Facing Saddam
Editor: Harris Factor, in his recent letter to this paper, has distorted my comments regarding getting rid of Saddam Hussein. When I was asked how the U.S. armed forces, along with the allied forces in Desert Storm, should respond to a chemical or biological attack, I did say that he should be "nuked." It was not my intention to promote the mass destruction of the Iraqi people, but at the same time I did not want the men and women of our armed forces to face the inhumane tactics of this insane dictator.
Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi military have proven to the world how efficient they are at torturing and killing innocent civilians. During a recent trip to Kuwait I saw for myself the destruction of human life which they undertook against unarmed civilians, including the children, of that country. It is my hope that we will not stand by and allow this to happen to another culture.
As thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens prepare to die at the hands of Saddam Hussein, should we simply stand around doing nothing to help these people, should we look away again as another insane dictator attempts to erase an entire race of people off the planet as if it never existed? I have attempted to use my position in Congress to spotlight the on-going destruction of the Iraqi Kurds. At the present time this is the only action that is within my power to take. If I could do more to help these people, I would.
Please take time now to consider how you, individually, would react if it were your family being hunted down and killed simply because of your family's ancestry. We are often asked to remember the atrocities men are capable of inflicting on one another. Well, we only have to open our eyes to what is happening in Iraq to see first hand how horrible human destruction can be.
A5 The problem of Saddam Hussein needs to be solved.
Helen Delich Bentley.
Washington.
The writer represents the Second District of Maryland in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Police Brutality
Editor: A Sun editorial expressed concern about police brutality in the beating of motorist Rodney G. King. I, like you, found the joking among the officers concerning the incident revolting.
You stated that the officers were white and the motorist was black. However, my contention is that the race of the participants should be de-emphasized.
As I repeatedly viewed the tape of the beating I saw not black or white. I saw and felt man's insensitivity to man.
Your last sentence states that the "Justice Department must respond swiftly and assertively to demonstrate that police brutality against minorities will not be tolerated."
I am disturbed about the last line. Does this mean the police can be brutal as long as the target is not the minorities?
L I feel that police brutality should not be tolerated at all.
Cynthia Hopkins.
Baltimore.
Less Garbage
Editor: My family is lucky enough to be included in the Baltimore City curb-side pickup recycling program. Every other week, we set out an attractive yellow bin filled with all of our recyclables (glass, plastic bottles, aluminum cans, tin) and alongside it, our paper (from junk mail and phone books to newspapers) in brown paper bags.
We compost our kitchen waste for the garden. The result is that our family of four now generates less than one single bag of trash each week for our regular trash pickup.
Unfortunately, only about 50 percent of the eligible households in the area are now participating in the available curb-side program.
If the regular trash pickups were reduced to one per week, with the other pickup being reserved for recyclables only, the fiscally-troubled city could generate significant cost savings. Revenues from the sale of recyclable commodities could further offset costs.
The current program is only a pilot. Citizens need to show the city that curb-side pickup can work.
Let's not wait until we are all billed according to how much trash we set out for pickup, as some cities do. Let's teach our children now that recycling is a responsible way of life.
Kathy Schuetz.
Overlea.
Promote Recycling
Editor: I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed by letter writer Dan Jerrems. The departure of Steve Chidsey as Baltimore's recycling coordinator clearly represents a great loss for the city.
Even more unfortunate (and unacceptable) for the citizens of Baltimore is the city's failure to make an adequate investment in recycling.
The city could support recycling at little or no additional cost by replacing one of Baltimore's two weekly trash collections with a collection of recyclables. Anyone who makes even a minimal effort at recycling realizes that when recyclables are eliminated from the waste stream, the volume decreases so much that the trash need not be collected twice a week.
Susan M. Battle.
Baltimore.
Not 'Well-Heeled'
Editor: The brief rundown of recent Republican electoral successes in Tom Bowman's April 21 story ("Republicans set sights on Mikulski's Senate seat") contains an adjective that gives credence to the mistaken but widely believed impression that the GOP is the "party of the rich."
"These well-heeled (emphasis mine) warriors," the article stated, are gunning for a U.S. Senate seat. But a cursory glance at the campaign reports of 1990's victorious challengers would reveal that the word "well-heeled" simply does not apply.
Baltimore County Executive Roger Hayden's campaign fund was dwarfed by Dennis Rasmussen's, by a ratio of 10:1. Howard County Executive Chuck Ecker was buried in a blizzard of Bobo money and still carries a campaign debt of several thousand dollars. Rep. Wayne Gilchrist withstood a flood of Roy Dyson PAC contributions. Even the Dukakis campaign outspent the Bush effort in 1988.
The Republicans have never been the party of big money in Maryland, and that's not likely to change any time soon. But we've learned to compensate for the financial disadvantage with great volunteers, innovative approaches, and plain old hard work.
:. Warriors, absolutely. Well-heeled, hardly.
Joyce Lyons Terhes.
Annapolis.
The writer is chairman of the Maryland Republican Party.
Know-Nothing Delegate
Editor: I wish to respond to Del. Ellen Sauerbrey's letter "Beware of Linowes." Since I have resigned my position as assistant secretary in the state's Department of Budget and Fiscal Planning, I can write from knowledge, but without fear of legislative reprisals.
The short of the matter is that, in advocating further downsizing of state government, Delegate Sauerbrey doesn't know what she is talking about.
Consider these facts:
State assistance to local governments will actually grow by 8.1 percent next year. A full 88 percent of this assistance will go to public education. Every county in the state is having to cut back funding for their public schools, even with this increase in state funding. Is Ms. Sauerbrey advocating further cuts in public schools?
Another area of growth is in Medicaid (16.8 percent) and in welfare payments (7.7 percent). The public assistance rolls always grow when the economy slows. That's the meaning of the "safety net." Ms. Sauerbrey should try and provide for children on $489 a month (plus food stamps), or on $205 a month if disabled and without children. Should we cut them by 2 percent?
Ms. Sauerbrey will say she only recommended a management cut in state agencies. There's lots of bureaucrats sitting behind desks, doing nothing but drawing salaries. You find them. I've been with the state for five years, and I haven't seen them.
In fact, the budget for state agencies next year will decline by 1.2 percent, before taking inflation into account. The state work force has actually been cut by 3.2 percent.
The personnel cuts are not evenly distributed. The Division of Correction will add 148 jobs to staff new prisons to accommodate the over 100 new inmates a month coming into the system. Does Ms. Sauerbrey want these prisoners on the street because the state cannot take care of them?
The fact is that Ms. Sauerbrey epitomizes the "know nothing" thinking that wants to pay less in taxes and get more in services. Ms. Sauerbrey reminds me of the citizen with whom I spoke several months ago. He was for cutting taxes (and voted for the Republican candidate for governor), but couldn't we please save the state inspection program for small meat and poultry butchers which cost only $600,000?
David Falk.
Annapolis.