Vehicle tax, fee hike are a bit sneaky

Some recent headlines: “Kulongoski proposes two-cent gasoline hike”; “Kulongoski proposes doubling titling fee to $110 for car purchases”; “Kulongoski proposes charging new cars in state $100”; “Kulongoski proposes raising car registration fee 300 percent to $81 a year.”

The first — and real — headline, amounts to about a 1 percent increase to our plunging (isn’t it nice?) gas prices. This amounts to a couple of tanks a month (40 gallons) or roughly $10 a year. And how timely this seems to be.

The second is a one-shot hit of about 10 times the first. The car dealers will be anxious to eat this one as a incentive to come in and purchase in this hot market.

The third: If you already live here, who cares?

The last -. well that is about eight times the first (and in addition to the first) and goes on and on, year after year, for all of us who do live here.

Of course, all of the information is buried in the article. Do we need new jobs? Yes. Do our roads and by-ways need much work? Sure they do. Can the majority live with the increases without much thought about it? Most likely.

But isn’t it fun to see how the least offensive of the items is used to form the sales pitch to soften the blow of a little, non-tax, tax hike?

Bruce Eckhardt, Corvallis

‘A new start’ high on wish list to Obama

The American people are sending a deep and soulful call out today to our new President-elect Barack Obama to create a government that reflects the goodness and diversity of our people.

We have suffered through eight years, and we want to move out of that darkness into the light. We want to see a government not of power brokers and egotists, but of women and men who are committed to community service, genuine cooperation, quiet listening, caring wisdom, thoughtfulness and kindness.

We want fellow citizens in his government who consider us their neighbors, friends and family and not poll numbers, consumers and financial statistics on some monthly report. We want people who really believe in full rights for all citizens.

We don’t expect miracles, but we do expect a real and sincere effort to recapture the vision of America that is the hope of the world: that America that is our dream, and for which we would all be willing to work, sacrifice to preserve it for our children and future generations.

We Americans pray Obama doesn’t listen to the “old boys” and the pleading and pressure from the “status quo” that are afraid to lose money, influence and power. They have had their day and it was ugly, mean and fear-driven for the majority of Americans.

The call goes out for a new beginning and new commitment to what America is all about. We want to be worthy again as a nation when we sing “God Bless America.”

David Anderer, Albany

Is fear of Obama a fear of losing out?

When I read Larry Daley’s original letter to the editor on Nov. 6, “What abuses will Obama bring?” I thought, This man is truly upset.

When I read his follow-up letter on Nov. 10, “Personal attacks are an ineffective tactic,” I thought, This man is truly afraid. It sounds very much like the fear of a man who realizes that he may be losing something he once took for granted. He realizes that he may be losing his majority status, in a political as well as a cultural sense, and all the invisible privilege that goes with it.

Speaking as a minority, I would like to assure Mr. Daley that we’ve still got a long way to go before that happens. More importantly, though, I would invite him to take this opportunity to examine some of the things he may have taken for granted in the past.

Finally, I would ask Mr. Daley to listen to what President-elect Obama said on Election Night: “And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn: I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.”

Shanilka deSoyza, Philomath

Put medical records, billing online to save

Before the election, all sides promised to do something to reduce health care costs and, as the last eight years come to an end, it is obvious that the states have taken over what would have been federal responsibilities. So with two wars and a disrupted economy to occupy the federal sector state, governments have an opportunity to step in and take the lead in healthcare cost reduction. A first step could be reducing administrative costs in keeping personal health records and insurance billing.

I suggest that the state Legislature appropriate a couple of million dollars to our governor for the development of a uniform computerized portable personal-health-record system (PHR), and a companion system for the reporting-and-billing (RAB) of healthcare services. Presently a multitude of current systems require undue time and costs.

The governor would be instructed to appoint medical, computer, insurance and business experts to the development committee and to solicit the participation of our neighboring states to join in this effort. State governments regulate the insurance industries within their boundaries and so carry the power to require adoption of such systems.

With a transparent, uniform, portable PHR and RAB, we could expect a decrease in administrative costs of health care and, who knows, the idea if adopted by a few states could spread across the country.

Finally, this proposal, addressing only efficiency, would not offend either pro or con stances on the question of a one-payer system.

Arne Landsberg, Corvallis