesting how all the Democrats, even Gov. Christine Gregoire, is trying their very best to tie every Republican to George W. Bush, probably because his approval rating is pretty low.

But U.S. Congress' approval ratings are even lower. Has anybody noticed that the gas prices and all this economic meltdown started when the Democrats took office?

I think gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi should tie Gregoire to the "do nothing" Congress. We, as the people of Washington, need to remember that it was she who, when she got in office, basically blew off I-912, which was the 9.5-cent-per-gallon gas tax that we voted down.

We now know that she got chummy with the Indian casinos, turning down millions of dollars of tax revenue, so they would donate thousands of dollars for her campaign.

Does anyone remember how King County basically kept recounting votes and finding extra votes here and there that were not in secure areas, but still allowed to count? It kept going until she won, then the counting stopped. Very interesting, wouldn't you say?
-- Pat Ferrell, Renton

The Associated Press

Gov. Christine Gregoire and challenger Dino Rossi debate Thursday in Spokane.

Gregoire knows community
Editor, The Times:
I am writing about your page-one story, "A born salesman tries to close the deal" [Oct. 9]
Gov. Christine Gregoire always tries to connect to the community. She participates in many activities and reaches out to the community.

I belong to the Sikh community, and Gregoire has visited the Sikh Gurudwara quite often. Her daughters are also involved in her campaign and reach out to the community. Her daughter Michelle has visited the Sikh Gurudwara and other community centers to support her mother. It is this connection that solidifies her victory.

She has heard the community and helped us even during our tough times.
She revised the guidelines for the turban when the DOT had issued a statement that said, "not valid for identification."

Immigrants have faced hardships and it would be a tough task if we did not have Gov. Gregoire in office.
Politics is not about making "real-estate deals." It is about providing services and reaching out to the community. It is working together to make Washington state and the country a better place. These are tough times. The economy is in turmoil.

We need Gov. Gregoire in office more now than any time before.
-- Sarab Singh, Kent

The worried citizen
Gov. Christine Gregoire should be winning this re-election race handily.

We live in a state that has dodged the worst of the economic crisis and still has a balanced budget when California is already asking the federal government for a $7 billion emergency loan.

The problem is that she's a good governor for the very reason she's having a tough time getting re-elected: She's pragmatic and honest.

A perfect example is her intervention in two recent Seattle-area disputes: When Boeing machinists and corporate negotiators reached an impasse, Gregoire urged them to give negotiations one more try. And when Seattle made moves to eject Nickelsville from its first home, Gregoire sent a negotiator to work out a deal and let them move temporarily to state property.

In both cases she was the "cooler head."

There's nothing sexy about this kind of leadership -- no grand speeches and no stunning debate performances.

She's faced with an opponent who is the epitome of the empty promise -- with his big smile and slick debate performances.

I'm not worried about Gregoire; she'll be fine whether she's governor or not. I'm worried about us.
-- Andy Jellin, Seattle

The businessman's got what it takes
In this time of national economic crisis and the implosion of Washington Mutual, people are wondering if they'll still have jobs in six months and if they'll be able to make their mortgage payments.

We need to elect a governor who will restore the strong economic growth and opportunity we used to enjoy.
Washington state has the nation's third-highest rate of small-business failure. People who want to start their own businesses can't afford to. Others are losing their jobs because companies can't make payroll.

Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi is a businessman and knows what it takes to create and keep jobs.
You want job security? Vote for Rossi.

Despite her 2004 campaign promises, Gov. Christine Gregoire has raised taxes. This has hindered job growth and left us all with less money in our pockets. Even with higher taxes, Gregoire's huge spending increases have left us with a projected billion-dollar-plus state-budget deficit for next year.

Rossi balanced the budget as a legislator in 2003 without raising taxes, and he will do it again.
We don't need higher taxes here in Washington; we need efficient government.

You want more of your paycheck in your pocket? Vote for Rossi.
--Elizabeth Stall, Bothell

Foster care has improved
Our children are too important to be subjected to partisan political attacks, and that is why I am upset with gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi lying about Gov. Christine Gregoire's record on foster care ["Radio ads criticize Gregoire on handling of sex offenders, funding for foster care," news, June 19].

Does he think we will ignore the fact that Gregoire is getting results that help foster children?

New caseworkers have been hired and investigations now begin within 24 hours instead of the previous 72 hours.

Our foster-care system has improved under Gregoire, and Rossi, a parent just like her, should understand this.
-- Josette Gregoire (not related), Seattle

Lose the blame game
While she held her own during the vice-presidential debate concerning the pertinent issues facing our nation, Gov. Sarah Palin modeled bipartisanship spirit with Sen. Joseph Biden.

By refusing to personally pinpoint Democrats as the only problem in the gridlocked Congress, she clearly separated herself from the "blame game" that Sens. Biden and Barack Obama incessantly play.

Neither offer any criticism of their own party for their dogged partisanship that helped lead to the mismanagement and greed that precipitated our current financial crisis. Rather, Republicans and the Bush administration are blamed for every malady that has occurred in the world during the past century.

To loosen the logjam of gridlock in the Congress, the new administration will have to reach across the aisle to help solve the major problems we face in the post- 9/11 world.

Sen. John McCain and Palin have shown throughout their political careers that including a broad spectrum of contributors reaps a beneficial harvest of ideas. Their nonpartisan style of leadership is missing from both political parties.

It's time for change in Washington beyond ideology.

The McCain / Palin team will infuse creative energy into the bipartisan flow of interaction needed to effectively manage our nation's needs.
-- Gene Harvey, Puyallup

Palin needs Internet-security lesson
The Justice Department has dangerously contradicted itself in bringing felony charges against David Kernell, the young student accused of hacking Sarah Palin's Yahoo e-mail account ["Man denies hacking Palin e-mail account," news, Oct. 9].

When the Justice Department wants to read a suspect's e-mail during an investigation, they routinely argue to courts that it is not "stored communications" and is thereby not subject to accompanying legal protections. The courts have largely agreed, and the FBI has used this investigative tool in many successful criminal investigations and subsequent prosecutions.

Ordinarily, Kernell's alleged crime would be a misdemeanor. However, the Justice Department reversed course and now claims that e-mail is stored communications after all.

The Justice Department should immediately drop its rushed and ill-considered felony charges against Kernell. And, for that matter, they should find something better to do than make a federal case out of a harmless college prank.

If Palin wishes to be a heartbeat away from being in charge of national security, she should more gracefully learn a valuable lesson about e-mail security along the campaign trail.
-- Robert Walker, Renton

Let the dying keep their dignity
Watching my proud father die a humiliating, degrading and painful death from cancer reinforced my belief that terminal patients (those who have six months or less to live) should have the legal option to make a personal choice to die in a more dignified, humane way.

Some families have called this end-of-life prolonged suffering a "beautiful time." I doubt most terminally ill patients would use those words. There was nothing beautiful or compassionate about my father's death.

Initiative-1000 gives mentally competent adult Washington state residents the legal choice to make a voluntary, informed and personal decision with their physician and their families, to obtain and self-administer life-ending medication. Numerous safeguards are in place to protect the patient from influence or coercion. Oregon has had this law in place for 10 years and it has not been abused.

In a country founded on personal liberties and individual freedoms, isn't how one dies one of the most personal choices a human being can make?

You may choose not to exercise this choice for yourself, but do not deny others the right to make a different choice.
-- Jan Whitsitt, Medina

Get the facts, Sheen
As much as I loved Martin Sheen on "The West Wing," he is using his television persona to act as if he has actually read Initiative-1000.

Contrary to his statements in the TV ad, there are many layers of safeguards to assure the person making the request is not being coerced or is not mentally depressed.

There is plenty of time to allow the person to rescind his decision, and he can do so at any time.

It is insulting to assume any person making the request automatically needs psychiatric help.
-- Brian Hogan, Kent

Vote for choice
It seems Mary Lund ["Say goodbye to civil liberties," Northwest Voices, Oct. 8] has been lied to and has been frightened into opposing I-1000. Some unscrupulous person surely put into her head that the initiative applies to people with disabilities, which is totally not true.

I-1000 applies only to persons who have a terminal diagnosis.

The insurance companies are not involved; the decision is between the terminally ill person and their physician.

The great Steven Hawking could not avail himself of I-1000 despite his profound physical disability. Former Gov. Booth Gardener has a devastating illness, but the law would not apply to him either.

I-1000 is about civil liberties. It is about the right to choose.

Out of our own misguided sense of morality, possessiveness or fear of death, we deny terminally ill people a fundamental right -- the right to determine the future course of what's left of their lives.
I-1000 extends basic rights of choice we should all have.

Fear-mongering is a common tactic of those who want to impose their views and values on others. Don't buy it.

Vote "yes" on I-1000. Vote for choice.
-- Stephen Lamphear, Burien

Be informed
I read the letter from Mary Lund of Bothell with horror.

She claims that insurance companies could somehow drop coverage of her disabled child and instead offer to pay for fatal doses of medication.

Good grief. There is no such provision in I-1000.

To be eligible for a death-with-dignity prescription, two doctors must agree that the patient has less than six months to live and that the patient is able to make an informed decision about his or her decision.
No one can force a patient to make a final end-of-life decision.

If Lund fears the insurance companies, take them on, but don't force terminally ill people to endure pain and suffering unnecessarily.

Lund is spewing the kind of lies and scare tactics opponents are using to fight against I-1000.

I agree with her on one thing: Please be informed on the issue before you vote.
-- Chris Fruitrich, Seattle

Bad medicine
The legislation of I-1000 is terribly flawed.

It will lead the practice of medicine in directions it has not seen before in this state. The law attempts to remove the stigma of "physician-assisted suicide" by replacing it with "self-administration of a lethal drug." The law would, however, allow for the administration of the dose in the case of the disability of the patient.

This removes the "safeguard" of self-administration and allows for another to end the life of a patient.
Until now, this would be considered homicide.

The law requires that the patient have no more than six months to live in order to be enacted. This is incredibly difficult to predict, and physicians, including myself, are routinely wrong. Most physicians have had patients who have been discharged from hospice care due to their failure to die in six months and actually flourish under the care of the hospice staff.

An error of special concern is the requirement in the law that the physician lie on a patient's death certificate. In a case of self-administered medication under the statute, the physician would be required to state that the cause of death was not suicide, but the disease process that the patient suffered from. This is fraud at best, a redefinition of suicide at worst. What kind of precedent does it set to require a licensed professional to lie on a legal document in order to be in compliance with a law?

Section 18 redefines suicide by barring the use of the words "suicide," "assisted suicide," "mercy killing" or "homicide" in cases of death by self-administered medication in accordance to the initiative. There is no reasonable justification for this change in definition. Even the editorial board of The Seattle Times, which supports this initiative, states "Make no mistake. This is assisted suicide" ["Death with dignity: Approve I-1000," Times, editorial, Oct. 5]. In accordance with the above errors, the initiative would also bar any enactments of insurance-company clauses against suicide.

The arguments for suicide in dying are many, and some are compelling. Suffering is difficult to watch and to go through. Pain can be a brutal mistress. It is often argued that if a ventilator can be removed or antibiotics be stopped or a surgery refused, why can a prescription for death not be written?

As patients, we have the right to refuse intervention. We can deny the placement of a tube. A woman in the throes of a difficult delivery can refuse a Caesarean section and a person can refuse lifesaving transfusion because of religious beliefs. Removing a ventilator is in the same category; it is a refusal of an intervention by the patient or their representative and allows a disease process to take its natural course. It is not an overt act by another to take a person's life outside of the disease process.

This legislation is misguided. It will be broadened over time, as most laws are. The Americans with Disabilities Act will be used to force open such initiatives to allow those without terminal illnesses to obtain physician-assisted suicide.

Physicians unwilling to participate may at some time be sanctioned for not writing the requested prescription. If this seems far-fetched, the Washington Board of Pharmacy has recently decided that pharmacists, who do not give the abortion-inducing morning after pill to patients due to personal belief, can be sanctioned by the board.

I-1000 is bad medicine and should not be passed.
-- Chris Beard, Mukilteo

Make Wall Street pay
Richard Fuld, chief executive of the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers, received an estimated $350 million in compensation between 2000 and 2007? ["Lehman exec defends big bonuses," News, Oct. 7.]

How can one person be worth more than a third of a billion dollars for seven years of work? Where do you sign up for such a position? I have a good job, and my employer might be upset, but I might consider switching jobs for that kind of pay increase.

Fuld claimed Lehman had a compensation committee that made sure the interests of the executives and employees were aligned with the shareholders'. Really? I suppose if Fuld had been paid only $5 million per year rather than $50 million, he would have defected to one of the other financial institutions that ended up in the same financial mess.

Somebody should ask those shareholders if they feel their interests were aligned by paying someone such a ridiculous amount of money, while running the company into the ground!

For his incompetence and irresponsible risk-taking, Fuld should be penalized rather than rewarded. The pain he has caused to his employees and stockholders is immense. He and the others who are responsible for today's financial crisis should be made to repay all excessive compensation and should also spend some quality time behind bars, where they can reflect on their dubious leadership skills.
-- Steve Layman, Seattle

Government already has answers
For those who think $700 billion is a tidy sum, it might be good to point out that it is peanuts compared to our current $10 trillion debt.

As with energy and many other things, the phrase "too little too late" might fit. We have a lot to do, and changing money from one hand to the other without anything useful happening is why, for the last 50 years, we have made very little progress.

When I was a teen, we talked about the time a car could go from zero to 60. I drove a car that turned 12.25 seconds in the quarter mile. Yet few realized, at the same time, our aircraft industry had a manned vehicle that did zero to outer space in eight minutes.

This same industry at the time had the answers to many of our current challenges, including energy. Few grasped that then, and current rhetoric tells us only generalities to try to cover up what those who are currently making the calls should know.

Current action shows a dismal level of knowledge in this area. We must start looking and dealing realistically with life, and we must start using what we have known for more than 50 years.

Debate all you want, but our required path is clear, whether we know it or not.
-- Hugh Coleman, Kelso

Main Street key to U.S. economy
Once again, everyone -- the politicians, the economists and the bankers -- miss the key point that, unless the benefits of tax cuts reach Main Street and the American consumer, our economic recovery will sputter and fail.

About 76 percent of the U.S. economy is consumer (spending) driven, so unless that majority feels secure to spend and earns enough to spend, nothing will change. Bailing out the banks, while the American consumer bleeds to death by high credit-card interest, is a national shame and a Pyrrhic, hypocritical effort to save those whose greed drove this great country and the world into this peril.

The solution is simple: Lower credit-card rates while freezing spending limits, until balances get reduced to avert credit-card defaults, which hurt banks.

