TO THE EDITOR
PRACTICALLY GREEN
Environmentalism is a predictable and
justifiable reaction to unrestrained imprudent
human expansion, destructive pointless ma-
terialism, and as George F. Will, conservative
political commentator, writes: “our national
knack for wretched excesses.” However,
once this is acknowledged, the certainty re-
mains that humans, in order to exist, must ei-
ther mine or grow wealth.
African conservationist David Western
contends in The Dust of Kilimanjaro that
“pragmatism seems to be a better approach to
saving diversity and integrity of life than does
a pursuit of a single universal ethic based on a
sense of moral superiority or virtue.” He fur-
ther suggests that “protected areas” alone will
never be large enough to insure the survival
of biological diversity. His elemental idea is
that “transition zones,” areas simultaneously
managed for ecological and economic health,
are essential.
In the lower 48 states, wilderness areas
and national parks are not large enough to be
ecologically functioning tracts. Transition
zones are required. The federal Northwest
Forest Plan — not without faults — offers an
opportunity to explore and develop methods
for managing transition zones. This plan de-
serves support and criticism so that it may
continue to evolve.
The net annual forest growth on the
Willamette N.F. is estimated to be about one
billion board feet — forgive me for the mo-
ment for being so commercially crass. Is it
unreasonable to harvest about 5 to 10 percent
of the net annual growth from one of the most
productive resilient forests in the world?
P.S. Folks as I write, owl habitat is im-
proving and accruing.
Monty Wilson
Blue River
THE MISSING LINK
As a New York native who stood,
awestruck, at the base of the newly con-
structed Twin Towers, one might think that I
would be gung ho about the war in Iraq. The
opposite is true.
Speaking for myself and every current
and former New Yorker I know, the war in
Iraq has made us less safe, squandered bil-
lions of dollars, cost hundreds of lives and I
don’t think it’s hyperbole to say it’s cost us
the sympathy of most of the world.
My jaw dropped about two weeks ago as
I watched one of our generals say that we
are now seeing cooperation between
Saddam loyalists and al-Qaeda. He also said
that has never happened before because
they are historically mortal enemies. I
thought the media would pounce and ask,
“But I thought Saddam and al-Qaeda were
working together before the war? Wasn’t
that, along with weapons of mass destruc-
tion, the major pretext for invading Iraq?” I
couldn’t find a word in any local or national
media.
Polls say 70 percent of the American pub-
lic believes Saddam and al-Qaeda were part-
ners in exporting terrorism. That belief is the
result of a long-discredited story repeated by
the media. No connection has been found al-
though the Bush administration still speaks as
if there were one.
The Bush administration and the media
owe it to all Americans, including those who
watched the Towers rise and fall, to tell the
truth and set the record straight.
Leslie Weinstein
Eugene
CONSIDER THEORIES
All in the peace and global justice move-
ment envision a peaceful and just world re-
gardless of who believes that those in power
allowed 9/11 or made it happen. There is
room for all in the movement whether you
believe conspiracy theories or not. I disagree
that researching these theories is a distraction
to the movement; in fact it is a necessary
part.
There’s increasing evidence that the peo-
ple in power have a specific agenda for global
fascism. All theories help to shed necessary
public light on critical matters. I’m sad that
the conference organizers oppose Mark
Robinowitz’s panel about 9/11 theories. It
disturbs me that proponents of this move-
ment lack an open mind on this. This is the
same impediment of free speech many of us
decry. This hurts and limits the movement.
We can think and decide for ourselves
whether we agree with part, all or none of any
theory. Who am I to judge as absurd what I
have not experienced? Rather than discredit
these theories, we need to overcome our nar-
row views. A lot of things were revealed histor-
ically that were met initially with ridicule and
contempt. These theories need consideration.
Cecelia (Starshine) Levine
Eugene
INADEQUATE COVERAGE
Thanks for mentioning the “unanswered
questions of 9/11” (cover story, 9/11) but
your reporting was grossly inadequate. You
reported the controversy over the events of
that day, but not the factual issues them-
selves, and there are plenty.
