Seat belt laws intrude on citizens' rights
The survey concerning seat belt use in automobiles in Maryland shows that people are not inclined to listen to government intrusion in their lives.
For some reason, government is still trying to circumvent the U.S. Constitution. The framers were guaranteeing that the people would not have their personal liberties denied. Why are ordinary citizens always treated as infants, unable to care for themselves?
It seems that the real reason for these intrusions is for people who make their living off of government programs, to take care of the ignorant citizens who can't care for themselves. It does not take millions of dollars in government programs to solve.
What it takes is an end to corporate lobbyists spending millions to get the government not to do something, like not require auto makers to provide automatic shoulder and lap restraints or air bags. Why should the individual citizen be required to and not big business?
It is a shame that several young children died recently strapped in their seats, their parents unable to free them. How dangerous do seat belts have to be before people become aware that these are government-mandated death traps and not the safe restraints that auto makers could provide?
I am tired of being told by government how I can live even when what I do has no ill effect on anyone else. Let's go back to the time when there was less government intrusion and more effort to punish those who intrude on others' lives, freedom and property.
Richard Shellhorn
Fells Point
Model visitors
Forget the post-game mudslinging, accusations of game fixing, trash talk between teams, supposed Canada/U.S. player war and the contrived referees conspiracy to keep the cup in Canada; I'd like to recognize the CFL fans from Baltimore who journeyed to Vancouver to cheer their team on in the Grey Cup.
I had the pleasure of meeting many of you throughout Grey Cup week, and watching you cheer at B.C. Place.
I was particularly impressed by your enthusiasm for the CFL, your patriotism for the United States and your dedication to your football club. We can honestly say that you were among the best guests we've ever had for a football game.
In addition, I'd consider Jim Speros to be one of the classiest owners in professional sport today.
While it may not seem important in Baltimore, you were part of an historic occasion. Never before had a Canadian-based team played an American-based team for the CFL championship.
It was also the first time ever (40 years) that the B.C. Lions won the Grey Cup in front of their home town fans.
Thanks for being such model visitors. I know I speak on behalf of all citizens of Vancouver in saying you'd be welcome back to our city any time. We hope you had fun.
Walt Jurias
Vancouver, B.C.
K? The writer is communications manager of B.C. Place Stadium.
Staggered terms
There is an alternative idea to term limits that I think should be discussed. Only let members of Congress serve one term at a time.
If currently serving in office, they would not be allowed to run for re-election. After others serve the next term, they could then run again.
In the interim, they could work in their home states like ordinary folks.
I think this plan has merits on a number of points. First, it does not limit someone to two or three terms in office, but still prevents someone from making a career of just being a member of the Senate or House.
Second, after each term served our representatives would have time to get reacquainted with their constituents.
Third, new representatives would have a chance to bring new ideas to government. In addition, there would be no incumbent running for office, so each candidate would be on an equal footing.
For this idea to work we may need to change the time House members serve from two to four years, so that every two years we would not have all new House members.
We would also have to decide how to handle House members wanting to run for the Senate and vice versa.
This idea will not solve all the problems with Congress, but it could help.
Alan Emerson
Towson
School standards
Wow! Pinch me! Did I actually read that state School Superintendent Nancy Grasmick said, "Perhaps we made a mistake"?
The idea that you could improve a child's education by establishing standards for school success without holding students accountable for their progress was an absurd idea from the beginning.
Parents who never abandoned the idea that holding their child accountable for his or her achievement are witness to the only successful students in Maryland.
Maryland teachers and parents have been screaming this truth from the top of their collective voices for the past five years. The Maryland state school reform program has sought to hold everyone in the school system accountable for success except the student.
Now the state is beginning to realize that mandated reform facilitates the manipulation of data and phony success, and may actually impede student success. Well slap me silly! What will the state think of next?
Robert J. Latham
Ellicott City
Remembering Cab
Many thanks for the multitude of good words and pictures noting the passing of the great Cab Calloway, truly a Baltimore phenomenon.
He may not have been born here, but he spent his youth and early adulthood here. We can surely claim him, even though the national media didn't see fit to acknowledge his Baltimore roots.
One writer made mention of the surreal lyrics in "Minnie the Moocher," but didn't cite an example. As best my memory serves:
Oh, Minnie went out with the King of Sweden --
She gave him the thing that he'd been needin'
(Presumably drugs, since that was Minnie's game)
He paid her a million dollars in nickles and dimes --
And she counted them over one thousand times!
And this is only one stanza. Wow -- what poetry!
They just don't write 'em like that any more.
Franklin W. Littleton
Baltimore
Proposition 187: Pandora's box or solution?
California has once again touched the pulse of the nation. A decade ago it was taxes. Now the issue is illegal immigration.
Proposition 187, if the courts allow it to go in effect, would essentially deny illegal immigrants all basic services such as schooling, access to health care and welfare, including Aid to Families with Dependent Children.
However, this measure actually goes much farther.
Proposition 187 would force doctors, nurses, school teachers, social workers and just about anyone else delivering essential services to the public to become secret police informants for the federal government. To this writer, that smacks of Big Brother.
Is anyone else frightened by such proposals? I believe this would lead to the opening of a very dangerous Pandora's box.
Recently, health officials in Los Angeles and other cities with large Latino populations have reported dramatic drops in clinic visits for pre-natal care, childhood immunizations and STD-HIV follow-up and results.
What are the public health ramifications of forcing so many at-risk people to go underground? From a public health perspective, Proposition 187 is a ticking time bomb.
What do the proponents of Proposition 187 suggest we do with the hundreds of thousands of school age Latino children? If they can't go to school under this measure, do we want them roaming the streets?
Do we allow families and children to go hungry and sleep in the streets?
This country has enough fault lines between people who are here legally -- blacks and whites, gays and straights, haves and have-nots -- without introducing nationalism and xenophobia into already volatile situation. As a country we must come together.
As the 21st century dawns and economic anxieties abound about America's role in the new post-Cold-War world, immigration is rightfully an issue.
As a nation, however, we should be careful and thoughtful during this crucial debate.
Solutions do not lie in polarization, division and scare tactics. Rather, they can be found in what has made our country great since its inception: ingenuity, fairness and decency.
Perhaps if we were willing to see what we have in common with one another instead of the things that set us apart we would all be better off.
John P. Quinn
Olney