Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, October 23, 1995 TAG: 9510240004
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The refuge is home to many rare or nonexistent species in the lower 48 states, including polar bears, wolverines and musk oxen. It's a vital nesting and staging area for thousands of birds and waterfowl, including tundra swans, horned grebes, lesser scaups, American tree sparrows, etc.
Perhaps most disastrous will be the effect on the 150,000-caribou herd that gives birth to and raises its calves in the area where oil companies will construct the huge infrastructure of the oil field, including roads, drill pads, gravel mines, pipelines, docking facilities and housing.
In a domino effect, the decimation of the caribou spells disaster for the Gwich'in Indians who live on the refuge's south border and have a subsistence culture based on caribou. Drilling will be catastrophic for animals and humans.
Congress claims it is opening the refuge to obtain $1 billion or so in revenues from leasing to balance the budget. The projected revenues are based on a 50-50 split between the feds and Alaska. But Alaskans have said publicly that as soon as the refuge is opened, they'll sue the feds to get what their state laws claim is their rightful 90 percent share.
Alaskans already get a payment from the state based on oil royalties of $1,000 per person per year. That's $4,000 for a family of four. They have no state income tax, and many regions have no sales tax. The net result is that the average Alaskan family pays half the taxes that we pay here in the lower 48 states.
Truly, this is a sweet setup for Alaskans who get to live in a beautiful state and get oil royalties to boot. The rest of us subsidize them and the oil industry's stockholders, and lose a precious national wilderness and wildlife treasure. This surely is welfare reform!
DAVE MARAVETZ
MEADOWS OF DAN
Educrats have enough money
LIBERAL Democrats - from President Clinton to Sen. Madison Marye - are screaming about Republican efforts to reduce bureaucracy in the education system by returning control of schools to the state and local levels. Voters need to examine the facts closely before accepting their claims that this cost-saving effort will hurt our children's future education.
Since 1960, total expenditures on education have increased more than 200 percent. Most of this money has gone to increased spending on bureaucracy, with administrative and noninstructional functions gaining 107 percent in real terms and the number of noninstructional personnel growing 400 percent, nearly seven times the rate of increase in classroom teachers.
What do taxpayers get from this bureaucracy, which now squanders more than 50 cents of every tax dollar spent on education? Well, at the last National Education Association conference held in Minneapolis, these educrats busied themselves with an agenda that had little to do with improving our children's education. Among the resolutions passed were 15 drawn up by the NEA's Gay and Lesbian Caucus on sexual-orientation issues, a resolution supporting statehood for Washington, D.C., and a resolution creating a national holiday to honor Cesar Chavez. The list goes on to cover the entire liberal agenda.
It thus becomes obvious that the reason Democrats support increased spending for, and protection of, the current bureaucratic mess in education is because these educrats are nothing more than taxpayer-funded lobbyists for their liberal agenda.
FRANK HOLS
GALAX
Voters should reject Falkinburg
ON BEHALF of the many registered nurses and board-certified physicians who perform utilization management, I'd like to express my outrage at the overtly sexist and demeaning terminology used by Newell Falkinburg in his recent speech (Oct. 10, Campaign Notes From Across Virginia - ``A `bimbo' by any other name ... '').
It's obvious that he is ignorant about the managed-care industry and the highly skilled professionals who work in utilization management. (One wonders if Falkinburg considers all nurses "bimbos.")
I find no comfort in the statement made by him that he "usually refers to them as idiots or cretins." It's unsettling to think that a physician/politician would have a need to refer to any segment of the population using such derogatory comments.
What other colorful terms does he use to describe people who don't fit into his version of how the world should be?
Southwestern Virginians deserve better representation than that offered by Falkinburg. I hope they indicate this on Nov. 7 by voting for Del. ``Chip'' Woodrum. I know I will!
JANET NILES
Director,
Utilization and Quality Management
Carilion Health Plans
ROANOKE
by CNB