Letters policy
We welcome letters, but please include your full name, address and a daytime telephone number. We edit all letters for libel, length and clarity.
Send letters to: Letters, Illinois Times. P.O. Box 5256. Springfield, Illinois 62705. Fax: (217) 753-3958. E-mail: editor@illinoistimes.com
DON’T PIN DNR CUTS ON BLAGOJEVICH
I am a Republican election judge in LaSalle
County, but I know how to be fair and honest. Gov. Rod Blagojevich
did nothing to the Department of Natural Resources but inherit
problems from the Republican governor [Rich Miller, “Trouble
at DNR,” Feb. 3]. He didn’t create the mess. If DNR had
met its mandated fiduciary duty, maybe, just maybe, there
wouldn’t have been any layoffs.
The comment about slashing staff from 2,300 to
1,700 is highly misleading. There was an early-retirement program
initiated by then-Gov. George Ryan and the Legislature. Those folks
represented the people of Illinois during that era, and
that’s what the people wanted at that point in time. So
don’t make it appear that staff was ruthlessly slashed for
political reasons by Blagojevich.
Bob Castelli
Retired DNR employee
Ottawa
GIVE OBAMA A BREAK — HE’S NEW
I was baffled by Fletcher Farrar’s
criticism of Barack Obama for not taking a stance on the Iraq war
[“When will Obama find his voice on Iraq?” Jan. 27]. He
has only been a U.S. senator for about one month, and the debate
about whether to go to war was lost about two years ago. That is
when Congress passed a joint resolution authorizing use of force
against Iraq, giving the president authority to take preemptive,
unilateral military action against Iraq, when and how he deems
necessary. This bill was opposed by only 133 representatives and
23 senators. The purpose of Obama’s meeting with the military
veterans was to discuss their benefits or lack thereof.
Considering that President Bush was re-elected
with slightly more than 50 percent of the vote, Obama may have
chosen to focus on the reason for the meeting without alienating
half of those in attendance with an anti-war dialogue. I would be
more interested in our senator’s opinions about the potential
for war with Iran. I wonder how many more thousands of American
soldiers and innocent foreigners will be injured and killed as our
president proclaims that “freedom is on the march” with
a goal to “end tyranny in our world.”
Jeff Woods
Williamsville
ANOTHER SPRINGFIELD ATTRACTION
I would like to compliment Illinois Times for the
outstanding and entertaining journalism of Dusty Rhodes. Although I
enjoy reading her little opinion columns (e.g., the “New
Year’s baby” story), it has been her hard-hitting news
work that brought me back to reading Illinois
Times for news again.
Like the many exceptional cultural events we
enjoy in Springfield, the writing of Dusty Rhodes provides an
ingredient that nudges this city well into the
“livable” column. Original rock, public and community
radio, live jazz, outstanding symphony and ballet companies —
all that and a big-city investigative reporter. We are lucky.
Some of our local leaders may need to just
come and go, but we will all be well served if Dusty Rhodes stays
on the beat for years to come. Thanks, Dusty Rhodes! Thanks, Illinois Times!
Frank Trompeter
Springfield
NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTS BARRICADE
I live at 431 S. Wesley St. You recently
published an article in your paper in which a resident of our
neighborhood, Ted Smith, suggested the need for a road through what
is basically my neighbor’s and my driveway [Fletcher Farrar,
“Tear down this barricade,” Jan. 13]. The reason we
don’t want a road here is because there is not enough room
between the houses for a road to be safe. It’s not the noise
or traffic — Lord knows Wesley Street is busy enough —
it’s a safety issue for our children. My neighbor has two
small children, and many other neighborhood kids play in this area.
When I first moved here, the city property
directly behind my house was covered in six-foot-high horseweed and
had multiple campfire spots, and, considering the fact that my
daughter found $60 in cash lying on the old railroad hill, I would
say it was a popular drug-dealing area. My wife and I have worked
very hard to clean up this area, which belongs to the city, and
make it a safe place for our family.
I would like to say that I love my country,
did my time in the Navy and Persian Gulf, and am a registered
voter. This is a democracy, and, like it or not, the majority of
people in my neighborhood do not want a road through this area.
Jeff Helmkamp
Springfield
THE U.S., IRAN, AND IRAQ
I’m thankful for people such as U.S.
