Congress members do what’s right – for selves

In a moment of truth-telling, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin from Illinois said the banking industry owns the Senate.

He should have acknowledged the influence of the rest of corporate America as well.

The banks’ lobbyists are as powerful as ever, but now, since most received federal bailout money, their lobbyists are being paid by We the People to work against our interests.

Like all Republicans and 12 Democrats, our Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain voted for the banks and against giving bankruptcy judges the ability to renegotiate loans of homeowners facing repossession.

Arizona has been particularly hard hit by foreclosures, but that hasn’t caused our senators to stand with their constituents over the banks.

Obama has said he wants to close the tax loopholes on offshore accounts that allow almost all large American companies to avoid paying billions in taxes.

This would add $200 billion to the nation’s coffers and allow tax breaks for companies that create American jobs.

Will Republicans and even some Democrats side with the companies that fill their campaign war chests, or will they do what is right?

What argument will Kyl and McCain use to vote against closing the loopholes?

Oh wait, I’ve got it: Closing tax loopholes is really raising taxes.

Likewise, get ready for Republicans and some Democrats to protect the health insurance industry over the need for universal care and real reform.

Conservative Democrat Ben Nelson, who has taken more than $2 million from the private health care industry, said he will fight a government option similar to Medicare, because it would be so superior to the private care option it would harm the health care insurance industry.

We need to fight this corporate stranglehold on our political process.

We need to write our members of Congress and remind them that we elected them.

They work for us, not the corporations that are trying to sabotage the change we need.

Joan Safier

retired teacher

2 senators try to mend health care system

I was really proud to watch Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Chuck Grassley, R-Idaho, working together on the health care bill we need to take for-profit health care off Wall Street and put it on Main Street as nonprofit organizations.

My dad brought health insurance from Blue Cross nonprofit in the 1950s for $1 per kid. My sons were born preemies, and I was in debt more than $100,000 overnight.

John Crouse

Find respectable work . . . as a local volunteer

I am part of President Obama’s Neighbor to Neighbor program, and was relieved that the budget passed.

I know that it is not a perfect budget. Not much is perfect in these times. But I am continually amazed by the “get out, get up and move” initiative of many Arizonans.

I see senior reading volunteers work lovingly with kids from the Pascua Yaqui Reservation. I hear unemployed individuals talk about “showing their motivation to get a new job” by volunteering at the Community Food Bank.

It is easy to sit back and complain about how hard things are and what bad jobs CEOs and Congress are doing. But it is a wonderful and inspiring thing to see neighbors getting up in the morning to go out and help others in whatever way they can.

Being involved in community efforts will get the country back on track. Sitting back will not.

No, we are not “The Greatest Generation,” but I would be proud to be mistaken for any of them in my most unselfish moments.

Nora Cunneely

Paper’s support helped put arts on the charts

I want to thank the Tucson Citizen for its support of arts groups through the years.

Without the media bringing attention to concerts, drama and art shows, many of us would be unemployed. Many of us are still unemployed, but not because you didn’t try.

Special thanks to Calendar Editor Rogelio Olivas and the Calendar staff for producing previews and listings and being so lovely to work with.

I also want to thank Dan Buckley. In one of his columns, he urged groups to perform during the summer so that Tucson audiences could have access to the arts year-round and not just during the regular season.

His suggestion is the reason that the St. Andrew’s Bach Society Summer Concert Series exists in its present form. He gave us a big preview before the first concert and the series has gone from strength to strength, now under the artistic direction of Dr. Lindabeth Binkley.

Dan Buckley also gave my early music group, Musica Sonora, a great review and put a video clip up on the Web, which meant a heck of a lot to me.

I hope the Citizen will carry on, but in case you end up at the Great Printing Press in the Sky, I couldn’t have lived with myself if I hadn’t thanked you. I can’t thank you enough.

May you survive and thrive.

Christina Jarvis

former artistic director, St. Andrew’s Bach Society;

artistic director, Musica Sonora;

music director, Grace St. Paul’s Episcopal Church

News industry’s depression has spillover implications

The Rocky Mountain News sign is removed from the Denver Newspaper Agency building March 1. Americans more than ever need newspapers as watchdogs whose mission transcends self-interest.

These are depressing days in news, and those still in the profession don’t talk nearly enough about how that affects Americans and their way of life.

Maybe it’s because we’re sensitive to being seen as defending dinosaurs, or too timid after endless ideological attacks on “the mainstream media.”

Newspapers in big cities like Denver and Seattle have folded. The Tucson Citizen’s future is uncertain.

Experienced journalists are being forced out of the business, often leaving to write speeches or press releases for politicians or corporations. State capital press corps have been decimated.

If not there already, we could soon be living in a world where government and politicians spend more on public relations and propaganda than an independent media spends to watch them.

Whether you’re a fan of the news media or not, this is anathema to honest self-government.

Imagine Richard Nixon with a 10 million-member e-mail army behind him, with legions of bloggers attacking his political foes, with a much larger phalanx of taxpayer-paid public relations people defending him, and with no independent investigative reporters raising questions others dare not ask.

If Nixon had survived the “third-rate burglary” at the Watergate, how long would his enemies list have grown, and how emboldened would he have become in spying on political rivals?

At a time when government is growing at an unprecedented pace, veteran Associated Press reporter Bob Lewis says it best: “There has never been a greater need for honest, truthful reporting than now. Sadly, there has never been less support for it than there is now. Invest in freedom. Buy a newspaper.”

In this season of scapegoating, Americans more than ever need watchdogs whose mission transcends self- interest. But it’s open season on the one industry that has tried to fill that role.

