Letters to the editor for Thursday, Feb. 28

I consider myself an Independent but almost always vote Republican, yet I sit here in utter dismay at what is happening with the state's Republican leaders.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty's whining about the size of the transportation funding bill is laughable. His refusal to consider even the smallest increase in taxes to fund more transportation spending meant he wasn't going to be at the negotiating table when this thing was put together, and so this is the result. Poll after poll shows this is the single most important issue to people in the Twin Cities. That meant someone at the Capitol was going to address the issue and now they have.

The repercussions for the six Republican House members who voted for the override is the issue Minnesotans should be most upset and scared about. Perhaps one of the six should buy House Minority Leader Marty Seifert a book on democracy.

MATTHEW RAND, MINNEAPOLIS

A few good Republicans In the Star Tribune lead story Feb 27, I believe a more appropriate adjective for the six Republican House members who voted to override the governor's veto would have been "responsible" rather than "rogue." Thank God there are still a few.

PETER H. SAMMOND, MINNETONKA

Statesmanship on view As a conservative, I am proud of the six Republican legislators who had the courage to vote the interests of their constituents rather than toe the Pawlenty party line. Kudos to Rep. Ron Erhardt and his colleagues for putting duty ahead of partisanship, and demonstrating the kind of statesmanship that has long been lacking in this governor and his cronies.

Is GOP grown-up party? It was a fascinating contrast to read Rep. Neil Peterson's adult, reasoned arguments why he supported the veto override (Opinion Exchange, Feb. 27) -- and in the same paper see his caucus leader, Marty Seifert, so generously offer to not smash his computer or snip his phone line.

How sad that only a few Republicans are willing to act like responsible adults.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty calling the bill and its supporters (including the Chamber of Commerce and 45 top CEOs) "ridiculous" just adds to the impression that most leaders with an R after their name are childish and unwilling to be responsible.

I am proud that our legislators finally took action, and will willingly pay the extra $1.50 per week that this measure will cost me. Grown-ups like me and Rep. Peterson know that not everything in this life comes to us for free.

RALPH WYMAN, MINNEAPOLIS

Thank you, sir, for reaching across the aisle and supporting this important bill for all the right reasons.

JUDY LEPP, STILLWATER

Watch out, DFL In regard to the transportation bill that became law the other day: Cost to taxpayers -- billions. Cost to an already hurting economy -- uncertain. Cost to left-wing liberal DFL House members this fall -- priceless!

AARON KUBASCH, WINSTED, MINN.

Hiking into a recession Isn't it ironic that one day after Democrats override (with the blessing of the Star Tribune editorial staff) Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto of a 5.5 percent gas tax increase, the Star Tribune prints a New York Times article which says that gas price increases could not come at a worse time because the sudden rise could worsen economic woes and drag down household budgets?

DOUG CLEMENS, BLOOMINGTON

While I agree that the death of college student Amanda Jax was tragic, there are some underlying items that don't seem to fit ("Mankato bar shut down for its role in woman's death," Feb. 26).

Mankato City Attorney Eileen Wells in a memo wrote that "the bartender had a duty to stop serving Jax, to remove any alcoholic beverage from her control, and further prevent any of the other patrons in the bar from providing alcohol ..." Hold the phone -- prevent other people from providing alcohol? What about the alcohol provided before she got to the bar? How is the establishment in any way responsible for other patrons giving alcohol to this young woman? Aren't those individuals who were, presumably, feeding her the alcohol just as much to blame as the bartenders?

I have read that the parents of the deceased woman are planning to sue the owners of the establishment; are they also going to sue the friends who bought their daughter round after round? Am I to believe that this young woman was out by herself celebrating her 21st birthday?

Perhaps we need to step back and ask ourselves a few questions. One, what are we teaching our children about alcohol (effects and consequences)? Two, if a lawsuit can come down on an establishment for providing something to an individual, who later dies or kills someone else, why can one not bring a lawsuit against the government agency that gave a driver's license to an illegal alien without doing a proper background check? Also, shouldn't Minnesota State University, Mankato, be under the microscope? Not too long ago didn't another young woman get struck and killed by a motor vehicle while walking down the street after having a night filled with alcohol? Where were the outcries at the university for not protecting its students better? There were none because it is easier to blame the establishments that provide the alcohol, not the individual or university.

AARON E. MEIER, FLETCHER, MINN.

As I read Feb. 26 about the Science Museum's new exhibit on eugenics in Germany, I was struck by the similarities to current discussions of "medical procedures."

Doesn't the definition in the article, "eugenics -- the idea that science could improve on humanity by weeding out undesirable traits," sound strangely like a rationale for "terminating a pregnancy" when prenatal tests reveal some imperfection?

When we legally allow "selection" -- for any and every reason including inconvenience, "quality of life" issues, economics -- are we not doing what the Nazi regime did to millions? How many babies have died? And who is next?