Ticket Mates
When are we going to see a debate between the two candidates for lieutenant governor?
How many voters even know their names?
In a presidential election, we are exposed to teams. Isn't a lieutenant governor similar to a vice president?
They do not make policy, but they are in command when the governor is away.
Harry S. Wolf
Baltimore
The Real EAI Issue
In your effort to objectively report the political turmoil surrounding the decline in achievement test scores in Baltimore City public schools managed by Education Alternatives Inc., you have inadvertently masked the issues of genuine relevance to the parents and taxpayers, if not the politicians.
The perceived successes and failures of private management of public instruction are marginal at best, unless they directly impact attendance and achievement system-wide.
Take another look at the data. Attendance is up 3 percent since 1991. This is a truly significant achievement; it means there are 3,500 fewer children out of school or on the streets.
Compare this attendance improvement with data from Philadelphia and Washington and you'll be pleasantly surprised.
In a school system that has historically discouraged pupil attendance, particularly at the secondary level, this gain is remarkable.
Who do you think might deserve some credit for this, the City Council? Are you sure the "can of worms" you have editorialized about is at North Avenue?
Take another look at the data. District-wide total reading and mathematics scores have increased by 6 percent and 7 1/2 percent, respectively, since 1992.
Don't bother going out of state; compare this data with Baltimore County over the same time period. This is the data that the parents and taxpayers of Baltimore City need, at least as much as the reporting of local political rhetoric.
A few weeks ago, The Sun properly identified the Mayor Kurt Schmoke-Council President Mary Pat Clark feud as tending to paralyze effective municipal governance. You have let it interfere with the accuracy and objectivity of your reporting.
Some real gains have been made. Let's recognize them. Live up to your motto.
Robert T. Rinaldi
Baltimore
The writer is former assistant superintendent of Baltimore City schools.
Insensitive Remark
Regarding the article "Running the Gantlet" in the Today section Oct. 9, Louise Eberhardt says, "I have a lot of empathy for white men today. I think it's hard for them to adapt to all the changes in the workplace today."
She seems to be saying all white males are knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who need to be "trained." I, for one, do not fit into this convenient niche. I was raised to treat people with respect, all people.
Insensitivity toward people different from oneself is not the sole domain of any one group.
Perhaps Ms. Eberhardt and the people who conduct her seminars can keep this in mind when planning future sessions.
Eugene Gronberg
Baltimore
Safe Streets
I am tired of crime in Charles Village and tired of know-nothings and misguided media trying to run down the efforts of citizens who are working to do something about the problem.
The Sun suggests on Oct. 14 that "the main problem is municipal bureaucratic indifference." What planet do you live on? It's the crime, stupid!
Crime is a big problem in every city in this country. It cannot be blamed on municipal bureaucratic indifference.
Recently, a young woman was gunned down in a drive-by shooting just a few blocks south of my house. Why? She made the mistake of walking home.
A few nights later, an older gentleman was robbed at gunpoint on my block. Why? He made the mistake of going to the corner store.
Just the other day, I called 911 for a friend who was robbed at gunpoint. What was his mistake? He walked past the playground on a Sunday morning.
The Charles Village Benefits District is an effort by local citizens to get a handle on the problem.
No one believes that it will eliminate crime. But if it slows down the crime rate just a little, then it will be a bargain because fewer of us will be victims. Maybe this could be a neighborhood again instead of a war zone.
Do I suspect the editors of The Sun will change their minds? No. I suspect that they live in the county and have wired their homes with security systems.
I do not want to live in a neighborhood governed by household electronic security systems. I want to live in a neighborhood where the streets are safe enough to walk. That is why I'm voting for the Charles Village Benefits District.
Dick Cook
Baltimore
Retirement Age for Judges
Perhaps because it appears benign, there has been little media coverage of Ballot Question 3, a proposal to amend the Maryland Constitution to raise the retirement age for all state court judges from 70 to 75.
In reality, Question 3 is far from benign. It should be voted down because its passage would mark a huge step backward for quality and diversity in the Maryland judiciary.
Having a mandatory retirement age for judges ensures that there is an ever-changing judiciary that is in step with modern society.
While it is important that the bench include experienced judges, it is just as critical that there be a steady supply of new judges with fresh outlooks and original ideas about the law.
It is for this purpose that the majority of states impose mandatory retirement age limits for judges.
Proponents of Question 3 argue that it is unfair to the older judges to force retirement at age 70, and that, after all, in the federal system, judges are appointed for life. Judges serve the people, however, not themselves.
The benefit that society derives from a dynamic and forward-looking judiciary outweighs the individual instances of unfairness that may result from a mandatory retirement age.
(Of course, judges who retire need not stay idle; they may return to the practice of law, serve as arbitrators and engage in any number of challenging endeavors in the legal world).
Moreover, the federal court analogy does not hold up, because older federal judges may take "senior status," by which their work loads are reduced but their positions are filled as if they had retired.
In this way, the federal system permits an influx of new judges without at the same time forcing retirement upon older judges.
While the Court of Appeals may designate retired judges to sit for limited periods of time when needed, Maryland does not have a "senior status" for judges.
Maintaining the age 70 mandatory retirement rule for judges is still our state's best way to promote change and vitality in the bench.
The timing of Question 3 is particularly damaging to the goal of diversity in the judiciary. The number of woman judges in our state remains low, especially at the circuit and appellate court levels.
For example, in Baltimore County, where I practice, only one of the 15 judges on the circuit court is female.
Only two of our 20 state appellate court judges are female, and women make up less than 10 percent of the entire circuit court bench.
These statistics persist even though law schools in Maryland and throughout the country have been graduating classes that are roughly 50 percent female for the past 15 years.
Until now, the accepted explanation for the dearth of women judges has been that most female attorneys lack the number of years of legal experience that one needs to be qualified for the bench.
Ironically, if Question 3 passes, the retirement age for judges will rise -- and the number of judicial vacancies decline -- just as the boom population of women who began practicing law in the late 1970s and early 1980s reaches an experience level that will make many of them viable judicial candidates.
Thus, increasing the retirement age for judges to 75 will have the decidedly negative effect of delaying the elevation of experienced women lawyers to judicial positions. There will be a similar negative impact on appointments of minorities.
Even those people who oppose mandatory retirement ages on principle must agree that it makes far more sense to retain the age 70 limit at least until the time comes that qualified and competent women and minorities fill a larger and more prominent role in our judiciary.
If the citizens of Maryland want our judges to be in tune with the times, they should vote against Question 3 on Nov. 8.
Deborah S. Byrnes
Towson