When comedian and cable political-show host Jon Stewart beat up on cable business-show host Jim Cramer, some cheered it as a righteous upbraiding of the news media for sleeping – or cheerleading – while Wall Street ran off with the nation’s piggybank.

There are fundamental problems with this claim.

First, as Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen pointed out, the dons of Wall Street were assuring shareholders and business journalists, including Cramer, of the genius behind the complicated financial “products” that later unraveled at investment houses and insurance giant AIG.

As Cohen noted, Wall Street big shots were putting their own money into their own businesses. No red flags there.

Former President George W. Bush assured Americans that the fundamentals of the economy were strong, even as crisis loomed.

Those with government regulatory subpoena and enforcement powers were slow to act or did not act at all. Members of Congress proclaimed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in good shape while the home-loan giants were apparently rotting from within.

Someone needs to be blamed, and what better target than the cartoonish Cramer? Ironically, cable news, where Cramer works, is the news medium that has weathered the financial crisis the best.

Why? Because people watch it, shouting and all. Perhaps because of the shouting.

But the picture is bleak for independent news gathering at a lower decibel. People are migrating to the Internet, where news and advertising have diverged, and where consumers have come to expect news for free.

Coupled with a crippling recession, these trends have cut advertising revenues by nearly a quarter in two years, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism. Massive layoffs have followed, while independent media race to invent a new business model.

“The problem facing American journalism is not fundamentally an audience problem or a credibility problem,” the Project for Excellence in Journalism said in its annual report. “It is a revenue problem – the decoupling . . . of advertising from news.”

Americans, the group concluded, “hunt and gather what they want when they want it, use search to comb among destinations and share what they find through a growing network of social media.”

The question is not whether platforms for public debate will be available.

Indeed, information overload is a bigger challenge to consumers today. In a world where niche news providers are growing at an explosive rate, consumers are forced to triage their choices. Under such conditions, it’s tempting to create a comfort zone of self-affirming opinion in which compromise and common ground are vilified as weakness.

The media universe may become warring information camps funded by rigidly ideological tribes or multimillionaires who see the public interest as an obstacle to personal success. If that happens, Americans will have a lot more to worry about than a few loud mouths in prime time.

Chuck Raasch is political editor for Gannett News Service. E-mail: craasch@gns.gannett.com

Reader corresponds on news, its delivery

Many times in the last few weeks, I started a letter to the editor but didn’t finish any of them in a timely manner.

One was about the deplorable situation of the arts in Tucson Unified schools. The new superintendent apparently doesn’t appreciate the fine arts as a vehicle for stimulating students’ minds. She must believe they are an unnecessary expense because they don’t appear on the AIMS test.

Another letter to the editor was about the mismanagement of the Tucson Symphony Orchestra and its convoluted pricing system for season tickets that no one in their office can explain.

And the musicians, without whom there would be no TSO, played for more than a year without a contract and when they finally received one, the amount was below what they had received in previous years.

Now TSO management is asking the public to donate $1 million before the end of 2009 for the Emergency Bridge Campaign. I am more inclined to make a donation directly to the musicians.

The topic of a third letter was the Regional Transportation Authority vote recount and County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry’s “all’s right with the world – what’s the fuss about – my elections department is the best and has done no wrong” blathering. Thanks to the Tucson Citizen for including Attorney Bill Risner’s statement for balance.

A fourth letter would aim squarely at the powers-that-be managing the Citizen. Why don’t they ask the readers what we want in the newspaper? Did they ask if readers valued the daily bridge column or did they just drop it? It can’t cost any more than Mallard Filmore but the duck keeps flapping along ad nauseam.

What about the powers-that-be requiring local columnists to do blogs? When do I have time to read a blog? Did they ask if I wanted to read a blog?

The Citizen goes to the heart of issues. It’s an honest newspaper and doesn’t deserve to die. On National Public Radio, I recently listened to a discussion about the demise of print newspapers throughout the country. I hope that Tucson can pull off a class act and keep both our daily papers alive and in print form.

I want to get the news dropped on my doorstep. I don’t want to click a mouse to read the news. I want to turn a page.

Lee Oler

No contest between a rock & a green place

Re: the Tuesday My Tucson column by Melissa Lamberton (“Go green, UA, and let the grass die”):

There is more to being “green” than living in a world of dirt and rocks.

I totally disagree with Melissa Lamberton’s My Tucson view that UA should let the grass die.

Being green is an attitude that reflects concern for the planet and our future, but it does not mean we have to give up the beauty that is already there.

We have to make it more special and protect it. That is what UA does with its landscaping and plant life.

Anyone who knows Tucson knows that the UA campus is a veritable oasis in a desert. It is more than just a college campus. It is a place of solitude. It is a place of contemplation. It is a place for gathering and sharing.

The trees and grass and vegetation provide a source of comfort on a hot day, a source of learning about our plant life and a place to escape.

How exciting for us when the professor would say, “Let’s hold class outside today on the grass under the trees that line the Mall.”

Every time I drive by on Campbell Avenue and look down at the green grass Mall of UA, I feel good. It’s my Central Park, in the midst of an urban center.

Author Leo Buscaglia writes that the time to celebrate one’s life is when they are alive and when families struggle the most. Not when they are gone or when things are going great.

To get rid of the grass at UA because of tight economic times is shortsighted and senseless. It’s not like UA is wasting its resources. I see no water running down the streets.

The plants are well maintained and protected. It is a living museum we can experience each and every day if we want.

Is it a selling point for UA? Sure it is! It’s a beautiful campus and if it makes someone from New York want to go here, great.

