www.roanoke.com

Don't blame the system for allowing others' views to be heard

The recent commentary "Campaign contributions buy something" (Sept. 25) is typical of the arguments made by many supporters of taxpayer-subsidized elections.

Upset that their favored policies are not always enacted by lawmakers, they blame the system that produces elected officials. They essentially argue that it's not fair because people who hold different views than them are allowed to have their voices heard too, and sometimes those different views prevail when Congress votes.

The alternative apparently preferred by the writer is a one-party state along the lines of North Korea, where dissenting voices are crushed so the government can serve "the people."

It is arrogant to assert that members of Congress are "bought" simply because some vote differently than proponents of taxpayer-financed elections wish. This refusal to believe that people can honestly disagree on important topics is both shallow and narrow-minded, contributing to the deep partisan divide afflicting our nation.

Instead of carelessly tossing around charges like "far-right conservative" (or far-left liberal, for that matter), America should have genuine debate and discussion, which is only possible through a campaign finance system that enables unlimited free speech.

Center for Competitive Politics

Of course the president was 'unapologetic'

Re: the article "Bush unapologetic about harsh interrogations" (Oct. 6):

Let's be clear on the facts. The New York Times has again released top-secret information regarding interrogation procedures. The president gets angry that top-secret information is printed in the news, and all that's printed is that he is unapologetic?

Perhaps some reporters deserve a good slap across the face.

Smith will stand by his principles

Ralph Smith is a man of principle and integrity. He is not the kind of man who, like some of our politicians, would go to Richmond with the intent to represent the people of Virginia but eventually become more interested in furthering his own self-interests.

As a person of character, he will tell you what he stands for, even if it may not be the popular thing to say, and he will do what he says he will do.

Smith is a firm believer in strict enforcement against illegal immigration. He believes that English should be the official language of our state.

He supports health care initiatives such as our local Project Access, which is funded without U.S. government money.

Voting for Smith for the senate is one of the best things we can do to help keep Virginia the best place in the country in which to live and raise our children. He will be able to devote his full time, all the time, to being our senator.

Hollins' reading drew a crowd

Not every event at the recent Arts Festival was brought in at the city's expense and poorly attended ("Arts fest didn't hit it big, but there will be a next year," Oct. 11, and "Inaugural reflections," Oct. 13).

I and my Hollins colleagues -- all accomplished writers and teachers who live in the Roanoke Valley -- participated in a reading at 202 Market.

The Hollins program is well known for producing nationally and internationally acclaimed authors.

Even if one doesn't enjoy or care much about literature, one can be proud that the Roanoke Valley is the starting place of many world-class writers of literary prose and poetry. With a few exceptions, we brought our own audience from campus. But the room was full and the audience was attentive for an hour and a half. The reporter who failed to mention the reading stayed for the whole event.

The reading brought undergraduates and graduate students downtown, and they enjoyed discovering the market area afterward.

Best of all, the event didn't cost the city or the public anything, thanks to the owners of 202 Market who provided the venue and the Hollins writers who volunteered their time.

Maybe we need more locally focused events next year, and certainly we need to include the many visual artists whose presence was missed. What's an arts festival without art?

Neighbors do want promises delivered

I take exception to Patrick Johnson's letter ("Residents aren't as unhappy as portrayed," Oct. 9).

As a resident of Wolf Creek who has attended the community meetings, I know the message the Runyons are delivering is real and absolute. Had Johnson attended any of the many community meetings held in regards to our concerns, he would know that a majority of neighbors in Wolf Creek favor getting Roanoke County to assist in holding the developers responsible for what they have promised.

He would also know that there are many more concerns other than pavement issues, including road issues with other sections of our development that are private streets and not state maintained.

Being happy in this neighborhood and holding the developers responsible for what they promised are two separate issues. I agree that most neighbors here are quite happy, but the developers need to be held accountable.

I am also sure that if, through the devoted efforts of the Runyons and their supporters, the developers are required to simply uphold their promises, Johnson will want to thank these "whining" neighbors for working so hard to increase the value of our properties, including his.

McNeil brings integrity and experience

The citizens of Roanoke County are fortunate to have an opportunity to elect Rodney McNeil to the board of supervisors.

I have worked for more than one Roanoke company in the realm of construction and have always known McNeil was well-respected in the industry for his wisdom and high standards.

On a personal level, he recently reached out to my family during a tragic time in our life just because he saw a need and an opportunity to make a difference.

Men of such caliber are hard to find, and we are fortunate that McNeil is willing to serve the citizens of Roanoke County. Experience and integrity make a powerful combination.

Consumers need more choices for health care

Ed Trottier's letter ("Liberals seek to destroy free-market economy," Oct. 10) exposes him as ignorant of the same basic economic principles he claims afflicts progressive liberals.

Government-administered health care will drive health care costs lower when consumers can choose between our current model that increased costs twice as much as inflation in 2006, and a competitor modeled after Medicare delivering equivalent service for half the cost. It's fuzzy math that adds up.

U.S. automobiles include a $2,000 premium for insurance, yet the employees have to strike for better care. This inefficiency threatens our ability to compete and our national security.

Tax credits compensate for current costs but disregard annual increases. Our health care choice is the most expensive in the world, yet has the 37th highest infant mortality rate.

I'm sure Trottier agrees that liberals and conservatives employed within this industry are both equally concerned about rising health care costs. This issue transcends political affiliation when it impacts everyone equally.

I challenge Trottier to find any competitive difference among the four dominant major health care options available. An alternative would give consumers a choice between a cartel and competition.

Don't mistake the "soft embrace of socialism" with the invisible hand of Adam Smith.