Letters from our Readers - February 2005

Texas Should Stay Out Of Our Bedroom
The Libertarian Party of Texas condemns a proposed state constitutional amendment against gay marriage as government interference in personal relationships and religion, according to state party chairman Patrick Dixon. 
"Texas state government needs to focus on its constitutional responsibilities instead of re-defining itself to intrude on the responsibilities of churches and families," said Dixon in a statement given
January 19th. House Joint Resolution 6, sponsored by Republican state representative Warren Chisum, would prohibit all forms of marriage except that between one man and one woman. It has provoked opposition from several groups, including Democratic Party of Texas chair Charles Soechting and the organization www.PracticeWhatYouPreach.org. "I join Charles Soechting and Practice What You Preach in opposition to this constitutional amendment. The purpose of a constitution is to limit the power and scope of government. In a time of ever growing government control, we need to reverse the trend. Marriage is the domain of churches and families, not government."
Dixon noted that government intrusion into marriage began when the first marriage licenses were issued after the Civil War to prevent inter-racial marriage. "The founder of our country, George Washington, did not have a marriage license. He did not need government to define marriage for him.
Does that make his marriage to Martha any less valid without the government stamp of approval?" The Libertarian Party regards prohibitions against same-sex marriage as the government establishment of religious tenets as law, in violation of the First Amendment. 
"As a Christian, I do not look to Ted Kennedy, Tom Delay, or Bill Clinton for my moral guidance," said Dixon. "I will not have politicians dictate my religious beliefs."
Patrick Dixon

Magnolia School District Allegedly Promoted School Bonds
The Texas Ethics Commission responded to a sworn complaint submitted by Magnolia resident claiming Texas Election Code violations. The complaint names Assistant Superintendent Todd Stephens as responsible for approving two pro­motional pieces advocating passage of the August 28 Magnolia School Bond election.
A black-and-white pamphlet (bearing the Magnolia Independent School District logo) was distributed in Magnolia schools advocating passage of the Magnolia school bond measure, allegedly in violation of section 255.003 of the Election Code. Going well be­yond merely explaining the bond’s purpose, the MISD pamphlet uses motivational slogans and “calls to action”:
“Good schools are a major indicator of the economic health of the community Businesses and individuals considering relocation look for a strong school system. With good schools, homeowners enjoy increasing property values. Most concerned adults desire to leave a lasting legacy that things will be better for the next generation of children. Having good and safe facilities for students increases student learning and better prepares those children for their future.” [emphasis added]
The MISD pamphlet also lists possible consequences if the bonds fail, one even speculating that it may be “difficult for the district to find enough acreage” for future schools. Additionally, the MISD pamphlet states that “the passage of this bond issue will not af­fect the taxpayer until the 2005-06 school year. At that time taxes may increase 13 cents.” [emphasis added] The District knows that this statement is misleading and certainly not true, leaving the impression that the tax increase is inconsequential. At best, the tax rate will increase by 13 cents per $100 valuation of property.
In August, the District mailed a full-color brochure using the same advocacy language of the MISD pamphlet, also allegedly in violation of section 255.003 of the Election Code.
Identical artwork and wording from the Magnolia ISD black-and-white pamphlet started appearing in a slick color pamphlet distributed by the Advocates for Education Committee, also advocating passage of the bonds. The close similarity of the two pamphlets strongly suggests that the District transferred school resources, bought by the taxpayers, to another advocacy group. Apparently, all but one member of the Advocates for Education Committee are also members of the MISD-appointed Facility Needs Committee which recommended the bond proposal.
In light of the close election results on proposition 3, the activity of Magnolia School Dis­trict employees and/or officials could have easily changed the election outcome.
Mike Ringenberg

