Related articles:

More letters Letters to the editor More letters More letters More letters More letters More letters More letters More letters More letters

General
CHULA VISTA LANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPE CREW LEADER Office and Clerical
Carf International
Clerical Office Assitant Trades/Construction
Best Paving
Asphalt Finish Roller Operators Driver/Transportation
Pioneer Landscaping
Dieel Fleet Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Buffalo Exchange
Bookkeeper/Office Asst. Health Care
Sonora Behavioral Health
CD Therapist Driver/Transportation
Western Emulsions
Class A CDL Drivers w/hazmat & tanker

Please add my name to the supporters of the initiative First Things First. In the last 10 years or so, it has been established by the brain scientists that distinct and lasting patterns of brain development occur during the first three years of life. The effect of this brain development is best understood by me as the effect of good nurture, and conversely, bad nurture during this critical time.

Babies who receive timely care, feeding, sleeping and cuddling will establish a brain pattern which concludes for them that the world is a pretty good place.

On the other hand, babies who do not receive such care and are subject to neglect will conclude for the rest of their life that the world is a tough place, and they have to scratch and claw to protect themselves.

I hope to help the Bashas and others in collecting the required signatures for the Initiative to be on the Arizona ballot this November.

H. John Dunshee

In response to the Feb. 11 editorial "Child-focused initiative deserves vote."

Thank you for the excellent editorial about First Things First Early Childhood Development and Heath Initiative.

The Star's support of this effort to establish a fund to assist early childhood development programs in our state is most commendable. The plan has everything going for it, as the Star's editorial so clearly points out — accountability, local control, no drain on General Fund, deterrent to smoking, etc.

Most of all, the funding will help provide the early childhood education, development and health care that have been shown to reduce dropout and crime rates and lessen the cost of providing social services. This is a win-win plan I hope every voter will support at the polls in November.

Marge Mead

Sun City

In response to the Feb. 12 column "Enormous dilemma."

I no longer support developing a larger compound for the elephants at Reid Park Zoo here in Tucson. I believe the elephants would be better off physically and emotionally in the out-of-state elephant compound Jim Kiser mentioned, where there is sufficient room and other elephants to socialize with.

One of these two elephants is constantly standing still, swaying her trunk back and forth. Every time I have seen her over the years, this is all she is doing. This does not appear to be normal, happy elephant behavior.

The well-being of the elephants supersedes any desire to educate or entertain the populace of Tucson, even the children.

Irma Sheppard

Psychotherapist, Tucson

In response to the Feb. 12 column "An enormous dilemma."

I am in complete agreement with Jim Kiser's argument and do not understand why the City Council would ever decide to maintain Connie and Shaba at our zoo. It is obvious the planned expansion would not improve the elephants' health.

The Detroit Zoo fought for months with the American Zoo Association for the welfare of their elephants. Do we not have it in our hearts to do the same? Is our own entertainment truly more important to us than the daily physical pain of another animal? I truly hope that is not the case.

Xeniia Astachkina

In response to the Feb. 12 article "Ranchers pleased, enviros unhappy."

Ranching is a integral part of Arizona history, and that is where it needs to remain — in history. Let's say you own a chain saw. This chain saw is broken. It would cost you $450 to fix it, but the saw only cost you $300. Common sense would tell you to buy a new saw. Would the government pay the $450 to keep that beat-up, rusty old chain saw a-hummin'?

If our government uses this same formula in efforts to keep ranching alive, who really pays? And is this not just another form of welfare? If the federal government was there to bail you out when times get tough, is that a sign of strength? I do not think so.

Serge Manna

In response to the Feb. 12 letter to the editor, "Hide I-10."

I would like to present a solution to the Tucson traffic problem that won't cost any local money.

Tucson needs an interstate highway bypass because at least half the people on I-10 are never going to stop in town. A bypass from Willcox to Casa Grande through the San Pedro River Valley, which already contains some useable bridges, will do quite a bit to alleviate through traffic. The truck traffic will be mostly eliminated in town, and I-10 expansion won't be needed in town.

Richard Lane

One has to question the moral character of this administration and the Republican-controlled Congress. At George W. Bush's urging, Congress passed a deficit-reduction bill that slashed student loans, Medicare and Medicaid and other programs benefiting the poor and middle class.

In addition, Bush's just-released budget contains massive cuts in other vital domestic programs. At the same time, billions of dollars in tax breaks have been given to oil companies that just posted obscene profits. And of course there is the relentless call for tax cuts on investments, which almost exclusively benefit the rich.

The administration panders to its rich friends and corporate donors at the expense of the general public. This is immoral. America needs to wake up or the country we know and love will be lost.

Joan Safier

In response to the Feb. 11 article "Water use up sharply here."

Sure water use is up. Now what could be the problem? A dry winter coupled with a growth rate with no end in sight and a City Council that apparently believes giving new development a free rein to pave what open land there is left around Tucson could be several reasons.

If Tucson's aim is to pass or even come close to Phoenix's growth and decline in the quality of life, then look forward to larger big city problems including the shortage of Tucson's greatest natural resource — water.

Gary Ludwig

Tucson