The Mall is UA, so much so that when they wanted to take away part of it years ago for a new building, they decided instead to put the building underground and preserve the Mall.

I suggest Melissa take her family down to the campus someday, pack a picnic lunch, walk among the olive trees and find a shady spot and enjoy our little “green” area. Save the grass and all the plants!

Matt Welch

UA alumnus

Focus should be on fix, not more tearing down

I’ve been surprised to hear that “ordinary” citizens who are being interviewed on radio news appear to be concerned that President Obama’s budget plan is spending too much.

They might be referring to the money spent on bailing out financial goofs. But that is just cleaning up what members of the last administration did when they deregulated the financial firms or didn’t upregulate the right sectors.

What we should be watching for is how we can help Obama compete with lobbyists to encourage Congress to bring jobs back home, build a smart, cost-lowering universal health insurance program and a preventive homeland security department that recognizes quality K-12 education as a peacemaker and crime reducer.

Philip Torrance

President Obama marked National Prayer Day with a proclamation instead of a White House prayer service. Everyone’s different. Bill Clinton came to Jesus, George W. Bush talked to Jesus and Barack Obama fills in for Jesus on major holidays.

Sarah Palin’s teen daughter Bristol, herself a mother, told a National Teen Pregnancy Awareness Day rally in New York that she misses her freedom. She also misses the baby’s father. So far she’s shot high and to the left every time he’s come to the door.

The President took Joe Biden out to lunch at a Virginia hamburger restaurant famous for its aged beef. The trip was the vice president’s idea. The best way to calm the nation about swine flu is to remind them mad cow is still out there waiting to strike.

Pakistan sought U.S. help guarding its nuclear arsenal from advancing Taliban. We face two scenarios. Either President Obama halts the Taliban from seizing Pakistan’s nukes or we can all finally stop worrying about retirement planning.

Liberty Sun shipping asked Congress for the right to arm its commercial ships against Somali pirates. It’s a dangerous world out there, but it’s lucrative. Replacing bullet-ridden U.S. flags is the biggest business in China since tennis shoes.

Sen. Arlen Specter was enraged when Sen. Harry Reid stripped him of his seniority after telling him if he turned Democrat he could keep it. Where’s he been? Reid represents Nevada and the people there won’t even deliver the mail unless you tip.

Argus Hamilton is host comedian at The Comedy Store in Hollywood. E-mail: argus@argushamilton.com

Mean streets dead-end downtown junctions

Streets are an important part of the urban fabric of any city.

Ideally, streets serve a variety of functions – transportation, gathering spaces, public outdoor rooms and more.

In recent years (since mass industrialization), streets have started to serve singular functions of transportation for vehicular traffic, often forsaking pedestrian and bicycle use.

This single-track attitude toward streets is filtering out the vibrant life we need to revitalize the ghost town that was Tucson downtown.

Saving downtown will require that we not only get people downtown, but also keep them there. This is impossible as long as streets are designed only to move cars, and as long as there are no spaces to foster interaction between people from all walks of Tucson life.

It’s this sense of community that is so desperately lacking in suburbia, and the density of the urban center is the only chance to really bring our local culture to life.

European cities – which have existed far longer than any American city – all feature pre-industrial design and planning.

Before cities were designed for the automobile, streets were made for walking. Small squares dotted cityscapes and allowed members of neighborhoods to gather in these multipurpose outdoor rooms.

As a result, communities were stronger.

The redesign of downtown roads can and must include not only large-scale open space for events, but also smaller-scale spaces for community interaction.

Evan Shallcross

Mock Trial member judges UA to be unfit

I am ecstatic to graduate May 15 – not because I am proud to be a University of Arizona alumnus, but rather because it means I no longer will be affiliated with UA.

When I pack my room, get in my car and leave for law school this summer, I will never look back – ever.

I came to UA as a freshman in the fall of 2005. I watched tuition costs rise incrementally without apology. I accepted these increases by not transferring to another school, believing the extra money improved my educational opportunities.

I watched incredibly underfunded clubs struggle to exist, including my own (Mock Trial). I watched excessive spending, I saw two consecutive big-name concerts net two consecutive six-digit losses.

This university is a disgrace to advanced education. I have been cheated of four years I could have spent at an institution devoted to spending my tuition toward my education.

Concerts netting nearly a $1 million loss do not aid my education.

ASUA funding to Mock Trial alone never surpassed $1,000 this year. Mock Trial has more than 20 students, and the cost for one student to attend one tournament is more than $400.

This year, we represented UA competitively and professionally at the Regional Tournament, the Opening Round Championship Tournament and the National Championship Tournament.

It is one of the best extracurricular educational activities offered at UA.

Yet we watch UA lose more than $900,000 on an extraneous entertainment event as our program suffered because students simply could not afford to compensate for the massive lack of funding.

Concerts do not play any vital role at an institution of higher learning. They should only be run if they can break event.

ASUA should represent the students, but for two years it has only represented the individuals planning the events, hoping to leave a legacy.

The Kanye West concert and the Jay-Z concert lost more than $1.3 million.

Tommy Bruce called the Jay-Z concert a success and blamed the loss on the economy, but those statements are irresponsible, immature and wrong. The concert contract was signed March 24, well after the initial crash.

There is no excuse for this refusal to accept responsibility. There is no excuse for the increase in tuition costs. There is no excuse for this misappropriation of funds.

I will never contribute to any activity or fundraising event put on with UA alumni. I will never give anything to aid this institution in any way.

I will make sure every family member, colleague and friend knows that UA is not devoted to higher learning.