Work with homeowners who have lost jobs or earnings to save their homes from foreclosure.
Doing these two things alone will boost the Consumer Confidence Index and, with reduced interest rates, security and the peace of mind in being able to keep their homes, Americans will go out and shop again; things will improve with more money in circulation.

To President Bush, Treasure Secretary Henry Paulson, Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama: Think of people before you think about financial institutions, and the results will surprise you. Think of Americans first if you want the American economy to improve.
-- Vik Puri, Seattle

Be transparent, government
I can't believe American International Group Inc. is getting another bailout ["Fed to loan AIG another $38B," News, Oct. 9].

$37.8 billion more for a company that has already received $85 billion and has been sending executives on ridiculously expensive vacation/spa weekends in California during the financial crisis? This has got to be one of the craziest things I've ever heard.

Two things government has failed at: solving the problem, and transparency in their efforts. One reason people are so upset (and anxious) is because there's no clear sense of what's going on, where it's going and what the government is doing.

Neither party, specifically Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain, has been willing or able to discuss specifics on what can, should and will be done to solve the financial problems.

I urge everyone to write or call their representatives and ask them to increase the transparency of the government's actions (and inactions) and time spent discussing with the people of this country what is being done. Elected officials must understand that without knowledge of their constituency, only anger, anxiety and more confusion will result.
-- Matt Padberg, Federal Way

Help pay bailout, AIG
On Oct. 8, AIG spent $440,000 on a retreat to the St. Regis Hotel in California after receiving a federal bailout ["AIG scolded for 'wining and dining,'." News, Oct. 8].

With the state of the economy now, Americans are suffering from the loss of jobs, homes and health insurance. Yet, within a week of getting bailed out with taxpayers' money, executives from the company are getting the royal treatment.

I think it's irresponsible and negligent for companies like AIG to blow thousands, if not millions, of dollars on unnecessary items.

If the company had so much money to spend on a retreat, it should be investing it toward a plan to pay off the bailout.
-- Benny Chung, San Jose, Calif.

Hold Wall Street accountable
I am outraged at the news of AIG executives attending a $440,000 retreat after the company was bailed out with 85 billion taxpayer dollars!

I don't know what actions the federal government is planning to take, but here are a few suggestions:

Immediately rescind the $85 billion loan.

Start a formal criminal investigation of AIG, its board members and the CEO, CFO, COO and all executives who attended the retreat. The full weight of the Justice Department, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Trade Commission, the Senate and state agencies must be brought to bear.

Arrest and prosecute any of their executives and board members who participated in any criminal activities, and seize their company and personal assets for payment of damages.

The people who have criminally caused this financial meltdown need to be held accountable. I don't know of a more perfect opportunity to do so than this one.

We must stand up to these people now and make it perfectly clear that this criminal behavior will not be tolerated ever again. We also must re-regulate this industry and demand that our representatives conduct thorough oversight.

Executive compensation and perks must change, and if this isn't done and soon, then the actions of these criminals may trigger an angry backlash of the American people. That may result in grave danger for this nation.
-- Bill Davis, Kingston

McCain patronized viewers
Sen. John McCain, don't patronize me by calling me your friend ["Tension, but little venom," page one, Oct. 8].

The 80-plus lobbyists in your campaign, including many who work for the financial and insurance industries that are responsible for the meltdown of the economy, are your friends. George Bush, whom you voted with more than 90 percent of the time, is your friend. The war profiteers, who are cashing in on Iraq, are your friends. The mega-rich and corporations, who are the only real beneficiaries of your tax cuts, are certainly your friends. I am definitely not your friend.

By the way, you kept repeating, "I'll get Osama bin Laden, my friends. I'll get him. I know how to get him. I'll get him no matter what, and I know how to do it," Sen. McCain, my friend, either you have kept this knowledge on exactly how to capture bin Laden to yourself these last seven years (which borders on treason), or more likely you are making another empty promise to try to swing voters.

Since the "Straight Talk Express" obviously ran off a cliff long ago, maybe you could get around in a rusty, smoke-belching, 1972 Maverick.
-- Rick Kalamar, Shoreline

Obama doesn't rely on past
Presidential candidates have been defining themselves in terms of successful past presidents since the birth of our nation. Political pundits and the media are quick to make this connection and spew the likenesses as well.

Sen. Barack Obama's message of change, and his courage to take on the challenges of the 21st century, not based on the past, reinforce my confidence in the future of this country.

His is a new message that does not seek to identify with the past or with past presidents' successes. His vision of change and grasp of all the issues that face Americans in the 21st century can't be denied. He has looked at the failures and is willing to lead this country in a new direction based on lessons learned.

If Obama is elected, I believe he will become one of those presidents that future presidential candidates will strive to emulate. So when I hear pundits, like Jeff Greenfield on CBS, after the Oct. 8 debate, say Obama is channeling Bill Clinton, I am amazed. Obama channels no one, except perhaps the hopes of all Americans.
-- Nanette Palo, Puyallup

Follow-up questions
Following Tuesday's presidential debate, I have just a few questions and/or comments for Sen. John McCain:

You claim you know how to get Osama bin Laden. Then, what the heck have you been waiting for?

You said we need to say "no" to another Rwanda or Holocaust. Then what, may I ask, would you call the situation in Darfur?

You said, "We have to give people choice in America." Then why do you propose to deny women the right to choose?
-- Allison Wegg, Seattle

McCain unqualified
It wasn't until Tuesday night's debate that I realized Sen. John McCain is not qualified to be president.
He appears to be incapable of the simultaneous intricate analysis that is required to juggle and resolve multiple complex problems. Instead, he can only beat the drum of simplistic reasoning.

He says, referring to Sen. Barack Obama, that we cannot afford time for on-the-job training. McCain's problem, I fear, is that he is incapable of on-the-job learning.
-- Mark Miller, Seattle

Scott Olson / The Associated Press

Sen. John McCain, foreground, and Sen. Barack Obama share a rare laugh during Tuesday night's town-hall debate in Nashville, Tenn.

Iraq is no success
Editor, The Times:
During Tuesday's debate, Sen. John McCain tried once again to pitch the Iraq war as a success story, asserting that victory -- a real "mission accomplished" -- is right around the bend ["Tension, but little venom," Times, page one, Oct. 8].

There is no victory cry that can be cobbled together on the backs of this war's human tallies: nearly 4,200 U.S. soldiers killed, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths and humanitarian crises stemming from more than 2 million Iraqi refugees.

McCain uses "the surge" as justification for starting and continuing a war that has been wrong from the outset. The United States has dug its heels into Iraq, constructing the world's largest embassy in a country where our invasion and occupation has wreaked devastation and ruin. We are establishing permanent military bases against Iraqi requests, keeping U.S. military might on the watch and prowl over Mideast oil reserves.

McCain's position on Iraq does not signal good judgment, nor does his insistence that victory can yet be wrung from the Iraqi soil. It is representative of his penchant to march toward war, and his incomprehension about the desperate need for the United States to practice diplomacy rather than trumpeting the drumbeats and guns of war.
-- Nancy Dickeman, Seattle

Debate redundancy
What I saw Tuesday night was a repeat of the first debate.

It doesn't matter what the question was, the answer from either participant rambled on about this, that or the other thing.

Can we please have a debate? To debate means to argue, not continually give us your ideas on things. (Look up the meaning of the word "debate," if you don't believe me.) When will Sen. Barack Obama bring up the Keating 5? Is McCain blackmailing him or something?

It has been drilled into me that we use 25 percent of the world's oil, but only produce 3 percent. Got it. Tell me something new, or I'm sleeping through the entire next debate!
-- Steve Drake, Seattle

Bomb joke not funny, McCain
During Tuesday's presidential debate, Senator John McCain said he was "just joking" with one of his friends, when he sang "bomb, bomb Iran."

What a great joker!

Someone who thinks he is fit to be president is joking about bombing other countries? Wow!
I would have liked to have seen someone in the room ask him how he would feel if a politician from another country "joked" about bombing the United States.

I am pretty sure he would not like that joke at all and think that those people must be terrorists, according to his definition of terrorism.

This man shows anything but leadership qualities. He sounds and acts like a senile, old man, running around mumbling to himself and calling everyone else stupid.

I hope people of this country can wake up and see the evil they are facing before it is too late. They did not do that eight years ago, but, hopefully, they have learned by now.
-- Farokh Talebi, Kirkland

McCain's policies scary
Sen. John McCain and his logic (or lack thereof) scares me.

During the debate last night, he said that he wouldn't raise taxes for anyone, but he would lower taxes for some people. He even implied that he would lower taxes for as many people as Sen. Barack Obama will. But the money to run the country -- and, hopefully, to start paying off the national debt -- has to come from somewhere.

Under the tax plan McCain preaches, where will this money come from? If McCain doesn't plan to undo President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, we will lose even more revenue. This is not the way to handle the economic crisis.

Another thing he said that frightened me: He clearly stated that nuclear power is clean and safe. Excuse me, but does no one remember the Chernobyl disaster? I hope people don't buy into his unsupported lies.
Besides these twisted energy and economy policies, McCain said little about his own policies for the future, only saying what he has voted for or misquoting Obama. Sometimes, things he said about Obama were outright lies, with no more grounding in fact than the "safety" of nuclear reactors.

McCain is dangerous. I am grateful to all the war veterans, but that does not make someone suited for the presidency.
-- Kelsey Josund (age 15), Lake Forest Park

The candidates needed to heel
After watching the "town hall" debate and seeing the terse, frustrated look on moderator Tom Brokaw's face as he tried to make something meaningful of the evening, I couldn't help but think the debate commission should take a lesson from Larry and Kirby.

Kirby is a young, frisky golden retriever, and Larry is Kirby's owner. They are very loyal to each other. Rather than relying on an electric fence -- used in big areas where dogs spend a lot of time chasing deer or getting lost -- Larry gave Kirby an electric collar. It took a few times for the dog to realize that getting a little jolt meant stop and come back. Now all he has to do is hear the warning tone, and he gets the message and returns to base.

How much better the debate would have been if Brokaw could have had such a tool when the candidates wandered away from the question!
-- Bill Clapp, Seattle

Just doesn't make sense
Maureen O'Hagan's story on I-1029 ["Initiative would require more training for caregivers," page one, Oct. 6] was spot on in explaining the problems with the Service Employees International Union's costly and unnecessary initiative to more than double training requirements for a broad range of caregivers for the elderly and disabled. I would like to elaborate on a couple of points touched on in her article.

First, the $29.7 million estimated cost in the first biennium is only the tip of the iceberg. Among the many costs not included in this number is the cost to taxpayers for the FBI background checks, for which the FBI charges $85.

So with 20,000 new caregivers each year and assuming that employers hire two out of every three applicants, taxpayers can expect to fork over $2.5 million to the FBI each year.

All of these background checks -- including those for private agencies, homes and facilities -- would be funneled through the Department of Social and Health Services, which means we would need a new bureaucracy there just to process all the paper. DSHS would pay the FBI and could not pass the costs on to the applicants or employers.

The FBI checks can take six to eight weeks, leaving applicants in limbo longer than most would tolerate. This mess would degrade current practice at many agencies that already conduct 50-state background checks through private services that are quick, reasonably priced and far more complete and accurate than the FBI database.

Second, the comments by Nancy Dapper of the Alzheimer's Association for Western and Central Washington are not accurate. She says that Washington is "somewhat unique because people who are ailing have more opportunity to stay in their own homes" rather than go into nursing homes.

In fact, home-care agencies throughout the country, and in many other countries, are caring for seniors with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia in their homes in large and growing numbers. There is nothing unique about Washington.

Dapper goes on to say that as a result of the move toward more home-based care, caregivers are increasingly performing services on a par with those performed in nursing homes. This is simply false. Home-care agencies are strictly nonmedical and are not licensed to provide the complex medical services available from skilled nurses in nursing homes.

Alzheimer's sufferers can receive a wide range of nonmedical care at home, including assistance with activities of daily living such as dressing, bathing and toileting.

Home-care agencies train their caregivers on these services today. Extending the training to include services on a par with those performed in nursing homes would require home-care agencies, and ultimately their clients, to pay for training they would be prohibited from using under their license.

The cost of care would increase with no benefit to the clients -- exactly the point made by Deb Murphy of Aging Services of Washington.
-- Tom Boughner, Sequim

Let's consult the money tree
Our seniors' wisdom and knowledge is the foundation for our families and communities. Should we deny them the compassionate care they deserve?

One of the initiatives on the November ballot is I-1029, the "training initiative" for all long-term care workers. It mandates new requirements for the hiring (FBI background checks), training (75 hours) and certification of a broad range of caregivers. Sounds like a great idea, right? Wrong.

Here's why:

The reality is I-1029 will harm both seniors and compassionate caregivers receiving and providing care services. Our company hires and trains caregivers to provide nonmedical home care to our greatest generation.

Training costs money, and for seniors who don't qualify for public assistance, those costs are ultimately passed on to them. The whole idea of nonmedical home care is to provide seniors and their families an affordable alternative to home health care when all they need to stay in their homes is help with household tasks and perhaps some personal care. We already provide targeted training for these nonmedical skills, and we do it efficiently to keep our fees reasonable.

We also provide supervision available to our caregivers 24/7. Should they encounter a situation they need help with, our staff is on-call and available to help. The added training required by I-1029 is not specific to the services we offer. It's a one-size-fits-all course including skills our caregivers could never use with our clients, such as caring for disabled children.

Our clients' fees would increase by about 25 percent because of this training.

I-1029 would make home care less available.

Requiring 75 hours of training will create a barrier to thousands of entry-level caregivers who just want to help seniors but don't want to spend two weeks in a classroom to qualify. If thousands of workers are eliminated from our care-delivery system at a time when the need is rapidly increasing, who will care for our seniors?

The provision for FBI background checks would degrade our current hiring practices. We already do a 50-state background check derived from court records, which are far more complete and accurate than the FBI database. Also, the FBI background check process takes weeks and is much more costly.

I-1029 would hurt all of us as taxpayers. With the nation facing a financial crisis and with the state facing a projected $3.2 billion budget shortfall, I-1029 would create a new state bureaucracy at a cost of at least $30 million in the first two years.

I-1029 would, however, benefit one group: union bosses at the Service Employees International Union.

Their Local 775 sponsored the initiative, and they wrote themselves into the bill by requiring that they do much of the training.

We strongly urge your readers to reject I-1029 by voting "no" this November.
-- Kelly Cavenah, Olympia

There's nothing wrong with more training
Concerning Monday's story by Maureen O'Hagan, we believe there is more that has been left unsaid.
First, this initiative has strong support and should not be dismissed as just a union effort. The SEIU [Service Employees International Union] may be the financial arm, but there is a long list of supporters. This initiative is good public policy.

