default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

- The Eagle: Opinion

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2012 12:00 am

On July 2, John J. Koraleski and other Union Pacific employees rang the opening bell of the New York Stock Exchange to commemorate Union Pacific's 150th anniversary. In an interview with NYSE TV, a reporter asked Koraleski to comment on "the company's rich history."

Korelski responded that "it was a tribute to the men and women of Union Pacific" - and especially to the 11 members of Union Pacific on the podium that day who were celebrating their "own family legacy of railroading."

Korleski further commented, "As excited as we are about our past, we are even more excited about the future and the next 150 years."

The owners of and the tenants who farm the land located between the community of Mumford and Muse Road in Robertson County also have a rich history and family legacies of generations of farming. They also are proud and excited about their past and looking forward to passing their land down to their heirs, just as their forefathers passed the land down to them. They do not want to sell their land at any price and want to die on the land that they love.

Union Pacific's plans to build a 1,000-acre, 72 track rail yard, an ugly industrial facility, could stop these legacies and family histories, however. It is really sad. Several of the landowners are just a few years away from being eligible for an historic designation from the state of Texas. What's even sadder is that Union Pacific wants to destroy these family legacies.

In condemnation, Union Pacific is required to compensate landowners for the value of the land; however, they are not required and will not compensate the landowners for lost histories and irreplaceable family legacies.

B. JOYCE COTROPIA MORELLO Highlands Ranch, Colo.

Edward Harris (Eagle, Sept. 10) objects to PACs that ask representatives to sign a "No to Raising Taxes" pledge. He said it allows a small group to manipulate Congress by getting incumbents who break their pledge, removed from office.

I disagree. PACs that get representatives to state clearly their positions are providing a valuable service to voters. Those PACs that have representatives in their pockets while keeping it secret are the ones who are attempting to manipulate Congress.

All this concern for a few incumbents that may have lost their re-elections because they broke their pledge, makes no sense. We do not need more laws to ensure reelection of incumbents since they are still being re-elected more than 90 percent of the time.

Harris says it forces representatives who sign the pledge to work against the majority. He implies the majority favors more taxes.

I disagree. I believe the majority of voters are against raising taxes. So, if I'm correct, the representatives who claim to be against raising taxes but vote to raise taxes, are the ones who are working against the majority.

Thank goodness we still have the freedom to form groups and those groups still have the freedom to ask representatives to sign pledges and that our representatives still have the freedom to sign or not sign them.

CLYDE GARLAND Bryan

Walter Buenger (Eagle, Sept. 5) had a lot of harsh words to say about Republicans in the 2012 presidential race. That doesn't surprise me coming from a liberal.

What does surprise me is a total lack of what his side, led by President Barack Obama, has to say about how to fix the mess the country is in. What is the liberal plan to lower the unemployment rate, which is higher now than when Obama took office? It is stuck at 8.1 percent with no sign of going down.

What is the liberal plan to reduce deficit spending by the federal government? We borrow 40 percent of our annual spending. This an annual rate of more than $300 billion more than George W. Bush.

Where is the liberal plan to reduce the country's debt? The debt was $10.5 trillion when Obama took office. It is now $16 trillion, an Obama spending rate in three and a half years that is double that of George W. Bush's eight-year term.

What is the liberal plan to improve economic growth? The current growth rate less than 2 percent a year, puny at best.

The answer to these questions is that the liberals in charge of our country have no viable plan. The best argument they can give to keep them in office is that they need more time. That is rubbish.

Our country needs to elect a Republican president and Senate so that we can get out of the doldrums of Obama's presidency, It happened in 1980 when Americans asked Ronald Reagan to clean up the mess Jimmy Carter made of the country. Reagan corrected our course and ushered in 20 years of prosperity. It will happen again in 2012 when Mitt Romney is elected president.

DON CONNEALY Bryan

More about

More about

More about

Follow us on Facebook