Letters to the editor

February 12, 2004

Why I opposed Miller's change in filibuster rule

To the editor:

I am writing to clarify to the people of Washington County why I opposed the recent change to the filibuster rule in the Maryland State Senate. In a recent editorial it was correctly described that I was the underdog in this fight.

What was incorrect however was that Senate President Mike Miller changed the filibuster rule because of a letter I sent out to some of my supporters last year.

In this letter I promised to those who had supported me in the past that I would continue to fight for them on such issues as Second Amendment rights, taxes, and family values. I also promised them that I would fight any attempts to take way their guns or raise their taxes with a filibuster if necessary.


The filibuster rule was changed because the old rule would have allowed us to stop the current attempt to ban certain sporting rifles.

Because of the change to the filibuster rule it will also be much harder to stop tax increases and bills that attack family values.

The last point I would like to address is the editorial criticism that I put up too much of a fuss and a fight in the Senate in defending the views of my constituents who put their trust in me. When it comes to the constitutional rights of my constituents, I wear my heart on my sleeve. I just wanted to let the people of Washington County know that even though I am the underdog, I will continue to fight for them.

State Sen. Alex Mooney
District 3
Frederick, Md.

Ax school pork and seek experience over big credentials

To the editor:

I am writing this letter in response to the questions posed to the school board candidates concerning budget cuts. There is a lot of wasteful spending that I am personally aware of that many in the general public have no idea about.

Some include unnecessary building renovations, yes, including certain restroom areas and thousands of dollars being spent on new office furniture and other conveniences. Also, we have unnecessary salaries and pay raises because it seems we can't function by hiring local educators to fill administrative positions.

The "powers that be" somehow feel the need to "entice" others from out of the area simply because they have more credentials. A good, experienced educator, who knows how to teach and handle students, is just as effective as a well-educated, high-credential administrator any day. I agree wholeheartedly about doing away with the elementary Spanish program.

This is nothing more than politically correct garbage. If politicians had the guts to make Spanish- speaking immigrants learn English, there would be no need for such a ridiculous program. As far as the school instrumental program goes, it would truly be a sad day if this program were to be eliminated. This has already been eliminated at the elementary level.

Most funding from these programs come from the students themselves. It has also been proven over and over again that school instrumental programs build character and that these students do indeed achieve higher academic success. If these people succeed in doing away with this program, rest assured, school sports will be next.

Then what will our children turn to? I'm afraid to ask! Here are some suggestions. First, cut out the unnecessary spending on conveniences. Place a freeze on administrative salaries. Cut as many substitute teachers as possible. I agree with Mr. Sonnik that in many instances, administrators can fill these positions when needed. Half-day kindergarten has worked for years, so why make it an all day program? If we eliminate the "pork" spending, good programs will never have to be eliminated.

Rob Butler

Nuts to ruts

To the editor:

In reply to Edward James "Deer in a rut" Feb. 2, I would like to start by saying I did indeed, Mr. James, read your original letter of Jan. 12, 2004, and thoroughly understood its content. I do not buy the "rut" theory as to why deer and car collisions take place.

I have yet to see scores of men and women or other animals for that matter running across my driving path while in "rut." Perhaps it may be that they're not being shot at. I do agree that hunting is in fact legal and for this, government greed is the driving force. My personal belief is it should have ended long ago around the time fire was discovered, yet it somehow remained.

In biblical teachings it was said a sheet came down filled with animals and it was at this time man was told he could eat meat. I feel this is nothing more than a fictitious tale from the mouth of a blood- thirsty Roman, perhaps Pilate himself. Either way I am well aware that you at no time directly said DNR should foot the bill. Your letter though formed the basis for this thought and I truly feel it worth looking into.

Please not though, the part "for animal responsibilities." It won't work. We are responsible for the animals but until humanity learns to transcend the metaphysical barriers of this world they will never learn this. We are responsible for this planet Mr. James, and as its keeper we have failed. Our president now has hopes that we may do the same to Mars, I hope not.

Randy A. Breeden

The Herald-Mail Articles