Second, the issues addressed by I-1029 are not new.

In 2000 the Washington State Long-term Care Ombudsman Program authored a report on the failures in the community-caregiver system. A key recommendation was to establish a certification mechanism for community-based caregivers -- those who work in boarding and adult family homes. That certification was patterned closely after the one that now applies to aides who work in nursing homes and hospitals.

The substance of I-1029 is a compromise that we can support even though it may fall short of the ideal.
It addresses background checks, training and certification in a uniform way that treats Medicaid and private-pay providers the same way.

The curriculum will be relevant to the adult learner and flexible.

It allows providers to offer their own training curriculum as approved by DSHS [Department of Social and Health Services]. Nothing in I-1029 would prevent part of the training hours to be supervised on-the-job training. I-1029 is not one-size-fits-all as opponents argue.

Yes, $30 million is a lot of money, but it is less than one-half of 1 percent of the total Medicaid budget for the state. And, it is cheaper than the millions of dollars in lawsuits that DSHS has paid out for failures in our long-term-care system.

It is interesting that opponents of I-1029 made many of the same arguments in 2000 when the training standards were increased from 22 to 34 hours. They said it was too costly, inflexible and would put them out of business.

They were wrong then and they are wrong now.

I-1029 is a wise investment in the future of Washington's long-term-care system, and is not one that we can afford to postpone.
--Nancy J. Dapper, Seattle

Leave your politics at the door
So much for the myth of the nonpolitical Supreme Court judges ["Ex-judges sue Rossi, builders, challenge fundraising," Times, news, Oct. 7].

For Faith Ireland and Robert Utter to use their prestige as former Supreme Court judges in this thoroughly partisan way demeans the Supreme Court.
Shame on them.

Any number of other political folks, PACs [political-action committees] or hacks could have brought this suit.
Is it any wonder that citizen initiatives reviewed and cleared over the years by various AGs [attorneys general] still got tanked by the Supreme Court?

If ever there were an advertisement for the need for divided government in Olympia with Republicans running some branch of government and Democrats another -- this is it.
-- Frank Klapach, Port Orchard

Parks for next generation
I strongly support Seattle Parks For All Proposition 2, and this is why: I watched as the grass-roots committee developed a comprehensive package of park projects that provides a rare opportunity to invest in a parks legacy for generations to come ["Yes on market upgrade; No on parks levy," editorial, Oct. 7].

This comes at a unique point in our history. Seattle's density is increasing at an all-time rate, and vacant land is virtually disappearing. At the same time, Seattle's parks are increasingly heavily used.

With Proposition 2, we have the opportunity to address these needs with a package that will benefit every citizen in the city.

Every area will receive new neighborhood parks, and missing links will be completed in our open-space and trail systems. Proposition 2 will also provide new recreational opportunities for our citizens and improve our citywide treasures, such as the Arboretum, Discovery Park and Jefferson Park.

Our citizens faced a similar decision almost 100 years ago, when Seattle was still virtually covered with trees. With incredible foresight, our community invested in implementation of a citywide Olmsted Plan and set aside hundreds of acres of land to form the backbone of our park system.

With Proposition 2, we can leave a legacy for the next 100 years.
-- Karen Daubert, campaign co-chair of Seattle Parks For All, Seattle

Pass levy for community
Financial times may be tough, and many (including your newspaper) don't seem to believe that renewing a parks levy now is the right thing to do.

As a new homeowner with a tight budget, I understand this. But I support Proposition 2 because public parks are precisely the type of civic infrastructure that we need most when we are pinching pennies. Public parks provide the quality of life that I searched for when choosing to live in Seattle, and a continued investment will ensure world-class parks long into the future.

Not everyone can escape to the mountains or ocean on the weekends, but everyone can enjoy our public parks, the open green spaces, beaches, various trails, playing fields and playgrounds.

This proposition will cost the average homeowner $81 per year to continue investing in the parks that so many enjoy. That's less than the current parks levy, and is an investment well worth making.

Furthermore, the projects in the levy are spread throughout Seattle's neighborhoods, providing a place for all to gather. This levy is about what sort of community we create for every citizen in Seattle and for the future.

I hope others will join me in voting "yes" on Proposition 2 to ensure the communal health of our city.
-- Tricia Vander Leest, Seattle

Parks a wise investment
The Seattle Parks and Green Space Levy is being supported by my neighbors because it is a wise investment.

By supporting the parks levy, voters can enhance the lives of people of all ages, economic and cultural backgrounds right now -- and also leave a legacy for future generations. The parks levy was put together by a group of dedicated volunteers who value community, the local economy and the environment.

Please join this group by voting "yes" for parks.
-- Cheryl dos Remedios, Seattle

Levy wasn't created in haste
As chair of the Citizen Advisory Committee that prepared the Parks and Green Spaces Levy package Seattle residents will vote on this fall, I tend to disagree with the Times editorial that it "feels hastily put together."

The diverse projects chosen for the $146 million parks levy were selected from existing neighborhood and other city plans based on years of grass-roots input and citizen efforts. The committee identified the highest-priority, most feasible projects that provided green space in Seattle's most underserved neighborhoods. See them all at www.seattleparksforall.org.

Our city must keep our open-space investments at pace with the growth in population and density if we are to maintain the quality of life that attracts business and keeps our communities safe and enjoyable. Now is not the time to turn our backs on green space, especially in the neighborhoods that need it most.

Quality public parks are even more important in tough economic times. For less than a quarter a day for the average homeowner, we can ensure that our entire community has free access to recreational open space. Vote "yes" on Proposition 2 this fall and continue smart investments in our public parks and green spaces.
-- Beth Purcell, chair of Citizen Advisory Committee on Parks and Green Spaces Levy, Seattle

Women don't want your puppet
I may not own a pit bull or many tubes of lipstick, but I am a soccer mom who has had years of experience in my community. I have earned my stripes as a women's activist by attending hours of meetings, marching and making many phone calls for 40-plus years. I have counseled and assisted women in getting abortions before and after Roe vs Wade. I have researched and worked for Native American women's right to quality health care and I have lobbied for equal pay.

I should be pleased to see a woman running (for the second time) as the vice-presidential candidate, but I am not.

Why?

Because the only option afforded me is Gov. Sarah Palin. She is not capable or qualified to lead on the issues that directly affect women's lives: maintaining a woman's right to control her own health care, improving employment and education opportunities or lobbying for equal pay.

I see this nomination as a slap in the face to all those women from Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Hillary Rodham Clinton who have given their time to promote women's rights.

Sarah Palin thinks she doesn't need to answer basic questions when interviewed. She should be proud enough to say she won't cooperate with a preapproved agenda. She wants to continue circumventing the constitution by maintaining Vice President Dick Cheney's trajectory of the VP position as a fourth branch of government and she continues to ignore the facts, all the while delivering glib comments with charisma and smiling zingers directly into the camera.

We need much more than a quick study and hockey mom to restore our moral and political image on the world stage. Is the Republican Party afraid of having an intellectual woman who might speak her mind?

McCain needed and got himself a media darling to counter the so-called "star power" of Obama. Palin is supposed to appease women, thereby deflecting any real debate. Women have been handed a puppet and not a real leader.
-- Kris Melroe, Seattle

What about the Keating Five?
Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin are trying to draw links between Sen. Barack Obama and former radical William Ayers, a man he does not appear to have been close to, nor whose views and actions has he ever expressed sympathy for ["Trailing Obama, McCain hopes to gain in debate," news, Oct. 7].

Since we're looking into the candidates' pasts for associates of influence, perhaps a more relevant example would be McCain's friendship with Charles Keating Jr. Keating stole billions from Lincoln Savings and Loan Association in the 1980s and helped precipitate the savings and loan crisis that has been much referenced recently.

What needs to be remembered is that McCain received more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from Keating and interfered with regulators on Keating's behalf, delaying the closing down of Lincoln Savings for two years and exacerbating the final cost to the tax payers by billions.

For his role as one of the Keating Five, McCain was reprimanded by the Senate ethics committee "for exercising poor judgment in intervening with regulators."

Given the current economic crisis and McCain's long history of deregulation, this is an association that really needs to be examined.
-- Richard Yonck, Seattle

Secrets don't make friends
Why did Sen. Barack Obama claim multiple times that he had no real relation with Bill Ayers when the two have served together on boards?

Ayers launched Obama's political career. This isn't normally done by someone who is just your neighbor.
Why is the Obama/Biden campaign hiding who their small donors are?

Over half of Obama's campaign donations are from people giving under $200.

They aren't required by law to disclose who gave the money, but every other campaign has revealed who they were getting money from. Why the secrecy? Will we find out years from now that many of these donations were fraudulent?
-- Janet Suppes, Bellevue

We don't want a prom queen
I read the story "So, how'd she do? Depends on the party" by Bob Young [news, Oct. 3] with interest.
As a teenage female voter, I was shocked that women are reacting positively to Gov. Sarah Palin.
In this story, one woman said, "You go girl!" and another commented, "You got the feeling she was an open person you could talk to."

What about substance and responsible leadership? American women need to realize that a woman who frequently winks into the camera, flirts with viewers and uses her looks to make up for lack of knowledge and experience, is lowering women to sexy, spunky prom queens.

Instead of a plan for reducing the taxes of Middle America, for alternative energy and protecting America from terrorists, Palin drew on dumb tactics.

Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton of the 19th-century Women's Rights Movement would be repulsed by Palin's version of women's progress. Let's wait for a woman who can be knowledgeable and truly capable of political leadership.

Think carefully before electing a prom queen!
--Janie Bube, Seattle

Divided we fail
Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have decided to try and win this election by further dividing an already deeply divided country.

Sen. Barack Obama has run his campaign on the idea of finding common ground.

The parties don't agree on abortion, but let's bring down the rate of unwanted pregnancies. People in gang-ridden parts of the country have different views on guns than people in rural communities, but let's at least agree to keep AK-47s out of the hands of gang members. He knows America is deeply divided and that a leader must be willing to bring people together.

If we have a president who is too far to the right, or too far to the left, half the country is always going to be outraged, and that doesn't solve a thing. Maybe Obama has a "liberal record" but that, as he pointed out at the first debate, comes from having to react to the extreme policies of President Bush. I truly believe he stands somewhere more in the middle.

McCain and Palin are using people's fear of the unknown (fueled by rampant Internet rumors) to divide us: "Don't trust this man who wants to teach your 5-year-olds about sex and will stop at nothing to tarnish the lily-white reputation of this hockey mom you can all relate to. Also, he's probably a terrorist; just look at his middle name!" It comes down to fear, but it also comes down to trust.

I trust Obama to continue to try and find the common ground and common good we need to bring this country together. I fear that if McCain is elected, the polarizing attacks he used during the campaign will continue and divide this country beyond repair.

Divided we fail.
-- Mairin Reed, Sherman Oaks, Calif.

Say goodbye to civil liberties

No pun intended, but the progressives have it dead wrong when it comes to Initiative 1000 ["Death with dignity: Approve I-1000," Times, editorial, Oct. 5].

Much like the Oregon law, which has been on the books for 10 years, the Washington law would, in effect, enable the insurance companies to wipe out civil liberties.

I have a disabled son. I don't want someone telling me that caring for him has become too costly, but that they will gladly pay for the pill to end his life "compassionately." This is a civil-rights issue. This is a disability-rights issue.

This is not a slippery slope. This is a blind leap over a precipice of no return.

Get informed, be shocked. Then get angry and vote "no" on I-1000.
-- Mary Lund, Bothell

Suicide is unacceptable
The Times concludes that, "On the grounds of compassion for the suffering, and recognition of the individual as a moral agent," we should vote for I-1000. Vote against I-1000 for the same reasons.

Compassion means suffering (passion) with (com) another and seeing the person through to the end -- not hastening it. This is much more difficult than turning away while the person injects himself or herself and commits suicide.

Yes, the individual is a moral agent. Choices one makes have moral implications -- for everyone. To legalize physician-assisted suicide, even for a few, is to begin to reshape it as a morally acceptable option for the many. The attempt to draw parameters around "acceptable" suicide is arbitrary and, thus, subject to change.

Why is physical suffering given greater weight than emotional suffering? Why is suicide only OK for someone who might die in six months? Why is suicide a tragedy when it falls outside these narrowly defined parameters but compassionate when inside them? Legalizing physician-assisted suicide opens it for discussion and implies its legitimacy.

Eventually, the discussion will be about broadening those arbitrary, narrow, "safe" parameters.
-- Brian Cummings, Port Orchard

Sheen's ad makes false claims
I much appreciate the effort The Times is expending to examine the claims made by candidates and groups supporting and opposing ballot issues in this election season.

My request is that you look at the claims being made by the two sides of the I-1000 (death with dignity) issue -- in particular, the radio and TV ads by actor Martin Sheen.

I loved Sheen in "The West Wing." He is not, however, well-cast in the role of death-with-dignity opponent. Sheen claims that "the 9,000 doctors" of the Washington State Medical Association oppose I-1000. In fact, that decision was made by the WSMA House of Delegates and executive board. Rank-and-file members of the WSMA were never allowed to vote on it.

Many physicians support the initiative. A quick check of the records in Olympia will reveal that more money from doctors has been donated to groups favoring I-1000 than those opposed to it.

Additionally, Sheen would have us believe that patients could opt for a lethal dose of medication even if they were suffering only from depression. This is not true. At least two doctors must certify that a patient is making an informed decision and is mentally competent.

One thing I can agree with the actor on is that patients should be treated with compassion. And what could be more compassionate than allowing someone to make an exit on their own terms, before physical conditions render the individual unrecognizable to his family?

Sheen should keep up the good work [acting], where his dialogue more often has the ring of truth.
-- Chris Fruitrich, West Seattle

Safeguards flawed in I-1000
I have strong opinions against the proposed Death with Dignity Act, I-1000. The safeguards are flawed.
The two objective witnesses can hardly be called objective if one witness may also be an heir, a beneficiary of the terminally-ill patient's estate. I-1000 leaves room for great anguish of the dying, as well as distrust and possible calamity within families in the moral and legal arenas.

Is anyone talking to the survivors of patients who chose to die under Oregon's Assisted Suicide law? Surely there must be trauma. Are there support groups to help counsel the families in this decision prior and following? Have there been lawsuits filed because of wrongdoing? Has there been any follow-up?

There must be safeguards in place and support for the dying, as well as for those who survive the death of a loved one before even considering I-1000.
-- Mary Cockerham, Lakewood

Thoughtful support
Thank you for your thoughtful, carefully considered support of I-1000.

