Opinion: Letters to the Editor

Letters for Dec. 9: New FBI building, theocracies, DC politics

|
Opinion,Letters to the Editor

D.C. campaign finance reform will start with new council

Re: "Campaign finance reforms stall in D.C.," Dec. 4

Why am I not surprised by the D.C. Council's inability to overhaul the city's campaign finance system in a timely manner? Council Chairman Phil Mendelson stated that there was not enough time for approving such legislation before the council's final meeting on Dec. 18.

Give me a break! What has the council been doing for the last six months?

The truth of the matter is that the citizens of the District are delusional if they expect serious campaign reform to come out of this council. These are the same council members who sat by idly while some of their colleagues were engaging in questionable behavior.

The only way to get the council to do the right thing is to extricate the current group from the confines of the Wilson Building and replace them.

-- Marvin E. Adams

Washington

FBI headquarters should not leave Washington

Re: "Virginia, Maryland competing for new FBI HQ," Dec. 2

Given the fact that we are in so much debt, a new FBI building is another example of something we do not need at this time.

What's also alarming are the proposed suburban locations cited in this article. A law enforcement agency with so many responsibilities should remain in the center of the troubled D.C. area, where response time is of utmost importance. Any locationother than its present sitewill not serve the interests of the public or the FBI.

Renovate rather than relocate.

-- Bernard Helinski

Baltimore

Aid to theocracies is unconstitutional

Many articles, editorials and letters to the editor are about our present budget difficulties or the situation in the Middle East. But we should be seriously discussing the constitutionality of American foreign aid to Islamic countries, which represents a huge outlay of American tax dollars.

The First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law respecting the establishment and free practice of religion. Is it not just as constitutionally egregious to give taxpayer dollars to a foreign regime whose government is driven by Islam as it is to give taxpayer dollars to a domestic American religious establishment?

Everybody knows that in Islamic nations, members of other religious groups are treated as second-class citizens or worse. We could significantly reduce our huge national deficit by ending foreign aid to them altogether.

Where is Edd Doerr, president of Americans United For Separation of Church and State, on this issue? Apparently, the "separation of church and state" concept applies only to Christianity, because Islam is politically correct and Christianity is not.

-- Lawrence K. Marsh

Gaithersburg

View article comments Leave a comment