Let's not forget that our air is much, much cleaner
Has the American Lung Association gone off the deep end? ("Region Gets Fourth 'F' in Review of Air Quality," May 3). "Butler and Fayette [counties] were not graded because they do not have ozone monitors, but the Lung Association said smog levels there would also deserve failing grades," according to the article.
In my 45 years here, I have watched this area's air quality improve dramatically. Auto emissions are 99 percent cleaner than they were 35 years ago. What is left of the steel industry doesn't smell nearly as bad as it used to.
The amount of raw soot is not nearly as prevalent as it used to be, and I see a greater abundance of wildlife in and around the city than ever before. I now see red-tailed hawks, peregrine falcons, seagulls and turkeys regularly. If the air here was that bad, these birds would leave.
This region deserves an award for cleaning up one of the dirtiest cities in the world over the past 50 years, not the "F" that the Lung Associtaton is handing out.
CHRIS MOONEY
Whitehall
Pay our debt
There have been 2 million jobs lost in the past two years. The Republicans once boldly stated that government cannot create jobs. They stated that only the private sector had the ability to create new jobs. Now President Bush has announced that his tax cut will create 1.4 million jobs ("White House on Tax-Cut Road Tour," April 16). That would still leave 600,000 people without work.
Like his last tax cut in 2001 that failed to stimulate the economy and create new jobs, this tax cut proposed by Bush will increase the annual budget deficit, thereby increasing the national debt. In 1994, when the Republicans introduced their infamous Contract with America, Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott, Rush Limbaugh and other Republicans were pushing for a balanced budget amendment. These and other Republicans demanded a balanced budget every year. The Republicans wanted a balanced budget even at times of war, recession, depression, etc. In short, "no matter what."
Now around $6.4 trillion, this national debt must be paid. In addition, like your credit card bills, interest to be paid on the national debt will also increase as the national debt increases. Interest on the national debt cost American taxpayers $332.5 billion in 2002. This is not constructive; paying high interest rates on the national debt is like throwing money down the drain.
All of this means that future generations of Americans will have their taxes increased to pay for spending that will increase the national debt created by the Bush administration today. This will take more money out of the economy, causing future economic slowdowns. And to think that Bill Clinton had all of this under control.
NIKOLA (NICK) DROBAC
Aliquippa
Get real, Mr. Motznik
I want to take this opportunity to respond to city Councilman Jim Motznik's May 7 letter, "The Party Endorsement Goes to the Candidate Who Works the Hardest," and offer some facts that belie Mr. Motznik's position.
As an elected official, Mr. Motznik should know and understand that the endorsement is as much about "getting together to decide whom not to support" as is about whom to support. Party leaders regularly "recruit" candidates whom they will support over another. Case in point is the recruitment of Richard Stahl in County Council District 13 to run against Brenda Frazier. Numerous examples exist where the candidate who worked the hardest and/or had the best message, did not win party endorsement.
It is too bad that Mr. Motznik is "sick and tired" of reading about how the Democratic Party "decided" not to support the African-American candidate in the Allegheny County controller's race because he is going to be hearing more. For an elected official to be "sick and tired" of citizens voicing their opinions and concerns is not only insensitive but smacks of arrogance.
The Democratic Party's endorsement has "everything" to do with race, contrary to what Mr. Motznik thinks. If it did not, then how in the world does he explain having five white candidates running unopposed for office and the African-American candidates all having opposition?
I call upon the fair-minded people of City Council District 4 to work to retire Councilman Motznik from his council seat at their next opportunity. Attitudes like his are what's at the root of deteriorating race relations in this city and we would be well served without him in office.
CHUCK GRAHAM
East Liberty
Humanity first
A great wave of history is being generated by the mental and physical battles taking place in Afghanistan and Iraq. The total effect here at home and abroad applies to our coalition members, as well as those with whom we disagree. This wave of change, of how we relate to each other as countries, is moving by action and reaction to the wars for the heart of man, not just for oil or geographical territory.
