Bush serious about Clear Skies
I would like to correct the distortions of the Bush
administration’s environmental policies in Mike
Bitondo’s column, “Bush’s attractive policy
titles hide truth” (Jan 15). Appropriately named, these
policies will produce meaningful results ““ air clearer than
what you see and breathe in Los Angeles today and healthier forests
that have been restored to their natural conditions and beauty. It
is that simple.
The Clear Skies Initiative will result in a 70 percent reduction
in the three major power plant emissions, including mercury, for
the first time, ever. This mandatory market-based approach has
already been proven to significantly cut sulfur dioxide emissions,
which cause acid rain, faster and cheaper with no drawn-out
lawsuits. Clear Skies will allow the overwhelming majority of
American counties to meet the new health-based air quality
standards supported by President Bush. Mercury has never been
regulated before, so your assertion that it would be cut 90 percent
under current law should be flatly dismissed.
What cannot be dismissed, though, is the destruction from last
year’s wildfires in California, which cost $250 million to
contain and resulted in 22 civilian deaths. Healthy Forests, which
received broad bipartisan support, including that of California
Sens. Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, will return sensible
management practices to our public lands, helping protect human
lives and wildlife habitats from the dangers of catastrophic
wildfires.
When it comes to environmental policy, President Bush says what
he means ““ and means what he
says.                Â
Dana Perino Associate director for Communications White
House Council on Environmental Quality Washington,
D.C.
Merit-based system is best
I am offended by Yousef Tajsar’s statements in Colleen
Honigsberg’s article on affirmative action
(“Affirmative action stance debated,” News, Jan. 16).
How dare he call those against affirmative action liars for
believing in the literal words of Martin Luther King Jr.,
“will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the
content of their character,” as if Tajsar knows for sure
which side Dr. King would take in this day and age.
Every student now has a fair opportunity to enter college based
on merit, the only basis for “discrimination,” which in
the past has made UCLA a top university. Blame the public school
system for not adequately preparing inner-city students for
high-ranking universities, but don’t blame the merit-based
system for acceptance rates.
Affirmative action is not the solution to the real problem of
our decrepit public school system. Not only that, but it is
insulting to minorities to insinuate that they need that kind of
assistance to be accepted.
Joe Groff Fourth-year history student