I am ashamed to be a member of this establishment, and I hope the Board of Regents realizes the UA administration’s failure to work toward the goals of higher education and spend its funds on better causes.

Corey Wlodarczyk

UA class of 2009

philosophy, political science

It does compute: Tech belongs in classrooms

Technology can be an enormous help to teachers; it helps prepare students for work and gives them a better grasp of concepts the teacher is trying to explain.

When all schools use technology, we will have a more computer literate populace.

Teachers must be given classes on how to use technology in the classroom, integrating it into lesson plans. Such education will help teachers to overcome their fear of change.

A technology team should provide technical support.

I believe more and better use of technology in education will spur higher test scores.

I cannot imagine trying to do a research project without computers, for example.

If a school has up-to-date technology, students will be better able to grasp the concepts.

Guillermo Vance

math education major

University of Arizona

Bristol Palin poses with actress Hayden Panettiere on the red carpet during an event in New York City to promote National Teen Pregnancy Awareness Day. Now an unwed mother, Bristol Palin said abstinence is a realistic way for teens to avoid unwanted pregnancy - a view not shared by the father of her infant son.

Bristol Palin is back in the news. The Alaska governor’s daughter became the most famous unwed pregnant teenager in America last summer when her mother was nominated to be the GOP’s vice presidential candidate.

Since then, Bristol has given birth to a boy in December and her engagement to the baby’s father has ended.

This week, she took center stage again for promoting abstinence among teenagers as part of Teen Pregnancy Awareness Day. But she’s been greeted with howls of derision from pundits and others who think her actions are hypocritical.

However, before critics jump on Bristol, maybe they should consider the facts.

The majority of teenagers who have had sex regret their decision – and that’s not just those who get pregnant.

We need to worry about increasing rates of teen pregnancy, which fell steadily between 1991 and 2005, but started moving up again in 2006 and are higher in the U.S. than in all other countries in the industrialized world.

But pregnancy isn’t the only issue that should concern us when teenagers are sexually active, especially young teens, even if they use contraception. Most young teens are not emotionally ready to have sex, even if their hormones are telling them differently.

The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy has been the leader in providing hard, empirical data on what works to prevent teenage pregnancy and in studying attitudes among young people on the issue. (I currently serve on the board of the National Campaign, which includes a broad range of public figures, health specialists and academics whose views cut across a wide political spectrum.)

In 2007, the National Campaign published a comprehensive survey on attitudes toward sexual activity, teen pregnancy, and who and what most affected teens’ likelihood of engaging in sex. “With One Voice: America’s Teens and Adults Sound Off about Teen Pregnancy” includes some surprising findings.

Among teenagers who have already had sex, 60 percent wished they had waited. And 90 percent of teens say they believe that providing young people with a strong abstinence message is important – a figure not much different from the 93 percent of adults who favor a pro-abstinence message.

Teens also credit parents with being the most important influence in their lives on their decisions to have sex or to delay sexual activity.

Nearly half (47 percent) credit their parents with influencing their decisions, more than friends (18 percent), religious leaders (7 percent), siblings (5 percent), teachers or sex educators (4 percent) or the media (3 percent).

These figures have remained consistent in all the National Campaign’s surveys.

According to the findings in this survey, which included a representative sample of more than 2,000 teens and adults interviewed by phone, both believe it is important to discourage teenagers from sexual activity at least until kids are out of high school.

Eight out of 10 adults said such messages were very important, as did two-thirds of teenagers.

But a majority of adults and teens also want information about contraception given to teenagers. However, nearly half of teens (46 percent) surveyed acknowledged that telling teens “don’t have sex but if you do, you should use birth control or protection” actually encourages teens to have sex.

Given these findings, Bristol Palin’s advocacy for teen abstinence is a good thing. She’s a high-profile example of why all the best-laid plans sometimes go awry.

Bristol got pregnant even though she and her former boyfriend admitted they usually used contraception. She may have thought she would marry the father of her baby, but they ended up breaking up after the baby was born.

And now, instead of being a college freshman enjoying an active social life, she’s home taking care of her infant son.

At least Bristol has a support network to help her raise her child – many unwed teen moms don’t. If she can discourage even a few young girls from following in her footsteps, I think she deserves our praise, not the snickers she’s been getting from some quarters.

Linda Chavez is chair of the Center for Equal Opportunity and author of “An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal.” E-mail: lchavez@ceousa.org

Jack Kemp - the ex-quarterback, congressman, one-time vice presidential nominee and self-described "bleeding-heart conservative" - died May 2.

Many have commented on the life and legacy of Jack Kemp – the former Buffalo, N.Y., congressman, former vice presidential candidate, former HUD secretary, former professional football star and a friend for life to all those who knew him.

I knew Jack and his family well. Our children grew up together. We belonged to the same church.

Next to Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp was probably the most optimistic Republican I knew. He was also a conservative advocate for civil rights long before many other Republicans would address that issue. This was because, as he said, it was difficult to oppose people you had showered with as an athlete.

Kemp believed civil rights was a conservative issue. After all, don’t conservatives value people before government and don’t they want to liberate individuals from those things that limit their ability to succeed?

Kemp saw racial discrimination as one of those limiting things and he tirelessly campaigned against it. He even supported voting rights for the District of Columbia, though it would ultimately mean more Democrats in Congress.

New York Times columnist Bob Herbert wrote that Kemp’s attempt to get his Republican Party to accept blacks and other ethnic minorities was “futile,” given the GOP’s “Southern strategy” in the 1960s and since.

