Letters to the Editor

LETTERS Netanyahu, oil, UC, pensions, Curtis Park

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with House Speaker John Boehner in 2011. Boehner has invited Netanyahu to address Congress about Iran.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with House Speaker John Boehner in 2011. Boehner has invited Netanyahu to address Congress about Iran. Assocated Press file

Netanyahu can’t fool us twice

Speaker John Boehner’s recent invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress regarding American foreign policy is at once underhanded and wrongheaded. By usurping the executive branch, currently in multinational talks with Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and Iran attempting to reach agreement on substantially limiting Iran’s nuclear program, Boehner jeopardizes these efforts at a critical time.

Netanyahu will undoubtedly advise Congress that Iran is on the brink of a nuclear bomb and can be stopped only by harsher measures, including war. His history of lying about similar claims and Israeli intelligence regarding Iraq in the lead-up to that disastrous war is well-documented. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me … well, ya can’t get fooled again.

Netanyahu has no more business addressing Congress about Iran than other lying Iraq War instigators Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. Common sense says that you don’t ask the guys who failed the last test to tutor you on the upcoming one.

Matt Harris, Sacramento

Carbon fee needed to protect Alaskan refuge

Re “Obama proposes making Alaska refuge off limits to drilling” (Page A1, Jan. 26): I applaud President Obama for proposing to designate the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a wilderness area, thus protecting it from potential oil exploration and development. Wouldn’t it be great if we could decrease demand for fossil fuels and protect one of the last places on Earth that has been undisturbed by humans?

A carbon fee and dividend with a border adjustment, as proposed by Citizens’ Climate Lobby, would create the incentive to do just that by giving the market the price signal it needed to select the most climate-friendly way to produce energy. As the price of carbon increased, society would look to alternative forms of energy production as goods with more fossil fuels in their supply chain would become more expensive than goods with less. All of the money from the carbon fee would be returned to American households in the form of a monthly dividend.

Paula M. Danz, Los Altos

Drilling is political hot potato

Is Obama pro- or anti-drilling? From Alaska to the Atlantic, he has taken measures both to block and encourage oil drilling. As he publicly calls for preservation of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which would prohibit any kind of oil and gas development, his Interior Department plans on opening up the Atlantic Ocean to offshore oil and gas drilling. While environment-friendly efforts are being made, efforts that directly oppose these advances stagnate our country in its obsession and dependency with oil and gas.

The long-term consequences of oil and gas development are common knowledge. If we want to avoid them, the first to do is for Obama to try to stay consistent.

Megan Ikeda, Sacramento

Seriously, UC?

Re “Divided UC regents table coach bonus policy” (Capitol & California, Jan. 23): What exactly is the priority for the University of California? To educate young people or feed its hungry bank account by giving ridiculous preference to its NCAA sports teams?

The institution is already being criticized about its increasing tuition rates, yet at the same time, the board has shelved a proposition to put restrictions on athletic coaches’ bonuses. No wonder Gov. Jerry Brown is reluctant to give them a bigger budget. As a high school student who applied for admission to several UCs last fall, I just can’t believe that coaches’ bonuses are even on the agenda.

Katie Brown, Sacramento

Pension abuse hurts taxpayers

Re “Law enforcers make top dollar” (Our Region, Jan. 25): I must applaud safety officers with doing a fantastic public relations job in getting top-notch salaries and pensions. First, they use the emotional argument that law enforcement is one of the most dangerous jobs in America. (Federal studies show it is not in the top 10.) Second, using salary surveys is brilliant. The back and forth method of comparing salaries of other local law enforcement agency results in a spiraling up regardless to the actual danger of the job.

These abuses give a black eye to the rest of public employees and more ammunition to dismantle the public pension system. Seriously, does anyone really think that 53-year-old David Keyes is worth the $7 million he will get if he lives another 20 years?

Michael Santos, Antelope

Petrovich runs amok

Re “Competing views of Curtis Park Village rely on scare tactics” (Editorial, Jan. 26): I’m glad to see The Bee call Paul Petrovich out on his scare tactics in Curtis Park. I hope the city musters the courage to reject this mega-fuel station proposal immediately, as it undermines the goals of transit, bike and pedestrian-oriented infill.

I also wonder who is investing in this Petrovich project. Would they publicly identify themselves as he carries on in this manner? And when the dust settles, how will they fare? Petrovich has deeply insulted potential customers and potential tenants. It is becoming ever harder to see how this truly unique infill opportunity can be fully realized.

Kathleen Ave, Sacramento

EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE

Find them at:

sacbee.com/letters-to-the-editor

HOW TO SUBMIT

Online form (preferred):

www.sacbee.com/submit-letter

Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,

Sacramento, CA 95852

150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.

  Comments