chapelhillnews.com | Your Letters

There's nothing like a nice shower

As a squeaky-clean liberal, I'd like to invite Terry Tyson ("Local lefties focus on the wrong rights," May 18) to my house to actually shower with one of OWASA's free low-flow showerheads.

The shower will clean off some of her conservative crustiness. And when she turns that little lever down, she will be amazed, as I was, by how little water flows out of the faucet into the tub! -- George Entenman, Chapel Hill

Council challengers face uphill fight

Matt Czajkowski on the Chapel Hill Town Council is correct to point out that incumbents have an advantage to win elections here and that Chapel Hill candidates do not receive large donations from lobbying groups. However, when pressed, Czajkowski stated that incumbents demonstrated their greater influence in last November's election by running as a "bloc."

Czajkowski did not state what many know: the Sierra Club, hand in glove with the Independent, chooses and promotes local candidates. Last November five local candidates ran for re-election together with one "campaign coordinator," Tom Jensen, a Sierra Club activist by his own description. Public funding of elections will not change this.

The Independent usually rubberstamps the Sierra Club political endorsements and says they endorse the same. In our municipal election, the Independent published Tom Jensen's letter endorsing re-election of all the incumbents with no identification of Jensen as their campaign coordinator or a paid Sierra Club worker, nor as vice chair of the Chapel Hill Planning Board at that time.

The Independent does a fine job tracking down information about Raleigh and Washington, D.C., politicians, but has trouble getting information on locals. However, the list of editors at the Independent includes a family member of a Chapel Hill politico, so the information should be readily available.

We need a Town Council more representative of all Chapel Hill, but challengers must overcome an entrenched political machine. Without soliciting campaign contributions, Czajkowski received about as much as Sally Greene. But he had to spend more on his campaign.

While I support publicly funded elections for those who want them, Matt Czajkowski points out existing tax pressures in Chapel Hill (as Chapel Hill News also, May 18, pp. A1 and 8, A6) and that truly new representation will require more than public campaign funds. -- Lynne Kane, Chapel Hill

Papers serve to aid monied interests

True to form as the N&O's mouthpiece for Big Money and conservative idolatry, Rick Martinez's latest column, "Smart voters say no, 20 times no" (May 14) would have been more aptly titled "Uninformed voters react to industry media blitz."

It's unfortunate that the N&O chose to dedicate so much print space to Martinez's puny exegesis of real-estate lobby press releases, while neglecting to provide any substantial coverage of the tax proposal itself -- its effects, its benefits, the tax relief it would have provided, etc. -- prior to the vote. The real estate-developer lobby spent over $200,000 in Orange County, hammering voters with phrases such as "home tax" and images of teary-eyed toddlers glancing up at their overwhelmed, hardworking parents.

Your paper failed to mention that this tax proposal would primarily affect commercial real estate and land transfers and actually promised to relieve the average homeowner from chronic property-tax increases and further hikes to local sales tax -- two profoundly regressive forms of taxation that in fact DO hurt struggling families.

The democratic value of a local and regional newspaper is to inform citizen-readers who are investing in their community, not to serve as a PR vehicle for the monied and powerful who are simply profiting from it. -- Jack Nestor, Carrboro

Let's keep meaning of 'illegal' in mind

Because we are a nation generous enough to give even illegal immigrants the benefits of free public primary and secondary education, some people think that they should automatically be eligible for post-secondary education, even though they would (sadly) have to pay out-of-state tuition.

It is my understanding that spaces in our universities and community colleges are limited, and therefore, for each illegal immigrant admitted, a U.S. citizen or legal immigrant would be excluded. Some say "punishing them (the illegals) for a situation not of their making is unfair." But is it fair to punish legal would-be students by admitting illegals, each of whom would cause a legal to be excluded from one of the limited spaces available?

Some people throw up their hands, saying that few of the illegals are likely to be sent back to their home countries, and claim that this justifies their being treated just like U.S. citizens or legal immigrants. Sorry, I don't buy it. The word "illegal" (which hypocrites don't like to use) has a meaning, and we should all keep it in mind. -- J. E. Williams, Carrboro

Shelter relocation won't solve problem

I read the report about the new shelter relocation to the homestead road location ("Big move for IFC," May 11). I'm a former resident of Chapel Hill for 22 years, having grown up in town, completed high school and graduated from UNC.

I think the relocation is a great idea, yet potentially short-sighted. In recent years the panhandlers have become quite emboldened and blatantly open about asking for money.

The big issue really is the enforcement of panhandling. I have never seen law enforcement arrest someone for asking for charitable donations. Is it really worth their time? I also know many of those who do ask for this, don't do so politely and often occupy public spaces in such a manner, that no one really wants to be around.

I like many others believe the shelter being downtown does encourage panhandlers to hang out, knowing they can receive money and still have a place to stay no matter what.

The IFC has done great things for many years, and I think it's great it now has an opportunity to play a greater role. The question is will panhandlers still gravitate toward the epicenter for culture in town? Probably so. They aren't likely to be that successful in other areas. So I believe proximity is less of an issue than it seems.

For successful solutions, there must be rehabilitation. Many of the panhandlers are simply content with their status. Much more needs to be done to ensure these people get the training to get equal opportunities within society. I felt like the shelter merely exacerbated the problem. We can move it, but if we don't provide proper support, these people won't succeed.

I believe this can be a success given the proper support, rehabilitation and resource allocations that would help people become production contributing members of society. Only time will tell how much it changes, but its great to see the town address one of the larger pressing issues. -- Ross Cidlowski, New York, N.Y.

Look homeward for global health

Psst ... I'd like to let you in on a little secret. OK, a big one. Medical care has little to do with the health of populations. And personal behaviors, the usual do's and don'ts preached by public health practitioners and studied by public health researchers, matter only a little.

What's really important are social, economic and political factors in our society. The PBS series "Unnatural Causes: Is Inequality Making Us Sick?" which aired Tuesday on UNC-TV, tapped into leading U.S. scholars on the social determinants of health.

Stephen Bezruchka, senior lecturer in the departments of health services and global health at the University of Washington, states (Antipode, Vol. 40, No. 3, 2008, p. 456), "Our health as a nation is determined by the political decisions we make on how to care for and share with one another. People in the United States die much younger than they should, if the standard of health is comparison between ourselves and other rich nations. No one who investigates the data can come to any other conclusion. Yet because of the overwhelming emphasis on consumption in our society, the knowledge and critical thinking skills required to make this assessment are lacking.... The U.S. spends the equivalent of half the world's health care bill, yet more than 30 nations are healthier than ours in terms of the overall health and longevity of the population."