Letters to the editor

In support of Stanley

Kathleen Belew's recent article concerning Casey Stanley's work as ASUW legislative liaison in Olympia is uninformed and unfair. Ms. Belew writes that Stanley abandoned his obligations as a UW representative in order to spend his spring break in Key West. While it may be true that Stanley took a vacation, as tens of thousands of other UW students did over the week of spring break, she fails to mention several important factors in her article.

First of all, as an ASUW employee, I know that ASUW employees, including BOD members, office staff and commission directors, are not required to work over spring break.* In fact, a majority of the ASUW employees, including several board members, the ASUW vice president and a majority of the commission directors, took the week of spring break off and were consequently taken off payroll for that week. Stanley had that same right to take a vacation during spring break, and no other employee was reprimanded for vacationing over spring break.

Second, Belew, and the other ASUW employees quoted in her article, completely fail to give Stanley credit for any of his positive achievements over the course of the recent legislative session. Did Stanley need to be "baby-sat" when he played a role in ensuring that the College Awareness Proposal passed through the Legislature? It seems that Weaver, Purcell and critical board members have taken credit regarding this success, and mention Stanley's contributions only when it comes to the shortcomings of the ASUW lobbying efforts.

Marci Comeau

senior, political science and women's studies

*Editor's note: According to Stanley's contract with ASUW, he must notify the president or personnel director of the ASUW in writing and in advance of any vacation during the legislative session, which includes spring break. There is no record or recollection by either ASUW President Jasmin Weaver or the personnel director Stephan Hamberg of any such notification by Stanley prior to his departure.

Confusion about consistency

The inconsistency of The Daily continues to amaze me. Although The Daily refused to print an advertisement from David Horowitz about reasons why America does not owe African Americans reparations for slavery, it published a column by Greg Carey in the opinion section arguing the converse. This is at best inconsistent, at worst hypocritical, but ridiculous in any case.

Jeremy Schertzinger

senior, economics

Editor's note: The decision not to run Mr. Horowitz' advertisement was made by The Daily's advertising department, NOT the editorial department, which chose to run Mr. Carey's article.

Get all the facts, Kemmling

If you believed everything you read, you might be tempted to buy Mr. Kemmling's insight into the underlying motivations behind Boeing's decision to relocate its corporate headquarters. The majority of the article is based on a tiny press release by the Association of Washington Businesses.

Mr. Kemmling fails to point out that while Washington state imposes some of the highest taxes on business in the West, Washington lacks the property and income taxes that weigh heavy on businesses in other states. To further blow the episode out of proportion, he sites the somewhat understandable fears of the Machinist Union as concrete proof of the impending mass exodus of jobs lurking around the corner. Perhaps most confounding is the lack of any sort of logical progression to the argument. If, as Mr. Kemmling argues, Boeing was motivated to escape the overwhelming burden of "extremist" environmental legislation and anti-business tax legislation, how does the relocation of "1,000 white-collar jobs" achieve this goal?

The plants and installations that remain are still subject to the crazed liberal antics of the incompetent leaders that have cleverly managed to dupe citizens into holding power in Washington state for the last 20 years.

Nathan Barnes

junior, history and political science

Stevens speaks up

I must let you and our other patriots know of something terribly ridiculous that I read in The Daily not very long ago. It was our supposed defender of American values, Mr. Richey Kemmling, wrapping himself up in reckless rhetoric spun from the feral fabric of fuzzy Texas logic and pulling the wool over the eyes of the UW community.

In his article, "Seattle's liberalism kicks Boeing out," Mr. Kemmling frantically attacks the tax structure of Washington state for its alleged hostility toward big business. In his frothing frenzy, Mr. Kemmling overlooks the fact that our state currently provides so many tax exemptions to large corporations -- including poor, pitiful Boeing -- that the repeal of even half of these would provide enough revenue to solve much of the current budget "crisis" faced by Washington state.

Later in his polemic, Mr. Kemmling audaciously attempts to pin the blame for rising tuition on the current tax structure. Perhaps Mr. Kemmling needs to stop frantically frothing and spinning around and find his sense of direction. Has it occurred to Mr. Kemmling that the tuition spiral we've experienced during the past decade could be due to the fact that big business doesn't contribute enough to our general fund?

Surely, this vile attack upon the art of rhetoric must be a clever in-joke that Mr. Kemmling is playing on us all. And indeed, my fellow patriots, this does turn out to be the case.

Jeff Stevens

senior, linguistics