The Times appropriately emphasizes the fundamental right of the individual to choose with dignity at the close of the life.
-- John Edwards, Seattle

I-1000 doesn't guarantee choice to die
I am against I-1000, due to the lack of safeguards.

The Times acknowledges that I-1000 requires "no witnesses" at the time of death. Without required witnesses, the opportunity is created for an heir or stressed-out caregiver to administer the lethal dose to Dad without his consent. Even if he struggled violently, who would know? With no required witnesses, I-1000 creates the perfect alibi.

Family members, of course, do this kind of thing all the time. The Times ran "Des Moines murder for hire brings 25-year prison terms" [Local News, Oct. 4], about a mother and son who hired a hit man to off her husband. Why should we pass a statute that rewards this type of behavior with a "get out of jail free card"?

Sadly, people commit suicide now. Let's help ensure that it's their choice.
-- Margaret Dore, Seattle

Rossi is another West
Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi certainly shares a lot of the same dangerous economic ideas with his Republican ally George Bush. They both favor deregulation, cutting education and health programs to pay for tax cuts for big corporations.

These strategies won't work in Washington state

But Rossi reminds me of another politician from our state Senate: the late Jim West. They were both conservative state senators, leaders in the state Republican Party, and chairmen of the Senate Ways and Means Committee. Both West and Rossi took great pride in their shameless cuts in health services for poor children and their tax breaks for corporate campaign donors. They also ran the most offensive and dishonest campaigns anywhere in this state.

West once tried to run for state office, but, like Rossi, he was defeated. It's time for the citizens to stand up and vote against Rossi one more time. We have seen the damage Bush did as president and West did as mayor of Spokane; we don't need to see the damage Rossi can do as governor.
-- Christopher Katke, Spokane

It's not broken; don't fix it
Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire has earned re-election in 2008 ["The truth behind claims by Rossi, Gregoire," Times, page one, Oct. 5].

Gregoire has shown leadership in health care, education, gay rights, the environment and the economy. She provided health coverage to 84,000 children and aims to cover all children by 2010. She increased funding at the K-12 level by $900 per student for smaller class sizes and better teacher pay.

Gregoire helped pass two landmark pieces of gay-rights legislation: a gay-anti-discrimination bill and a domestic-partner bill. She also championed two key environmental initiatives: The Puget Sound Partnership to clean up Puget Sound and the Climate Action and Green Jobs bill aimed at reducing carbon emissions and creating more green jobs.

Forbes Magazine recently ranked Washington as the third-best state in the U.S. to do business. The state economy added 200,000 jobs during Gregoire's tenure. Job creation and unemployment rates have been better than the national average.

Gregoire's opponent, Dino Rossi, offers no substance beyond a delusional transportation plan marked by a gross underestimation of the costs and an inability to offer specifics as to how it will be paid.

Rossi simply doesn't have the record to compete with Gregoire's accomplishments.
--Terence Tada, Olympia

Don't be fooled
Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's campaign is a mirror image of the Republican/Karl Rove style, even though he avoids using the "R" word.

Unfortunately, some citizens are still focused on greed and deregulation so they are pouring money into his misleading campaign.

Christine Gregoire is the best governor Washington state has had in the 30 years I have lived here.

As an early-childhood-education professional, I have been impressed with her leadership regarding increasing state support for children's services in ways that can really make a difference for their future success. She is fiscally prudent but knows that we get what we pay for.

She has improved funding for schools, higher education and transportation, which are all essential investments for the state's economic future.

Rossi's agenda is similar to that of the Bush administration.

Don't be fooled by the lies. Re-elect Gregoire for the sake of our state's future.
--Betty Williams, Seattle

Burner: It's time for some inspiration
Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner's run for office is inspirational and refreshing in today's politics ["Liberal blogs across nation see Darcy Burner as 'family,'" Politics & Government, Oct. 2].

I think what has excited people about her campaign is her idealism.

I am a resident of the 8th Congressional District and am sick of the war and occupation in Iraq, along with the loss of lives and money that has resulted. There are many of us on the Eastside that recognize the need for a forward-looking representative who can bring new skills to the office.

Our country has been heading in the wrong direction under the current leadership and we have difficult economic, social and health problems to solve. We need a new kind of person to step forward to become one of the new leaders for America.

At 62, I've been through a lot, but the last eight years have been dreadful. We have to change. It's time to give young, creative people a chance to govern.
-- Andrew McCormick, Bellevue

Where's the love?
"Change" has been a persistent theme in both presidential campaigns.

I certainly agree it's time for change in the representation of Washington's 8th Congressional District. Republican U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert voted twice last week against the economic rescue bills. Apparently, Reichert missed the 700-plus-point drop in the stock market after Monday's vote.

Reichert and his House colleagues took two days off midweek while his constituents' life savings lost 20 percent in value and unemployment rose by 159,000.

This unconscionable insensitivity to the plight of working families outside the Beltway can't continue.

That's why I'm voting for Darcy Burner for Congress.
-- David Billick, North Bend

What empire?
In response to Lance Dickie's rumination on the waning American empire, ["As American empire wanes, the world shrugs its shoulders," editorial column, Oct. 2] consider this:

We are now paying for many decades of misplaced priorities in which a permanent war economy has trumped all concerns for domestic economic and social health. What would be on a domestic need-to-do wish list?

How about addressing education. Dickie reflects on the burgeoning global economy and the enormous political shifts contained therein. While we as a nation have been for many years inundated with the argument that education, science literacy and numeracy, along with refined technical skills are critical to a competent work force in an ever-evolving technological society, we have simultaneously witnessed a persistent erosion of vast swaths of public education.

In many communities, school facilities are inadequate and in some instances literally falling apart. This is a particular tragedy in many inner city schools where obtaining a decent education is becoming increasingly difficult if not impossible.

A full-scale commitment to reinvigorating public education could staunch the trends in illiteracy and innumeracy, and ensure that an educated citizenry can meet the economic and political challenges of an interdependent global community.

Salvaging our decaying infrastructure, ensuring that all citizens are properly housed, creating a truly accessible and just system of health care and assisting ready and willing workers with adequate and dignified employment are but a few areas of domestic concern that must be addressed if this nation is to reclaim its legacy of hope.

The path we have been on has been abysmal and we are now reaping the bitter fruits of that folly. It is high time to claim a new ethos and direction for America.
-- Joe Martin, Seattle

Choice to die not assured
The Times editorial about I-1000 states that 49 patients in Oregon used the Oregon assisted-suicide law to take their lives last year ["Death with dignity: approve I-1000," Times, editorial, Oct. 5]. The editorial further states that It further states that some of the 49 patients took their lives "because of pain, but most because they were losing their autonomy, their dignity and their engagement with life."

But Oregon's law, like I-1000, has no required witness at the death. For this reason, no one -- including Oregon or Tthe Times editorial board -- knows why these 49 patients took their lives or whether someone other than the patients took their lives for them. The Times is engaged in speculation.

Supporters of I-1000 claim that it allows an individual to die with dignity and that it supports patient autonomy. The real choice to "die," however, is not assured by I-1000. This is again because I-1000 has no requirement that there be a witness at death. Without a required witness at death, a stressed-out caregiver or heir could administer the lethal dose without the patient's consent. This is not personal autonomy for the patient.

I-1000 is a flawed legislation that puts vulnerable people at risk.

Vote "No" on I-1000.
-- Michael A. Patterson, Seattle

Times kudos
The Times' endorsement of Initiative 1000 gladdens my heart. As a retired nurse who worked primarily with cancer patients, I have given priority over the past 20 years to promoting this option, as well as educating others about for making choices about end-of-life decisions by means of advance directives.

The Times' coverage of this issue has been superb. The two-part series was professionally researched and clearly written. The editorials you have published have been fair and convincing.

If this law passes, I will be content at age 82 to know I have given my time, energy and money to a successful and compassionate advance for humanity.
-- Mary Watson, Gig Harbor

Reject I-1000
The primary goal of government is to protect the lives of its citizens. It shouldn't be involved in dispensing death to those citizens. The primary goal of a physician is to cure his patient when possible, comfort always, kill never. I-1000 undermines these fundamental goals.

All patients are vulnerable as they approach the end of life. A patient may worry about loss of autonomy and becoming a burden to loved ones. The appropriate response from the medical community is reassurance, care, compassion and practical assistance -- not facilitation of suicide. I-1000 would radically change the role of the physician from an advocate of healing to an accomplice in death.

Our profession has renounced medical killing. Assisted suicide has been rejected by the Washington State Medical Association and 48 other state medical associations in 48 other states. The Oregon State Medical Association supported a repeal of Oregon's assisted-suicide law.

Initiative 1000 is poorly thought out and dangerous. We urge Washington voters to vote "no."
-- Richard Wonderly, M.D., and James Gasparich, M.D., Seattle

I-1000 shows compassion for terminally ill
You are so right -- requesting life-ending medication is "the right of the terminally ill to decide for themselves."

If only we could all just die in our sleep, we wouldn't have to be faced with end-of-life decisions. How wonderful that would be. But, unfortunately, that's not the case for every person.

Those who must endure a death sentence because of a terminal illness deserve the compassion Initiative 1000 would allow.

Thank you for your reasoned approach to this issue.
-- Maureen Galbreath, Edmonds

Initiative modeled after safe Oregon law
I can speak from personal experience about Initiative I-1000.

My mom used Oregon's Death with Dignity law to hasten her death. When she had two weeks left to live, my mom was unable to do anything she liked. Hospice workers did a great job trying to keep my mom pain-free, but the truth is that at that point she was miserable.

My mom said her goodbyes, and with my stepdad and me by her side, took the lethal medication and passed away peacefully. My family is very grateful for the Oregon Death with Dignity law that allowed my mom a dignified death on her own terms.

Washington's I-1000 is modeled after onthe Oregon law with the same safeguards to make sure that no one will ever be forced to end their lifeinto this. The past decade of the Oregon law has shown that this is a safe law, used very sparingly, without one single case of misuse.

I greatly respect those who would never use this option because of personal or religious beliefs. This is a very personal choice. But please allow all of us to make our own decisions if we are ever faced with a terminal diagnosis. I urge you to vote "yes" on I-1000.
-- Jonathon Turlove, Olympia

Bush supporters are to blame
Since Congress has just approved the largest bailout of Wall Street in U.S. history, I think it's time to set the record straight ["Congress OKs unprecedented $700 billion bailout plan," News, Oct. 5]. There have been a lot of pundits spouting off about who's is to blame for this mess. The consensus of mainstream media and the economists who that appear on their shows is that we are all collectively to blame.

I beg to differ. I blame each and every person who voted for President Bush and the Republicans in 2004 (I cut you a little slack if you voted for him in 2000).

This crisis was caused primarily by the bubble in the mortgage market bursting. That bubble developed due to deregulation and lack of proper government oversight. Bush and Co. have been running the government for the past seven-plus 7+ years. Their policies caused the greed that which created the bubble.

But are they really to blame? Didn't they tell the American people upfront that the Republican Party was the great believer of free markets? Didn't they tout the wisdom of deregulation so the market could function more efficiently without undue constraint?

Instead, I blame you, the Bush voters. You supported them. You chose to listen to the propaganda being spewed out of Fixed -- I mean Fox -- News ChannelNetwork. You chose to watch Sean Shawn Hannity and Bill O'Reilly on your TV. You chose to listen to Rush Limbaugh on your radio. You chose to blindly accept their talking points without question and buy into the "bias of the left-wing media" assertion and ignore warning signs.

While watching Fox for your dose of news you chose to tune in to your favorite sports channel, American Idol or 24.

So now, after so many other things have gone wrong in this country due to the Bush administration and you who supported them, we are witnessing the meltdown of the U.S. economy. Good job!!!
So When you open up your financial statements in the months ahead, put the blame where it belongs for once -- on you.

Oh yes -- I know you are going to vote for McCain. That's because you are patriotic.
Just to let you know ahead of time. If by some catastrophe he wins; I'll BLAME YOU!!! I won't forgive you either!!!
-- Leonard Rodenberg, Seattle

Obama will clean up deregulation mess
Lack of government enforcement under the existing bodies of regulatory federal financial departments created this financial crisis, namely the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.

Our financial markets changed under the deregulation law with Bill Clinton in 1999, but President Bush did not step up the regulatory enforcement to accommodate that change during his first term, despite warnings. Instead, he cut it back.

The banks were allowed to run amok and do risky mortgages that caused this crisis through foreclosures and defaults. I was a mortgage broker and vice president of a mortgage firm for seven years. I know.

Companies like such as Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and AIG that didn't know the mortgage industry were allowed to buy mortgage-backed securities and subprime loans not insured by the government.

The Republicans had majority rule in 2003 in both houses of Congress when Bush pushed his regulation bill for oversight. It was voted down because it sought to privatize the oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

It's not about party or partisanship anymore. This is about the future of our country. Let's elect the best and brightest -- Obama-Biden!
My business can't take another two months of this. Can yours?
-- Daniel Powers, Kent

Rescue this
Well, the Senate renamed the bailout package the "rescue" package. As in, rescue the seven-figure golden parachutes of the Wall Street campaign contributors and their chauffeur-driven limousines.

I wouldn't necessarily oppose the bill if the government raised taxes or cut spending to pay for it, but this bill is paid for entirely with debt. Yep, whip out the national credit card for a $700 billion boondoggle.

Claims that the government may make money on the deal? Hogwash! This is an "investment" in commercial paper of such poor quality that none of the world's banks, brokerage firms or insurance companies will touch it at any price. The government will be borrowing the money to buy this horse manure and it's not entirely clear who will lend us the money or at what interest rate.

I'm disgusted and less than optimistic that common sense will ever prevail in Congress.
-- Robert Walker, Renton

Silly Congress
Packaging tax cuts with a request for $700 billion in additional spending has to be the craziest idea to come out of Washington, D.C., in quite a while.

Let's be realistic: $700 billion is a lot of money, but is in all likelihood just a down payment on the total amount of damage hiding in the financial markets. With $55 trillion of outstanding credit-default swap contracts lurking out there, who knows how many more bailouts we will eventually be asked to fund?

Congress, tell me what the problem is, what you need the money for, what I get for my money, and if it will fix the problem. Then I have no problem spending $700 billion. But don't try to bribe me with a silly tax cut. It just makes me even more suspicious.
-- Trevor Hall, Bellevue

What about the Supreme Court?
Thank you for your recent full-page story listing presidential candidate positions on major issues ["Obama vs. McCain on the issues," Politics & Government, Sept. 27].

