Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, July 11, 1995 TAG: 9507110025
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
We, too, have enjoyed hiking, hunting and camping on federal government-acquired property. But for the past few years, the National Park Service has been a loose cannon with far too many powers and too much money at its disposal. This situation is definitely in need of review. This concern may be after the fact, but better late than never.
The Park Service appears to possess unlimited finances, as well as unlimited powers of condemnation, based on the opinion of some of its personnel. Thus far, these people have given every appearance of being unreasonable and untouchable. Do we want this to continue? For example, consider the acquisition of four prime commercial properties on the east and west sides of U.S. 220 in Daleville.
Two properties purchased or condemned on the east side of U.S. 220, totaling less than 19 acres, went for more than $600,000.
Two properties purchased or condemned on the west side of U.S. 220 went for more than $525,000, and had less acreage than the east side. These two west-side properties sold for approximately $36,400 per acre.
These are just four examples of expensive properties purchased or under condemnation by the Park Service for the Appalachian Trail, with the blessing and backing of the U.S. government. These purchases and many more are removed from the tax base at the local level at a time when schools are in dire need of additional funding. Why all the ``land grabbing''? In most cases, easements would suffice, along with limited purchases of small-acreage tracts for shelters where necessary.
We're not arguing about the need for a hiking trail. But as citizens, we need to be informed. Before any funds are reallocated, we need a full public accounting, outlining the specific needs for all acquisitions to date, including tract size, consideration, and anticipated use. Every locality affected by the Park Service acquisitions should have access to this information.
ROBERT A. WAID
JOSEPH G. JOHNSON JR.
FINCASTLE
Clean water will be down the toilet
ONCE AGAIN we're seeing the fine print in the Contract With America. A lot of this seems to be a contract with industrial interests, and a contract on the environment. The latest incentive is House Bill 961 to revise the Clean Water Act.
This bill guts existing water standards - standards that in 25 years have meant life to Lake Erie again, as well as to the lower Potomac and Hudson rivers. Also, the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland no longer catches on fire.
Under this legislation, as noted by USA Today, we can look backward to when we will again ``swim in the water that flushed their city's dirty streets'' or ``eat fish from waters rich with fertilizer, pesticide, mud and manure.''
Even now, with present standards, cryptosporidium, a parasite that killed 100 people in Milwaukee, is still present in about half the nation's water supply. Why should Congress care? Seventy-six percent of its members have bottled water dispensed in their offices.
Our very lives, not simply our health, depend on clean water. Congressmen know this. That's why they won't drink it from the tap - but you have to!
CARY HOPPER
BLACKSBURG
Cyberspace helps expand democracy
THANK YOU for running the "Your guide to cyber democracy" in the July 4 Extra section.
The opening of Internet to the public provides a new and powerful means of communicating with and influencing representative government. While there may be those who dismiss the use of electronic communications as a fad or who suspect that the e-mail of representatives, senators and the president goes unread until it's purged from their computers, I believe that participation by individuals in our democratic process is of greater importance.
By communicating, even if only to a staff member who scans and compiles the day's opinions, we become better informed of our elected officials' positions, and inform ourselves of the views we truly hold. By participating in forums of open discussion, we become consumers in the marketplace of ideas. An informed electorate will always produce a superior elected government.
Your readers may also be interested in a new Internet mailing list, VALAWLISTaol.com, a moderated mailing list of discussion topics and trends in the law of Virginia.
JOHN S. KOEHLER
ROANOKE
Wall of separation is vital to liberty
REGARDING THE July 2 Back Pew column by Cody Lowe, ``Our continued religious freedom is reason to celebrate'':
His column was right on target. The proposals being offered in the name of religious liberty are a direct threat to precious national treasures - freedom of religion and freedom from religion for every American. Today's religious zealots, no matter how sincerely motivated, must not be allowed to trash that treasure.
The ``Religious Equality Amendment,'' put forth by Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition and others, would actually damage religious liberty. A more appropriate name for it would be Religious Tyranny Amendment. It would enable the majority religion in local areas to dominate over those whose beliefs are different. It should certainly be viewed with alarm by those who hold minority religious beliefs, and those who exercise their right to hold no religious convictions.
We need only open our eyes to our nation's history, and look at other nations around the world, to see how vitally important is the principle of separation of church and state.
Three and a half centuries ago the Puritans, having fled across the Atlantic to find freedom to practice their religion as they saw fit, then - incredibly - proceeded to oppress other religious minorities by law. It proved a sour mix - church and state - and it still is.
The ``wall of separation'' was made for religion's benefit, as well as government's. A quick look around the planet reveals nations, like Iran, whose governments are more like religious dictatorships, with one ``official'' religion. America has so far been able to avoid the tyranny, oppression, terrorism and religious war that characterizes so many nations that don't have separation of church and state.
The religious right's claim of an exclusive endorsement from God is disturbing. Of course, we need ethics and morals in government, but let's not imply that without religion - or without the ``correct'' religion - a person cannot be ethical or moral. Some of the finest, most moral people I've known aren't religious, while some of the worst scoundrels in public and private life are, or loudly proclaim themselves to be, religious.
ALAN L. LIGHT
IOWA CITY, IOWA
Medicaid rules exploit the elderly
MY FATHER, who was a honest and hard-working man of modest means, paid taxes to Roanoke city and the state of Virginia for more than 50 years. And now his widow is in need of temporary help from Medicaid. Given the considerable sum they paid into the system, she deserves it.
To become eligible for benefits, she must turn over all income, except for $30. Of course, officials think that will pay for all her bills and personal needs.
Exploitation of the elderly is a disgrace. Guidelines set by the state go by a person's gross income, which a person doesn't get. You live on net income. There's quite a difference.
If you own a home, you must liquidate that to ensure you have no money left to go with losing your dignity. The state has the right to expropriate your property, which you worked hard for, and then it turns right around and freely gives the money to young, unwed mothers who apply for and get Medicaid with no problems.
To be elderly and of middle income means losing it all to the system. It's truly your worst nightmare come true. Who ever said there is no free lunch was wrong. The free lunch goes to the ones who take from the system, not give to it.
SANDRA PARKS
SALEM
by CNB