Sen. Dick Durbin, who is taking his duties seriously and keeping
us, the represented, represented [John Nichols, “Bush
fighter,” Feb. 3]. I’m thankful also for the [Feb. 3]
commentary of Rod Helle: What indeed is happening to the country?
In the 1960s there were convulsions in
Iraq as people holding democratic ideals and attempting to create a
representative government were thwarted. Several of these key
people were assassinated. Saddam Hussein was later supported by the
CIA in a coup that left him in control of the country. This origin
of Baathist Iraq is not often commented on by even the
“liberal” media. Questions arise: Was the motivation
for installing Saddam the same as that for the recent invasion and
removal of him? What was going on in Iran at around the same time?
Some may remember a coup that restored Reza Pahlavi as the shah.
Iran and Iraq went to war in the 1980s. Who
provided both countries with ammunition, military hardware, and
logistics? Who sold both nations chemical weapons? Who later urged
the Shia in Basra to revolt against Saddam, then offered no aid
while they were slaughtered? Whose ambassador responded,
“Your internal matters are of no concern to us” when
Saddam indicated he was ready to invade Kuwait because he claimed the Kuwaitis were
stealing his oil?
Ah, now there’s a word. Which two
countries hold a considerable amount of the world’s oil
reserves?
Ed Gutierrez-Perry
Pleasant Plains
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
In this country, whenever there is the mere
mention of a proposal for national health care, like the ones that
all major Western industrialized countries have, the cry goes up:
“Socialized medicine!” It is also said that Americans
would never accept such a Canadian-style system. They believe
we’re too attached to choice of coverage and care to embrace
such a monolithic system.
Well, as it is now, Americans are
particularly vulnerable to financial catastrophe as a result of the
fact that fewer and fewer Americans are insured and many are
underinsured, something that Canadians, Brits, Germans, and French
don’t have to worry about. So what if such a system means
rationing? We have rationing now. The system is broken, and the
only way to fix it is a single-payer system, Canadian-style.
Beni Kitching
Springfield
CONSUMERS BEAR RESPONSIBILITY
With regard to the article concerning mortgage
lending in the subprime arena, several items are worthy of
consideration [Rich Lord, “Penalizing homeowners,” Jan.
27].
In our practice, we do not in any way condone
questionable lending activities. As registered loan officers with
no affiliation with Ameriquest Mortgage Co., we have on occasion
suggested to consumers that a loan may not be in their best
interest. Sometimes they take this advice, and sometimes they want
to go ahead. Whatever happens, it is their decision.
All lenders, be it for a mortgage, an
installment loan, or any type of loan, place great emphasis on
risk. The dominant question in approving a loan is “Will we
be repaid by the borrower as they agree to do?” Lenders
attempt to answer this question by examining the financial
background of the borrower, specifically the credit history.
If a borrower who applies for a loan brings a
solid credit score to the lender and a significant equity
investment, a lender will feel more comfortable in making this
loan, compared with a borrower who has a questionable credit
background and little or no equity investment. Therefore it is
reasonable that the borrower who is stronger should be rewarded
with a lower rate and the borrower who has had financial issues
should pay a higher rate.
The premise for this development in America is
that people often do not save funds for a down payment or possess an “I
want it now” outlook. This situation is not necessarily
associated with any subsection of society or limited to specific
geographic areas. There are clients who want to purchase high-dollar
value properties in desirable areas who have credit issues.
The consumer has a responsibility in this.
One does not have to accept a loan with terms that are not
appropriate for a given situation. The article included an
interesting quote by a borrower: “I wasn’t sure that I
should do it.” That should be a signal to the consumer that a
thorough evaluation of the transaction would be in order before
proceeding.
In refinance transactions, a federal law known
as right of rescission provides the consumer with a three-day
period in which the loan can be canceled. In Illinois, consumers
must complete a form for refinance mortgages that shows there is a
net tangible benefit for going forward with the loan. If there are
terms that do not work for your situation or if the loan does not
provide a solution to your dilemma, why proceed?
