Punitive damagesImagine this: In the state of Alabama, a...

If the balanced budget is a good idea for the future, it is a good idea for now. If it is bad now, and we can't live with it, why should we create an uncertain instrument for the future?

Herbert K. Lodder

Baltimore

Free lunch

For quite some time now, it has disturbed me that the government provides breakfasts and lunches in the schools.

This is a costly program that should be eliminated. Those needing assistance are most likely already receiving food stamps and other entitlements.

The schools should concentrate on education, not restauranting. Having large, full-service cafeterias is extremely costly and a distraction from the purpose of the school.

Welfare programs and programs such as subsidized school breakfasts and lunches take the responsibility away from parents and place it on the government.

It does not belong to the government, it belongs to the parents. This, in reality, hurts the self-esteem of parents receiving such assistance.

My parents considered it not only a duty, but a joy to personally pack me a nutritious lunch for school, and I feel the same way about doing this for my children.

House Bill 999 (to end the federal lunch program) is a step in the right direction.

Rebecca Reynolds

Baltimore

19th Amendment

Throughout the year there will be celebrations of the 75th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote.

Not many of the pioneer women of the suffrage movement who participated in the glorious event are still around, as they would be nearing the century mark.

Those who are, I hope, will tell how it felt in 1920 to vote for the first time. Bless them.

These gallant early voters should be honored for their longevity and their achievements.

Joseph T. Kasprzak

Baltimore

Watered down smoking ban ill serves citizens

Legislators, many of whom smoke like chimneys and choose to kill themselves, are now foisting their bad choices on those who choose not to be killed by smoking. What a travesty!

I resent their decision to exempt restaurants from the regulations that would go into effect March 27.

It is clearly a decision to care more about their own pockets being lined by the tobacco industry than the health of Maryland's citizens.

It is an ill conceived decision to listen to the whinings of restaurant owners rather than to consider the millions of dollars in health care costs for people who suffer as the result of second-hand smoke.

Our esteemed legislators don't read, don't listen. They choose not to care that Maryland already has one of the highest cancer rates in the country. They choose not to care that second-hand smoke is directly linked to many diseases resulting from exposure to smoke.

Plainly, they simply don't care about plain, ordinary citizens who care about their heath.

There are restaurants and hotels all over the country that have banned smoking. How about a compromise, an amendment that says everyone who voted for this legislation in the General Assembly shall be responsible for all health care costs of all Maryland citizens suffering from second-hand smoking?

Laura Steele

Ellicott City