Kemp advocated economic independence and strong families. Herbert suggested that Kemp’s strategy should have been to embrace Democratic objectives – i.e., bigger and ever-growing government – to help blacks overcome discrimination and poverty.

The Herbert and Democratic Party approach has deepened dependency on government handouts. The Kemp approach sought to make the poor self-sustaining and independent of government.

In 1988, I attended a reception hosted by Kemp during the Republican National Convention in New Orleans. There may have been more African-Americans at that event than in the entire GOP at the time.

Kemp’s civil rights activism was not for the purpose of attracting black votes – though he openly appealed to blacks that they would find a better home and a better future in the Republican Party.

Rather, his civil rights activism flowed from his belief that when the Declaration of Independence says all are created equal, it actually means all.

Kemp was way ahead of Republicans and Southern Democrats on race. He would visit housing projects like the notorious Cabrini-Green in Chicago, a nest of poverty and gang activity that even Chicago police officers were afraid to enter.

It is now in the process of being torn down and its residents relocated. Whatever replaces it should include a plaque with a tribute to Kemp.

Kemp was an idea man, not caring who got credit so long as people’s lives were improved. He disliked those who demonized people on “the other side.”

He saw all Americans on the same side and this put him at odds with certain people in his party who made enemies out of those who held different beliefs in order to raise money and attract votes. Some had a divide-and-conquer approach. Kemp’s approach was to unite for the benefit of all.

This attitude was most evident during his 1996 vice presidential debate with Al Gore. Kemp began his remarks by promising no personal attacks and pledging to conduct himself with civility. The approach angered some on the right, who wanted blood, but Kemp was true to himself.

Kemp regarded the football teams he played against as opponents, not enemies. His politics displayed the same attitude, which is why his opponents admired him on and off the field.

It is also why his funeral Friday will be held at Washington’s massive National Cathedral (the service was moved from his church to accommodate the large crowd that’s expected). The cross-section of attendees will be a testimony to the value of his approach to politics and to life.

Jack liked people and if there was anyone who didn’t like him, he worked overtime to change their opinion.

As Republicans hold public forums on how best to rebuild their party, they could do a lot worse than consider the ideas and attitude of Jack Kemp.

His approach to problem solving, not destroying opponents, ought to be the GOP’s strategy for building a better future . . . and a better America.

Cal Thomas is an author and broadcast commentator. His e-mail address is calthomas@tribune.com.

Giffords fails cowboys by not backing act

The Kentucky Derby reminds us of our love and partnership with the horse.

But American horses remain in jeopardy of being stolen from our backyards and stables and taken to profiteers who sell them at auctions.

Killer buyers then transport them under horrendous condition to Mexico and Canada for slaughter.

Up to the day public pressure closed the last U.S. horse slaughter plant in Illinois, there were reports of mares giving birth to foals in holding areas while awaiting slaughter.

There were reports of injured, crippled and abused horses suffering miserably, provided no food and no water after long journeys under horrific conditions.

Seventy percent of Americans want to end horse slaughter, and Congress has concurred time and again.

Federal legislation pending in the House and Senate would end horse slaughter and prohibit the use of double-decker trailers, meant for cattle, to transport horses.

Congressman Raúl Grijalva and Sen. John McCain are co-sponsors of the Equine Cruelty Act. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was a co-sponsor in the last Congress but has not yet signed onto equine legislation since her re-election. This is a great disappointment to her constituents and the horse community.

Among the 97 pieces of legislation for which Giffords is a sponsor or co-sponsor is HR 322, to declare July 25 as National Day of the Cowboy. How can Ms. Giffords honor the cowboy and sell the horse he rode in on down the road to the slaughter plant?

Call Sen. Jon Kyl at 202-224-4521 and ask him to become a co-sponsor of S 727. Call Giffords at 202-225-2542 and ask her to co-sponsor HR 503 the Equine Cruelty Act, HR 1018 Restoring Protection for Wild Horses and Burros Act and HR 305 Horse Transportation Act.

Legislation to honor the cowboy cannot matter much without his faithful partner, the horse.

Julianne French

Refreshing to watch Obama at work

It is refreshing to see our president go through a deliberative process.

He explains his decisions with logic, in speeches, press conferences and town hall meetings where “real” people from all parties ask questions.

With all the things on his plate, mistakes, even big ones are inevitable.

Some in his own party won’t stand up to banks on behalf of underwater mortgage debtors for the most important element of President Obama’s bankruptcy reform package.

Meanwhile, the other party has lost one of its three (of 41) moderating elements in the Senate with the switch of Arlen Spector.

There is so much to be corrected. Thank heaven the guy with the shovel has started to fill the holes instead of making them deeper.

Barry Kirschner

Students truly benefit from extracurriculars

College admissions requirements change quickly.

High school students need a good grade point average and a good score on their SAT or ACT. But they also need more.

Participation in extracurricular activities helps a student’s GPA, behavior, attendance and academic performance while building their résumé to help with college admissions.

Researcher Douglas Reeves studied a Woodstock, Ill., school that had added a comprehensive extracurricular program. In one year after the program became active, the ninth-grade failure rate in math, science, social studies and English dropped nearly 40 percent.

The school had more national merit honorees than ever and, in five years, it doubled the number of students taking and passing advance placement classes and exams.

The graduation rate rose to 88 percent – its highest level in 10 years – with 94 percent of the graduates planning to attend some postsecondary education.

With moderate participation in activities, students benefit. All it takes is a little encouragement by teachers and parents.

Sports, student council, debate, clubs, all build a student’s résumé, help build life skills and a work ethic. This is an easy way to help students succeed.