The Cost of Underpaying Texas Teachers 
I recently released my special report, The Cost of Underpaying Texas Teachers, which showed Texas loses $13.3 billion each year by underpaying teachers. I am calling on the Legislature to approve a $3,000 pay raise now for Texas teachers, to institute a competitive, automatic pay increase every two years, and to pay bonuses to all teachers whose low performing schools improve.
Texas ranks 33rd in these United States in teachers' salaries. We can and we must do better. Nearly 37,000 Texas teachers leave the classroom each year taking their skills to better-paying jobs or simply quitting. To ensure our state's economic prosperity, we must recruit, reward and retain highly qualified and experienced teachers who are fully certified, well paid and dedicated to a lifelong career with our most precious resource, our children.
Tragically, as many as 50,000 students drop out of Texas schools every year. These dropouts cost our Texas economy $11.4 billion every year. Add incarceration and welfare costs of dropouts to the costs of teacher training and recruiting and other state and federal expenses, and the annual price tag jumps to $13.3 billion.
My report showed turnover is highest where teacher pay is lowest. I would rather spend $1 billion today investing in our future by giving teachers this much-deserved pay raise, than continue paying for failed policies of the past $13.3 billion year after year after year. 
The return on our investment: keeping good teachers, fewer low-performing schools, fewer failing students, fewer dropouts and a stronger economy for the state of Texas.
As a former public school teacher and a former school board president, but most importantly as a momma and a grandmomma, my goal is to drive more of every education dollar directly into the classroom with the students and the teachers, where it belongs. Today, our Texas teachers are underpaid and underappreciated. Texas is great, but we can do better.
Carole Keeton Strayhorn

Where’s The Beef?
What our schoolchildren need is a well-rounded diet that provides for a quality education. The governor’s plans for education lack the meat and potatoes to lead us to higher achievement.
In particular, the governor’s emphasis on incentive pay for teachers is icing on a cake yet to be baked. First, put a decent meal on the table, then bake us the cake and we’ll be happy to talk about what kind of icing we like.
The governor speaks of reform, but what’s really needed is an effort to fully fund the significant education reforms already on the books. We have measures for increasing accountability and performance, but those measures so far haven’t received the resources promised to make them successful.
Texas has made outstanding progress in teacher and student performance in the last 20 years, but as we set higher and higher hurdles for achievement, we need funding to support our students and teachers.
We’re pleased that the governor in effect has called for continuation of many other laws already on the books, such as school choice, accountability, and budget transparency for districts. And we’re doubly pleased that he is supporting programs that faced significant cuts that he signed into law, such as pre-kindergarten, the master teacher initiatives and mentoring.
John Cole

Texas Public Employees Association Opposes LBB Recommendations
The Texas Public Employees Association (TPEA) today announced it will vigorously oppose specific recommendations by the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) in its "Staff Performance Report” to further shift additional health insurance costs to state employees and retirees.
I am deeply disappointed with the LBB's recommendations regarding health insurance benefits for state employees and retirees. Even though the Legislature may never enact these recommendations, the fact that they are even being suggested is very troubling.
Instead of actually saving money, the LBB recommendations TPEA opposes simply shift the cost to employees and retirees. For example the LBB recomends eliminating the current 50 percent contribution the state makes for retiree spouse and dependent health insurance coverage.
The LBB also suggests eliminating drug coverage for Medicare-eligible retirees.The combination of these changes would shift hundreds of millions of dollars onto retirees who lack the financial ability to absorb these additional costs. 
For active employees the LBB has recommended dropping the state's share of employee health premiums from 100 percent to 90 percent. This proposal would lower take-home pay for every employee by more than $30 a month, even though state employees have not received a raise in three years, and had substantial increases in out-of-pocket health costs last session that averaged $900 per employee annually.
These recommendations represent a fundamental break in trust with state retirees that would amount to the State of Texas reneging on the agreement under which tens of thousands of current and retired state employees loyally and efficiently served the taxpayers of this state, and an agreement under which many thousands of employees had planned on as an integral part of their retirement. If the state goes back on its word now, this will demoralize current employees and devastate efforts to recruit, train and retain an efficient state workforce.
The proposals to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars in health care costs onto the back of state employees and retires fails to acknowledge the fact that three pay raises in the last 12 years has left state pay an average of 17 percent lower than that paid for comparable work.
State employees and retirees are financially incapable of absorbing any additional shifted health care costs. Regretfully, LBB's recommendations continue the 15-year-long trend of chronically under funding not only state programs but also the people who faithfully deliver these services to the taxpayers of this state.
Gary W. Anderson