What is the point of elections if not to understand how each candidate would shape our future? However, I noticed the omission of candidate positions with respect to the Supreme Court. This matters.

How many people are aware that in the current Supreme Court, seven of the nine justices were appointed by Republican presidents? John Paul Stevens (Ford), Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy (Reagan), David Hackett Souter and Clarence Thomas (George H.W. Bush) and Samuel Alito and John Roberts (George W. Bush.) Only two justices (Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer) were appointed by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton).

The Supreme Court is intended to be balanced. It would be a matter of great discussion if 78 percent of either major party occupied either the U.S. House or Senate.

If McCain needed to appoint replacements for the only remaining Democrat-appointed positions (these two justices are now in their 70s), the entire Supreme Court would be Republican-appointed.

This year, both the makeup of the current Supreme Court and presidential positions with respect to it are relevant.
-- Susan Temple, Bellevue

Let's fix the problem
It would be to the betterment of the Puget Sound region if voters rejected Proposition 1 at the upcoming election ["Supporters, opponents of light rail face off in Proposition 1 debate," News, Sept. 23]. They should then ask their legislator or representative to spend some time drafting an initiative to reorganize the entire public transportation system in Puget Sound.

In the last 25 years, many major industries have gone through a restructuring period in order to meet the demands of the changing market. In order to be successful and cost effective, they had to establish organizational designs that were more efficient and operated more effectively in the marketplace. Those reformed businesses became leaner and meaner, in turn becoming more successful and more economically sound.

The regional public transportation industry is operating under protocols that were established more than 50 years ago and have not changed with the evolving transportation markets, financial funding sources and public transportation service alterations.

The transportation industry is self-regulating and is not accountable to any one regional governing body.
In the Puget Sound region, there are more than 45 different transportation taxing districts -- all of which have some authority to engage in raising public funds for public transportation projects or programs.
There are more than 12 major public transit agencies providing bus services, light rail and commuter rail services in Puget Sound -- all competing for state and federal funding.

Each year, millions of dollars are expended by these transit agencies trying to coordinate planning of bus service and public-transit-related programs. The agencies are self-serving and focused on meeting their own goals.

For example, a person traveling by bus from Olympia to Everett would have to use bus services from as many as five different bus agencies and could encounter five different fare structures.

This is a cumbersome system and does not support seamless travel in the region. For customers who want to use public transportation, it really isn't important which agency provides the bus service; it is the service that is important.

Vote "no" on Proposition 1 and vote "yes" to reform and reorganize the Puget Sound regional public transportation industry.
--Scott Preston, Seattle

Protect the doctors
Historically, people have resisted many social and medical advancements which over time have been shown to benefit society, such as: desegregation, women's right to vote, polio vaccinations, fluoridation of the water supply, anesthesia during childbirth, organ donation, admission of Jews to higher education, the horseless carriage, etc.

Opponents of these new ideas argued that catastrophic outcomes would result. In each of these cases, not only have these feared outcomes not occurred, but history later judged these changes as progress.

I-1000, the "Washington Death with Dignity Act," if passed, would likely be judged as a contribution to humanity in Washington state ["Initiative 1000 would let patients get help ending their lives," Politics & Government," Sept. 21].

The concept of a physician prescribing life-ending medication that the suffering patient might take during the last six months of life is a new concept for the medical profession, much as the social and medical changes were at one time.

The concept of a collaborative effort between the physician and terminally ill patient to plan the moment of death is new. However, this concept has been practiced throughout history, without the benefit of legal sanction.

Supporters of I-1000 want to provide legal protection for doctors and patients in situations which follow the safeguards provided by the proposed law.
-- Elaine Gordon, Seattle

Kudos to Gregoire on nuclear-waste issue
Gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi attacks Gov. Christine Gregoire for not bending over backward to invite the French nuclear giant Areva to bring nuclear-waste reprocessing to Washington state ["Gregoire, Rossi clash on spending, health care," Local News, Oct. 2].

If Rossi thinks Areva is great for Washington, maybe he should talk to the wine growers of Tricastin in the southern Rhone Valley. They are less than thrilled with the spill of 75 kilograms of untreated uranium solution last July and Areva's molasses-slow pace alerting authorities that there was a problem.

Revelations of waste-management failures at Tricastin have shaken French complacency about nuclear power. France ordered residents downstream not to drink water from their wells and farmers not to irrigate their fields. Not the kind of image a wine region wants to cultivate.

Kudos to Gregoire for asking basic questions like, where would the radioactive waste from reprocessing go?
Some bandwagons aren't worth jumping on.
-- Helen Wheatley, Olympia

Biden won the debate
Editor, The Times:
Sen. Joseph Biden clearly won the vice-presidential debate on Thursday night ["VPs deliver; will focus shift?" Times, page one, Oct. 3]. Gov. Sarah Palin clearly has no clue about what it's like to be in the national spotlight.

Paul J. Richards / APF / Getty Images

Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden and his Republican counterpart, Sarah Palin, shake hands following Thursday night's debate.

However, there is praise for Palin's performance on Thursday night. She had a few talking points, mostly on energy and statistical numbers, about Biden and Sen. Barack Obama's histories that seemed to be well-rehearsed and well-planned. But that's it.

When it came down to it, Palin simply did not address the questions from the moderator. She sometimes avoided the questions altogether.

Biden, on the other hand, looked like a real vice president -- something America has not experienced for quite some time. He laid out a clear case for why the Obama-Biden ticket represents the change America needs. Their change does a complete turnaround from the eight years of Bush Doctrine.

Biden made it clear that the Obama-Biden administration will make the middle class a priority. He also said they have a plan in place to bring home the troops from Iraq safely and responsibly, and to restore America's leadership to the world.

Obama and Biden are our beacons of hope in this fearful and stressful time.
-- Brandon Melton, Spokane

Palin is the oil-industry candidate
As a woman, I was delighted to see Gov. Sarah Palin give a good speech during the vice-presidential candidates' debate. I was glad she didn't "collapse into an incomprehensible heap" -- a scenario recently posited by a Washington correspondent when pressed to describe a situation that could force Palin off the Republican presidential ticket.

Because she has proved herself comprehensible at the podium, we can now concentrate on what she is saying instead of how she is saying it.

For instance, as a result of Thursday's debate, I now understand that Palin was selected as the candidate of the oil industry. Her stated mission is to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. She wants to lower taxes on an industry that made unprecedented profits, while we paid $4.50 a gallon for gas. Forget her story about how she stood up to big oil in Alaska. They didn't need the profit Alaska denied them because they were raking it in down here. And that investment has paid off big in putting Palin on the "maverick" ticket with Sen. John McCain.

Her "energy policy" would destroy natural areas and contribute to global warming without doing a single thing to make the United States energy independent. Moreover, one of the first gubernatorial acts of this "Country First" candidate was to sign a contract with a Canadian company to build an oil pipeline in Alaska.

Palin was well-coached and made a folksy delivery, but her politics are all about giving wealth to the wealthy and otherwise preserving the status quo.
-- Wendy Shook, Tukwila

Jeez Louise, Palin
While I watched the vice-presidential debate, I waited on the edge of my seat for "gee willikers." Imagine my disappointment when Gov. Sarah Palin left that one out. However, she came very close, and I appreciate her efforts.

It was painfully obvious that Palin had completed a crash course in the George Bush School of "Ain't-I-Just-Plain-Folk."

Isn't it odd that we're made to feel bad about expecting more from someone running for vice president? With all the substantive women politicians out there, it leaves me with just one thought: "Aww, shucks!"
-- Ricky Barnes, Seattle

Neither won the debate
Well, the great debate is over, and, essentially, we are where we were the day before the debate. Gov. Sarah Palin has shown that she can deliver a line in a folksy way similar to Ronald Reagan, and Sen. Joseph Biden has shown that he has a firm grasp of the facts.

During the debate, Palin repeatedly didn't answer the question asked and dove directly into the sound bite she was instructed to deliver.

Biden at least first answered the questions and then went about his mission of tying Sen. John McCain to President Bush.

Based on this, I can't determine a winner or loser. We're just back to where we were: Who will make the better president, and who will lead us in the direction that this country needs to go in?

I don't know if Thursday night's vice-presidential debate helped anyone make that decision. It sure didn't help change my mind one way or the other.
-- Robert Oberlander, Issaquah

Answer the questions asked, Palin
Gov. Sarah Palin sidestepped the point of having a debate by not answering the questions asked and talking about whatever else she felt like. She even said that she was going to do this very early in the debate, which would have been a good time for the moderator, Gwen Ifill, to put a stop to it.

Interviewers and moderators in the media need to remember that, while they are supposed to remain objective, they are supposed to keep to the rules. When Palin so willfully did not answer the questions asked, she broke the rules of the debate and should have been called on it.

I guess that is how it will work, as it has for the past eight years, if the McCain-Palin ticket wins in November. They'll break the rules, and everybody will be too polite to call them on it until it is too late.
-- David Comito, Seattle

Play on words
Who took de bait in Thursday night's vice-presidential white flag of surrender? I thought Sen. Joseph Biden looked Palin comparison.
-- Leo Shillong, Bellingham

Sound professional, GOP
I find it curious how the current Republican philosophy appears to believe that speaking in a folksy manner, such as using the words "betcha," "gonna," "folks," etc., is somehow an endearing and appropriate way to speak.

What in the world makes them think that? We've endured this dumbing-down of the Most Powerful Person in the World for the last eight years. I want someone in office who not only acts like a president (or vice president), but sounds like one.

No, you are not my next-door neighbors -- you're the ultimate representatives of this country. Please represent us with dignity and intelligence, and have the grace to sound like you possess both.
-- Karen Thompson, Port Angeles

We can't trust Dino
Editor, The Times:
The fact check on gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi's latest misleading ad ["Rossi ad in error," Times, Local News, Sept. 30] shows why we can't trust Rossi to be our governor. He is blatantly lying to voters and unfairly distorting Gov. Christine Gregoire's economic accomplishments.

Elaine Thomson / The Associated Press

Gov. Christine Gregoire, left, and Dino Rossi have squared off in three debates.

Gregoire has built a strong economy for our state. Any economic woes we now face should be attributed solely to the failed economic agenda of the Bush administration -- an agenda that Rossi wholeheartedly supports.

On Nov. 4 we have a simple decision to make: We can re-elect a governor who has fought for our state's economic stability during a time of national economic turmoil; or we can elect a man who lies and uses our state government to prop up the Bush agenda.

Which do you think is the better choice?
-- Maxine Lipkin Marple, Seattle

Tomorrow is another story
Gov. Christine Gregoire's Sept. 15 statement, "We do not have a deficit today," reminds me of the guy who jumps off the roof of a 10-story building and shouts out as he falls past the fifth story, "It doesn't hurt yet!"
-- Bill Hirt, Bellevue

It's wrong to ignore looming deficit
Tuesday's headline, "Rossi ad in error on state deficit -- there isn't one yet" and the article that follows are straight from Gov. Christine Gregoire's campaign.

Moreover, they represent a Clintonesque parsing of small words: Whether there is a deficit depends on what the meaning of "is" is!

To this ordinary, plain-spoken voter, a big spending hole is a big spending hole whether the bottom line turns red today or in a few weeks. We'd better call it what it is.

Your headline is like seeing a wall of water up the street heading toward our dry front lawn, and saying "Nope -- we don't have a flood problem!"

We ignore what looms ahead to our peril.
-- Doug Trotter, Snohomish

Election about politics, not race
A friend called me a racist the other day because I do not plan to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. No one called me a racist when this liberal didn't vote for Jimmy Carter. I keep asking my friends why I should vote for Obama. Because he is the man for change, they say. But not so good on the details, I respond.

Obama started this election season without wearing an American flag lapel, but now he does. He bent to pressure. Obama says he was always against the war in Iraq, but since he was not in Congress at the time, we really do not know how he would have voted.

Obama sat in church, for 20 years or so, listening to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright speak from his heart. Obama left the church, but only after Wright was publicly criticized. Again, Obama bowed to pressure.

Obama said he was against wiretaps without a warrant, but voted for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act bill.

I was listening to Amy Goodman, host of "Democracy Now!," the other day interview Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about the death penalty for gays in Iran. The president pointed out that the United States has the death penalty. Goodman responded that progressives are trying to change that. Obama believes in the death penalty -- he said as much when he disagreed with the Supreme Court ruling that child rapists could not be given the death penalty.

Obama at first said he would bring the troops home from Iraq in six months after he was elected; now he is saying 18 months. And he is not bringing anyone home -- he is sending these troops to Afghanistan. Sounds to me like we are staying in a war.

Obama believes that faith-based organizations should get federal funding to deliver social services.
I can go on, but you get the point. Why should this liberal vote for Obama? Because he is black, and I don't want to be considered racist? Because he is a Democrat? I am a progressive liberal who cannot vote for someone who does not share my political views.

It is about politics, isn't it?
-- Hilary Emmer, Vashon Island

Look beyond the abortion issue
Every four years, like clockwork, Republicans raise the issue of abortion. During presidential elections for the past 30 years, conservative candidates wave their pro-life, anti-choice credentials like a red flag in front of a bull.

Sure enough, the electorate splits along predictable fault lines -- with conservative Catholic and evangelical voters voting Republican in the sincere belief that their candidate will overturn Roe v. Wade. For them, this single issue trumps all others.

But it's all eyewash.

In 2006, with Republican control of all branches of government, it would have been easy to eliminate the right to abortion. As ever, they did nothing. With breathtaking cynicism, Republican politicians abandoned the issue they campaigned on to preserve it for the next election cycle.

Because if they did make abortions illegal in this country, millions of single-issue voters would be compelled to look beyond the red flag and confront genuine issues: a failing economy, an ill-begotten war, the serial abuses of power and the abandonment of constitutional principles.

Simply put, if abortion is your only issue, you are being played for a fool.
-- Donald Sherrard, Bellevue

McCain is no maverick
During his bid for president in 2000, Sen. John McCain demonstrated his "maverick" credentials when he criticized candidate George Bush for courting the smarmiest elements of the religious right. McCain said, "Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance." That statement was deemed courageous since it was principled and true, but McCain lost the far-right fringe.

But in 2008, McCain's struggle to generate momentum required desperate measures. So, in a decision disguised as a maverick move, he selected as his running mate a sorority queen given to bubbly platitudes and razor-thin knowledge of world affairs -- obviously, not because she is ready to step in and take over, but because she brings in those very agents of intolerance he alienated eight years ago.

By selecting Palin as his running mate, McCain has shown he is the opposite of a maverick. The sad irony is, his actions fly in the face of his slogan. Rather than put "Country First" and continue his legitimate stand against the "agents of intolerance," he invited them right onto his ticket.