Jacob Rich

freshman

University of Arizona

HR 1388 passage gives support to terrorists

Why is this not being given proper coverage? This is nothing less than presidential support for terrorists who are enemies of America.

HR 1388 was just passed behind our backs. You may want to read about it.

It wasn’t mentioned on the news, just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen.

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in “migration assistance” to the Palestinian refugees and “conflict victims” in Gaza.

This is the news that didn’t make the headlines.

The “presidential determination,” which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States, was signed on Jan. 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on Feb. 4.

Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

Thomas Wheeler

After the public forum held last week regarding the Tucson budget, I concur – as do many – that the city needs to prioritize outlays, cut the budget where necessary and defer raising taxes given the state of our economy.

What I suggest, in the form of a pilot program, is the deployment of the field of economic research to assist the mayor and council members to better allocate scarce resources.

This is probably as foreign to you as it would be to the elected city officials. And you may think it unlikely that an intellectual pursuit such as economics would intersect with the political agenda of balancing the city budget. You would be wrong.

Many of the highly specialized fields within economics can answer such vexing questions as: What is the optimum level of service for police and fire?

(The correct answer – surprisingly – is not how Tucson compares with other cities of similar size, or what the police and fire unions demand of certain staffing and support levels, or even what the mayor, council members and public think it should otherwise be.)

Others would include: What are the contributing factors to the supply and demand for crime? How can the economic theory of “deadweight loss” be avoided in the form of excess burden of taxation?

These and many other questions can be answered under the umbrella of economics.

Please be clear, I am not necessarily advocating for the direct employment of an economist by the city, but rather a partnership with the department of economics at the University of Arizona.

Apparently such an alliance already exists mainly for the purpose of economic forecasting. This could be expanded to include the efficient allocation of city resources based on economic science.

In the end, the city budget is a political document. I understand that.

Yet it seems rather unreasonable we would expect the mayor and council members to determine service levels, and then efficiently and fairly allocate city resources without complete information.

David Dutra, a Linux enterprise solutions software developer, has a bachelor’s degree in economics and advocates use of economic research to provide for more effective public policy at all levels of government.

Members of the U.S. Supreme Court sit for a group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington in this file photo from March 3, 2006. Seated in the front row (left to right) are: Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, Chief Justice of the United States John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia and Associate Justice David Souter. Standing, in the top row, are: Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr. There has never been a Hispanic on the court.

As someone who knows what it’s like to make history, Barack Obama should understand intuitively that – with the retirement of Justice David Souter – it’s time for the president to whip up another batch, putting a Latino or Latina on the Supreme Court.

With all respect to Justice Benjamin Cardozo, a New Yorker of Portuguese heritage who was nominated to the high court by Herbert Hoover in 1932, Latinos are eager for a more recent example of someone who identifies with being Latino.

America’s largest minority has a reputation for patience and passivity, but now isn’t the time for either.

Hispanics are due a Supreme Court justice, but they can’t count on either liberals or conservatives in Congress to make that a priority. So they need to raise their voices and demand that a president who received two-thirds of their votes recognize their place in society and correct a terrible oversight.

The good news is that Obama doesn’t have to sacrifice quality in the process. These days, there are plenty of highly accomplished Latinos in the sorts of positions that typically lead to a Supreme Court nomination.

Of course, there are those who still get squeamish over the idea that “identity politics” or “diversity” should factor into a decision this important.

Much of that resistance is probably leftover resentment of the affirmative action policies of the last 40 years. There’s also an assumption that the most qualified to fill such prestigious positions must be white males; anyone else is a diversity candidate.

That’s ridiculous. For every vacancy on the Supreme Court, there are usually many good candidates who could do the job.

And sometimes, individuals are helped along because they have a great personal story or a unique perspective, or come from a certain part of the country, or they’re trailblazers for a group of people.

Jewish Americans are rightfully proud of Louis Brandeis, Abe Fortas, Felix Frankfurter, Arthur Goldberg, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Cardozo.

African-Americans have had Thurgood Marshall and – over the objections of many of them – Clarence Thomas.

Gee, it looks like Hispanics missed a turn. Past presidents – even supposed liberals who talk a good game about diversity – have had a blind spot when it comes to putting a Latino on the Supreme Court.

Democrat Bill Clinton was elected, then re-elected, averaging about 70 percent of the Latino vote, and yet he stiffed that constituency by using both of his Supreme Court picks to nominate Ginsburg and Breyer. While disappointed, Latinos kept quiet about being slighted.

Now, Obama has plenty of choices of qualified Hispanic candidates to help him break that barrier.

While Supreme Court nominees don’t have to come from the lower federal courts, they’re considered a good training ground. As of 2008, Hispanics accounted for 71 of the 1,294 sitting federal judges.

Standouts include Christine Arguello, a Harvard Law grad and U.S. district judge (District of Colorado); Ruben Castillo, a U.S. district judge (Northern District of Illinois); and Sonia Sotomayor, a Yale Law grad who is on the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.

Republicans warn that Obama should choose someone in the judicial “mainstream.” That’s code for someone who won’t frighten off conservatives.

Obama should ignore that advice, just as President Bush ignored demands by Democrats that he pick Supreme Court nominees more to their liking. If Republicans want to be in the driver’s seat, they should do the obvious thing and concentrate on winning elections.

The bigger concern is Obama himself might be ambivalent about nominating a Latino and – according to some former law students – often prefers to take a pragmatic approach.

That could mean biding his time, and – assuming he stands to get at least one, and possibly two, more selections during his presidency – tabling the Hispanic candidate until later.