5 Reasons I Quit Going to Church on Sundays
I recently quit going to church on Sundays. Call it a backlash against the Red State/Blue State election or a New Year's Revolution. Like cubicle slave Peter Gibbons in the classic comedy Office Space, I decided, “I just wasn't going to go anymore.”
My reason?
5. The people were fake.
Plastic smiles and spray-on hair are for Stepford Wives, Ken dolls, and televangelists. As for me, I wanted to be around real people women who don't always wear make-up, guys who play Xbox, and folks who were frustrated with their jobs and uncertain of their futures you know, people like my wife and me.
I needed people who lived in the same world I did not some Christian subculture bubble. I mean they have Christian T-shirts, action figures, and even candy! I myself am not sure how any of those items have a spirit that could decide its own eternal after-life, but from what it looks like, somebody out there would beg to differ.
Why do I need that congregation when “Jesus Walks” with me and Kanye West on the radio, I hear God's love in the new U2 record, and see Him in action through Joan of Arcadia on my TV? 
That question (or possibly my three references alone) may seem like a foreign language to most church folks. I want to be around people from the Real World (but I don't mean those drunken model-types from the MTV show.) 
4. I didn't fit in anywhere.
I attended some churches where it didn't matter if I was there each week or not. They were either too large to notice or not interested enough to care. There was nobody there like me anyway.
Where were the people who liked rap? Where were the artists and creative types? The fellas who had just earned a degree and still didn't know what they wanted to be when they grew up? The newlyweds who didn't want to have kids yet? The people from broken homes? The ones who struggled with their weight or dealt with other temptations?
Were they there on Sunday mornings or had they decided to checkout before I did? 
3. The sermons were boring and the teaching was never practical.
Who hasn't sat in church and let his mind wander once the pastor took the main stage? Most of the time the guy just stood behind that elevated platform and talked about something or some Bible passage I could never relate to anyway. 
I'd often daze off lost in translation - thinking about how Dr. Phil could provide more real life application than what I just sat through.
Wasn't Jesus the Greater Communicator? Didn't he use stories and props to get his point across? Why couldn't these Christ-ian preachers do the same?
2. The place was too stiff.
Who were these people introduced as “Brother Gary,” “Deacon Jennings,” and “Pastor Offering” Why did they get to sit on thrones waving handkerchiefs behind the pulpit anyway?
And when exactly did it become a fashion house of worship? I wear slacks and button-downs five days a week to work in an office environment. Did I really need to do the same on my “day of rest?” Couldn't the atmosphere be as nice and comfortable as Starbucks? 
If so, I might actually want to hang out a little longer, instead of unbuttoning my collar as I rushed out the door on the way to grab a bagel and a Venti® mocha. 
1. I found a group that did it better. 
Perhaps the biggest reason I quit going to church on Sundays was that I discovered a community, right here in Conroe, that did it a better way. When I went to theBridge, it didn't feel like I was going to church, it felt like it was the church the one that Jesus established just before he ascended.
It wasn't perfect I know no church body is. But I met real people who shared my goals and life experiences. They had a place in their group for me to hang out, do something productive, and feel connected. There were messages I could follow and new insights to learn. Although I met with them in a rec center gym, it's warm and relaxed. 
And they met on Saturday nights! I could sleep in on Sundays, read the paper with family, and have a nice brunch afterward (okay, maybe a trip to Shipley's, but you see the picture.) 
The meeting time was also ideal - late enough to have a Saturday for work or play, but early enough to still have time to grab dinner, a movie, a concert, or a sunset.
If you can identify with any of the reasons above, you too can quit going to church on Sundays. 
And you can still feel like you're pursuing your spiritual journey with earnest passion. 
TheBridge's gymnasium location is the perfect place to work out our faith. Each Saturday night at six we sip the best coffee I've ever tasted, and we learn. We worship. And I fit.
Jason Bellini 