So, don't call McCain a maverick. He is running for panderer-in-chief.
-- Jim Corbett, Edmonds

Palin's responses impressive
I was leaning toward voting for Sen. Barack Obama, but Gov. Sarah Palin's responses to the media's grilling has so impressed me that I'm going with McCain-Palin.
-- Paul Korneliussen, Mount Vernon

Palin shows disrespect for U.S. laws
In the midst of the nation's economic woes, Gov. Sarah Palin, who soon could be a heartbeat away from providing leadership in economic policy, has asked for more time to file her personal financial information with the Federal Election Commission.

The filing was originally due Monday of this week, but Palin campaign attorneys disputed the date, and settled on Friday. The campaign also asked for an extension because of the complexity of the form. So, the filling period has been extended another week.

Are we to elect somebody to the second-highest office in the nation who lacks the skills or the inclination to accomplish -- with hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign resources -- a required administrative financial responsibility?

What chance is there for fiscal leadership here? What chance for simple executive management of the responsibilities of office? And if this is a matter of considering the filing an improper and unimportant government intrusion, what chance would there be for rule of law under a Palin administration?

Her reasons for her unwillingness to testify in regard to abuse-of-power charges in Alaska already speak to a disrespect of our system of laws.
-- Neil Berkowitz, Seattle

Have faith in Obama-Biden ticket
I am a committed Lutheran and a proud supporter of the Obama-Biden campaign. My faith is central to who I am and, while the next president doesn't have to share my faith, it is very important to me that he be a person who shares certain core values.

On issue after issue, Sens. Barack Obama and Joseph Biden have led with values and conviction, and they will promote the change we need. It is about time that we had a government that didn't just say it was for family values, but valued families. Compassion shouldn't just be a campaign slogan; it should be a governing philosophy.

The Obama-Biden ticket will make sure health care in this country is no longer a privilege but something that is accessible and attainable for all Americans. Obama and Biden believe in being good stewards of the environment, personal responsibility, lifting up the poor and responsible foreign policy. These are the ideals that speak to my faith and our highest calling as a nation.

Obama will be a president who will unite the American people, instead of dividing them for political gain. He has shown an extraordinary capacity to seek the common good, and that is what our country needs right now.

I'm going to vote all my values, not just one or two. That's why I am proud to be a supporter of Obama and Biden, and I urge all people of faith who want to see their values reflected in their government to support the Obama-Biden ticket.
-- Curt Eidem, Everett

Cut the sensationalism
I would like to know why the news media are exploiting only Gov. Sarah Palin's background and not those of her opponents. Is it because she is a woman or because media are endorsing the Democratic Party?

We all know that every politician has things from his or her past or the way they currently conduct themselves that they don't want the public to know about. Why can't we have good, clean, honest reporting and journalism instead of sensationalism? If I want to read trash, I will pick up copies of the scandalous publications at the grocery store next to the checkout stands. It's a shame the way reporters slant the news.

And, so far, none of the candidates has actually said what he or she intends to do regarding the changes they keep talking about.

We also know that whoever is voted in as president has Congress to contend with and that the president's votes go the way of the in-power party's platform. So, you can't say they are representing all the people.

So far, this has been a very expensive election that seems to be in a rut -- and the definition of a rut is a coffin with both ends kicked out.
-- Bill Brayer, Edmonds

Obama will change our hearts
I am a Catholic, and I will proudly support the Obama-Biden ticket.

To take just one issue, let's look at abortion. The Catholic Church teaches me that abortion is never morally acceptable.

The Republican Party says abortion is wrong, but then does nothing to stop it and, under its policies, abortions increase. The Democratic Party says that abortion is a decision that each individual has to make, yet under its policies, abortions decrease.

Do you want to vote to actually save lives or vote to say you are against abortion as more are killed? I find my answer in Matthew 21:27-31.

I also have real trouble with the nominally pro-life sections of the body politic. There is far too much talk of the child in the cases of abortion as being God's punishment on those who have sinned. I am totally sick of that line. No child is God's punishment! Children are blessings that God gives us sinners as a way of saying, "You messed up, but I forgive you, and I give you this blessing to tend for me. Do better this time."

This is an issue that will never be decided by the laws of man. We can outlaw abortion until the end of time, and it will not stop. It is only through the changing of hearts that it will end.

And the only candidate who shows the ability and thoughtfulness to effectively change the hearts of Americans on this issue (and many others) is Sen. Barack Obama. The choice is clear to me: I'm pro-life, and I'm supporting Obama-Biden.
-- Tim Bridges, Mount Vernon

No money, let alone tax cuts

It's reassuring to learn that the Senate is trying to resuscitate the Wall Street rescue plan ["Senate revises rescue plan, will vote on bailout tonight," Times, page one, Oct. 1]. It's appalling that they have added substantial tax cuts in order to appeal to House Republicans who scuttled the plan on Monday.

Throughout this crisis, there has been little mention of the fact that the $700 billion proposed for the plan, on top of the billions we're already spending on the war in Iraq, is not money we actually have in hand. Once again, we would borrow the funds and further mortgage future generations in the process.

To add a tax cut to the bill without including spending offsets is totally irresponsible and heightens the sense that Congress -- along with the Bush administration -- is incapable of protecting the interests of the people they were elected to serve.
-- Erika Giles, Mercer Island

What price inaction?
One of the key arguments used by members of the House, such as U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Bainbridge Island, to vote against the financial rescue bill was that $700 billion is too much to hand out and not enough taxpayer protection ["Most Dems in Wash. delegation back bill," Politics & Government, Sept. 30].

But, what's the price of inaction?

On the day of the House vote, taxpayers lost more than $1 trillion on paper in the 777-point drop in the Dow Jones. This is taxpayer retirement accounts such as IRAs, 401(k)s, college savings and 529 [education] plans evaporating before our eyes.

LIBOR [London Interbank Offered Rate] bank-to-bank interest rates are up making necessary borrowing much more difficult for homebuyers and businesses. That means higher unemployment, lost jobs, and home values continuing to drop -- which will mean tens of thousands of dollars in losses for individual homeowners.

The rescue will soften the financial blow by freeing up funds for lending, thus improving home values. The cost of doing nothing far exceeds the cost of the rescue.
Get to work, Congress, and get something done!
-- Ward Drennan, Shoreline

Listen to economists, not politicians
I am thankful Congress did not pass a hastily conceived emergency bill and am hopeful they will craft a more thoughtful response to the financial meltdown -- as long as the updated version values the input of economists over elected officials and Wall Street insiders ["Bailout rejected: Angry voters put pressure on pols," News, Oct. 1].

We need a plan that puts individuals ahead of financial institutions. Instead of bailing out Wall Street, government should assist stressed borrowers. I do not want to be left holding Wall Street's bag of bad mortgages.

I am willing to underwrite loan restructuring for borrowers.
Fifty-seven percent of borrowers who are late on their mortgage payments are unaware of foreclosure alternatives offered by their lenders, according to a survey by Freddie Mac and marketing research firm Roper Public Affairs & Media.

Support a plan that targets them.
-- Victoria Martinsen, Seattle

Put out the fire; pass the bill
I was dismayed and alarmed that both Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted against the bailout measure and defeated it Monday.

The nation's economic house is on fire and this fire must be put out.

I appreciate that most of those opposed to the measure have misgivings of various kinds, but it is simply not enough to complain from the sidelines about the actions of others.

If you disagree with this bailout measure, do your homework and propose a robust alternative.
I am fortunate in that I am not deeply invested financially in the current crisis. I have no mortgage or auto loans that I am paying off. Nonetheless, I am affected like most others I know. I have seen my own retirement savings shrink from 20 percent to 25 percent in the past 12 months.

The time to act is now before things get worse. Not doing so would be simply irresponsible.
-- Craig Hoppler, Federal Way

Bail yourselves out, Wall Street
Where is it written that the poor will bear the financial mistakes of the rich?

What I hear is that the people dreaming up these exotic investment packages have steered Wall Street to the edge of the abyss.

Are we really in the same situation as they would have us believe? Consequences will be thrown out the window and bad behavior will be rewarded with tax dollars; how nice not to have to be accountable to your constituents.

Where have truth, honesty, dignity and pride in hard work gone?

The IRS doesn't accept wooden nickels from taxpayers, nor my mortgage company any excuses.

My hope is that cooler heads prevail and someone can explain why the money appropriated from this bailout proposal is the only solution. Why can't those who got themselves into this mess borrow the money from another willing lender, like anyone else would?
-- Gregory Dean, Whidbey Island

Kill the politics; fix the problem
What members of the House and citizens who oppose the bailout bill need know is this: When lines of credit fail, as they are doing now, businesses can't operate the way they need to; orders don't get placed; and bills don't get paid. This leads to payrolls that don't get made and jobs that are lost.

I have heard my parents' and grandparents' stories of the Great Depression. There is a time for politics and it is not now.

Every congressperson who voted against the bailout should be ashamed for putting politics above the preservation of our nation's basic financial infrastructure.
-- Linda Atkins, Enumclaw

Associated Press

Traders work on the New York Stock Exchange floor.

What about protection for taxpayers?
If what I am reading in today's papers is correct, there are more than a few things wrong about the taxpayer bailout plan. ["For outraged public, it's a matter of distrust," Times, page one, Sept. 30].

There should be sensible regulation. Currently there are no requirements for re-regulating the banking system and no listing of no-brainer reforms such as extending limits on capital and leverage to the shadow banking system.

A bailout that rescues Wall Street without re-regulation is a fool's errand. If the bankers think their losses are covered and no limits are put on their gambles, they will soon be taking even greater risks. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson wants the bailout now and regulation later. But when Wall Street is back on its feet, its lobby will fight relentlessly against regulation.

There should also be help for the economy off Wall Street. It is simply perverse that the president argues we need $700 billion tomorrow to save the banks but that it is "premature" to have another stimulus program for the real economy.

Layoffs are accelerating. States and localities are about to cut back on police, health care, schools and construction projects. We should be investing major sums in the real economy to put people back to work. If the recession worsens, the balance sheet of banks will worsen as more people default on credit card, auto and consumer loans.

The final piece missing in the current plan is the logical authority to allow bankruptcy courts to work out mortgages. This would require modifications on mortgages that are picked up in the bailout. I'd like to see more protection for the taxpayers in this bill.

Why aren't the Democrats in Washington, D.C., doing more to have better protections in this bailout?
-- Don Burch, Seattle

Take responsibility, taxpayers
I am adamantly opposed to any government action that would alleviate the consequences for lenders or borrowers who have made reckless and irresponsible financial decisions related to home mortgages or other means of credit.

While I understand the consequences of a recession and subsequent reductions in the availability of credit, I will not condone the use of hard-earned and promptly paid tax dollars to assist companies and executives who have profited in the near term. Nor do I feel sympathy for individuals who have lived a lifestyle beyond their means or failed to expend the necessary time and energy to understand their mortgage and credit obligations.

I don't pass judgment on people with different spending and saving priorities, but I also think that it is extremely unjust to reward them for their decisions with money I've paid in taxes above and beyond my own saving and investment strategies.

I urge our political representatives to find market-based alternatives to the current financial crisis or at the very least structure government intervention to minimize the burden on taxpayers, provide strong oversight in financial markets going forward and to hold the companies and individuals responsible for contributing to their own hardships.
-- Ben Johnson, Seattle

Close the markets
I completely oppose Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's bailout plan and clone proposals to resolve the current crisis in the banking industry. Instead, I support alternative solutions including the guidelines of transparency and oversight. It is time to rely on the advice of economists, not financiers.

The Bush administration refuses to regulate or insist upon transparency of transactions, uses the current liquidity crisis for political purposes and is demonstrating failure through a treasury power grab resulting in "economic martial law."

Solutions must include congressional intervention. This would require calming the markets with a temporary closing. The plan should insist upon U.S. government-controlled interest in the investment market, complete transparency of ledgers, creating oversight regulation by separating commercial and investment functions of banking.

We learn from history; Congress must develop support for basic social infrastructure.

Shame is not part of my emotional glossary, but I am grateful my late mother, an accountant, is not alive to endure another economic meltdown due to the same power-scheme mentality.
-- Alice Dubiel, Seattle

Point the finger at yourself
In the muddle over the chaos in our economy many are pointing fingers at the current administration, Wall Street, banks and CEOs.

The slogans and signs advocating to "protect Main Street from Wall Street" are particularly ironic.

It seems we have forgotten that a share of the blame belongs to those on Main Street who "bought" houses with no down payment, lied on their loan applications and basically intended to get "something for nothing" by selling those houses at huge profits because the housing market was going to continue its upward spiral.
-- Diane Matlock, Seattle

No corporation left behind
Since the beginning of child-labor laws American leaders have understood that, if left to themselves, large American corporations act in the interest of the bottom line -- not the American public.

Unfortunately for American children, present-day lawmakers at the state and national levels suffered a memory lapse when they ushered in wide-sweeping standards and testing legislation in the forms of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) at the behest of none other than big business.

Perhaps the need for a "No Corporation Left Behind" bailout will nudge federal lawmakers to revisit business round-table propagated NCLB mandates. And perhaps the collapse of Washington Mutual will jar state leaders into remembering that Washington state big business has been the entity lobbying to maintain the collapsing WASL.
-- Juanita Doyon, Spanaway

What goes up must come down
My husband and I are both in our 60s with a moderately good income. We cannot find an affordable home on reasonable terms in this inflated market so we rent. We paid off our new van a year after buying it and I am still driving my 1998 Chevy. We have no debt and are building up modest savings for retirement someday. I am working on a master's degree, hoping that will allow me to work indefinitely so that my older husband can eventually retire.

My sister in rural Oklahoma, with severe asthma, rheumatoid arthritis and no health insurance, makes minimum wage doing phone work from home. In the winter she does the phone work from bed under three layers of blankets with a wood stove burning in the corner. She has discontinued her cable and garbage service, getting by with local TV, recycling and a burn barrel. She is independent and happy, and she somehow manages to pay her modest mortgage every month.

This is a description of middle-class Americans. We work hard and live within our means. We have no sympathy for people who thought they had to have more and more. I have even less sympathy for the greedy fools who enabled this behavior and are now hollering "uncle." I intensely disagree with those who think the rate of growth is the key indicator of a healthy society.

It's time to stop this craziness. $700 billion to bail out fools and greedy lenders? There are so many places where we could put this money and have more important long-term benefits for everyone.
Our education and health systems are in shambles. Some law-enforcement agencies are so squeezed on funding that they are laying off officers.

