Yup'ik mother agrees that Native language is best taught at home

I am writing to thank A.M. Johnson of Ketchikan ("Leave teaching Yup'ik to families; school is for 21^st century learning," Jan. 30).

You are right, Mr. Johnson. I am a Yup'ik mother and grandmother with four children. All my children understand my language because they learned it at home. They learned English in school and are all college graduates.

I have many relatives and friends. All their homes have at least one television and most have two. There are no programs in Yup'ik on TV. I don't know any children who start kindergarten speaking and comprehending only Yup'ik.

I am with you! The job of our schools is to prepare our children for the 21^st century.

-- Lucy Crow

Bethel

Show respect for our U.S. soldiers, but feel free to express your opinion

After reading Audrey Jensen's letter, "U.S. soldiers' unselfish sacrifices make writer's criticisms possible" (Jan. 27), I was disappointed in her point of view.

Ms. Jensen said that Mr. Hanson's opinion was off base about the war in Iraq. She said that Mr. Hanson, instead of criticizing the war in Iraq, should applaud the service women and men. I agree that, indeed, we should show respect for the service men and women, but we also should not silence our grievances and opinions. Our government was structured so we could speak out, and in fact, we are expected to.

If everyone were to lie down and not speak up about what was bothering them, then eventually we would no longer have the opportunity. It is our responsibility as citizens to question the government, not blindly follow along.

-- Meaghan Gould

Anchorage

Motives behind Rep. McGuire's bill would appear vaguely suspicious

Regarding "Elections proposed for U.S. Senate vacancies" (Jan. 29): Rep. McGuire's motive for introducing a bill that will prevent people from voting on the Trust the People initiative does not settle well with me. Let's consider the facts. First, Rep. McGuire was opposed to having the people of Alaska have a say when the Senate seat now occupied by Sen. Lisa was vacant.

Second, it seems highly likely that the Trust the People initiative will be on the ballot this November. Third, this same November election will have: 1) The initiative that could potentially remind the voters of the anger and feelings of betrayal they felt when Gov. Murkowski appointed his daughter, 2) Sen. Lisa's name as a Senate candidate, and 3) Rep. McGuire's name as a candidate for re-election. Hmm. If we are upset about Sen. Lisa's appointment, does "trickle-down effect" have anything to do with Rep. McGuire's introduction of this bill? Just wondering.

-- Marie Husa

Anchorage

Tourism boycott is great news for Alaskans who enjoy camping

In regard to the aerial wolf control here in Alaska: I think the tourism boycott that is in the headlines in the Lower 48 is great.

I think they should take some good pictures of one of the local Bush planes, with the pilot out in front of it holding up a couple wolf pelts. Then the state should send a copy to every major newspaper in the country. This would definitely help my chances to find a place to park my camper this next summer when I want to go camping.

-- Steve Jones

Eagle River

Voters must elect leaders who will work for proper school funding

People running for the Assembly are again starting to come around knocking on doors and speaking in broad, meaningless platitudes.

I just want candidates running for the Assembly (and the state House in the fall) to know that if their No. 1 priority is not to restore the $26 million cut to the Anchorage School District, they need not bother coming to my house and asking me for my vote.

I do not blame the School Board for the budget cuts because it has no taxing power. I do blame the gutless politicians who run on a platform that our children are our most valuable resource, but then are afraid to say we need to raise more money so that we will be able to fully fund education.

If we truly want to "leave no child left behind," let's elect people to the Assembly (and the Legislature) who will provide enough money to the School District so that the teacher-student ratio is decreased, not increased and so that teachers will be able to teach and our children able to learn.

-- Jim Crary

Anchorage

Hopefully, conference delegates will strongly consider Hammond's plan

Former Gov. Jay Hammond continues to serve Alaska with his ingenious new plan to preserve the Permanent Fund dividend and provide funds to pay for state services. What a man!

Gov. Murkowski, on the other hand, is bringing together an elite group in Fairbanks for a conference to bless his predisposition to use our Permanent Fund dividend. Hopefully, the conference attendees will not allow themselves to be limited to the narrow questions Gov. Murkowski has directed them to consider and give Gov. Hammond's plan the consideration it deserves. The plan will not place a new tax burden on the people who can least afford it.

