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.
Better regs, not new agencies
A Jan. 29 letter to the editor incorrectly stated that Gov. Janet Napolitano’s State of the State address calls for the creation of “two new government regulatory bodies” to address the subprime mortgage crisis.
This is not accurate. Instead, the governor called on the Legislature to pass two bills that would require both mortgage loan originators and equity purchasers to be licensed and regulated through the Department of Financial Institutions, an existing state agency.
The intent of the first bill is to protect Arizona homeowners by making sure loan originators are ethical, experienced and qualified to advise home buyers on loan products that are right for them. The intent of the Arizona Home Equity Theft Prevention Act is to stop unscrupulous and deceptive foreclosure “rescue” scams that are aimed to victimize desperate financially-distressed homeowners, causing them to lose their home and any equity they may have had.
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Q.C. should honor service
Regarding the Tribune editorial of Jan. 26 regarding park land not being donated to the American Legion: As a retired Canadian soldier with 25 years of service to my country, and experience serving with American troops, I am troubled by the content of your article. You point out a number of reasons why Queen Creek officials should not donate land to the Legion.
Notwithstanding, you fail to mention that Legion members are men and women who have placed themselves in harm’s way serving this great country. We can and should thank them for the freedom, liberty and security we enjoy each and every day.
Queen Creek officials and the residents should show their respect and appreciation by setting aside petty issues and donating land to the Duane Ellsworth post of the American Legion.
Pay attention to detail
If I am reading the statements of Rep. Bill Konopnicki, R-Safford, correctly, when he voted “affirmative” on the employer sanctions law, he indicated that “the bill was drafted too quickly and there wasn’t enough attention to detail.”
Now he wants the law watered down along with a few others who also did not serve their constituents properly. In other words, they just did not do their homework. It’s called “due diligence.” That’s the least we would expect out of a lawmaker who slings hamburgers — specifically Konopnicki, when it dawned on him that he owned a few McDonald’s restuarants and could be hurt by the law.
If my representatives fall in line with Konopnicki, they don’t get my vote, and I urge other constituents of the Konopnicki lemmings do likewise.
It’s not Mill time
If you want to see what the future holds for Scottsdale traffic, just take a trip to Tempe this week. McClintock Road will be closed until Feb. 15 due to a water line break, forcing all southbound traffic to Scottsdale Road. And so gridlock is occurring daily on Tempe streets.
Years ago, the geniuses in Tempe (headed by Mary O’Connor), virtually closed Mill Avenue to through traffic by eliminating lanes, adding streetscape treatments, and programming traffic signals to stop traffic to give right of way to pedestrians. And no alternative route was established to replace this arterial.
If Scottsdale’s transportation planners and O’Connor have their way, Scottsdale Road will share the same fate as Mill Avenue, thus eliminating a necessary north-south arterial, with no alternative. I wonder if HDR took a drive to Tempe before they wrote Scottsdale’s new Transportation Master Plan.
How dangerous are they?
I just read an article in the National Review concerning a new book about liberal fascism. The premise of the book is that although liberals are fond of labeling conservatives as fascists, they are actually the ones who are fascist. Look closely at the face of modern, “progressive” liberalism. You will see:
• The Hitler youth movement mirrored by the legions of children who have been indoctrinated, but not educated, by the liberal education establishment.
• Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda ministry apparatus mirrored by the liberal-biased mainstream media.
• The one area in which modern liberal fascists “out-fascist” the fascists of old is in the area of environmental extremism and propaganda. Although Nazi Germany did have environmental writers and some mystical earth worship, here modern liberals literally have no peers. If you do not think that the lengths to which they will go to accomplish their environmental goals constitute a tyranny, you need to think again.
Look closely, folks, you will see a face every bit as brutally uncompromising and as tyrannical as any ascribed to Adolf Hitler or Mussolini. Perhaps it is time for the Democratic Party to practice some truth in advertising, and adopt the name “National Socialist” or Nazi party.
It’s impossible and undesirable
John Stossel’s interview with Ron Paul in the Jan. 20 Perspective section was interesting. I agree with many of the ideas expressed by Paul. However, in contrast to Paul, I don’t think our only choice is tyranny versus freedom.
A government is tyrannical to the extent that it imposes restrictions on people against their will. How do we minimize unnecessary restrictions on people? We begin by letting people participate in choosing the rules under which they must live.
Since people sometimes have different opinions about what the rules should be, it is probably impossible to create a government that will not, at times, take away choices that some people would like to make. However, if you have majority rule, the majority of people should be happy with our laws. What is the alternative? Should we let minorities impose their will on the majority of us?
While tyranny is bad, so is freedom. We have government because people do not always get along. People frequently have conflicts. Without government, people must resolve conflicts on their own. Without a mediator, people sometimes decide to resolve their conflicts by one person imposing his or her will on the other person. Conflicts too often escalate to violence. We create government to manage conflict.
While I cheer Paul for his opposition to tyranny, I must disagree with his assertion that our only choice is tyranny or freedom. Freedom is both impossible and undesirable. Since those around us always limit us, we cannot be free. We also do not want true freedom for others because total freedom for one person is only possible if the rest of us accept that person’s tyranny. The alternative to tyranny and freedom is democracy.
JESSE CHANLEY JR.