We're going to pay now or pay later. Kill this knee-jerk bill and find a solution that places the pain where it belongs and benefits everyone else.
-- Mary Ann Chapman, Seattle

Hold candidates accountable for claims
I've just finished reading "The claims and the truth" [News, Sept. 27], regarding fact checking of statements made by Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama at the first presidential debate.

I find it astounding that anyone can sling any falsehoods they want at a debate, and there is no accountability as to the credibility of their statements.

It would be a great service to the voters of this country if, after each debate begins, there be a listing of false statements made by each candidate at the previous debate. We've suffered through too much delusional thinking and revisionist history from the Oval Office lately, and I'd like to hold those vying for new tenancy there to a reasonable standard of truth during the approval process.
-- Stephen Salamunovich, Seattle

McCain lied more
"The claims and the truth" article opens with the statement that "Both presidential candidates distorted the facts Friday in their first debate." This supposedly "fair and balanced" comment gives the impression that each man is equally guilty of lying in order to win the White House.

But those who don't just conclude "to hell with both of them" and stop reading right there learn that Sen. John McCain was guilty of warping the truth in four of the five issues examined. In other words, McCain lied four times as often as Obama.

In fact, Obama's only listed offense was when he "substituted 'can' for 'may' " in a comment McCain made about "muddl[ing] through in Afghanistan."

By contrast, McCain's claim that Obama voted "to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year" was condemned as " 'simply false' by the nonpartisan FactCheck.org."

McCain has proved he will lie and flip-flop on any issue to get into the Oval Office. That's some "straight talk" to which the rabid fans of the "maverick" are willfully deaf. America doesn't deserve McCain -- or, God help us, Sarah Palin -- as president.
-- Michael Spence, Tukwila

It was a tie
After viewing Friday night's presidential debate, I found myself shocked at what I had just watched ["First debate wasn't a game-changer," News, Sept. 28]. In my opinion, the debate couldn't have been more of a tie.

Sen. John McCain seems to be stuck in his past experiences, while Sen. Barack Obama is so focused on the future that he appears to care little about the past. This was evident in the language they each chose to use throughout the night. McCain repetitively said, "Sen. Obama doesn't understand," and Obama repeated that he agreed exactly with what McCain was saying.

I think we would all appreciate some forward thinking from McCain. He cannot be so focused on the past that he does not plan for the future. However, I also know that without a clear understanding of the past and without vast experience, there is a lack of understanding in how to approach the future. Therein lies the problem for Obama.

In my opinion, the debate was more of a series of defenses, stories, examples and promotion of their candidacy than a question-and-answer session. Many of the questions were not even answered, because the opponents continued to remind viewers of things they were first to accomplish or support, rather than give a clear idea of how our nation would function with either as our president.
-- Morgan Prospek, Bothell

McCain's behavior disrespectful
While watching the first presidential debate, I was disgusted at Sen. John McCain's behavior. To refuse to look Sen. Barack Obama in the eye -- or to even look at him at all -- and to smirk and sneer when Obama was speaking was belligerent, childish, disrespectful and rude.

We try to teach our children that this type of behavior is unacceptable, yet, here was a U.S. senator engaged in a debate for the highest elected office in our country, demonstrating such unprofessional behavior. Is this how McCain, if elected president of the United States, would treat heads of foreign governments, particularly those with whom we disagree?

How is this type of behavior going to win back our friends and allies and help return the United States to our former status in the eyes of the world community? McCain considers himself a maverick, but in reality he is a loose cannon with unstable behavior. McCain's attitude, personality and temperament make him unfit for the Office of the President of the United States.
-- Elaine Dimon, Mill Creek

Neither were prepared
The spirited debate between the presidential candidates -- Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama -- was all the more interesting in that neither candidate had had time for intensive practice. However, credit goes to Obama for being willing to go forward with the debate.

One McCain's arguments against Obama was that he "lacked experience" and "was not ready for the job" appears almost as an anachronism in view of his choice of Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin as a "running mate."
-- Doreen W. Badger, Bellevue

Oval Office not the place for paranoia
I heard something in Friday's presidential debate that deeply disturbed me. I heard Sen. John McCain say that when he looked into the eyes of Russian President Vladimir Putin, he saw the letters KGB. I also heard McCain say he does not want to sit down with the president of Iran because of threats toward Israel.

To me this sounds very paranoid. The chances of anyone wiping out another country are almost nil. But a paranoid U.S. president has attacked a nation before. We got into the war with Iraq because of paranoia over weapons of mass destruction. That paranoia resulted in the loss of life of thousands of our children.
I, for one, do not want another paranoid president.
-- Claire Gonder, Seattle

Obama's ideas strong
Last week brought more wild, hotheaded changes of direction from Sen. John McCain, ending with the non-stoppage of his campaign that led him to debate on Friday night anyway.

What America needs in time of crisis is less drama, not more. We need steady, clearheaded leadership, not cheap gimmicks.

Sen. Barack Obama's debate discussion laid out a clear plan for America that includes the middle class. Obama's ideas will strengthen our economy and create jobs. It's worth noting that McCain never mentioned the middle class once in his speech, while Obama made the middle class a clear focus in his responses.

Our domestic security is predicated on a strong economy at home. Obama has the new ideas to help solve these problems, and the debate in Mississippi made that perfectly clear to me as a viewer.
-- Jennifer Hauseman, Seattle

Thanks a lot, Rove
Political strategist Karl Rove has been busy. His tactics, introduced to the world in the 2000 debates and buffed to a shine in 2004, have now reached their zenith.

Sen. John McCain spent most of his time on Friday evening misrepresenting his own positions, lying about Sen. Barack Obama's record and platform and hurling accusations of naivete at his opponent. Obama was forced to spend much of his time refuting false claims, correcting misquotes and trying to explain his positions to the American people while being pelted with a barrage of nonsense.

What a waste.
-- Erin Byrne, Auburn

McCain heeded rides' warning
Anybody who questions why Sen. John McCain refused to look Sen. Barack Obama in the eye during Friday's debate has obviously never ridden the Indiana Jones Adventure ride in Disneyland, where one is warned, "Don't look into the eye of the idol!"
-- Doug Hartsock, Kirkland

It's no contest
How can Friday's meeting of presidential candidates be considered a debate? Why didn't Sen. John McCain look Sen. Barack Obama in the eyes and establish some kind of personal contact? He stood in his own world and showed what a shallow unprepared candidate he truly is.

McCain put forth his many anecdotes and gave Obama multiple put-downs, but he did not offer any resolutions to the financial crisis, health-care crisis or any other ongoing crisis in our country, except to say the war in Iraq is being won and that he'll keep it going.

There is no contest as to who the next president should be.
-- Roberta Hill, Edmonds

Republican debate tactics tiring
I don't know if it's a tactic or a strategy, but the Republican use of the derisive and dismissive laugh when losing an argument has grown stale.

Sen. John McCain used it so often in the debate that I feared his face would crack. Add the somewhat new tactic of interrupting as the time expires, thus, getting in the last word, and one has to conclude that there are no issues for McCain to run on.
-- Garth Culver, Snohomish

Take Palin seriously
You've got to be kidding me. "VP debate: Substance, style at center stage" [Politics&Government, Sept. 29] states that Sen. Joseph Biden has years of foreign-policy experience but "if he says everything he knows and is tough, he runs the risk of being a bully."

Are we talking about a debate against Gov. Sarah Palin whom Sen. John McCain has called strong, experienced, knowledgeable and ready to take on the federal government in Washington, D.C.?

Palin doesn't sound like someone who needs to be handled with kid gloves. I hope she is fully tested in Thursday's vice-presidential debate so the audience can learn whether she is fully qualified to be president, as McCain and Palin have claimed.
-- Jan Schwert, Seattle

Give the candidates a chance
Your recent article about the upcoming VP debates this Thursday brought up some important points.
But as voters we have a responsibility to not view these debates as unimportant.

It's unfortunate that this debate has already been dubbed as being "dumbed down." Sarah Palin shouldn't be given high marks and a win for just showing up and Joseph Biden shouldn't be dinged for talking too much.

What's important is not how well these two deliver the prepared sound bites to given questions but rather what would they do in a situation of crisis.

What's important is how these two would react and set a course to solve a problem.
-- Robert Oberlander, Issaquah

Associated Press

Sens. Barack Obama, left, and John McCain debate at at the University of Mississippi Friday.

Friday's presidential debate illuminated the two candidates' notions of leadership ["First debate wasn't a game-changer," Times, News, Sept. 28]. Sen. John McCain's behavior and demeanor illustrated a widely held view of what it means to be "tough." Sen. Barack Obama's showed a very different view of strength.
McCain interrupted Obama, sneered at him, refused to look him in the eye and insulted him. I think we can safely expect that McCain would relate in the same way to people and nations he regarded as our enemies. This is what has been, in the past eight years, widely perceived as what a strong leader would do. It is obvious what an utter failure this behavior has been.
President Bush has treated foreign leaders and dissenting Americans in the same way: [with] contempt for the press, his failure to include democratic leadership in important decisions, and his treatment of the American people as ignorant sheep that he can frighten into obedience. McCain is Bush with a great deal more sneering.
On the other hand, Obama's wide smile, his persistent cool and his articulate, calm critique did nothing to degrade McCain: "You were wrong about that." And Obama calmly invited the American people to choose which of them showed better judgment about the key issue of when to deploy American troops.
Under Obama's leadership, I believe our troops would be safer, but Osama bin Laden would not. For all Bush's and McCain's bluster, they have still not apprehended bin Laden. That may be the most damning criticism of their leadership.

-- Robert Stevenson, Port Townsend

Have a conversation, don't fight
Friday's presidential debate was frustrating in the extreme for me. I learned nothing new about either man or his policies. Sen. John McCain was doing his usual alpha-male, angry thing, and Sen. Barack Obama was cool and cerebral. We learned nothing about how either would govern day to day or in a crisis.
Why do we expect debates to be a 21st-century version of a duel with parries and thrusts? What nonsense! The ability to deliver knockout blows to a rival tells me nothing about governing a nation well.
I would be far more interested in seeing these two men sit down together and have a real conversation in which they listened to each other's views, tried to learn from one another, sought common ground and looked for a way to solve one of our nation's problems together. Wouldn't that be something? Or how about taking us inside a policy meeting with their top advisers, so we can see how they work?
Governing well is tough. You have to think on your feet, work with a team and make good choices. Show me that, and then I'll vote for you.
-- Joy Helmer, Shoreline

Obama ignorant of world politics
Am I the only person who noticed this howler in Friday night's debate? Sen. Barack Obama: "Back in April, I warned the administration that you had Russian peacekeepers in Georgian territory. That made no sense whatsoever, and what we needed to do was replace them with international peacekeepers and a special envoy to resolve the crisis before it boiled over."
How does Obama propose to replace Russian invaders with international peacekeepers? Do we just ask them to leave? Since he appears to think they are occupying Georgian territory on a peacekeeping mission, I expect he would be surprised when they decline to leave.
Obama's stunning ignorance of what is going on in the world is no bar to his being elected president, so long as his protectors in the media are resolved to cover up his delusions.
-- Brad Rind, Mercer Island

McCain ignoring Navy tenets
Sen. John McCain and I were classmates in the U.S. Naval Academy, class of 1958. From our earliest days at the Academy, we were expected to adhere to the tenets expressed in a letter from the father of our U.S. Navy, John Paul Jones.
The letter said that a naval officer must be a gentleman of education, of highest honor and integrity.
Saturday's front-page photograph and accompanying articles covering Friday's debate both disappointed and alarmed me ["Exchange of blows on economy, war," page one, Sept. 27]. McCain showed no respect to a fellow senator. He replaced respect and honor with rudeness and mendacity.
How can we expect McCain to treat our nation’s friends and adversaries with honor and fairness as president, based on his performance Friday night?
-- Samuel A. Belcher III, U.S. Navy (ret.), Bellevue

Obama a man of integrity, compassion
I nervously watched the presidential debate Friday night. It seems now, in the postgame analysis, that most Americans and pundits alike agree that Sen. Barack Obama won the night, both on substance and demeanor.
However, I wanted to point out a moment that was likely missed by most people. I cringed and sweated while Sen. John McCain struggled over the difficult name of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was an honest and tongue-twisting mistake, but one that would likely be replayed over and over during the critical evaluation of the debate.
Just after McCain finally vocalized the name, Obama quietly says with a kindly and sympathetic tone, "That's a tough one."
It was that moment that reminded me that Obama is a man of integrity and compassion -- that he truly cares for his fellow man, even when that man is an adversary. It reminded me, too, of the moment in the primary debates, when Gov. Bill Richardson had not heard the question posed to him, and Obama whispered, "Katrina, Katrina."
Obama reminded me that we all need to live up to the better angels of our nature, and that one can excel at presidential politics without being meaner and nastier than the other guy.
This to me was a defining moment for our future as a nation. One can imagine that a president with Obama's character, grace and compassion would vastly improve the image and standing of the United States in the world community.
-- Victoria Wilkins, Seattle

Don't exclude countries in league
During Friday's debate, Sen. John McCain said he wanted to create a "league" of democracies that would be able to do what the U.N. Security Council cannot do: create stricter sanctions that we are not able to create now.
While I agree that the U.N. Security Council is flawed, I think creating this league is the wrong decision, especially if we are to exclude countries from it.
Before World War II, the League of Nations -- the predecessor of the United Nations -- did not include Germany or Communist Russia because they were deemed not worthy; that because Germany was the "aggressor" in World War I and Russia was communist, they shouldn't be included. The league felt it had the right to punish Germany and Russia. It excluded instead of helping, which might have prevented the rise of extremists in both nations.
The problem is in the veto power all members of the Security Council have. It is important to include dissident viewpoints, so we can deal with these worldwide problems and have no dominance from either side. That is the point of the U.N.
Don't run away from the problem at hand. Start fixing it.
-- Paul Duncan, Seattle

Seattleites don't know GOP
I disagree with The Times' claim that it was frivolous to bring a lawsuit to prevent candidates from hiding behind the GOP label, instead of identifying themselves as Republicans ["A frivolous lawsuit," editorial, Sept. 26].
Recently, I saw a couple on the bus holding up a sweat shirt they'd been given in downtown Seattle. In large letters, the sweat shirt said: Grand Old Party. I asked the couple if they knew that this was the Republican slogan. They looked puzzled and shook their heads no. Before I could discuss this further, they got off the bus.
-- Carole Glickfeld, Seattle

