Letters are posted as we receive them during the week, and before they are printed in the paper, so check back frequently to see new letters. If you'd like to send a letter to the editor, use this postmarks submission form, or email your letter directly to [email protected]. Thanks for your patience.

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Cap Metro Changes Bus Routes, Hikes Fares” [News, Jan. 22]: “To receive the free fares, riders must have a valid Capital Metro-issued ID, which is valid for two years and costs $5. Seniors are defined as persons 65 and older.” This is misleading. I have been on Supplemental Security Income for the past seven years … I am disabled. In order to get the free fares, I have to provide Capital Metro with documentation from a doctor showing that I am disabled. The doctors who deemed me disabled do not have practices in Austin. Why do I need to show Capital Metro medical records to prove disability when I have received a check from the Social Security Administration every month for the past seven years? Shouldn't proof that I am disabled coming from the Social Security Administration be enough for Capital Metro?

Dear Editors,
    In last week's Austin Chronicle, you listed the candidates from the Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians for the November 2010 statewide election [“The Primary Candidates,” News, Jan. 22]. However, Texans should know that the slate of Green Party candidates can be found at www.txgreens.org. Interested voters will see that Austin's own Roger Baker is running for Travis County Clerk with a focus on bringing changes to the office to institute fair, transparent, and verifiable elections for Travis County voters – no more black box voting!
    In order to sign the petition for "alternative" political parties like the Greens, Libertarians, Constitution Party, Socialists, and others, voters should not vote in the primary elections for the status quo party(s) that have placed many unconstitutional barriers against electoral competition.
    Instead, registered voters can still vote for their favorite candidate in the November election and sign a petition to allow alternative candidates the opportunity to be on the ballot so that all of us will have a wider choice of qualified individuals that could be voted into offices and represent citizens' interests instead of only the present corporate duopoly that regularly purchases and/or creates legislation so that they think they own the ballot box!
    Save your vote for a party that will work to make certain your vote is counted fairly, verifiably, transparently.

Dear Editor,
    To whomever at the Texas Department of Transportation that is responsible for timing the stoplights on U.S. 183 at the Toll 45 overpass in Mustang Ridge:
    Thanks a lot, psychopath – I've very nearly killed people at that intersection twice because you set both the north and south lights to trip at the exact same time. Those lights are on either side of a divided overpass, and thus the far light is not visible to drivers on U.S. 183 until they are almost underneath the near light; that means that drivers who see the near light change to yellow at too short a distance to easily stop for it will carry through the intersection, and not realize until they're under the overpass that they are now approaching another light – now red – at 65 mph, with just barely enough room to stop before crashing into cross traffic. At least one massive wreck has already occurred there because of this insane stoplight timing; you can still see the skid marks and police paint markings leading to a blackened concrete support column.
    Good job, you lunatic – good job.

Dear Editor,
    In some large cities in the world (Lisbon and Hong Kong come to mind), a bus comes by every 15 minutes or so and bus stops are readily available. So many government entities forget that the main purpose of government is to provide for the people collectively what they cannot provide for themselves individually. In Austin, smoother streets and coherent bus service come to mind.

Dear Mr. Black,
    On January 15 the Chronicle ran a story about the Commissioners Court race in Precinct 4 [“Precinct 4: It's Good to Be the Incumbent,” News]. The story said it's good being an incumbent. I'm not so sure. Incumbents have established track records and Margaret Gómez's track record leads to a loss of confidence.
    I worked for Commissioner Gómez for more than a decade and have lived in East Austin for 22 years. I observed how she lost touch with her constituents firsthand. We need better advocacy, someone who will show up for work and speak to the needs of Precinct 4. The name Joe Vela (my name) appears on the supporters lists of both candidates for Precinct 4 Travis County Commissioner. To clarify any confusion, I support Raul Alvarez for this office.
    Raul is much more interested in doing the job than just having the job. He has a proven track record as a public servant, not just another politician.