-- Reagan Russey

Anchorage

Children, the dividend is not your money; think of it as a gift

It seems to me that many of Alaska's citizens have regressed to 2 and 3 years old when the concept of "mine" is discovered, where everything observed is "mine."

Regarding the dividend, children. The dividend is not now, nor was it ever "yours." It is not "your" money. The money was intended for use by the state for the operation of general government, not for the general populace.

The dividend is not an "entitlement." The dividend is a gift. I appreciate the gift as much as the next Alaskan, but as a gift, I have no expectation of it. I do not deserve it for simply living and breathing here.

The Legislature may take the earnings anytime it wishes and without a vote of the people. If this comes as a shock, please feel free to read the state statute regarding the dividend. Ignorance is no excuse for greed.

The governor's and Board of Trustees' promoting of the percent of market value management for the Permanent Fund make sense. With the current fiscal situation the state finds itself in, would you rather receive part of something rather than nothing at all? For that is the direction we are all heading.

For parents, a choice. Would you rather have your child's dividend or an education system that is worthy of them?

The dividend isn't a cash cow for the people. Deal with it.

-- Randy Lee Harkins

Anchorage

Those who pay taxes also pay more attention to state expenditures

I can support using the percent of market value approach for annual payouts from the Permanent Fund, however, I don't think a penny of that payout should go directly to government. Funds necessary for the level of government we are willing to pay for should come from income and sales taxes, like they do for the rest of the United States.

That is fair, and making everyone pay taxes makes them pay more attention to expenditures than if they just get a smaller dividend check.

-- Earl Boone

Anchorage

Handing out unearned PFDs, then taking back earned income is dumb

I've only lived in Alaska for two years, so fellow citizens, help me get this straight: The state is going broke. It is giving out hundreds of millions of dollars worth of gifts every year -- in the form of Permanent Fund dividend checks -- to citizens who didn't really earn that money; but at the same time, they are talking about taking back hundreds of millions of dollars yearly, which the citizens did earn, in the form of a sales tax or, worse yet, an income tax. Pardon my ignorance, but it seems really dumb, or even worse, to hand out unearned money with one hand, and then take back earned income with the other.

-- Ray Fowler

Homer

Daily News could make bond issues clearer by providing a simple graph

In your article, "Mayor unveils bonds package" (Feb. 2), you mentioned that Assemblywoman Janice Shamberg said some old bonds get paid off each year. It would be of great interest to all taxpayers to know what bonds are still currently in effect and when they will be paid off. Publishing a time-line graph with dollars per $100,000 property value, along with the length of time that we'll be paying for those bonds, would better show the overall impact of the proposed bonds package on top of the current bonds we're paying for now. It seems like we all forget that after we approve a bond package, it eventually gets paid off. No one ever tells us when that happens. All we ever hear about is the dollar impact of the proposed bonds package.

Please see if you can publish such a graph before the April 6 ballot and all future articles about proposed bonds.

-- W. L. Pierce

Anchorage

Gov. Murkowski's legacy will be tainted with the blood of wolves

I am absolutely outraged; 30 wolves have been killed in the state's efforts to curb "over-predation" of moose and caribou in two areas of Alaska. Over 100 more are likely to be shot by gunmen using airplanes and snowmachines.

Meanwhile, efforts are under way to recall the governor, nearly 60 nationwide protests against the wolf killings have been held, and many of Murkowski's own constituents have publicly voiced their opposition to this brass form of predator control. Yet he still turns a deaf ear to the growing opposition.

Initially, I had faith that the governor would respect the voice of Alaska voters and rescind his decision to kill wolves before blood was shed. Sadly, I was mistaken. Does Murkowski hold a personal grudge against wolves? Does he hold a personal grudge against Alaskans? Most politicians hope to leave behind a legacy after leaving office. Well, it's apparent that the governor's "legacy" will be tainted with the blood of wolves, the ire of Alaska voters and besieged with stubbornness.