From "grand" to "greedy"
The Times' assertion that everyone knows GOP stands for "Grand Old Party" needs to be challenged.
Since the early 1900s, the GOP has consistently shown it is the "Greedy Old Party." It has fought to kill our national park system, Social Security, unions, Medicare and all regulations that, until recently, gave us a healthy middle class and lots of hope and pride.
In recent years, the GOP has pushed to privatize both Social Security and Medicare by putting them into the hands of the same financial and corporate thugs who have destroyed our economy and our way of life.
Only rich folks could love the "Greedy Old Party."
-- Dick Hughes, Enumclaw

I-1000 simply another option
A practical hypothetical: Doctors tell you that you've got a horrible incurable disease that'll kill you in a few months ["How we die," page one, Sept. 21]. They describe the deterioration that will afflict your mind and body before you actually pass on. Putting it mildly, they don't paint a pretty picture. It seems foolish and masochistic to put yourself through all that ugliness. Worse yet, you'll be subjecting those you love to that same ugliness. You decide you don't want to make that sort of departure.
So what do you do? If you're lucky enough to reside in an enlightened state of our Union, you'll be able to acquire a dose of something that will neatly ease you into whatever afterlife you believe exists. You can die with some dignity. You can die while you're still recognizable to yourself and those you hold dear.
Why not turn Washington into an enlightened state? Vote yes on I-1000. Vote yes even if you don't intend to make use of it. That would be your choice. Let those of us who hold differently have our choice.
The thing about I-1000 is that, when it passes, no one is forced to use it. It merely provides an option, and it's always better to have options.
-- Bob Wojtyna, Woodinville

Doctors approve
There is considerable confusion about what the majority of Washington medical doctors think of I-1000.
Opponents of I-1000 in the Washington State Medical Association (WSMA), representing less than half of the physicians in the state, claim that most members are against I-1000, even though it was never put to a vote.
Proponents claim that the majority are for it.
A poll of WSMA members, run by an independent pollster who stands by its representative value, found 50 percent in favor and 42 percent against I-1000.
Some doctors have written letters to the editor to say that all of their M.D. friends are against it. Well, birds of a feather flock together. I am not a medical doctor, but I am acquainted with several of them, and they are all for I-1000.
It is true that I-1000 has been endorsed by the American Medical Women's Association, the American Medical Student Association, the Washington chapter of the National Association of Social Workers and the Washington State Public Health Association.
-- Susan Perigo, Lake Forest Park

Don't rescue Wall Street
This nation has been duped. We have been cheated and exploited and yet we do nothing. We stand in the middle of the raging river of deception and call it a puddle.
Change? We don't need change; we need a revolution!
On the independent news program "Democracy Now," Ralph Nader said there are three important questions regarding the financial crisis that are not being addressed: Why do we need this bailout? Why should we spend $700 billion of the taxpayers money to do it? What does the average American stand to gain from doing so?
We must think, act and fight. Grave and devastating results will not occur if Wall Street is left to clean up their mess. The only devastation I see is what is waiting for us down the road if we allow those who should have known better to be rescued.
-- Lisa Harmon, Auburn
The enemy is us
The recent financial crisis has brought forth every imaginable pundit, politician and journalist claiming that Wall Street and Washington, D.C., are corrupt and greedy -- leaving John Q. Taxpayer blameless for the demise.
For about the past 15 years, we've been led to believe that the American dream is about having anything you want. This idea has led Americans to borrowing against their future and their children's future without any possibility of paying it back. It's reflected in the gigantic flat screens sitting in the living rooms of American homes and the TV shows where six friends sit around all day talking about their miseries -- where are they getting their money to pay for those lattes? It is reflected in the larger-than-needed homes that we must heat and furnish and the cars we drive -- who needs the extra SUV sitting in the driveway?
The American cultural experiment has become the American economic nightmare. The government is about to take on another $700 billion in debt to buy "toxic" assets -- none of which are certain to provide any payback in the future. This will increase the federal debt to over $11 trillion. This does not include consumer and mortgage debt already dragging our futures down into the mud. Who will pay this debt and when will it be paid back?
The reality is that we are all to blame; politicians, Wall Street, the American public. We must learn to live within our means, otherwise we will never wake up from the nightmare that has plagued this nation for far too long.
Pogo once said, "We have met the enemy and he is us." Oh, how true this is.
-- Chris Santos, Seattle

Stop playing games, McCain
I am retired and furious.
I did not grant President George W. Bush the right to be negligent and risk my savings and I certainly didn't ask Sen. John McCain to make it worse.
Nothing we can touch backs up the U.S. dollar or debt. We can only trust that the U.S. government will make it through the night.
With the choking amount we owe China and others, our nation's economic health has long been at the precipice of doubt. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke were right -- we have to move swiftly and at least appear to be confident and in control of our financial markets.
Sen. Barack Obama, working behind the scenes, reached across the aisle and asked Sen. McCain to join him to show solidarity. Instead, John McCain rocketed himself into the spotlight by playing a political game.
Sen. McCain, you said you don't understand economics. Your actions last week proved it.
-- Ianne Smyer, Seattle

Fix the problem quickly, Congress
I am a 31-year-old veteran that who just left the U.S. Navy after 10 years of service and started working in the private sector. I believe I may have a suggestion -- or rather, a different solution -- to the Wall Street bailout.
Instead of using the $700 billion to buy the bad mortgages from these companies that were partly responsible for the current financial crisis, we should do the following: Take that $700 billion and divide it among the 130 million Americans that make less than $100,000 a year. This would mean the government would pay up to $5,384 of each person's debt -- mortgages, loans and credit cards.
Will this stop foreclosures or financial institutions from collapsing? No, but I believe it will reduce them dramatically. This will still cause some stress in the economy and will not stop us from entering a recession. But by doing this, the people who would have some of their debt removed will be more inclined and able to pump their hard-earned money in the economy, which will allow us to have some more time to come up with a plan to fix the broken economy.
We need to get back to classic economics. Reagan economics, of giving the wealthiest Americans more exemptions so the money can trickle down to the rest of us, has been proven to not work at all.
I understand that there are some consequences but the current generation will have to take the brunt and come out on top and not pass on this problem to the coming generations.
-- Fernando G. Rivera, Buckley

Think before you speak, Sarah
With all the coverage of Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric, I find myself in discussions with many women who don't support Gov. Palin but nonetheless "feel sorry for her" because she was obviously ill-prepared and uncomfortable.
I don't feel sorry for Palin. She has sold herself as a conservative feminist and is responsible for making mature decisions.
Sen. Barack Obama reportedly did a lot of soul-searching before deciding to run in 2008. He had been advised that he needed to wait and accumulate more experience. He ultimately decided that this election was a unique moment. He had sufficient understanding of the problems of this country to be president and to lead the country in trying times.
When asked to be a candidate for vice president, Palin should have done some soul-searching as well. If she had "blinked," she might well have judged that she was not ready. So really, her VP candidacy represents two important failures of judgment -- hers and Sen. John McCain's
-- Anne Trench, Seattle

With the economy in trouble, gas prices rising and oil companies infiltrating our oceans, investments in transportation alternatives demand more attention than ever before.

Proposition 1 may not satisfy all the city's transportation demands, however, it's a much-needed investment to jump-start solving Seattle's transportation woes ["Eastside debates value of light rail," Local News, Sept. 24].

It is hardly a novelty to watch as overcrowded buses whiz by even more-crowded bus stops, as they are too full to pick up waiting passengers. As gas prices continue to increase, more and more drivers will be pushed to the Metro buses, only adding to the congestion. Proposition 1 will begin to bring Seattle into the 21st century with regard to transit, joining the likes of other progressive cities, such as San Francisco, New York City and Boston. It's about time!

-- Rele'e Davis, Seattle

This election season, both political parties are blaming Washington, D.C.'s, woes on "special interests," yet fail to identify who these interests are. The reality is that this means most Americans, without realizing it, have someone advocating for them in our nation's capital and state legislatures on a daily basis.

Anyone who belongs to any organization -- AAA, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, a church, union or professional organization -- has lobbyists working on his or her behalf. These groups are in constant contact with legislators for the protection of their members' rights and interests, because the average working American can't just leave their job for weeks at a time to lobby for themselves.

Both major presidential camps are casting lobbyists as the scapegoats for everything wrong with our nation, yet both candidates know and recognize the value of lobbying in the political process -- it's just not an effective sound bite.

The next time you hear a candidate blame "special interests" for America's woes, understand they are talking about every citizen who has a job, a child in school or goes to a hospital or house of worship.

-- Brian T. Pallasch, president of American League of Lobbyists, Alexandria, Va.

This too shall pass
Democratic capitalism is the worst system except for all the rest; therefore, we must occasionally manage its transition through turbulent times, such as our transition into the global economy.
This upheaval in our mostly capitalistic system is not unprecedented, and neither is massive governmental regulation -- FDR's New Deal comes to mind. Just as capitalism survived the Great Depression, thanks in part to the New Deal, so too will it survive this upheaval in our financial markets, with the help of this unfortunate but necessary bailout.
Ironically, it is because America is such an attractive place to invest that led to this financial catastrophe: Money influx into the United States made it very easy to get credit. Politicians encouraged increased homeownership and banks obliged with risky, subprime mortgages to buyers who could not pay their rising adjustable rates. Simultaneously, home values decreased.
Inevitably, home buyers with questionable credit defaulted on their loans and investors holding mortgage-backed securities incurred great losses. Eventually, lending dried up, but, in the words of wisdom made popular by Abraham Lincoln, " this too shall pass."
With this unfortunate but necessary bailout, even these daunting financial and economic challenges will pass. Eventually the government will sell the mortgage-backed securities and assets, which do, after all, have intrinsic value. The government will get much of the money back, taxpayers will be reimbursed, capitalism will continue to be the worst system except for all the rest and “this, too, shall pass.”
-- Noel S. Williams, Lakewood

Paulson's plan is scary
I am appalled by the lack of clear coverage on Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's bailout bill. Last week, The Seattle Times ran two contradicting, incomplete stories. Please set things straight. This is not just a bad bill, it is a deadly bill -- deadly to the American way of life.
I keep hearing that this is a $700 billion bailout. It is not. The bill does not limit the amount of spending; it states that not more than $700 billion can be outstanding at one time. So, if a penny is paid back, it can then be spent again.
The bill gives sole discretion to the secretary in regards to how the money is spent, what can be bought, from whom and for how much. This means Paulson can pay double the price of something to his buddies or a penny on the dollar for people he doesn't like. It's the equivalent of buying indulgences, a true recipe for rampant corruption.
But the provision that makes this bill poison is aptly numbered as Section 8, which states that the activities of the secretary are non-reviewable, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency. Not even Congress or the Supreme Court of the United States can halt, punish or even see any wrongdoing.
Yes, it's a scary time. Yes, I'm scared. But I am more scared for my country than for my wallet. This bill gives unprecedented power and opacity to a nonelected official in an administration that has already been shown it cannot be trusted. It shreds any pretense to democracy and the liberties promised by democracy.
Ben Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Passage of this bill will show that we deserve neither.
-- Deborah Hardy, Renton

Raise taxes on
passive investments
For at least a while on Wednesday, 10-year federal Treasury notes were being sold at a negative yield ["Stocks mixed amid debate over bailout," Business, Sept. 24]. Which is to say that investors were willing to buy bonds at a small loss, relying on the government guarantee that they wouldn't lose more.
In today's market, it's hard for investors to avoid losing their money at an alarming rate, almost no matter where they put it.
So now they're buying guaranteed losses. It's safer that way.
Flash back a few years ago, when President Bush was pushing his tax cuts for investors. We were told investors needed low taxes in order to encourage them to invest.
Bunk. People with lots of money are desperate to find places to invest their money. It's a constant challenge to try to find an investment with good returns or, these days, to find one with low risk of huge losses. People with lots of money never need any incentive to invest -- it's about the only thing they can do with their money.
The proposed Wall Street bailout should not saddle average Americans with a huge tax bill. It should be paid for by raising taxes on capital gains from passive investments.
And, here, a clear line should be drawn: Investors who are actually involved in creating jobs by starting companies should be able to retain the low tax rate. But most investments are entirely passive -- mutual funds, shares of stock, bonds. These investors are not directly contributing to job creation, nor are they taking on large specific risk, nor do they help manage the companies. They do not deserve minuscule tax rates.
-- Michael Hobbs, Kirkland

Four bailout-bill mustsI support the proposed bailout plan ["Bailout in limbo; candidates scheduled to debate," page one, Sept. 26], but it must contain the following:
-- Adequate oversight and accountability;
-- No excessive compensation for officers of bailed-out companies;
-- A taxpayer stake in bailed-out companies, through something like stock warrants, so that if and when the bailed-out companies regain value, the taxpayers' bailout is recovered, perhaps with profit;
-- Opportunity for endangered mortgage holders to renegotiate affordable repayment terms.
Without all four of these items, the bailout plan will not work. It would be no more than complicity in the largest theft in the history of civilization. A flawed plan will destabilize the very core of our nation: public trust.
-- Bruce Joffe, Piedmont, Calif.

Topic moot
Thank you for your editorial chastising the Gregoire campaign for trying to make embryonic stem-cell research the "core" issue of this campaign ["Stick to the election, get past stem cells," editorial, Sept. 23].
To reiterate, there are no state programs involving embryonic stem-cell research. Gov. Christine Gregoire has proposed no programs involving embryonic stem-cell research.
Therefore, this is a nonissue in the current gubernatorial campaign and a red herring to distract voters from the fact that the governor has no real accomplishment upon which to campaign.
-- Mark Ursino, Sammamish

I am an Alaskan supporting Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Joseph Biden.

At this critical time in our history, we need responsible leadership that will stabilize our economy, commit to a smarter energy policy that will create jobs and bring ethics and honesty back to our government.

I wish Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was "the reformer" she purports to be. In the last election she opposed the citizen initiatives for clean elections, clean water and the banning of aerial hunting of wolves, bears and wolverines.

McCain made a reckless choice which does not bode well for how he would govern in the future.

-- Kathleen Menke, Haines, Alaska

We should not underestimate the wisdom of initiative guru Tim Eyman's solution to traffic congestion ["Eyman warns DOT," page one, Sept. 24].

Under his proposed Initiative 985, all carpool lanes will be opened to all drivers during nonpeak hours. (If it's "nonpeak," where is the need?)

If I-985 is approved by the voters, surely we can expect peak-period ticketing for inadvertent violations to skyrocket. Is I-985 really a well-targeted budget proposal to render the State Patrol fiscally independent? No new taxes, just fines. Depending on the degree of driver confusion and ticketing, we might even have here a solution to the overall state budget deficit!

Keep a trusting eye on Eyman. Beneath the surface, this armchair expert is not really on a vendetta against the state Department of Transportation.

-- Peter D. Beaulieu, Shoreline