Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, January 6, 1995 TAG: 9501060069
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Obviously, the user wouldn't feel driven to commit assaults, robbery, prostitution, etc., to acquire cash needed to pay the drug pusher. The result would be much less crime.
If there's less crime, it directly follows that there is a drastic cut in building prisons, illegal activities, street gangs, etc. Inasmuch as the drug pusher would no longer have customers, he'd have to find other means to earn money.
Unfortunately, the hard-core addicts would continue their habit, but they'd have an inexpensive (free) supply from the state. In all likelihood, persons receiving these drugs would have to give their true identity and possibly demonstrate a willingness to be counseled. Thus, a chance to stop their habits.
As it is now, all the efforts and trillions of dollars have failed to stop the flow of illegal drugs to the user. Nothing works. Under the free-drug plan, the addicted person at worst would no longer be a criminal. At best, he or she might kick the habit.
GEORGE SEIGLER
ROANOKE
Baseball, hockey fans - unite!
WHILE GREEDY players and team owners (baseball and hockey) argue over how to split millions of dollars that will find its way into the till, there's a forgotten third and most-needed party: the public!
The time has come for the public that gives up those millions of dollars to exercise its power to make a demand for lower-cost game seats. Now that we know life goes on without professional baseball and hockey, it seems reasonable to demand that a family be able to attend professional sports games without spending its life savings.
Ten dollars for a game seat sounds reasonable. If that level doesn't support arenas, a subsidy from television receipts can fill that bill. Owners and players can work out their respective takes based on the reduction of arena receipts. The average player's salary may end up being only hundreds of thousands of dollars as opposed to a million, and the owners' take might be less millions. Tough!
Since the public is the source of all revenue, either by attending games or watching on television (the greatest source), it has the greatest strength of the parties involved in the business of professional sports. Unfortunately, the only avenue the public has to flex its muscle is through a boycott. Without public participation at arenas or in front of the television, the message will be clear and unbearable, and it will be only a short duration before team owners and players realize the consequences. Lower-price seats will be a small price to pay for the return of the viewing fans!
It's certain that owners are well-aware of the public's power if fans band together to use their strength, a possibility that team owners and players hope will never happen. This situation isn't so different from the recent elections when the public decided it didn't like the posture of the Washington bureaucrats.
JOHN E. ARNESEN
MONETA
County officials are strangely silent
JOHN BOSTIAN'S Dec. 8 letter to the editor (``Why the higher water rates?'') asked several interesting questions concerning surplus money in Roanoke County's water fund, including why the county needs to raise water rates another 10 percent this year. I've noted with interest that no member of the Board of Supervisors or anyone from the county administrator's office has replied to his questions.
Since no answers have been forthcoming, it could be assumed that water rates are truly in excess of what's needed to finance water-system improvements and current operation and maintenance expenses. If the county is using high water rates to finance non-water projects, water customers should at least know the truth.
JAMES W. PROFFITT
ROANOKE
Health-care plan was a monster
LIBERALS BLAME the demise of Clinton's health-care plan on scare tactics by special-interest groups. The reality is quite different: People simply realized what a monstrosity it was.
The very idea of achieving cost control via a new government bureaucracy is a joke. Recently, we heard about a spark-plug connector costing several times what we would pay for it in a store; cost overruns for a still incomplete visitor's center at Hoover Dam; unnecessary construction projects at military bases; and federal court buildings that are Taj Mahals. In light of this track record, how can anyone keep a straight face while claiming government could actually keep a lid on health-care costs? Besides, did anyone really know its cost?
Some costs the Clinton plan would have created weren't obvious. Among proposals for financing it, the Clintons suggested that all employers pay a tax on their employees. That would take millions of dollars out of our country's public-school budgets, not to mention the impact on police and fire departments.
Another factor that figured in this plan's rejection was people's experiences dealing with large federal bureaucracies. Talk to someone who has filed a Social Security disability claim, if you want an example of how responsive and helpful a federal agency can be.
Then, there is the resentment factor. While there are innocent victims of AIDS, most get it through sexual promiscuity, homosexual activity and intravenous drug use. Many resented the idea of being taxed to treat folks who became ill as a result of their own misbehavior. People who believe abortion is murder under another name also resented the idea of being taxed to pay for millions of legal infanticides occurring every year.
Finally, there was the potential threat to liberty. The sight of Clinton brandishing his ``mark of the beast'' card on television in the fall of l993 struck me as rather ominous. This card was going to hold a person's entire medical history? How and to what future use would the government put this information?
Fortunately, Dr. Clintonstein's monster is dead and, with Republicans controlling both houses of Congress, won't be resurrected. Perhaps now we can get real health-care reform, fixing problems in the existing system rather than taking a blind leap of faith into big government.
JOHN BARNHART
ROANOKE
Sgro's assessment was wrong
I SUPPORT your Jan. 2 editorial, ``Secretary Sgro's blooper.'' I, too, take exception to her comment that there's little international activity in Western Virginia and it's doubtful there ever will be. Since the secretary came from Southwest Virginia, it's hard to understand how she could minimize the international activities of the area, including those of Virginia Tech and the Blacksburg Electronic Village, which links the area to the world via Internet.
Your editorial named a number of companies in Southwestern Virginia that do a significant amount of business overseas. I want to add to the list the name VTLS Inc. in Blacksburg. VTLS develops and markets library-automation and information-management software used by more than 300 libraries in 23 countries, including Finland, Russia, Spain and Switzerland. International clients make up 50 percent of the company's business. VTLS recruits employees with international experience and foreign-language expertise.
I disagree with Secretary Sgro's assessment of the international activity in Western Virginia and wish she would reconsider her opinions.
GAIL GULBENKIAN
Information Officer
VTLS Inc.
BLACKSBURG
CIA's wrongdoings can't be denied
APPARENTLY the Dec. 10 letter to the editor entitled ``Crimes of the CIA'' by Bob DellaValle-Rauth touched a nerve with Richard J. Bidwell and three others (Dec. 23 letter, ``Writer bit on defector's line'').
This isn't surprising to me since, as a people, U.S. citizens tend to deny any wrongdoings committed in their name by our government. We should acknowledge facts and accept a share of responsibility.
It's just this attitude of ``my country, right or wrong'' that has earned Americans the disdain of many people, including many innocent civilians who have suffered the effects of brutal covert activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.
ADELE DELLAVALLE-RAUTH
HUDDLESTON
by CNB