Dear Editor,
    Louis Black has had some of his best editorials lately. There are some things I would like to add to his most recent about "throwing the bums out" and why it doesn't work [“Page Two,” Jan. 22].
    More and more today, the political landscape is one dominated by anti-movements instead of movements. We have many people who are very clear about what they are against and very few people who know what they are for. I have actually asked people: "What are you for?" They do not know how to answer the question.
    As Louis correctly pointed out, the Ross Perot movement died a quick death because it had no ideology, no philosophy, no ideas. It was a movement of people who simply wanted to vote for somebody else. These people were actually the most docile products of the system.
    Another result of this is that people search for villains instead of solutions. This gives rise to the many conspiracy theories, whether they be about the assassination of men like Kennedy and King or about the destruction of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and the World Trade Center.
    And, while most of the conspiracy theories I've heard over the years have some validity, there is also a lot of truth in Hanlon's razor. It basically says, "Never attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by stupidity."
    One of the reasons why the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s movement was successful was that King was not interested in punishing the many villains. He treated his opponents as misinformed, not evil. He was, above all, a man of peace.
    Perhaps during this period of ideological bankruptcy, Americans will find a positive vision to support. Until they do, it won't matter who is in office.

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Conservatives Take Another Swing at Social Studies” [News, Jan. 22]: I attended this hearing and was pleased that most people there want textbooks to be more diverse with more minorities and most are against the proselytization of one religion. But I was shocked by the comments of some people, mostly from Dallas and Houston. They're against public schools teaching about the past injustices of minorities, stating that we should not try to be "politically correct" by adding them to the curriculum. Several spoke about promoting the theory of American exceptionalism. This nationalist propaganda declares that the U.S. is special and superior to all other countries and is above international law. This concept tends to ignore the killings of Native Americans and Mexicans for their land and the slavery of blacks! Fortunately, board members Mavis Knight and Mary Helen Berlanga immediately pointed out to them the hypocrisy and absurdness of their statements. It is very sad and unfortunate that there are still people today that want to remain ignorant about Texas' dark history. Only until we learn the truth can we truly move forward as a more intelligent and humane society. Such a future would certainly be brighter and more peaceful for our children.

Dear Editor,
    I am writing to beg you to reconsider your influential opinion on the smoking ban [“Page Two,” Jan. 15]. I have been working, off and on, in nightclubs for 20 years, and the difference between a smoking club and nonsmoking club is literally night and day. To try and repeal this would be like taking away the 40-hour work week or removing safety standards from the mining industry. A true step backward.
    It's very simple: When other people drink, I don't get drunk, but when other people smoke cigarettes, I am smoking, too. I quit 15 years ago; it was very hard, but I stuck with it and I finally prevailed. Why should I still be at risk of getting lung cancer just because of the way I make my living?
    As far as the clubs not doing well, it's a recession, that's what happens. People aren't going out 'cause they're broke! Not because they have to go outside to smoke. To attach the two is complete nonsense. As I said, I beg you to reconsider.

   [Louis Black responds: Relax, Gary. The editorial said nothing about a repeal, and I can safely assure you that calling my influence even "very limited" would still be an exaggeration.]

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Can't Get There From Here” [News, Jan. 22]: I have lived in Austin for the past 10 years, and I can say that Capital Metro really doesn't offer the service it promotes or advertises. I used services from the Texas Commission for the Blind, and they had me enrolled in stupid training programs that try to help those with eye impairments get jobs. For all the talk the city of Austin has done, it has failed to serve the disabled community here in Austin. Getting an education and trying to find a job makes no sense if you can't get to that job. Cap Metro bus stops haven't been updated for decades and have the same routes. I have been offered many jobs with higher salaries over the years but had to take lower-paying jobs or no job at all because there was no ride to that job. Cap Metro has really failed in its mission to provide quality service. Try complaining to them and all you get is a shove to the side and a complaint that will get you nowhere in life. Cap Metro needs to be sued and shut down, and a realistic transportation system should take its place, because it's doing nobody a bit of good.

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Page Two” [Jan. 15]: Mr. Black has gone over to the dark side – I believe he is now a neocon. In the past he championed issues like the safety and health of the workplace and the rights of its workers. How does that apply to every business but entertainment? What is the current policy of the Chronicle's offices regarding smoking, and when was it implemented and why? Whenever something is legislated, unfortunately, there are losers as well as winners; some rights are affirmed and the others denied; that is our system. Dig this: People with asthma or other respiratory illnesses for whom it would have been an impossibility to catch a live show almost anywhere other than the Cactus Cafe can enjoy going out as much as anyone else. Or I guess maybe they don't matter either.

   [Louis Black responds: I'm not sure where neocons would stand on a smoking ban, but starting out a letter with an insult is a good strategy. When the final law regarding the smoking ban was passed, there were only 200 businesses that still allowed smoking, out of the many thousands of Austin businesses.]

