Letters to the editor for Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2008

The Bush administration's economic-stimulus package does not provide rebates for the very poor, specifically families making less than $24,900. Once again, this Republican administration wants to stiff the working poor in favor of the wealthy. Not only is this morally wrong, it is economically disastrous.

The working poor are far more likely to spend a rebate than the wealthy. That extra spending will create demand for products and services, which in turn will create jobs. In the end, business owners will see increased profits and will get their share.

Stiffing the working poor will only increase the federal deficit and dig us deeper into the recession we are likely already in.

JEFF SOMMERS, MAPLE GROVE

Two choices The business cycle, with periods of growth and recession, is a part of our economic system.

Our government has two major tools that it can use to shorten a recession -- fiscal policy and monetary policy. For fiscal policy to be most effective, you have to have something near a balance or surplus of government spending during the growth period of the business cycle so that you can cut taxes and/or increase spending if you see a recession coming. Otherwise it's just another loan from our children -- with interest to China.

This leaves us with one tool that may be effective right now, monetary policy in the form of Federal Reserve rate cuts. But the cuts have to be used judiciously to be most effective, and timing is everything. Lately, the market drops every time the Fed cuts rates. At best, these cuts may be delaying the onset of a true recession. At worst, they are using our only tool too early.

JEFF GOODMAN, HOPKINS

Regarding the Jan. 22 letter of the day, I too have thought of a Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton ticket, but I dismissed it. I would warn Obama not to accept a vice-presidential nomination. With Bill Clinton in the picture, Obama would end up No. 3 in the presidential pecking order, right behind Hillary.

CALVIN VRAA, BLOOMINGTON

If it bashes, it passes. That must be the new standard used by Star Tribune editors. What else explains publication of the Eric Hanson piece "Devil's in the details -- and who likes devils?" Even as a diatribe against Republicans, it didn't hold together.

This piece was all conclusion, all stereotype, no arguments developed, no supporting facts. Just every ugly stereotype in the book -- Republicans are rich (e.g., what evidence does Hanson offer to prove that all Republicans are rich?), stingy, neglectful, uncaring, irresponsible, vain -- followed by a conclusion.

The Interstate 35W bridge collapse is turning into another Oliver Stone conspiracy movie. The preliminary report is released from the National Transportation Safety Board and immediately it's the biggest coverup since Watergate.

While I think it was premature for the governor to essentially say "I told you so" in his news conference, the reaction of other so-called leaders in this community is nothing short of infantile. And the implication by several media people that NTSB staff and/or MnDOT engineers and inspectors are not only incompetent but also hacks for the governor or Republican Party instead of the professionals they are is absolutely ludicrous.

SCOTT BANKEN, BLOOMINGTON

Trust in the NTSB Finally, an article about the bridge collapse that makes sense! Katherine Kersten's Jan. 21 column was right on.

The NTSB report should be totally independent and reliable. After all, we consider the board to be the best there is in determining air and other disaster causes. For DFL Sen. Steve Murphy to make a statement that "the report isn't worth the paper it is written on" makes one wonder how anyone could ever take his comments as credible. It was an irresponsible comment.

LARRY A. SORENSON, ARLINGTON, MINN.

It is easy and common to blame teachers' unions or "bad" teachers for what is wrong with schools.

Minneapolis has settled its teachers' contract by giving more power to principals to choose their staffs. Would that it were that easy!

What principals must do is to serve as real curriculum leaders in their schools. That does not necessarily mean closer evaluations of teachers. It means creating an atmosphere where learning can take place; it means backing teachers when they try to discipline students; it means being honest with parents when more parental support is needed. It means serving as a voice for the teachers with the school board, city leaders and the Legislature.

Critics of teachers' unions forget that contract guidelines which have been hard-won by teachers are not for the teachers' convenience; those guidelines attempted to create reasonable conditions for teaching -- a reasonable amount of time to prepare for various classes and correct homework, a reasonable number of assigned students, and reasonable compensation for supervising after-school activities.