Letters To The Editor

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

January 24, 2008

Optical-scan voting a step to security

The Sun's article "Security of ballot not 100%" (Jan. 19) did a generally good job of describing optical-scan voting as the most accurate, transparent, cost-effective and reliable voting system available.

Gov. Martin O'Malley deserves credit for moving Maryland away from paper-less voting.

After five years of energetic citizen organizing, Mr. O'Malley signed legislation mandating the new system in 2007; last week, he dedicated funding for the transition in his budget.

This is a major step forward for Maryland, as this new arrangement will combine the rapid counting of optical-scan voting with the ability to recount a paper ballot.

But one last reform is needed to ensure the accuracy of our elections in Maryland: routine random audits of a percentage of the votes to ensure that the optical-scan machines have counted them accurately.

Currently, only an expensive recount process sponsored by a losing candidate would trigger a review of the vote count.

Audits for businesses are routine; our elections deserve no less scrutiny.

Linda Schade

Baltimore

The writer is the founder of TrueVoteMD.org.

New mayor moves the city forward

Kudos to Mayor Sheila Dixon and the city for unveiling a 10-year plan to end homelessness in our beloved city ("End to homelessness," Jan.18).

The mayor's resolve to end homelessness in the city is commendable. Under Ms. Dixon's leadership, I see Baltimore changing for the better.

J. W. Chapman

Baltimore

60 years to house the city's homeless?

The Sun's editorial "Ending homelessness" (Jan. 17) is inexcusably misleading.

It points out that there are 3,000 homeless people in Baltimore and that the jewel of the mayor's plan is that "within the decade, 500 units would be rented to individuals or families who have been homeless for a long time or who have multiple problems."

At that rate, it would take 60 years to house Baltimore's 3,000 homeless people. Most of them would be dead by then.

Worse still, those "500 units" within 10 years won't even be new apartments or houses. Presumably, they will merely be transferred from 500 other low-income subsidized housing residents who are almost as needy, and who, as a result, might well become homeless themselves.

What would be gained?

In the meantime, the impending economic collapse of capitalism will certainly increase homelessness by hundreds or thousands.

To herald such puny promises as an "ambitious" plan is to mightily deceive the public.

A. Robert Kaufman

Baltimore

Efficiency can save energy, cut pollution

I'm delighted to see that both the governor and The Sun are focusing on improving energy efficiency in Maryland ("Planting bulbs," editorial, Jan. 18).

The days of cheap energy really are gone for good, and continuing to use energy thoughtlessly will cost us big bucks as consumers.

However, it's easy to save money by replacing our old bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs, unplugging TVs and cell phone chargers when not in use, replacing old appliances with more energy-efficient ones and turning off computers at the end of the day.

And we all save when other people do the same thing because that reduces the need for new power plants and the threat of rolling blackouts.

But the best part is that by conserving, we reduce asthma-causing air pollution and the devastating effects of global warming.

Kudos to Gov. Martin O'Malley for putting forth an ambitious plan ("O'Malley to offer energy package," Jan. 14).

Let's hope the legislature sees the long-term benefits of energy efficiency and sets the governor's goals into law.

Julie Burris

Baltimore

Keillor's blast unfair to Republican voters

In his column "Writer blasts candidates for not lashing out" (Opinion

Commentary, Jan. 17), Garrison Keillor conveniently seems to have forgotten that it was the votes of millions of Americans that elected our current president who, Mr. Keillor states "with all due respect to fools and idiots, is a fool and an idiot."

Politics aside, personal attacks on the mental fitness of our highest official dishonor those who voted and do nothing to advance constructive thinking on the issues we face.

Richard Vollmer

Arnold

Life tenure fosters judicial arrogance

Michael Cain and Zach Messitte are against Maryland judges' being subject to contested popular elections ("Elections don't do justice to state's Circuit Court judges," Opinion

Commentary, Jan. 14).

While their concern is understandable, the answer is not for Maryland to go back to lifetime judicial appointments. The better solution would be for Maryland judges to be appointed to a fixed term, perhaps seven years, with no additional terms possible.

Under lifetime appointments, judges, for all practical purposes, become accountable to no one, and too many become indifferent to their duty to be fair and impartial jurists.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.