If that happens, it won’t be easy for many Hispanics to swallow. Who can blame them? They’ve waited long enough. They’ll be disappointed.

But will they fall quietly back in line and return to their familiar habits of being passive and patient?

Let’s hope not.

Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a columnist and editorial board member of The San Diego Union-Tribune. E-mail: ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com

Doubt weaver poses what’s in a name

Re: the May 4 column by DeWayne Wickham (“Specter defection shows GOP in death spiral“):

Specter’s a Democrat, Madonna’s a virgin, and I’m a platypus.

Weaver Barkman

Native Tucsonan right fit for police command

May 1, the Tucson City Manager’s Office announced its nomination of Assistant Police Chief Roberto Villaseñor as next chief of the Tucson Police Department.

The Tucson Police Command Association fully supports the selection of Assistant Chief Villaseñor as our next chief.

Villaseñor was born, raised and educated in Tucson and has been a dedicated member of the department for 29 years.

He completed his bachelor’s and master’s degrees as well as executive-level management courses specific to law enforcement leadership. He worked his way through the ranks, assigned to many positions and large projects.

As an assistant chief, he has successfully led each of the four bureaus of TPD.

Villaseñor has been actively involved in many community organizations and law enforcement affiliations.

His training, experience and education have prepared him to lead TPD.

As Tucson’s professional police managers, from lieutenant and above, we feel the City Manager’s Office has made an excellent choice.

We will strive to make Chief Villaseñor’s vision for our department a reality.

We look forward to his leadership and have confidence that the citizens and leaders of Tucson will appreciate his professionalism, abilities and his sincere concern for, and commitment to, our community.

Lts. Edward Schlitz and James McShea

Capts. Michael Gillooly, Perry Tarrant and David Neri

Lts. Jamie Turner and Elise Souter

executive board, Tucson Police Command Association

Lawmakers take lawman to task

An open letter to Sheriff Clarence Dupnik: Due to your long history of involvement and commitment to the community, we were surprised by your comments in the print media.

Children in schools, regardless of their immigration status, are not the cause of our problems, nor should we publicly target them. We have an obligation to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

It is our responsibility to ensure our children are always safe and secure. All children are vulnerable, and we must protect them like they are our own.

It is wrong to force teachers and school administrators to become immigration officers. We remind you to uphold the law established by the Supreme Court ruling, Plyer v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).

This case established that children, though not U.S. citizens, are considered a “person” and therefore protected under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

An additional cause of grave concern were your unsubstantiated charges that 40 percent of Sunnyside School District students are “illegal” and linking the South Side as the primary source of crime in Pima County.

These false charges are inflammatory and prejudicial. Your comments only further divide our community and debase a large part of the population.

The county electorate trusted you to protect and serve our community, not to humiliate and instill fear. Every child is entitled to an education regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation and status.

We urge you to apologize for your ill-advised comments and join us in a rational and honest discussion about solving our problems together.

Richard ElÍas, chairman, Pima County Board of Supervisors

Regina Romero, Tucson vice mayor

Adelita Grijalva, Tucson Unified School District Governing Board

Eva Dong, Sunnyside School District Governing Board

Daniel Patterson, state representative, LD 29

Matt Heinz, M.D., state representative, LD 29

Linda Lopez, state senator, LD 29

Jorge Luis GarcÍa, Senate minority leader, LD 2

Olivia Cajero Bedford, state representative, LD 27

Phil Lopes, state representative, LD 27

Raúl M. Grijalva, U.S. representative, Arizona Congressional District 7

KIMBERLY FERREIRA

I moved to Arizona for health reasons 1 1/2 years ago with my daughter, who was receiving a private education, to Catalina Foothills School District in Tucson.

I am shocked that Arizona legislators are playing political football with public education.

No game time was necessary as lawmakers gave an “oath of office” to the Arizona Constitution, which mandates they balance the budget and fund public education.

Says Article 11, Section 10, “the legislature shall make such appropriations, to be met by taxation, as shall insure the proper maintenance of all state educational institutions, and shall make such special appropriations as shall provide for their development and improvement.”

Figures support the charge that Arizona’s constitutional obligations to “develop and improve” public education are falling abysmally short.

Since the 1986-1987 school year, Arizona’s per-pupil expenditures have actually declined by $61, according to the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council.

The latest figures, for the 2006-2007 school year, show the per-pupil expenditure of $6,248 at 50th place among the states.

In 1986-87, the $6,309 expenditure ranked 31st.

The $1.6 billion budget reduction for 2009, which left deep cuts to education, was unconstitutional.

The recent Basic Joint Draft Budget proposals dismantle the stability and viability of public education.

It cripples districts’ cash flow by taking $300 million that is necessary for their solvent operation, reducing transportation funding from $110 million to $8 million and slashing $175 million from basic K-12 funding.

Obviously, Proposition 301′s requirement to increase public educational expenditures above the constitutional aggregate limit is being ignored.

To complicate matters further, 39 Republican legislators signed a pledge by the Washington, D.C., special interest lobbying group Americans for Tax Reform. It says the elected official will “oppose any and all efforts to increase taxes.”

These legislators are putting this pledge before their oath of office. They should strip their names from this no-tax pledge; otherwise, immediate voter recall should be considered.

In the Senate, they are: Sylvia Allen, Bob Burns, Pamela Gorman, Ron Gould, Chuck Gray, Linda Gray, Jack Harper, John Huppenthal, Barbara Leff, Al Melvin, Russell Pearce, Steve Pierce, Jay Tibshraeny and Thayer Verschoor.