Save American Democracy: Curb Corporate Power
It is very rare to find a talk show host or writer writing a column basically urging readers to read the writings or opinions of other talk show hosts or writers. I am urging readers of this commentary to read the full text of “Is Wal-Mart a Person? Thom Hartmann Tells Why It Is--Kind of--But Not Really: A Buzzflash.com Interview” http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/05/01/int05004.html 
I am posting a few passages for this long interview to give readers a brief taste of this excellent examination of the threat posed by dominant Corporate political, legal and economic power in the United States today. This interview gives the readers an excellent insight into the historical evolution of this extremely serious problem. 
“……the Constitution by the addition of the Bill of Rights, which gave humans a huge club they could use to beat back government if it ever were to become oppressive. 
Thus, with the founding of America, for the first time, only humans could hold rights. Institutions -- churches, civic groups, corporations, clubs, even government itself -- held only privileges. Of course, you'd want government -- that is, We the People through our elected representatives -- to control the privileges of institutions like corporations. And that's what we did. For example, to prevent kingdom-like accumulations of wealth that could, as Jefferson noted, "threaten the state" itself, corporations in the first hundred or so years of this nation couldn't exist longer than 40 years, and then had to be dissolved. Their first purpose had to be to serve the public, and their second purpose to make money. Their books and all their activities had to be fully open and available to inspection by We the People. Their officers and directors could be held personally liable for crimes committed by the corporation. 
This held as a legal doctrine until the end of the 1800s, and even after that largely held until the Reagan Revolution…” I believe that unchecked Corporate Power is the greatest threat ever posed to the American Experiment created by our Founding Fathers! Corporate Power threatens our American Democracy and Freedom more than the Communism before the collapse of the Soviet Union, more than the combined Nazi-Fascist-Japanese threat of the World War II era and more than the current Islamic terrorist threat of today- combined. None of these forces ever had domestic strength significant enough to threaten our system of free elections or to undermine our basic lifestyles. Corporate Power does have enough strength in the American homeland to destroy our system of free elections and to destroy our middle classes. A very large number of American citizens believe the process is well underway while others are starting to believe it is already a done deal! We need to work on two basic tracks to preserve American Freedom from this serious threat. 
First, we need to support extensive election reform along the lines of the Democratic Senate Leadership’s Senate Bill 17 to make voting easier and vote tampering harder. Reforms would include guarantees that all voting systems in Federal elections use voter verified and auditable ballots. Disabled voters would be guaranteed workable voting systems that ensure privacy and independence. Everyone would be able to register on Election Day. The bill “requires states to establish early voting periods for a
minimum of fifteen calendar days prior to a Federal election, with uniform mandatory Saturday hours, and a minimum of four hours per day, including Saturdays; requires punch card voting systems to provide in-person notice of over-votes; and prohibits central count optical scan systems from meeting the voter verification requirements without the public's knowledge or
accountability; and requires notice provisions, public statements, and other
transparency/accountability measures with regard to election administrators.” It requires “each state to adopt Election Day registration procedures for Federal elections; creates a National Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot (NFWAB) for Federal offices that every and any eligible voter is entitled to cast from anywhere inside or
outside the United States and requires the NFWAB be counted without regard
to which polling place, precinct, local unit of government, state, or country the NFWAB is cast in; requires states to provide public notice of all proposed purged names from voting rolls 60 days in advance of a Federal
election.” Democracy promotion should begin at home!
Until citizens regain control of the voting process, there will be zero possibility of checking runaway Corporate Power. Corporations are in many cases no longer really American. They are collections of International Big Money. They usually are not looking after the interests of American citizens. They are looking after the interests of International Big Money. We can see this in government policy since the early 1980’s as the power of Corporation in politics and government increased. 
Corporate Power was held in check by three forces for much of the 20th Century. America grew rich and powerful as a result. Labor unions helped millions of American workers get a fair shake from Corporations and become middle class citizens. Anti-monopoly and fair trade laws stopped large Corporations from destroying small businesses and ripping-off American consumers. Lawyers used the courts and lawsuits to protect workers, consumers and small investors from unethical, unfair or illegal actions by the powerful few who controlled the Corporations. The benefits to the American nation were collectively a cleaner environment, safer products, safer working conditions, a more diverse and free press, stronger companies, greater status in the world, more secure investments and a healthier economy.
With each wave of deregulation, Corporate Power grew and American citizens as workers, consumers, investors and taxpayers suffered. Our Founding Fathers understood the need to regulate Corporate Power. We need to start exercising our Democracy, while we still have an American Democracy, by looking at how to rein in runaway Corporate Power. We need to have our nation run to benefit average American citizens instead of International Big Money Corporations.
Stephen Crockett