You even omitted the most important ele-
ment of the only one you mentioned, the fail-
ure to scramble the interceptors in response to
the hijackings. The omission: That is stan-
dard procedure, much repeated. For it not to
happen, someone very high up had to coun-
termand standing orders.
Of the evidence I’ve seen, that is far and
away the most damning. The rest is a long list
of fishy events that could be explained by
gross incompetence. I have seen no
BY TOM LININGER
Chiding Chads
Don’t be misled by the vilification
of punch-card ballots.
A
ccording to the website of the Social Security Administration, the name “Chad”
plummeted from the 107th most popular name for newborns in the 1990s to the
312th most popular name a decade later. These days, you’re more likely to tickle
the toes of Adolph, Milhaus, or Orenthal than to meet an infant named Chad.
Why were so few Chads born in 2001 and 2002? Because too many chads were preg-
nant in 2000. That is, the difficulty of pushing “pregnant chads” all the way out of punch-
card ballots became infamous during the November 2000 presidential election, and
played a role in swinging Florida’s crucial electoral votes to George W. Bush. With all the
bumper stickers and jokes on Leno (“Abort the pregnant chad,” “Hang the hanging
chad,” etc.), few parents want to make the job of the playground bully any easier.
No doubt about it, punch-card ballots need to be replaced. Researchers at MIT have
confirmed that punch-card balloting is more prone to errors than other methods of vot-
ing. I once marked a punch-card so sloppily that I needed to get a new one from the Lane
County Elections Office (and no, I wasn’t following Richard Daley’s advice to “vote early
and often”). I’m glad that Congress — due in part to the leadership of America’s best con-
gressman, Peter DeFazio — has appropriated money for counties to replace punch-card
ballots with modern technology.
But as we criticize punch-cards, let’s be careful that we don’t become punch drunk. I
was surprised when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit held that punch-card ballot-
ing forecloses any possibility of fair elections — a holding that the Ninth Circuit reversed
en banc last week. The original ruling by the three-judge panel won praise from some
4 OCTOBER 2, 2003
conservative revisionists who blame punch-card ballots for the entire debacle in
Florida. According to this view, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris was just
an innocent victim of the evil punch-card ballot.
C’mon. Poor Chad shouldn’t be the only fall guy for the disaster in Florida. The
elections officials deserve most of the blame. Any inherent flaws in punch-card bal-
loting were greatly exacerbated when the Florida officials opted for a two-page “but-
terfly ballot” that did not match candidates’ names to punch holes very clearly. In fact,
the “butterfly ballot” was so confusing that even Pat Buchanan admitted some of the
votes he received were probably intended for Al Gore. Other problems in Florida had
nothing to do with punch-card balloting. Elections officials sent absentee ballots gratu-
itously to voters in heavily Republican counties, but not to voters in heavily Democratic
counties. Also, the officials simply “lost” boxes of completed ballots. These problems
were aptly summarized in my favorite bumper sticker from 2001: “One person, one vote
(offer not valid in Florida).”
S
hould we question the validity of past elections in Lane County because our
county has used punch-card ballots? Of course not. Our elections officials are a
lot more scrupulous than their counterparts in Florida. For the surest proof that
the Lane County Elections Office is above board, just check out the win-loss record for
the county’s money measures last year: 0 for 6! In 1998, Lane County lost a revenue
measure by 13 votes out of 52,000 cast. That would have been a win in the Sunshine
State.
Let’s not forget that election fraud predates the punch-card ballot. When Chicago res-
idents voted with pencils fastened to the walls of voting booths, some voters complained
that the strings were only long enough for the pencils to reach the Democratic boxes.
I’ll conclude by paraphrasing the NRA: Ballots don’t steal elections, people do.
Tom Lininger is a law professor and former county commissioner.