One item in the article as stated is at best
misleading. It was stated that 4 percent of subprime loans are in
foreclosure. The opposite of that is 96 percent are in good
standing. There will always be a percentage of loans in foreclosure
status in both prime and subprime markets. The important factor is
that one does not go into foreclosure status for being late on one
payment. Typically, to get to foreclosure, a borrower has to be at
least four to five months late and unwilling to work with the
lender. A mortgage lender will make every reasonable effort to
avoid foreclosure, which can easily cost the lender more than
$10,000.
An interesting fact in the article that is
directly applicable to Illinois was the statement that some state
regulations have the effect of increasing the loan cost. In
Illinois, that is an understatement. Due to regulations, the
State of Illinois has made the capital market inaccessible to many
potential borrowers. The stifling laws have made loans under
$50,000 almost impossible to accomplish for people who have had
credit issues.
Relative to adjustable rate mortgages, rates
cannot be increased without reason. The rate is connected to an
index such as LIBOR, COFI, or T-bills. As the economy moves, the
rate can change. Regulations limit the change to 2 percentage
points in one year and 6 percentage points over the life of the
loan. The rate on an adjustable-rate loan is typically fixed for
two or three years. A smart consumer in the subprime market will be
working diligently to keep payments current. Commonly 12 to 18
months of consistent payments will allow enough improvement in the
consumer’s credit score to for the loan to be refinanced into
one with a lower rate.
In the end, the loan program for which a
consumer will qualify is solely determined by the actions of the
consumer. Pay your bills on time, do not overextend, and use good
financial sense, and you will be eligible for the best terms.
Dave Boyd
John Meyer
State Street Mortgage & Loan Co.
Springfield
WHEN LIBERALS TURN CONSERVATIVE
When I was growing up, liberalism to me
represented more choice, more freedom, and above all taking risks
in order to make things better. The recent outcry of liberals
against George W. Bush’s Social Security plan makes me
rethink these values. His plan is criticized as being “too
risky.” Too risky? Are liberals now afraid of change? Or do
they oppose the plan because of who said it?
I’m not suggesting that Bush’s
plan is flawless, but how about some better ideas instead of simply
dismissing it under the assumption that “everything is fine,
leave it alone.” Liberals could learn a few things from Bush.
Seth Bohlen
Springfield
HYPOCRITES AND LIARS
Much has been made by commentators and
pundits from all avenues of the political spectrum about the role
morality and values played in the 2004 election and it’s
apparent that one of those values is concern for the life of the
unborn fetus, a cause taken up by the disingenuous
“pro-life” movement.
However, it seems as if the concern of most
— but certainly not all — “pro-lifers” for
human life ends at birth, when this mortal coil really gets tricky
and fraught with danger.
How do I know “pro-life” concerns
end at birth? Easily: Pro-lifers voted en masse for George W. Bush,
the butcher of Fallujah and Baghdad and the maestro of murder and
mayhem for at least 100,000 Iraqis killed by coalition forces. As
reported in a very recent research study conducted by the Johns
Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in Maryland, and
reported in a British medical journal, many of those thousands upon
thousands of victims were children and women.
Where’s the “pro-life”
outrage? I don’t see Right to Life contingents marching
alongside anti-war, pro-quality of life groups like the Sierra
Club, United for Peace and Justice, and SEIU. Why is it that the
dominant elements of the Republican Party, the political agency for
the so-called religious right, are pro-life/anti-woman and
pro-execution, even if that means executing innocent and/or poorly
defended prisoners of the state? Pro-lifers, why is it acceptable
for the government to slice and dice essential public services,
services imperative to improve the quality of life for low-income
children, while, at the same time, Bush’s tax cuts enrich the
coffers of the elite? These are glaring and inhumane contradictions
on the part of “pro-lifers” and the “religious
right.”
Also, why the lack of concern? Is one American
fetus really worth 10,000 Iraqi civilians? Are white babies that
much more important in the minds of the “pro-lifers”
than brown or black babies? Aren’t we all God’s
children?
The deceivers and manipulators should not be
allowed to dictate the terms of life and liberty so let’s
call these self-righteous, self-serving “Apocalyptics”
appropriately: smug and arrogant frauds and cheats. Better yet,
let’s use biblical terms: Like the self-serving priests,
opportunistic political officials and greedy money changers who
crucified Christ for defying their authority and embracing
society’s disenfranchised, disadvantaged, and disposable,
they are hypocrites and liars.
Michael Ziri
Springfield
This article appears in Feb 10-16, 2005.