Do you believe in slavery?
Lets be honest here. Even though this barbaric practice has been outlawed around the world for well over a century, it is still practiced discreetly in Texas. Surprisingly, the Honorable Lloyd Benson went with president Bill Clinton to China and condemned the use of prison slave labor for a variety of products; however, these leaders need not have traveled halfway around the globe when right here in Benson’s own back yard, Texas prisoners slave for the state in a variety of capacities. Virtually every other state in America pays their prisoners something for their labor, it’s usually not much, but even the state of Alabama gives inmates a quarter an hour. Texas used to pay their prisoners in time off their sentence; however, work time no longer is deducted from an inmate’s prison term with the abolishment of mandatory release. Yet, prisoners manufacture clothes, furniture, hygiene products, canned foods, and a variety of other items which are sold and distributed , not just to other state agencies, but to a long list of counties, companies, and other government agencies. Nonetheless, a Texas inmate receives no more than $50.00 gate money when he or she is released. No wonder so many are desperate enough to commit new crimes. We have created a system guaranteed to fail. Prisoners in Texas cannot save back for their eventual release unless they are one of the privileged few working with a contracted employer. Consequently, the state cannot charge inmates for a variety of services enjoyed by other states, such as Florida and California. If more private industry were allowed to contract with the state prisons and all working inmates were paid something for their time, inmates could be expected to shoulder some of the cost of confinement. As it is, this ever expanding concentration camp is breaking the backs of taxpayers while perpetuating more crime by newly released offenders. This is something this legislative session should be considering. 
What the general public in NOT told, Texas prisons are big money , as each inmate must work a forty hour work week. Unless the inmate has family or friends on the outside, that care, there is no way an inmate can buy toothpaste, soap, or deodorant, the necessities of everyday life. The state of Texas does not furnish these things.
Bobbie Greer

Sit There and Judge a Person
They wouldn't sit there and say that God sent something to kill all the gay people in a certain area..... So the man that wrote the whole sponge bob article needs to rethink what he said and ask God for forgiveness for judging others wouldn't u say????? 
I dint think that he sent the tsunami to kill innocent little children... And leave a whole country in that kind of pain.... Just to get rid of the gays..... And the whole 9/11 was just the progress of someone sick in the head..... How can u print something like that ....
Name Withheld

(Editors Note: We believe you have misunderstood the point of the story. The things written in that piece were meant to be taken in a sarcastic, satirical tone. You and I are in complete agreement: true people of God would never wish this disaster on anyone -- much less children. And they certainly wouldn't revel with glee in the wake of this tragedy the way Pat Robertson and others have in the media. Please give the article a second glance -- and we hope you continue to read The Bulletin.)