But first, let's measure man's current and historical efforts, of any collective civilization's efforts, as well as by each of us as individuals. That measure is the kind of world, the kind of society we turn over to the next generation.
We who are here today can enrich or impoverish that world which we know we will all too soon leave behind. It's our choice. The future of the world will always be in the hands of our children. At best our years to contribute as adults to what we will leave behind is limited. Therefore, it is our children, my three son's families and their eight children, who will measure the value of our thinking and our actions on behalf of causes. In passing the baton in the race of life's course through ours and future generations, we have the momentary opportunity to meet the greater responsibility in making the world a safer, happier, healthier and more peaceful place to live.
There is a global universality in parenthood. We want our children to be our leaders, our society to prosper. We hope that by educating them that we can achieve our earlier mentioned goals. We teach children to compete, how to win in every life situation.
The heart of our problem is that we have not found a way as yet to "teach living in peace" both individually, as well as in the world community. Therefore, should each country's representatives to the United Nations carry and display during negotiation the photographs of their grandchildren to remind themselves that each of us individually and/or internationally is creating the next wave of our collective history?
In final judgment, humanity knows for whom we labor, regardless of religious beliefs. I believe that man has and will continue to learn from history, painful as it is, and therefore, will reach out endlessly to the lessons of societies where there is greater freedom.
From the challenges, a world society takes its responsibility to the grandchildren of future generations.
LESTER LUDWIG
Squirrel Hill
About city lawyers
Regrettably, the May 10 article "Disputes Settled With Homeless Sweeps" misconstrued my statements to be "criticism at city lawyers." My criticisms were directed at city leaders and their disdain for, and past treatment of, the homeless. I have high regard for the city's hard-working assistant solicitors, who are always professional and were so in this case.
VIC WALCZAK
Legal Director
Pittsburgh Chapter
American Civil Liberties Union
Downtown
It's Brenda Nichol's cross to wear
I ardently support the idea of freedom of religion, and the concept of separation of church and state, so I found myself conflicted over the story about Brenda Nichol and her suspension for wearing a cross while at work in public schools ("Suspended Teacher's Aide Sues Employer Over Wearing Cross on Necklace," May 7). On the one hand, Ms. Nichol should be free to follow the tenets of her faith as she sees fit. On the other hand, public schools should be neutral on the subject of religion.
One interesting fact not present in the Post-Gazette article, but present in reporting elsewhere, is that Ms. Nichol does not wear the cross all of the time -- she wears it on average three to five times a week. If she feels that it is fine not to wear it some of the time, then I do not see the request for her to remove it or tuck it beneath her clothing while working an undue burden for her. It is not an item compulsory to the practice of her faith.
On the greater subject of religious freedom, if there must be a rule banning religious garb from employees in public schools, it should be applied to all faiths across the board. If a practicing Muslim or Orthodox Jewish woman cannot wear a head covering, then a practicing Christian cannot wear a cross, nor should a practicing pagan be allowed to wear a pentagram or Goddess symbol, etc. No symbols of any faith should be allowed on any employee with access to students, period.
Personally, I believe the better solution would be to allow religious symbols and religiously mandated clothing to be worn by everyone. This is true neutrality; true separation of church and state. Religion or lack of religion should not be hindered, nor mandated. The state should be silent about it, as long as such displays do not infringe on other people's rights.
Where is the line drawn between expressions of faith and preaching? While wearing a cross is not tantamount to preaching, what about wearing a head covering? It is certainly more apparent. It is also a silent testament of faith. Which faith's religious garb or symbols are disruptive to education? Who decides that?
Ms. Nichol is lucky in that her faith is the dominant faith of this nation; a cross on a necklace is not generally considered odd or disruptive, so I suspect she will win her case.
ANN KOPCHIK
McCandless
E-mail this story 
