Who pays the greatest price

for Measure 28?
I would like to respond to Kelly Flynn’s letter to the editor entitled “Voters must hold Salem fiscally responsible” (ODE, Feb. 5). In his letter, Flynn urges Oregonians to open their eyes and realize that the Oregon Legislature has wasted money and is thus responsible for Oregon’s budget woes.
I am quite certain that the decision for Oregonians over Measure 28 had little to do with whose shoulders the blame for Oregon’s budget deficit should fall on. Much like Flynn, I think it is time that we “acknowledge a collective need to stand together and hold the real culprits responsible.” Unfortunately, I did not see that measure on the ballot.
Flynn is correct that Measure 28 is only a band-aid used to cover up the real problem of irresponsible politicians residing in Salem. However, what he and the majority of Oregonians failed to realize was that in their attempt to bring the “real culprits” to justice, they managed to ensure that it is our public school children who will pay the greatest price, rather than the tax-paying voters who elected those politicians in the first place.

Zach Cuda

first-year graduate

educational leadership

Taxpayers should

have war options
White House economists have projected the cost of a military campaign in Iraq, and the ensuing occupation, to be at least $100 billion. These experts have comfortingly reassured us that our economy can afford this price tag. Whether our uninsured, our homeless, our disabled and our schoolchildren can afford it is, apparently, another matter.
This sum can be better understood as roughly $350 for every American, or $1,400 for a family of four. Unlike the economists, I appreciate what a difference $1,400 could make for millions of American families. Therefore, I propose that every American taxpayer be given the option of waging war against Iraq, or receiving a $350 refund.
This new plan could take effect retroactive to 2002. It’d be a relatively small matter compared with invading another country to print and distribute new tax forms well ahead of April 15. A new line could be added asking whether or not we want to be refunded $350 per family member from the “Attack Iraq” Treasury Department fund.
About 15 percent of American families live at or below the poverty level, which currently is only $18,100 for a family of four. Given a choice between war and receiving $1,400 from the government, my bet is that most of these impoverished families would choose the money.
I might be mistaken. Perhaps there are many Americans who might feel that their $350 would be better spent installing puppet governments. Some Americans are funny that way.

Todd Huffman

Eugene