RLC taking over the WCA?
Wake up Woodlands!!! We've obviously missed something that been happening in the last few Woodlands Community Association elections. The Republican Leadership Council (RLC) has taken advantage of low voter turnout and voter apathy to place at least two of their “members” on the WCA Board of Directors, and at least one more is running this time.
Remember the RLC? That's the group which believes that feel Michelangelo's David needs a fig leaf to be decent, wants creationism taught in public schools, and opposed the library and school bond issues. And don't forget that they feel that we're not responsible enough to choose our own children's reading materials; they want to censor books in our County Libraries according to their standards. 
There was a Candidate's Forum on Tuesday night, February 2nd. Most of you were too busy to notice or care. The candidates outnumbered the spectators. Evidently there are a number of residents on the ball however, because the League of Women Voters were given the same question to ask by several audience members, “Are you, or have you ever been a member of the RLC?”
After much squirming, two candidates 'fessed up. Tom Campbell, the incumbent in the open At- Large race, and Stephen Chauvin, a candidate for the Indian Springs seat, admitted to affiliation with the RLC. One of the other candidates, who answered no, asked why this matters to anyone because the Board of Directors is a non-partisan group. I've thought about it, and I think it does matter a great deal. Many of the other questions at the forum were about future local governance in The Woodlands. If you've been too busy to notice, the moratorium on annexation by Houston will end in just a few years and some tough decisions needed to be made by the Board of Directors of the two community associations on this issue. The people who are on the Board now will determine the future direction of our community. We need people of vision, not people tied to a group notorious for their short-sightedness and tunnel vision who represent only their narrow viewpoint and ignore the views of the majority.
So, that's two RLC candidates for sure. I personally know there is at least one more already on the Board who is not up for re-election this year. I had a very revealing conversation with a prominent RLC member at my local polling place last year. He was there putting up illegal campaign signs for Jim Jenkins, the RLC leader, and was chastised by the local elections judge. Afterward he offered me a flyer for the RLC candidate, and talked about how the RLC was getting their membership out in force for this candidate because with local voter apathy, their candidate was a shoe-in. He was, because the RLC turned out to vote, and the mainstream did not.
One interesting note: when Mr. Chauvin was questioned about whether he was a member of the RLC, he replied that the RLC didn't really have members, that it was just a group of people getting together to share similar ideas, and that he had met with them in the past. Hey, Jim Jenkins, is this true? No members? I heard you claim that the RLC has the largest membership of any political group in the County. Which is true?
So, neighbors, get out there and vote. The future direction this community is taking will be determined by how many of you vote. Don't forget, a city needs a mayor and a city council, and you have only yourself to blame if it's Mayor Jim Jenkins and his band of merry yes-men. 
Teresa Domino

In Harm's Way
I had a similarly negative expedience with Dr Harms several years ago. I was helping a client who was suicidal and I suggested he contact his church. When no one had called him back after several days, I started calling. When I finally got Pastor Harms on the phone he disputed whether the man belonged to his church and then said he didn't want to send someone out there to see this man and then have him commit suicide and have his family sue the church. 
I've been praying for that church ever since.
Judy Hudgens

The Church As Big Business 
It seems to me that a lot of new BIG building churches are springing up in the East Montgomery/Northeast Harris county areas. Just drive down US 59 from Porter to the 610 Loop and there are at least 5 BIG building churches either new or in construction in that section of road. 
Sort of seems like, who wants to be the new Lakeside Church? Please, nothing against Lakeside. They seem to be a very old and established church with members who cross all lines of color and gender and age. But because of their success, here come the pretenders. Education? Bah! We're Gonna Have a CHURCH!!! 
So often we forget that the CHURCH is the PEOPLE who congregate at a specific building. My dad used to call it the church house, just to make that distinction. 
I hope that Pastor Harms not only has a good line of credit, but also, a good line of ... the Gospel. To pay for the building, he'll need both. 
Don Holley 

Political Affiliation is Relevant 
I attended the WCA Candidate's Forum on February 2nd and would like to respond to Editor Amy Logan's editorial comments to a letter submitted by Teresa Domino. Ms. Logan stated that a more accurate account of the forum could be found in the Villager article on page one of her newspaper. I also had a front row seat at this forum and heard the responses of the candidates to the question "Are you a member of the RLC?" Tom Campbell and Stephen Chauvin avoided answering this question accurately. They evaded the question and answered with "spin". In addition to their public response at the forum, both gentlemen gave quotes to the reporter after the forum that
were also not accurate. Leadership members of the Montgomery County Republican Party Executive Committee are well aware that these two men are considered members of the RLC.
The RLC is not a recognized auxiliary of the Montgomery County Republican Party. We have observed them at RLC meetings and watched them align themselves with the RLC during elections, precinct conventions, senatorial conventions and state conventions. 
In America we have the right to join any organization that reflects our interests and philosophy. I respect Mr. Campbell's and Mr. Chauvin's right to be affiliated with the RLC. What I do not understand is why they deny
it! Are they ashamed of the group they have aligned themselves with? Do they think that admitting the truth will cost them votes?
Ms. Logan asked in her editorial, "Why should the RLC 'nonmember sympathizers' be barred from a group that is not political and nonpartisan?"
I would like to reply with a quote from Jim Fredricks, Editor of the Courier, in his Courier editorial dated February 8th, 2005. "The fact is that it's fair game to ask questions about a candidate's political affiliations and interests, even in a non-partisan, community government election. A candidate's political philosophy can offer insights into a candidate's ultimate values and give perhaps some indication how they might govern. Also, some voters may want to be assured that a candidate is not simply carrying water for their political organization. Voters want a candidate who will vote his or her conscience and not their group's political platform." 
I doubt that Ms. Logan has much personal knowledge concerning Mr. Campbell and Mr. Chauvin. I personally know both gentlemen and am well aware that they are affiliated with the RLC. 
Knowing a candidate’s political leanings offers a quick way for a voter to decide how the candidate will shape the future of The 
Woodlands. Perhaps Ms. Logan thinks that someone's affiliation with the RLC is not important, but both men must think it is important or they would have admitted the truth. 
The Villager should do more investigating before they claim their account of events is more accurate—their account is no more accurate than the title of the “RLC” organization. 
Rosemary Roe

