We encourage readers to submit letters to the editor on issues of interest to East Valley residents. Submissions should be no longer than 300 words, factually accurate and original thoughts of the writer. Please be brief and include name, address, city and phone number for verification. Letters and call-in comments may be edited for clarity and length.
FEEDING THE HUNGRY
Veto hurts the cause
In this season of giving, it is distressing to read that our food banks are running low even as more people have to turn to them for emergency help. According to Tribune stories in the Nov. 20 issue, giving is down even as there are more demands placed on private charities. I will be giving to charities and food banks, as many others will, in the same spirit that President Bush praised in his tribute: “Our nation’s greatest strength is the decency and compassion of our people.” His Thanksgiving theme rings empty, however — a trip to a food bank does not make up for the vetoing of a bill that could have helped the 35 million that went hungry in 2006.
Let us not forget the president vetoed a bill which would have provided funding for the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services. The House was unable to override that veto. The bill would have provided heating and cooling assistance for 1.4 million more low-income households than the numbers served by the president’s budget. The president’s proposal would either deny Head Start to 34,000 children or cut services by $279 per child.
And 173,000 unemployed youth and adults would not get training if the president prevails; community health centers would serve 1.2 million fewer people.
We must hold the president and our representatives accountable. We know that sick people need medical treatment, children need a good education and the elderly need heat in their apartments. Compassion and decency should be demanded of our leaders.
Many of Arizona’s congressional delegation insist on using the term “illegal immigrants,” Wrong! The correct term is “illegal aliens.” Anyone who uses the other term should be corrected.
An alien is someone from someplace else. In contrast, an immigrant is a person who comes here legally, fully intending to swear allegiance to his or her new country. How is that for my spin? My support is that we are a nation of immigrants, not a nation of aliens. There are repugnant terms, such as Sen. Harry Reid’s “illegal Americans” or Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s “good citizens without citizenship.” The blatant pandering of politicians exposed in the above terms is beyond shame, the sole purpose being to avoid alienating the illegal aliens.
To Lady Liberty: “We’re up to our ears with the poor and huddled masses, close the door and put out the light.”
Dire national threat
It may be politically incorrect to refer to the small group of dissenters who pull the strings of MoveOn.org, Media Matters and other liberal organizations as “subversive.” They compliment the ACLU, which has pressed for the collapse of democracy in America since its inception in 1919 but is still not classified as a subversive organization by the government.
Far-left intellectuals who support radical movements in America with new money do not understand Islamic history. They are too ignorant to realize they will be the first to be killed if al-Qaida erupts in the United States. The reason: they cannot be trusted.
Decide now if he will be paid
Chandler City Councilman Martin Sepulveda has been called up to serve in Iraq again. Martin’s son will soon embark on a similar mission as well. His son is also employed by Chandler, but as a firefighter, and will take time off to serve our country. Their decisions are commendable and the two men deserve our deepest thanks for their service to defend America. God bless them both.
It is a city policy that when Sepulveda’s son temporarily leaves to serve overseas, if his salary from the military is less than what he is paid as a firefighter, the city will graciously make up the difference in pay so that Sepulveda’s son will not incur any financial hardship for his decision to serve our country. On the same hand, if Sepulveda’s son is paid more in military salary than his city job, he will not receive his salary from the city. All employees of the city are treated as fairly.
All but one.
Sepulveda helped to write a policy in the 1990s after he returned from a tour overseas while serving on the council. While he was gone, he was paid his council salary and, evidently, didn’t think it was right. The new policy stated City Council members could not “double-dip” from the city if they earned more from the military than the city salary.
However, when Sepulveda was called up for the second time to Iraq earlier in his current term, the city manager implemented the new law for council members. Sepulveda went on a rampage when his salary was taken away. He joined forces with his council crony Matt Orlando to fire City Manager Mark Pentz, who was only trying to carry out policy that Sepulveda had crafted.
What will be the city’s direction be this time? Treat Sepulveda like everyone else or continue to pay him? The council needs to make a decision soon so we don’t go through another mess like the last time.
What a shame that less than 30 percent of the voters in Mesa determined, because of apathy by 70 percent, that we would have more congestion at the convergence of the Loops 101 and 202, waste huge amounts of water (we just don’t get that this is the desert), encourage more people into our already polluted and overcrowded East Valley and make a few developers even more wealthy at the expense of all of us who live here year round.