EDITOR: Both Proposition 30 and Proposition 38 are designed to increase funding for children's education (while paying down state debt). There are good arguments on both sides regarding which one will help children more, but what we know for sure is that if neither proposition passes, our children will be in trouble. We need at least one of these propositions to pass to protect funding for schools.
We urge you not to let the arguments for or against either of these propositions keep you from voting on them. You can even vote yes for both; if both pass by a majority, the tax increases from the proposition with the most yes votes will be enacted.
Polls show that voters are ready to pay more taxes if they're for children's education; on Nov. 6 we have a fantastic opportunity to act. We know that investing in our children means investing in our economy, our society and our future. It is the smartest investment we can make.
The Child Care Planning Council of Sonoma County urges you to vote yes for kids on Proposition 30 or Proposition 38 or both.
Child Care Planning Council of Sonoma County
<b>Right to know</b>
EDITOR: I will be voting yes on Proposition 37, because there's more to the issue than The Press Democrat's Oct. 2 editorial would have you believe ("No on 37: Label this one over-regulation").
You say that "families can't afford (GMO labeling)." Currently, a mom's only option for GMO-free food is to buy premium organic products. After Proposition 37 passes, she'll be able to purchase less expensive, conventional non-GMO food. How is this not a win?
Next, the paper said "science simply doesn't warrant it." What you didn't say is is that the U.S. government does little testing of GMOs, instead relying on the results of studies conducted by the manufacturers. Remember when DDT was harmless and cigarettes were good for you? It's no different this time.
The environment and the human body are simply too complex to say definitively whether or not GMOs have negative long-term effects. This is our food, our bodies and our choice. Isn't it better to be safe than sorry?
Don't be fooled. The only ones who benefit from GMO food are the corporations who don't think twice about destroying our health and our planet if they can make billions in the process.
We have the right to know. Vote yes on 37.
<b>No role model</b>
EDITOR: Supervisor Shirlee Zane's comments about the Graton Rancheria's casino are as sad and disheartening as the child of an abusive parent who keeps quiet with the promise of a new toy: "Without a doubt, I think it's the best agreement between a tribe and a local government," and the tribe has "been continually trying to put their best foot forward in terms of negotiating" ("Tribe to pay $9 million a year to county," Oct. 20). Best foot forward? How about their only foot right through the door of Sonoma County.
I imagine Zane would have lauded the thugs that charged for "protection" in 19th century New York or Chicago, declaring "at least they fixed the door after they broke it down." Nothing about how this unrelated group of Native Americans (backed by Las Vegas dollars) has weaseled its way into town is honorable or a role model for anyone.