Where Does Government Draw the Line? 
What should the public think about the state taking private lands then using those same lands for getting into the motel, restaurant, gas, etc, business? I thought in our system that's a private enterprise opportunity, not one for the government. 
And where does the government draw the line? Is this the beginning of a new form of governmental competition with the private sector? Is it the first round of unlimited condemnations of private lands for any use whatsoever? And what about the huge opportunity it presents for government cronyism, patronage and corruption? 
This proposal looks very much like a form of government we long considered tyrannical, were opposed to and fought against for many, many years. Is this what the public wants? Or is it just for opportunistic politicians? Does the public really understand what is going down here? 
Let’s hope that Governor Perry and his legislative cohorts have thought this through and fully recognize the slippery slope on which they are about to embark. 
Robert Brandes

What’s Your Rush... to Log?
Bush and his chainsaw-cronies are assaulting our national forests in Oregon right now.
According to the Heritage Forest Campaign, the U.S. Forest Service is awarding contracts to clean snow from logging roads leading to some of our last old-growth forest in the Siskiyou National Forest, Oregon.
The Siskiyou National Forest is a pristine wilderness that supports wild salmon and steelhead trout, the forest provides home to thousands of species of wildlife. It's being cut down and sold to China and Japan.
This rush to log while the matter is still in Federal Court is a crime. Not only a crime but also immoral to destroy a national treasure that belongs to us all, not Bush and his cronies.
Helen Terry

It’s Time to Draw a Line in the Sand 
It is do or die time for the Democrats. The Republicans can not be allowed to eviscerate Social Security. This issue, of all issues, stands at the very heart of what the Democratic Party stands for. In all reality, this issue, of all issues, defines the Democratic Party. 
Benefits may need to be adjusted. Retirement age may have to be adjusted. Taxes may have to be adjusted. An open and spirited debate on making social security strong enough to meet the challenges of time is a must. 
But the principle feature of this program must go untouched. Namely, Social Security is a public insurance program. There is nothing private about it. 
Democratic lawmakers can not in any way shape or form agree to allow the Republicans to strike what could be a mortal blow to Social Security. Democratic lawmakers must go on the offensive not only to beat back this poorly disguised attempt to do away with the New Deal but must show it for what it is – an attempt to get rid of entitlement programs in their entirety. 
This is a litmus test. You can not be a Democrat and support this concept. You can not be a Democrat and agree to privatization. There is no room for “wishy-washiness” here. 
It is time to draw a line in the sand. 
Is there a Social Security crisis? No. Social Security has a trust fund that is backed by the government of the United States. If these IOU's are worthless, then somebody better tell China, Japan and the rest of the world who are gobbling up US Government IOU's by the truckload to finance our exploding trade deficit. 
Is there a budget deficit crisis? Yes. The Bush Administration has cut taxes too much. Supply side economic theory doesn't say zero taxes. It simply states that at some point there are too many taxes. It's corollary is true as well. There can be too few. The lines have crossed on the graphs and we are sinking quickly down the diminishing returns curve. It's time to be fiscally responsible and talk about raising taxes. 
As the Republican propaganda machine roles out with its audiovisuals and armies of paid consultants, the Democrats must be prepared to call a spade a spade. There is no room for compromise of this issue. 
If the Republican Party would like to make the 2006 election a referendum of Social Security privatization then so be it. This is not a fight to run away from. It is a fight that must be confronted head on -- with no confusion. 
Angie Pratt

