Letters on climate change, money in classroom, Cuba, sentencing disparities, rude people

Undermining trust in scientists, reason

It’s been 50 years since the U.S. surgeon general declared smoking tobacco to be hazardous to our health. Yet many people continue to use tobacco in spite of the warnings on cigarette packages, the advice from trusted doctors, and the experience of seeing friends and family members struggle to quit smoking and even die from diseases associated with smoking. There are millions of tombstones in the world that stand as mute testimony to the efficacy of well-funded propaganda.

It has been 35 years since scientists declared increasing carbon dioxide levels to be hazardous to the Earth. Yet many people refuse to support alternatives to fossil fuels. The industry has mounted propaganda attacks on climate scientists, the Environmental Protection Agency, and anyone who supports reducing carbon emissions. Climate scientists have been threatened with job loss, Senate investigations and legal charges because of their research findings. Sadly, for the first time in history, scientists are collecting a defense fund to defend scientists against legal and political attacks.

The propaganda is not only supporting damage to the environment, it is undermining trust in our scientists, in our democratic government, and even in evidence and reason. Without those, what do we have?

Tax the weather

Only Democrats could figure out a way to tax the weather. Their dire warnings that 2015 was the warmest year on record failed to mention that climate records have been collected for fewer than 200 years. Care to guess the statistical significance of that sampling interval over Earth’s 4.5 billion-year history? Or to put it more poetically:

In August was Obama born; the rains fell in September; “Now such a fearful flood as this,” says he, “I can’t remember!”

Separate electrons?

I propose that Santa put coal in the stockings of the Westar Energy executives. They recently asked for and received a rate increase to bring the coal and nuclear power plants up to new standards. That same money could build more modern wind and solar facilities. Choosing old technology indicates a lack of business savvy. Or perhaps there is more corporate welfare given for the old energy sources.

On the other hand, they have made a great breakthrough in the laws of physics. They offered to guarantee that all the energy I receive could be from clean energy if I pay more. Wow. They can identify and segregate the electrons that come from wind from the electrons that come from coal, and they can guarantee that only the wind electrons come through their lines to my house, while my neighbor on the same wire gets a different set of electrons. Surely the ability to segregate electrons deserves an award.

And if we could have people appointed to the Citizens’ Utility Ratepayer Board who actually defend the consumers, that would be a Christmas miracle.

Affecting classroom

Gov. Sam Brownback doesn’t want to approve a spending formula for education until more money goes directly to the classroom. I would argue that just about every dollar spent already directly affects the classroom.

Some items are easy to see. Teacher salaries, benefits, desks, textbooks, computers and software are all direct classroom spending. What is not seen as classroom spending is time to teach. That is exactly what you are buying when you spend money supporting the classroom teacher: time to teach.

Employing custodians, food services, front office staff, transportation, technology specialists, paraprofessionals, curriculum specialists, administrators and other important “nonclassroom” jobs allow teachers the time to do their most important job, which is to teach. We can’t do it without them.

The classroom is the heart of a school district, and the rest of the district works to make the classroom a better place to learn. That is the mission of every school district. Unfortunately, this mission is not cheap, and its value to the classroom is not easily reduced to a line item on a spreadsheet.

Appeasing Castros

A year ago this month, our president announced: “Today America chooses to cut loose the shackles of the past so as to reach for a better future – for the Cuban people, for the American people, for our entire hemisphere and for the world.”

He also said: “It’s time for a new approach.”

Today we have diplomatic relations with the Castro regime, and our flag flies again in the American Embassy. But the changes we have seen are only cosmetic economic changes that have no political or human values and are reversible as the government pleases.

The values we enjoy in this country and so sadly take for granted – such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom to travel, and respect for universal human rights – have been sequestered in the Castro brothers’ Cuba for more than half a century. Three generations of Cubans have grown under the Stalinist regime of the Castros and under conditions comparable only to those in North Korea.

The “new approach” has granted the Castro brothers and their scoundrels concessions in a unilateral and unconditional manner without us gaining anything in return.

It is shameful that we are willing to appease the Cuban dictator in order to sell commodities such as wheat to make money at any cost or by whatever means.

Sentence disparities

The Dec. 20 Eagle included two articles reflecting the differences between convictions.

One article was about Ethan Couch, the “affluenza” teen who killed four people when he was 16 while drinking and driving and only received 10 years’ probation. After he failed to appear at a recent hearing, a warrant was issued for his arrest.

The other article was about Peter Ninemire, who was sentenced to 27 years for growing marijuana while he was a young man. He received clemency from President Clinton after serving 10 years in prison.

Why would someone who killed four people get a lesser sentence than someone selling drugs or using drugs? It is my opinion that the amount of money spent on lawyers explains the disparity between convictions.

What is wrong with this picture?

Don’t be rude

I think the ugly political rhetoric we hear every day is turning us into boorish, rude people. This holiday season, I have witnessed head-shaking, uncivil behavior on the road, in parking lots and in stores. And being “politically correct” is not the same thing as acting politely to others.

We are better than that. Don’t mirror the antics of Donald Trump when you deal with people in your daily life. He is not the role model for a civil and decent society.

This story was originally published December 26, 2015 at 6:03 PM with the headline "Letters on climate change, money in classroom, Cuba, sentencing disparities, rude people."