Don't fund escalation in Afghanistan war
The administration is asking for an increase in the defense budget for Fiscal Year 2011 to $708.2 billion.
Besides this baseline budget, Defense Secretary Gates is asking for another $33 billion for the current year's budget to pay for the 30,000 extra troops that are being sent to Afghanistan. Altogether that's $741.2 billion that's being requested. That's $741,200,000,000. This request comes at the same time that domestic spending is being frozen.
Personally, I think this request is unconscionable _ especially because extending the war in Afghanistan is counter-productive.
In a recent video, former Gen. Karl Eikenberry, who previously led the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan and who is now ambassador to Afghanistan, said, "the proposed troop increase will bring vastly increased costs and an indefinite, large-scale U.S. military role in Afghanistan ... in a mission that most agree cannot be won solely by military means."
I hope the House Armed Services Committee, which is now meeting to consider authorizing this Defense Department request _ much of which will fund more troops and money for this unwinnable war, will read Eikenberry's memos before they vote on the issue.
Readers, if you agree with me, please contact Rep. Scott Murphy, who is a member of the committee, and ask him not to increase defense spending.
Encourage him to read Eikenberry's memos and to urge his fellow committee members to read the memos, too! Rep. Murphy's contact number for Delaware and Otsego counties is 746-8449. You can leave a message with his staff and ask them to pass your message along to the appropriate staff in D.C.
Kate Ryan
Delhi
Health care facilities should be applauded
Your Feb. 2 article "Drug dumping charges threaten loans" reported demands made by state and local politicians that orders against certain Delaware County health care facilities be nullified. These suggestions overlook the cooperative and commendable efforts of those facilities that reached agreements with the state.
Those facilities that signed consent agreements with the state should be applauded for striving to be national leaders in the effort to curb the release of harmful pharmaceuticals into drinking water. Rather than engage in protracted litigation, these facilities sought to partner with the state and craft an agreement to address this problem. They should be commended for this.
Pharmaceutical discharges into public drinking water supplies are a growing, national problem. A 2008 Associated Press investigation found levels of pharmaceuticals in the drinking water of 46 million Americans. Further, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified pharmaceuticals as "contaminants of emerging concern." The Catskill Watershed Corp., in conjunction with the involved state agencies, has already met to help these facilities comply with the novel resolution to this challenging issue.
Just as the 1997 Watershed Memorandum of Agreement is now hailed as an international model on how to protect a livable water supply, these health care facilities should be hailed for trying to establish a national model on how to protect drinking water from pharmaceuticals.
While many MOA parties may differ on the manner this issue was handled, Riverkeeper commends the tough leadership these facilities demonstrated.
James L. Simpson
White Plains
Simpson is a staff attorney for Riverkeeper Inc.
Don't let minority rule on drilling
I live downstream from the Ross No. 1 well in Maryland and I applaud just how well the drilling was done. I believe we can have our energy and do it in a clean and ethically safe manner.
It is time for Otsego County to embrace drilling as long as it is done carefully. The benefits of drilling outweigh potential risks.
The DEC report clearly shows how safe drilling can and will be.
The residents, town and county can expect a long-term payback for the minor time and any inconvenience drilling may cause.
Horizontal drilling and multiple wells from the same site will lessen any large-scale environmental disturbance
Why doesn't the county think about building a recycling plant for treating the hydrofracking fluid? It would create jobs, create revenue, lessen the time the fluid has to be moved (lessening time for a potential traffic accident) and be environmentally responsible.
Increasing gas production from New York would lessen the energy hold that foreign nations have on us.
The only downside I see is the new economic power that drilling would produce for this area. It would change the old paradigm of New York City holding us as political pawns. We would begin to have the subsequent political power that money brings and can then demand that the state starts listening to our needs.
Unless you are off the energy grid, purveyors of the "Not in My Backyard" mentality are just the hypocritical political ranting of a small but vocal minority.
Our elected leaders should begin to recognize that now is the time for rational action instead of acquiescing to the irrational desires of a loud and vocal minority that believes society can run on wind and solar power.
Drill here. Drill now. And do so in a safe and logical manner.
Ted Stucka
Maryland
Flat tax without loopholes needed
I watched the first episode of CBS's "Undercover Boss" on Sunday and it is one of the best shows I have seen. It is a true reality show. Not only is Larry O'Donnell the COO of Waste Management, he is an honest, down- to-earth man. He went undercover and performed the low-end jobs of his company and realized that decisions he was making were unfair to the workers. He made changes and has formed groups of those workers to find more-reasonable working conditions.
The world needs bosses like him. Too bad all CEOs, in fact all those who run this country, don't do the same, to see what it is like to live on minimum wage or as a middle-income worker. I just hope that CBS keeps this show on air, because I really enjoyed it. If you haven't seen it, watch out for it, I think it will be on Sunday evenings.
Nothing to do with the show, but I am sick of hearing the Republicans crying about how the richest 5 percent pays 85 percent of the taxes. If we had a fair, progressive income tax (both state and federal), they should be paying 95 percent of the taxes. If the Republicans didn't pass tax breaks for the rich over the years, we would not be in the mess we are in today. New York wouldn't have to reduce services and hammer education, especially SUNY. We need to convince our lawmakers to go back to a progressive tax and make the rich pay their fair share. Taking 40 percent from a millionaire won't hurt him, but taking 25 percent from low-end workers makes them choose between food and medicine. A flat tax without any deductions or loopholes would solve it.
Robert "Duke" Piroha
Hamden
