Red Line plan just isn't rapid enough
A rapid east-west mass transit route is definitely something this city needs ("Getting on board," Dec. 10). But "rapid" is the key word, and the 4C alternative the city seems almost certain to pursue would be anything but rapid.
Under the 4C plan, it would take 41 minutes to get from Bayview to the Social Security administration headquarters in Woodlawn. According to the Maryland Transit Administration's timetables and my own commuting experiences, the No. 40 "Quickbus" now runs that route in 45 to 50 minutes.
I know additional tunneling on the Red Line route would be costly. But do we really want to spend all this money on a transit line that would reduce the trip time by four minutes?
Plan 4C would mostly benefit those who commute from Fells Point or Canton to downtown. This is definitely a needed service. But for those, like me, who commute to the Social Security Administration headquarters, the 4C train would not be much quicker than the bus.
As I understand it, the idea of the Red Line is to get people on trains who are currently driving. But people will never get out of their cars if driving is quicker than riding public transit.
So whom would this system serve? Not the people who are already riding public transit.
Jonathan Howard, Baltimore
Abortion advocate cited as authority
It is not surprising that Dr. Robert Blum, the authority cited in Susan Reimer's column "Studying the truth about consequences," (Dec. 8) found little reliable research to support the claims that abortion has long-lasting ill effects on mental health.
Dr. Blum is a former board chairman of the Guttmacher Institute.
Since the Guttmacher Institute is associated with Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, Dr. Blum could hardly be called an impartial researcher in this field.
His interest in abortion advocacy should have been revealed in Ms. Reimer's column.
Lisa Basarab, Baltimore
Why waste energy purging unused laws?
I'm curious as to why City Councilman James B. Kraft is wasting his time and taxpayer dollars on such foolishness ("Past time to purge archaic city laws," letters, Dec. 9).
I think his time and energy would be better spent dealing with the city business at hand - including the budget woes and the multitude of other problems the city faces.
Why scour the book for archaic laws that aren't enforced anyway?