WoW... 
I recently read the article written by Jim Hightower and it really hit home w/ MBNA. I have perfect credit, never missed a payment and have never been late with any creditor.
I had a 7.9% fixed balance transfer rate w/ MBNA and they decided since I had only made minimum payments on the $8,750 balance for the past 12 months they were going to change my account to a "variable rate". The unethical manner in which it was done was amazing. They posted a small note next to the Radio Shack advertisement that my account would be changed to variable unless I closed it. 
Well... I missed the small print and my rate went to 19.9... I called and got exactly what Mr Hightower explained. (they had me right where they wanted me) The next month it went to 22.9% so I closed the account thinking this might stop... wrong again. It's now at 24.9% and climbing. I also explained in multiple phone conversations I could easily afford 4 times the minimum payment if they would lower the rate, but instead they preferred to have the 4X payment but in interest only.
UNBELIEVABLE 
Luckily I just got a big bonus and I will pay them off next month, but I'm so mad about the ethics of this company I could scream. Thank you for the U.S. PIRG number. At least now I have an avenue to vent.
Thanks again, 
Mike

Fix Social Security Now
Despite the false assurances of some politicians, mostly Democrats, spewing forth their partisan spin, our U S Social Security System is going broke. 
I am 66 years old, retired, and on Social Security. I don't have to worry about losing my benefits. And, if you are 55 or older, neither do you. 
But, if you are younger than 55, your Social Security benefits will be much less than expected...if at all. 
We working Americans allowing our employee and employer contributions to the Social Security System and the U S Treasury Bonds purchased by those contributions to end up as General Funds spent by members of our U S Congress on other things, including "pork" and themselves, was a catastrophic mistake. 
Our U S Social Security System must be "fixed" now. The longer we delay, the more expensive and maybe even cost prohibitive the "fix" becomes. 
President George W. Bush who got his MBA at Harvard has a common sense plan to repair Social Security, giving you younger workers the option to save some of your payroll taxes. 
Personal retirement accounts would begin gradually with yearly contribution limits being raised over time, eventually allowing all American workers to voluntarily set aside up to 4 percent of their payroll taxes to be invested in personal retirement accounts (PRAs). Contributions would be invested in a mix of conservative bond and stock funds. And, because the personal retirement accounts would be owned by individual taxpayers who choose to participate in the program, the U S Congress could never spend the savings accumulated in the personal retirement accounts, apparently one reason some politicians oppose the new program. 
The PRAs would be much like Federal employees' Thrifty Savings Plan (TSP). 
President Bush is being opposed in his efforts to save our Social Security System by some politicians who seem to know nothing about business, finances, investments or our economy. And they don't seem to really be concerned about the future of our Social Security System. 
All true representatives of "we the people" should enthusiastically support the personal retirement accounts for all working and tax-paying Americans, accounts very similar to their own TSPs. 
For all our sakes, especially our children and grandchildren, please actively support our President's plan to repair our U S Social Security System before it's too late. 
Contact your Senators and Representatives, and tell them, "No more political rhetoric. Just do it. 'Fix' Social Security NOW!" 
R. Tullos "Dan" Hanchey

Editor's Note: We encourage you to send in your Letters to the Editor, but please remember to give your name and town. `Anonymous' letters will no longer be accepted. Direct confidential questions by calling (936)539-2200 or e-mail editor@thebulletin.com.

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2005

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2004

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2004

LETTERS FROM JULY 2004

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2004

LETTERS FROM MAY 2004

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2004

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2004

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2004

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2004

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2003

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2003

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2003

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2003

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2003

LETTERS FROM JULY 2003

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2003

LETTERS FROM MAY 2003

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2003

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2003

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2003

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2003

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2002

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2002

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2002

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2002

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2002

LETTERS FROM JULY 2002

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2002

LETTERS FROM MAY 2002

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2002

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2002

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2002

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2002