Whether or not the governor is run out of the office early or maintains his position for full term, his poor decision to promote killing wolves not only blemishes the state's status as a national treasure, but more importantly damages the natural cycle of predator-prey relationships within its primeval forests.

-- Jeff Schively

Girdwood

You have supporters, governor; hang tough on wolf control efforts

I noticed that the local news reported that the Friends of Animals have identified some 60,000 potential "Alaska-haters." Does the state plan to post their identities on the Web, like those of other offenders? Is the state going to require them to have a special visa? I'm making a little fun here at their expense.

Seriously, governor. There is a deep base of support for your stand on this issue. Stay the course. It's a lot simpler for people to pay a few bucks to get a "Friends of Animals" coffee mug than it is to bear responsibility as the leader of the great state of Alaska.

-- Parker Rittgers

Anchorage

When was Daily News ordained to judge gambling's social costs?

The Daily News has used its position to misinform its readers regarding legalized gambling in Alaska ("Casino? Don't fall for sucker's bet," Jan. 22).

As of 2003, more than 39 states had legalized gambling. With a percentage of the money generated, most have provided numerous worthwhile community services such as meals and transportation for the elderly, reducing state and local taxes and providing prescription drug benefits for senior citizens to name a few. It would be folly to think you could not do the same in Alaska. In addition, the state could use a percentage of the profits to reinstate the longevity bonus to those individuals who were pioneers in building Alaska.

The casino would provide jobs. Those employed would now add to the tax base, rather than be a burden to it.

The Daily News' editorial presumes that there will be a greater social cost if gambling is allowed; however, they fail to back this statement with any statistical data. They add that under Alaska's charitable gambling, "This small-scale legalized gambling strikes a balance between social benefits and social cost." My question to the Daily News is: "When were they ordained to be both judge and jury in determining social benefits and cost?"

This issue will continue to be debated, but let me give the citizens of Alaska a sure bet: You can always count on the Daily News to support propositions opposed to free enterprise and entrepreneurship.

-- Larry Seethaler

Anchorage

The real boobies seem to be writing for the Voice of the Times

After reading the strident diatribe from The Voice of The Times, "Super Bowl Half-Time Show. ... A disgrace" (Feb. 3) I felt I had to respond. What is all this fuss over a little booby? According to the Times writers, accidentally flashing a tender piece of flesh is "Sleazy, vulgar, offensive. ... Or how about repugnant and shameful?" In other editorials, these same bastions of morality seemed to think plunging into war was the noblest and most moral thing this country could do. The real boobies seem to be writing for the Voice of the Times.

In the same paper, in the sports section, a shirtless Chris Anderson shows off his tats and one can clearly see his right nipple ("Marked men," Feb. 3). To me, his nipple is much more titillating than Janet Jackson's. Why are some nipples forbidden objects of shame and desire, and others are simply acceptable?

Luckily, I am no longer burdened with the weight of respectability, so I can ask such questions.

-- Tim Young Anchorage

Super Bowl trash didn't bother those who went skiing instead

I read that folks were upset by the halftime show at the Super Bowl. It didn't bother me, because I didn't see it. I was out skiing. It was a beautiful, sunny afternoon.

There's a real easy solution to the trash on television. Don't watch it. Turn off your TV. Live. We're in a great place for it.

-- Gunnar Knapp

Anchorage

Super Bowl halftime show was offensive on too many levels

Concerning the revealing episode that occurred during the Super Bowl halftime show. The fact that Ms. Jackson had a part of her body exposed due to a "wardrobe error" and tried to assign blame is not important.

The point that everyone seems to be missing is that the performance portrayed a man ripping clothes off a woman. Was this appropriate, especially on a nationally televised event of this magnitude? I think not.

The action potentially pushes so many hot buttons and is offensive on so many levels that sufficient commentary is not possible here due to the limitations of this forum.

I think that all who were responsible, such as the performers, choreographers, director and producers of the halftime show should be sanctioned from ever being given that privilege again. Shame on the National Football League for allowing this type of display during what could have and should have been the finest hours of sports and entertainment.

-- James Canitz