Letters to the Editor, June 27-July 3

  • Monday, March 24, 2014 2:03pm
  • Opinion

 

Ecology rule falls short

Following the Department of Ecology public hearing this past Thursday evening there are some inescapable conclusions that must be recognized.

By their own statements DOE asserts:

The water belongs to all of us, BUT some of us must pay and others collect.

The water rule must be based upon their computer model which shows wells impacting the river rather than actual measurements which show the opposite.

The rule will result in no additional water in the river.

They will not be held accountable if not even 1 additional salmon returns.

The rule will affect not only new users of water but also changes in use of water, i.e.: additions, remodels, add garden or pool or an apple tree.

Eventually all properties change use and eventually almost everyone will come under the impact of this rule.

Most important they are willing to tell us who will PAY but not who will RECEIVE the payment. What is the secret?

These facts must lead us to conclude that this entire exercise is solely about taking money from one group of citizens to pay off another (unnamed) group.

Finally; when your employee, (any bureaucrat) confronted with the contradictions within his statements, looks blankly back at you a repeats the same statement there are only two possible conclusions you can draw.

Either that employee is stupid OR he believes you are.

Tom Williamson

Sequim

Votes should not be for sale

Let’s return to a representative political system where people are people and corporations are not. Our votes should not be treated like a commodity for sale to the highest bidder. 

A joint resolution was introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives on June 18 (H. J. RES. 111). It proposes an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the authority of Congress and the States to regulate contributions and expenditures in political campaigns and to enact public financing systems for such campaigns.

The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. This bill is the only way to undo the damage done to our representative political process by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision commonly referred to as Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission.

I urge to you to ask your Congressman or Congresswoman (for us, Norm Dicks; www.house.gov/dicks/email.shtml) and members of the House Judiciary to support this bill. Members of the House Judiciary Committee can be found at judiciary.house.gov/about/members.html.

Thank you for your citizenship!

Roger Briggs

Sequim

More in Opinion

Letters to the editor — Dec. 5, 2018

Do right by our youth with new field Nathalie Torres worked hard… Continue reading

Guest opinion: On civility and power, Part II

How can we have civil conversations about complicated issues? What specific steps… Continue reading

Think About It: Light, dark sides of giving

I thought I’d better write this column early in the season, lest… Continue reading

From the Back Nine: Unexpected pride

I’ve been thinking about Pride. Not a pride of lions, or “Pride… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Move forward on water quality standards

In an unfortunate reversal, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has decided to… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Tribes release habitat recovery strategy

“As the salmon disappear, so do our cultures and treaty rights. We… Continue reading

Guest opinion: A billion here, a billion there …

Fifty billion dollars. It will soon be the subject of many conversations… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Reducing wildfire risk is imperative

While massive wildfires are historic, they are more dangerous today. As our… Continue reading

Guest opinion: Costs matter in hiring

While both sides argue over the merits of Seattle’s escalating minimum wage,… Continue reading

Most Read