In the House: Kirk Adams, Frank Antenori, Cecil Ash, Ray Barnes, Nancy Barto, Andy Biggs, Tom Boone, Judy Burges, Sam Crump, Adam Driggs, David Gowan, Laurin Hendrix, John Kavanagh, Bill Konopnicki, Debbie Lesko, Steve Montenegro, Rick Murphy, Warde Nichols, Doug Quelland, Carl Seel, David Stevens, Andy Tobin, Jerry Weiers, Jim Weiers and Steve Yarbrough.

To make progress toward a better Arizona, public education funding needs to be addressed, first and foremost, as a statewide issue.

Gov. Jan Brewer recommends a tax increase to fund public education. Recent polling shows support for this.

The Legislature is obligated to increase appropriations to improve public education. This action would be a strong statement that Arizona will not stand in 50th place and understands that education fuels economic development.

Please contact your legislators and let them know you will hold them accountable to their constitutional obligations to fund, develop and improve public education.

If you aren’t sure who your representatives are, check www.votesmart.org and enter your zip code.

Kimberly Ferreira is a freelance project manager, education advocate and the mother of a 7-year-old daughter in public school and a 14-year-old son in private school.

Perez Hilton

I’m afraid that I join gay rights activists in being confused as to just what “great opportunity” they forgo in not publicly defending Miss California against Miss USA judge Perez Hilton.

Ah, what the heck – I’m feeling tolerant, so let me state this unequivocally: Carrie Prejean has every right to voice her views on both gay marriage and, in her words, “opposite marriage.”

Let’s be clear that although this didn’t cost her the crown (Miss North Carolina was already ahead in two competitions), Prejean was subject to some awfully crass treatment by Hilton in the days following this low-rent ripoff of the Miss America pageant.

Of course, anyone familiar with “The Queen of All Media” expected the ensuing drama.

Mario Lavandeira, aka Perez Hilton, is an outrageous blogger who uses photos, captions and drawings to savagely rip on celebrities of all persuasions on a daily basis.

Being mean? Name-calling? Honey, that’s his bread and butter and the Miss USA folks were perfectly aware of that when they gave him the job.

Once more, pageant co-owner Donald Trump pulled America’s strings, and we did our little marionette dance. I’ve got to hand it to that guy.

Most serious activists for any cause are not going to lose their hard-won credibility by commenting on a made-for-TV blowup generated by a publicity-seeking provocateur like Lavandeira.

They’re also well aware that few Americans opposed to their viewpoint will be won over by any outlandish rant, agreeing instead that civil discourse does get you further.

On the other hand, sometimes an issue can stir within you such a passionate response that passionate words are required. “AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals,” the Rev. Jerry Falwell once declared. “It is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”

Cruel, alienating language usually backfires. Falwell’s horrific bigotry is now seen as such by the majority of Americans, whether or not they approve of gay marriage.

We’ve come a long way, and tolerance of one another’s viewpoints is a huge part of that. So I, too, encourage folks in the gay marriage movement to stay respectful and resist name-calling.

Yet know this: They’ll never stop fighting for all citizens to have equal protection and status under the law. Tolerate that, America.

Andrea Sarvady (w2wcolumn@gmail.com) is a writer and educator specializing in counseling and a married mother of three.

Perez Hilton

For years, the gay rights movement was about “live and let live” tolerance. But the Miss USA flap showed just how much ill will has built up among activists, and how much the need for tolerance has shifted.

Even though the majority of Americans simply want to preserve the traditional definition of marriage – and themselves have no ill will in the process – gay marriage activists have been very successful at redefining disagreement as hateful bigotry.

Ironically, this has given those crying “tolerance” permission to treat others with thinly veiled (or outright) derision and loathing.

This bizarre reality is possible only because of how the mainstream entertainment and news media present the issue. Editors and producers jump on traditionalists, yet don’t even notice slanted pro-gay reporting.

For example, this lede from an April 23 Associated Press report about gay marriage in Connecticut: “A decade-long battle for marriage equality in Connecticut ended when the General Assembly voted to update the state’s marriage laws.”

Just imagine the furor if this equally biased opening had been used: “A decade-long battle to preserve traditional marriage was lost today … ”

After the Miss USA pageant, this shocking anti-traditional bigotry was on display.

Following Miss California Carrie Prejean’s respectful answer that she believed marriage was between a man and a woman, gay activist and pageant judge Perez Hilton began such vile persecution that America gasped.

Hilton said she was a “dumb b-tch” and the “c-word.” On his Web site, he posted her picture and drew a male phallus in her mouth.

He apparently never saw the hypocrisy of telling the “Today” show that he attacked her because she wasn’t “saying things that will make everyone feel welcome.”

Gay activists had a great opportunity at that moment. But instead of loudly condemning Hilton’s hatefulness, all too many defended him or stayed virtually silent.

Americans have always managed vehemently differing opinions via our belief in respect-based free speech: “I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.”

To that, I might add, “And your difference of opinion doesn’t mean you are evil.”

I believe most Americans – gay or straight – prefer that civil approach, and I urge activists on both sides to embrace it.

Shaunti Feldhahn (scfeldhahn@yahoo.com) is a conservative Christian author and speaker, and married mother of two.

Should the gay marriage movement become more tolerant of other viewpoints?

Shaunti Feldhahn: Many gay activists too intolerant

Andrea Sarvady: Be nice, but never give up fight

Shaunti Feldhahn (scfeldhahn@yahoo.com) is a conservative Christian author and speaker, and married mother of two. Andrea Sarvady (ASarvad@gmail.com) is a writer and educator specializing in counseling and a married mother of three.