Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, March 15, 1994 TAG: 9403150185
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
With this country's trillion-dollar debt, continuing budget crisis, and what little discretionary funds there are in state coffers, we can't afford to build the longest, most expensive route, Alternative 6, which would go through Catawba Valley and tunnel under Fort Lewis Mountain. This proposed route is so full of pork-barrel politics that it meanders through Virginia more than 50 miles farther than the most direct and least expensive route - Alternative 3 (I-77). Alternative 6 would travel northeast on its southbound route just to get to Roanoke. This is a waste of money and resources. It's estimated at close to $1 trillion more than Alternative 3, which should disqualify Alternative 6 as a feasible route.
Since West Virginia and North Carolina have chosen their routes for I-73, Virginia should use our money wisely by choosing the most direct route. Anyone in a hurry going to Winston-Salem, N.C., from Bluefield, W.Va., would take I-77 before using I-73 because it's much shorter.
We need highway planning, not pavement that taxpayers provide for the perceived benefit of a few. In the interest of getting the most for our money, the shortest, most direct route needs to be utilized in Virginia. Montgomery County has access to I-81, such as U.S. 460, Alternative 3A (which has been approved for building) and the ``smart road.'' Roanoke has I-81 and I-581. We don't need I-73, especially at such a cost.
The environmental damage that I-73 would cause in Southwest Virginia would be enormous. By expanding existing I-77 to six lanes, not only would we save millions, if not billions, of dollars, we would minimize the environmental impact such a road would surely have.
CHRISTOPHER M. SWAN BLACKSBURG
Alcohol is also an unhealthy habit
WHEN PRESIDENT Clinton first began to talk about a proposed sin tax, he was speaking of a tax on cigarettes and alcohol. But now it's on cigarettes only. What happened to the alcohol tax? Could it be that alcohol is more popular than cigarettes on Capitol Hill?
I don't condone smoking, but I'd like to point out that alcohol is also unhealthy and addictive. There's a lot of talk about the effects of second-hand smoke. Well, think about this. I can smoke all I want before driving my car and am not likely to cause an accident that might kill innocent people because I drove after I'd been smoking. Also, I could stop off after work, smoke a few cigarettes and not go home and abuse my family because I'd smoked a few too many.
To be fair, divide the tax up between cigarettes and alcohol, and use the extra tax dollars to fund more programs to help break these addictions and save lives.
SHIRLEY SAUNDERS ROANOKE
Open competition to the Baby Bells
THE LONG-DISTANCE companies' tired lament (March 7 commentary by James M. Smith, ``Keep Baby Bells off the long-distance lines'') reminds me of the city dweller who moves out to the country and tries to slam the door behind him.
Smith, who is president of the so-called Competitive Telecommunications Association, suggests the time has come to close the door on further long-distance competition. He boasts that long-distance customers have enjoyed a savings as a result of competition. Yet, he insists that any efforts to increase the number of competitors, by allowing the regional Bell companies to enter the fray, would somehow be bad for consumers. I fail to understand his logic.
Are we to believe that competition in an industry is beneficial, but not if there are more than three real competitors, and the addition of seven separate companies to the field is anti-competitive?
Perhaps we should consider the source. Smith doesn't represent telephone customers. He draws a paycheck from a coalition controlled by the Big Three long-distance companies (AT&T, MCI and Sprint), which have cornered more than 80 percent of the nation's business. While the Big Three may laud the glories of competition, they're keeping a tight fist on their own selfish interests, clinging to existing market share.
If you study them, as I have, it seems the right hand doesn't always know what the left's doing. In this case, the right hand is feverishly attempting to erect a barricade to further long-distance competition, while the left hand grasps for entry into the local telephone market. On the one hand, they tell us, competition is good; on the other, competition is bad.
Legislation currently before Congress will, without question, stimulate competition in both the local and long-distance markets, while also accelerating development of emerging telecommunications technologies. The promise of the Information Age may never be realized if we, through action or inaction, exclude those very companies that have the resources and know-how to get the job done.
HUGH R. STALLARD President and Chief Executive Officer Bell Atlantic RICHMOND
Public supports capital punishment
YOUR Feb. 26 editorial, ``Different ways to die,'' states that no form of capital punishment is humane. The state is an agent of final vengeance, whatever the method. You fail to mention that the state is the representative of the people (the democratic form of government).
The most recent national survey showed that 77 percent of the public favors capital punishment. Therefore, it's the people who have the final say, not the government, as your editorial suggests.
VICTOR B. MARCUSSEN MONETA
by CNB