Give people tax-free money for a stimulus

You know that if the people running the country had half a brain, they might figure some things out. Such as giving all this stimulus money to the rich and large corporations is not going to help the economy at all. This only helps the CEOs get richer. They would be spending just as much money or less if they would give the money to every U.S. citizen who files taxes.

I mean, if they were to give us all $150,000 to $200,000, TAX FREE FROM FEDERAL AND STATE, wouldn't you go and spend most of it? Such as giving the money to the banks and automotive company is not going to work, cause I still am not going to go out and spend any money.

But if I had tax-free money in the quantity above, I would go buy a new car, remodel the house I live in and put some away for retirement. I am sure that most all Americans would do the same. They may go out and buy a home or even refinance the one that they own with a fixed-rate mortgage and get themselves out of the mess that they are in. Heck, they may even go take that vacation that they been wanting to do for years. This would get more money out into the economy and keep all businesses going.

Instead we are getting more dictatorship by the government. We are becoming more of a communist country every day. My dad fought in World War II to STOP this from happening; lot of good it has done us.

Mary Grill, Albany

GOPs in House have let the nation down

A grudge? Not even anger. Sadness, yes. I have said it once, I'll say it again; "People are free to believe whatever they want -. but they are not free to force their beliefs on others through legislation of those beliefs." The Taliban does that in Afghanistan. Enough said.

A March 9, 2008, article in the Washington Post stated that with the hidden costs added to the war in Iraq it will cost the American taxpayers $3 trillion.

Tonight's NEWS: not a single Republican representative voted for the Obama administration's stimulus package. Strange how Congress can vote for death and destruction in a foreign country but somehow can't cross party lines to possibly help Americans. No matter what you think about this bill and its effectiveness, the idea is to help "Main Street." And help it now. Seems that I recall under the former administration there wasn't this much hue and cry to bail out Wall Street.

Who do these people work for? Who pays their salaries? I say let's get together a national referendum, cut their salaries, take away their health insurance and other perks. But that sounds like a call for revolution, and under the Patriot Act I could be arrested, so I won't do that.

Roger Paul, Corvallis

Stimulus isn't perfect, but give it time to work

Apparently the old pattern of politics is taking over at this critical time in our nation's economic survival.

I ask everyone to stick to clear factual information about the present economic recovery act. Though it is imperfect, it promotes investment in public transportation, education and health care. It creates public projects to put people back to work and encourages green options in construction and energy conservation.

These measures are critical to change our energy use. They will also create jobs in new economic sectors to carry us forward into new industries, and technology.

Lies are rampant on the media, turning people against this legislation. This trouble arose in the previous administration's political climate. Now we have elected to change that climate and our public discourse. Change is never easy. Change takes courage and clear thinking. Change requires our action to support it.

Write or call your congresspeople and insist on the change in political behavior you have voted for. Ask them to support change in our government's approach to economic disasters: no more bailouts. Support them when they take political risk with new pathways through this mess.

The way we do politics has much to say about who we want to be as people. We must change as Americans, not merely as Democrats or Republicans. It is up to all of us together to change our political climate. Let's support this economic recovery plan.

Carol Bosworth, Corvallis

Marriage already just a government institution

It is apparent to me that (letter writer) Robert Gourley and I are approaching the issue of marriage from completely different perspectives. I agree with Mr. Gourley's assessment that government and religion should be completely separate. However, using the "if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, it's a duck" theory, I contend that marriage is a government institution and not a religious one. Hence, the separation already exists.

Here's how I conclude this:

If I walk down to the courthouse with my "opposite-sex friend" and pay for a "government-issued" marriage license, (similar to a dog license), and my friend and I go to a "Justice of the Peace" (not a religious position) to have that person "witness" our signing of the document. And, I have a couple of -. say -. Atheist, friends also sign as witnesses -. I am then married.

Where, exactly, did the government and church become entwined in this example? Now, to be sure, I can take that same license to my local church and plan a big ceremony around this very civil transaction. But, I look at that in a similar fashion to taking a driving test in the church parking lot.

Once I am legally married, I then have more than 1,000 rights given to me by the U.S. government (not the church). None of those rights has to do with religion.

Tom Johnston, Corvallis