Easy To Deceive
Editor: I enjoyed Kal's cartoon of Jan. 30. It captures the misdirected interest of Congress and the executive branch and both parties. However, it left out the other end zone. It's called the ''national debt.'' I wonder why everyone, including Kal, likes to exclude it in this game.
It's like an overdue bill, and you are getting nasty phone calls. It's like a raise you think you deserve, but know you can't get. It's like ''what did I do wrong'' and ''things don't seem to get better.''
The American people are so easy to deceive. Our national politicians from Johnson to Goldwater, Nixon to Sarbanes, Reagan to Kennedy haven't got the ability or guts to look beyond their own re-election to truly deal with our country's internal financial responsibilities.
Now, it's happening again.
Who owns our debt? Many foreign countries, pension funds, banks, secure S&Ls, corporations hold this debt. Why? Your tax dollar is paying the interest on this debt created over the last 30 years by the donkeys and elephants. And, as everyone knows, we have one of the best tax collection systems in the world. Our national debt is a secure investment!
How do our national politicians react to problems with the economy? They just create more debt for us to pay taxes on.
There is a very sad, terrible secret that no one really wants let out, especially those in national office. The quality of life in the U.S. is not going up. It is going down. The standard of living, as we have known it or expected it to be in the future, is going to be disappointing.
That national debt that Kal left out in the other end zone is going to roll down the field and wrap up both teams if they don't change direction and play half the game going both ways.
aul H. Leamer.
Editor: It is totally reprehensible and self-serving for anyone in public education to be picketing for higher taxes. They are teaching our children and don't understand the principals of basic economics.
Everyone must sacrifice.
Editor: I read your Feb. 11 editorial, ''For the Sitting Judges.'' I am one of the four challenges and strongly disagree with the position espoused.
The premise of your editorial is that judicial selections should not be contested vigorously. This is hardly a ringing endorsement of the democratic process.
I agree with your editorial to the extent that, ideally, judicial appointments should be non-political and non-partisan. However, I am a candidate for precisely that reason -- the present system has failed the residents of Baltimore County and must be reformed in the election process.
The system has led to a disproportionate lack of representation for women on the Circuit Court and the absence of any representation for other minorities. However, most reprehensible is the prevalence of favoritism, or nepotism, or ''Old Boys' Network'' in the selection of judges. There have been eight new Circuit Court appointments by two administrations since 1986. Three of the eight appointments have been filled by sons of former judges and one by the son of a former county executive.
Appointments based on merit, election or when a confirmation process is involved do not result in children succeeding parents in important positions in high percentages. For example, only 1 percent of current National Football league players are sons of former N.F.L. players, only 3 percent of present U.S. senators are sons of former senators and no Supreme Court justice has ever been succeeded by his child.
I would not be running if I did not believe I was the best qualified of the candidates. As a former assistant state's attorney for almost 10 years and a lecturer at the School of Law of the University of Baltimore for more than 15 years, I am not in any sense an ''ambitious attorney'' with ''nothing to lose.'' I have never before sought political office and do so, at this time, only to assure that voters elect the best qualified candidates and not merely rubber stamp political appointments.
To this date, there has been no acknowledgment of my candidacy by your paper. Therefore, my qualifications could not have been compared before your endorsement of the sitting judges. I expect, in fairness, you will give my candidacy and qualifications equal mention in future editions. How else are the voters of Baltimore County to know they do have a choice?
Joseph S. Lyons.
Canadian Health Care
Editor: President Bush misspoke in his attempt to sell his ''food stamp'' health care insurance. He might have checked his facts first with the British Columbia Ministry of Health.
As an American living in Canada since 1977, I can vouch for the superiority of the health care system here. My B.C. Medical Services Plan premium is $35 ($30 U.S.) per month. My 1990 income tax was $4,405.62 on a taxable income of $25,871.90.