Letter to the Editor - July 5, 2012

The attack on our environmentAs we move into summer in the Northwest Corner of Connecticut, we feel especially blessed by the beauty of our surroundings, the cleanliness of our rivers and freshness of our air. Our environment gives us new vigor in tune with the season. We appreciate our good fortune to live where we do. Meanwhile, down in Washington, the Republicans in the House are working to roll back environmental laws and endanger public health.The Internet brings a warning from the League of Women Voters, “Mercury and Air Toxics Coming to a Town Near You” ... beware, the Party of NO wants to allow the likes of PCBs in the Housatonic River courtesy of GE, mercury in our water, more pollutants in our air and drilling in our public lands, even the national parks. House Republicans are putting the interests of oil companies, utilities and other big polluters over the health, safety, and enjoyment of families. In the 112th Congress in 2011 and 2012 the Republican-controlled House voted 247 times to dismantle environmental and public health protections. Look at democrats.energycommerce.house.gov. Many of the laws Republicans are attacking have been in place for 25 years and more, passed at times when we had thoughtful legislators who governed, rather than blind advocates focused on destruction of our global legacy. Republicans (including those who have sought a Presidential nomination) bent on overturning environmental progress, want to destroy the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). The Republicans have tried to enact these and others voting to: repeal the Clean Air Act’s health-based standards, block regulation of emissions from power plants, curtail emissions from offshore drilling operations, block protections of forests and other wilderness areas, reject scientific findings re climate change, reject EPA’s authority to set water quality standards and enforce discharge limits, block oversight of mountaintop removal coal mining, block protections of wetlands, cut water quality funding, cut funding for clean energy programs, to preserve oil industry tax and royalty breaks.The damage would have been monstrous except the Democratic Senate or a presidential veto intervened. Why do the Republicans, top to bottom, want to mess up our environment? They are buying votes by pleasing the big companies, getting massive donations to fund their elections. If you are concerned about your environment and the public health beware the despoilers, the party of NO.John Ritchie Jr., SalisburyWhat would King John say about the Affordable Health Care Act?This regards Paul Bartomioli’s letter (June 21) commenting on columnist Anthony Piel’s use of the U.S. Constitution to support the Affordable Health Care Act. Reading The Journal, as I regularly do, I usually agree with Mr. Piel and less often with Mr. Bartomioli. That said, in regards to Mr. Piel’s application of the phrase, to support the general welfare, in this case I agree with Mr. Bartomioli. The Preamble to the Constitution sets out the goals the framers intended the document to accomplish; the Articles that follow the Preamble lay down the tools that can be used to accomplish those goals. I agree with Mr. Bartomioli that Mr. Piel in this case has got his cart before his constitutional horse. But...Consider for a moment what always happens, historically, to documents like the Constitution. In the context of changing times, the meaning of a primary document, like our Constitution, always changes. Magna Carta, for example — Great Britain’s constitution — in June 1215, established at Runnymede the limited rights of the rules vis-a-vis King John. Under the terms of The Great Charter, the executive remained preeminent. Then, over the next 600 years, things changed. Today, the relationship between crown and the governed has changed unrecognizably. Queen Elizabeth has morphed from powerful monarch to icon. The meaning of the U.S. Constitution started the process of change almost before the ink was dry on the document. President Washington’s first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, advocated for, and Congress readily approved, the creation of a national bank even though provision for such a bank is not found in the Constitution. Then things in the nation changed. State banking became big business and, among other things, local banks didn’t want competition from a national bank. Since the day United States cloaked itself in the protecting folds of the Constitution, We the People, through our elected representatives, have written laws in Congress that have reflected passage of time and changes in circumstance. When these laws have been challenged the Supreme Court has looked at what Congress wrote and what the Constitution would permit and then the Court has ruled.Before Justices Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Scalia came on the court, ferreting out the original intent of the Founding Fathers was no part of the court’s judicial process. Why? Because in days of yore the Court, in its wisdom, had demonstrated that the Court knows what people intend at one time changes over time, and that what politicians say or write is not necessarily reflected in what they do. James Madison, quoted by Mr. Bartomioli, is a case in point. What Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers about constitutional limits was not always reflected in what Madison did as President Madison. The same was true of Jefferson as president.In the past, whether or not we liked the result, the Court has ruled most effectively when it has made its decision within a context that recognized that circumstances change with the times. Wm. Earl Brecher, West CornwallDear friendsTo my dear family and friends, each and every one of you, I offer my sincerest thanks for your love and caring while I was in the hospital. You were, and continue to be, such a tremendous support at a difficult time. Thank you.Mary Lamb, SharonExtra thanksOn behalf of the E.X.T.R.A.S. board of directors, staff and the families we serve, thank you to all who participated in the E.X.T.R.A.S. “Cuts for Kids” fundraiser held on June 10 at Chad’s Hair Studio in Millerton. The funds raised will support the E.X.T.R.A.S. mission of providing quality care for school-age children of working parents in Lakeville and Salisbury.Thank you first and foremost to Chad Malarchuck of Chad’s Hair Studio, who graciously donated his salon to host the event. Thanks also to all the incredible stylists: Amy Carol, Ronda Dingee, Megan Edgeworth, Jessica Fowx, Loren Hawley, Tarah Kennedy, Kelly Kilmer and Suany Leedy. Without your offering of time and talent, this fundraiser could not have happened. Thank you, too, to all the trunk show vendors; your participation in provided the perfect complement to the event and demonstrated how diverse interests can serve a common good. A special thank you to board member Amy Carol. Your leadership, energy, and enthusiasm set a high bar for all future events. You truly embody the spirit of volunteerism that makes E.X.T.R.A.S. a reality.And finally, thank you to all those who stopped by Chad’s for a haircut or to do some shopping. The response from the public was both encouraging and touching, and the children served by E.X.T.R.A.S. will benefit from your donations for months to come! Stephen Moore, president E.X.T.R.A.S., Salisbury