Letters - Sunday

FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS

Congress can’t lump cars, trucks in same mandate

There’s a battle going on in Congress today that not many people are aware of, yet the result could have a devastating impact on a huge component of America’s economy. I’m talking about the Democratic leaders in the House and Senate who are trying to push through a controversial Senate bill that has unrealistic fuel economy mandates and doesn’t take into account the difference between cars and trucks.

As an auto dealership owner, I’ve seen firsthand the improvements that U.S. automakers have made in fuel economy in their cars and trucks. And I’ll be the first to say that we need to do even better. America needs to raise fuel economy standards, but they must be increased in a way that will preserve vehicle choice, jobs, economic growth and safety.

But meeting the proposed Senate mandates could prove devastating to auto manufacturers, consumers, auto dealers, auto workers and anyone else whose job is dependent on the auto industry. It simply doesn’t make sense to treat passenger cars and light trucks the same — they are different kinds of vehicles that have different needs and uses.

America could have strong new fuel economy standards right away, if Congress instead would agree to pass the tough, bipartisan Hill/Terry bill, mandating 32-35 mpg by 2022, but also keeping the car/truck distinction. That’s up to a 40 percent increase in fuel economy. And since it’s supported by more than 170 congressmen on both sides of the aisle, you’d have to consider it to be a bipartisan policy win.

The Hill/Terry proposal allows adequate time for automakers to make major changes in autos; they’re already designing vehicles for model year 2013. The proposal also sets the federal standards at the maximum achievable level within that 32-35 mpg range without eliminating popular vehicles, without harming jobs, without raising costs for consumers, and without affecting vehicle safety. That means that American auto buyers would still have the ability to buy the vehicles they want, rather than being told by Congress which vehicles they have to buy.

It’s time for Congress to stop arguing and put this proposal into overdrive.

Bob Fenton

Chief Operating Officer, Phil Long Ford

Colorado Springs

5TH DISTRICT ELECTIONS

Chairman’s comments on Lamborn misrepresented

As the state chairman of Colorado Republicans, I remain neutral in the threeway contest for the Republican nomination for the 5th Congressional District.

Unfortunately, the letter to the editor from Don Littleton in the Nov. 9 Gazette (“Lamborn’s sole strength is voting party line”) mischaracterized a recent quote of mine that appeared in the political blog Politico. During a wide-ranging conversation about Colorado politics, the Politico reporter clumsily used an observation of mine about the nature of the opposition to U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn. I must make it clear I did not make such a charge against Lamborn.

I consider all three Republican candidates — Lamborn, Jeff Crank and Bentley Rayburn — to be friends of mine, and I think they all are well-qualified in their own ways to be the congressman from the 5th District. Just like in any other political race, they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Voters will decide who the Republican nominee will be from this field of great candidates.

Dick Wadhams

Colorado Republican State Chairman

Denver

BUDGET CUTS

Given recent shootings, more support is the answer

The wave of shootings, murders and serious crimes in the city in the past few months is alarming. Given this increase in crime, why is the city on the verge of cutting the police budget? Shouldn’t we be giving more support to the police, who put their lives on the line, have families and are our friends and neighbors? If we don’t get their backs, who will?

In Monday’s shootings, the victims were racing to get to the Sand Creek police substation — one of those targeted to have its night hours cut. (So I guess this crime fit the city’s criteria, in that it took place during the day — for victims who schedule their needs.) Yet parks and after-school youth program budgets are being increased while police and fire protection get the ax? Interesting priorities. That’s the equivalent of a family cutting the food budget so it can go to more movies.

I love the city’s park system, but when revenues are down, you either make sensible cuts or increase revenue (read: taxes). I’ve experienced the negative effects of overtaxation by extremists back east (which is why I’m now in Colorado), but undertaxation is equally irresponsible. How about finding some balance?

I think the City Council needs to rethink priorities or find a way to pay for both. The purpose of government is to do what citizens on their own can’t. Parents can pay for youth programs (buy one less violent video game for the kids this Christmas). But are private citizens supposed to hire rent-a-cops so we don’t get caught in the midafternoon cross-fire?

J.E. Keeler

Colorado Springs

GOODWILL MISSION

Editorial buys into view of U.S. as occupiers

We are new residents of Colorado Springs, having moved here this past April from the Washington, D.C., area where I enjoyed the balance I received by reading both the Washington Post and Washington Times. I have to say that I am disappointed in the Gazette and the liberal bias contained in your editorials.

I refer most recently to the “Innocents abroad” editorial (Nov. 6, Our View) regarding Ambassador Karen Hughes and her goodwill mission. As the mother of a fallen soldier, I had the opportunity to meet Hughes at a recent event at the White House. The respect and appreciation shown for the sacrifices our families had been called upon to make was abundantly clear.

Less clear is The Gazette’s support for our troops and the difficult mission they have been given to accomplish in Iraq. The premise of the editorial buys into the “group think” that our country is seen as occupiers and that our military is nationbuilding without the assistance of the Iraqi people. This is false. Perhaps The Gazette is missing the good news of what is happening in Iraq as the militaries of both countries work together to improve the security situation and offer a hope for freedom. Our son gave his life working for this goal, and perpetuating this falsehood denigrates his sacrifice.

I might add that I spoke at length with Hughes. One of the most difficult obstacles she had to overcome was the false image of America that is projected through our Hollywood movies. In her many travels abroad, she found that it was the people-topeople exchanges that countered this image and made a difference in how favorably we were viewed.

Nancy Hecker

Colorado Springs

SMOKING BAN

Regulating outdoor air goes too far

Colorado’s indoor smoking ban restricts smoking within 20 feet of public building. So from reading the article (“CU wants to clear the air,” Nov. 9, Metro), I am assuming that the University of Colorado and Memorial Hospital are invoking their property owner rights to regulate the air on their property and go beyond the standard set by law. If this is legal, then why can’t a bar owner regulate his rights concerning the air surrounding his property?

One individual in the article complained that the smoke near the buildings was polluting the air. Well, are CU and Memorial Hospital going to ban automobiles on their property? They also emit offensive and harmful odors.

Show me a study where an individual has gotten sick from secondhand smoke in an outdoor area. If the nonsmokers, health officials and the state were really concerned about air quality related to cigarette smoke, they would lobby to ban cigarette sales in the whole state. But, oh no, we would lose that tax revenue.

Robert Brown

Colorado Springs