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Public Humiliation Is Punishment Enough” [Newsdesk, Jan. 20]: No. Public humiliation is not enough. Sharon Keller's decision cost a human life. She should not be given immunity from prosecution. Keller should be criminally charged, and her case decided by a jury. I sparked a federal investigation that ended with the conviction of my own attorney and judge. What was discovered is state oversight commissions do not police their judges, they protect them.

Dear Editor,
    Not long ago conservatives in Congress were grilling Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor on her impartiality, impugning her ability to avoid ideological bias in her rulings. Now a conservative Supreme Court majority is blatantly pursuing an activist agenda at the expense of decades of legal precedence. The recent ruling on campaign financing by corporations amounts to conservatives’ very own pornography, which is also protected on the grounds of a First Amendment right to free speech. Just as pornography represents a hideous stain on our national character, so unfettered political influence by corporations will result in the complete prostitution of a political system already dominated by special interests and powerful lobbies. Under this ruling, “freedom for all” becomes just a free-for-all in which only the biggest, baddest, and wealthiest have the chance to make their voices heard. Most sickening are conservative commentators who disingenuously try to claim that this ruling gives more power to the little guy. In their grotesque, egregious, yet innate hypocrisy, conservatives insist that in the unregulated market, individuals have the right and the ability to “decide for themselves” when faced, for example, with an onslaught of political advertising. Yet these same conservatives will fight tooth and nail against the right of Americans to decide matters of conscience and morality according to their individual belief systems or lack thereof. It only goes to show, once again, that the Republican is an animal most at home in the jungle – the bloodier, more cruel, more vicious it is, the better he likes it, for at heart he is at best, in addition to being a natural-born hypocrite, nothing but a bully.

Dear Editor,
    Re: Lauren Mueller's “Postmark” “Laws Impose on Rights,” Jan. 22: Please see “Postmark” “New Punctuation Tool!” Jan. 22. You may be able to get a group rate. Sorry, I could not resist.

   [Editor's note: Letters to the editor are published with as few or as many paragraph breaks as they are submitted with.]

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Talking Travis: Elliott Naishtat” [Newsdesk, May 15, 2009]: Thank you for your continued coverage of the medical use of marijuana (cannabis). My hope is that there are more representatives than Rep. Elliott Naishtat who find the issue of cannabis important enough to provide legal provisions for Texans with painful disabilities and diseases to grow and use cannabis medically without worry of criminal charges. The American Medical Association and the federal government have recently changed direction regarding their previous stances on this topic and Texas policy should follow. The value of a drug to a patient should be between a doctor and patient, not between lawmakers. The current Texas drug policy, especially surrounding the uses of the cannabis plant, is outdated, unwarranted, and overly penalizes Texans who choose to use cannabis for any purpose. The plant has clear, scientifically proven benefits to health and society. Clearly, abusing the plant is not its only use, yet Texas drug policy only focuses on the abuse of the plant in the formation of its laws regarding the plant. If all laws were made this way, we would not have access to many paints, solvents, or gasoline for that matter. Alcohol was once outlawed using this very outdated methodology. We must repeal prohibition laws because we currently cannot grow cannabis for food, oil, or fiber products. We cannot use it for clothing, cosmetics, medicinally, or even research its other beneficial properties and uses (like clean fuel). It's time everyone come out and get educated about this useful plant. It's not just about abuses anymore.

Dear Editor,
    I happen to know that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, presumably among other state agencies, gives an optional holiday to its workers for something known as Confederate Heroes Day, one day after the holiday of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The only plausible theory is that the state does not wish to offend its racists by giving them a day off for Martin Luther King Jr. Come on, Texas, I know you can do better than to squander salary dollars on an oxymoronic holiday that contravenes the spirit of the holiday you just gave the previous day. Perhaps by celebrating a step forward one day, then a step backward the next day, you may seem to stand still and thus seem stable. My dear Texas, others may think you're wobbling.

Dear Editor,
    Today the Supreme Court removed restrictions on the political spending of corporations and unions. If you agree that special interests tend to hijack public policy for narrow, selfish, and short-term gains, then this should alarm you. “The Fortune 100 companies alone had combined revenues of $13 trillion and profits of $605 billion during the last election cycle" [Forbes.com, Jan. 21].
    Please consider taking a few minutes to call your representative and urge him or her to support the Fair Elections Now Act to create publicly funded campaigns.