Let Big Three fail

As a taxpayer, I do not want to see Washington bail out the failing auto industry. This bailout is nothing more than rewarding mismanagement and unreasonable union contracts. It will solve nothing. Congress should let GM, Ford and Chrysler fail and file for bankruptcy, thus forcing renegotiation of union contracts.

The UAW is as much at fault for the collapse of the auto industry as the companies themselves. If this bailout does happen, it should be only on the condition that the auto industry and the UAW renegotiate their contracts and the companies agree to bring their operations back to the United States. The most glaring example of mismanagement and a contributing factor in their failure is the industry's lack of response to the demand for more fuel-efficient cars.

– Gene Curry, Ione

Anonymous comments hurt

Re "High court to hear Prop. 8" (Page A1, Nov. 20): This isn't about Proposition 8, this is about you, my neighbors, and it's about me. I have no hatred for how you chose to vote, no matter which way you decided, but when you read the "Comments" section, well, it makes you wonder if we can ever make it as a society. I ask, I request, that we stop allowing the anonymous comment and ask people to stand by what they say, be accountable. The anonymous comment to this article has not lifted me up, not brought me closer to God, or to the gay cause of wanting to get married, it has reduced my optimism and damaged my spirit. I leave it to God to heal the latter and I leave it to you, the editor, to decide if the anonymous comments are helping society or hurting it. Maybe there was a day it helped; today was not that day. Maybe people are more real when they don't have to give their name, but if that's the case, then I want less real, please, now. At least when we are less real we don't hate so much.

– Richard Claeys, Palo Alto

UC cuts won't lower standards

Re "UC may cut some admission requirements" (Page A1, (Nov. 19): Readers may be left with an inaccurate impression that the proposal under consideration would lower academic standards at the University of California. This is simply not the case.

The proposal would expand the number of students who would be able to have an application reviewed by UC campuses, and it would remove the requirement of the SAT Subject Tests, which are not required by other public university systems around the country. But the regular SAT or ACT with Writing still would be required along with high grades in high school, and the total size of the admitted class would remain the same.

As a result, we expect that freshman classes admitted under the proposal, starting with the 2012 entering class, would be just as qualified as any in the past, including by the traditional measures of test scores and high school grades. The difference is that more students will have an opportunity to submit their qualifications to UC and have them thoroughly reviewed.

The suggestion that the proposal is an attempt to get around Proposition 209 is untrue. UC campuses will continue to comply with Proposition 209 in their admissions decisions.

– Mary Croughan,

chair, UC Academic Senate

Green goals are reasonable

Re "Going green carries very heavy price" (Page A3, Nov. 16): Dan Walters should read the studies. They are done by UC Berkeley, Riverside and Stanford. One shows that doing nothing will be disastrous for California. Another shows that implementing Assembly Bill 32 is good for business and California. The last shows our past actions have been beneficial to our economy, health and environment.

I disagree that the goals are unattainable. My business is producing 30 percent of our energy from solar and nonfood agricultural byproducts. This technology is already available. Next year we will produce about $125,000 worth of energy from these sources, or about 60 percent of all our energy used. The biggest hurdle so far has been PG&E. Another major issue has been outdated emissions regulations. I have always enjoyed reading Walters' column. I believe he puts too much value in one biased source. I have always felt the California Chamber of Commerce takes a very regressive stance on most issues. They need to embrace the positive aspect of this change. We cannot afford to keep sending our energy dollars abroad. Let's keep them and our jobs here. I believe our economic problems are largely due to our dependence on fossil fuel.