How is it possible that Muni’s suggested changes, based on an 18-month study, can be altered based on some squeaky wheels who want to keep a bus line, such as the 26-Valencia, because “it’s very calm”? (“Public voice may alter Muni’s plans,” Examiner, May 7) That’s nonsense. It is similar to telling a doctor who just notified you, after running a battery of tests and analyses, that you have a terminal disease that his diagnosis is wrong, because you feel fine.

My understanding of the Transit Effectiveness Project is that the hard data collected about Muni ridership and usage would be used to make sure that all residents of The City benefit by making the best use of the money spent on our public transportation system. If there are certain bus lines that people want to keep going that do not make the best use of our public dollars, I would suggest they form a nonprofit shuttle service and figure out how to fund it themselves rather than being oblivious to what the ridership numbers suggest and selfish about the use of public funds. Our government agencies are supposed to do the most they can to benefit the most number of people — even more so in these economically challenging times.

Jamie Whitaker

San Francisco

Stern Grove tree removal

Those of us who walk The Grove [Stern Grove] regularly with our dogs are acutely aware that many, many trees were slated to be removed, but it didn’t seem as many disappeared as we had heard. We all thought they didn’t remove more trees because they had to spend their monies replacing the faulty irrigation system they put in for the concert meadow lawn again so that the grass would grow back before summer concerts were to begin.

Sherry Michalske

San Francisco

Act on health care crisis

I am a participant at the Institute on Aging. I think it is important that we provide adequate health insurance for all Americans in terms of Medi-Cal and Medicare. Laurence J. Kotlikoff (The Healthcare Fix, MIT Press) has been warning of the pending financial crisis in social security and health care for all workers and retirees. It is imperative that full funding be provided for all segments of health care. I would urge you to contact your legislators in Washington and Sacramento on this issue.

Claude M. Ury

San Francisco

Media’s double standard

Letter writer Minnie Hanover asks if Barack Obama was sleeping in church every week. I wonder if Hanover holds the same opinion about John McCain. There are two major differences between McCain and Obama: (1) Obama has distanced himself from Wright’s comments while McCain has actively sought the endorsement of John Hagee, whose bigotry goes way beyond that of Wright’s; and (2) Wright’s comments are based on centuries of being persecuted, while Hagee’s are a continuation of centuries of persecution. Ironically, the double standard shown by the media and people like Hanover are also a continuation of that persecution.

Len Shaffer

Emeryville

Black eye for green energy

In the rush to “go green,” whether solar, wind or bio-diesel, individuals and government entities sometimes rush to be at the head of the line without doing a little fiscal research. Bay Solar came into Pacifica with much hoopla and many got stung (“Solar panel company faces lawsuits, investigations,” Examiner, May 7). Wind farms in the Altamont supply power; they also chop migrating raptors to pieces. Bio-diesel will create a market for our waste oil; it also sucks up the world’s grain supply and exacerbates food shortages. Solar is free power, and subject to the whims of a changing economy. Most agree that we need to explore alternate sources of power. I would urge that we move forward prudently. Fiascos like Bay Solar will only give the alternative-energy industry a black eye.

Jim Wagner

Pacifica

Democrats ignore issues

Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton address the much more central issue of energy supply, particularly the lack of domestic energy production resulting from decades of Congressional restrictions.

Both Obama and Clinton are dusting off plans for the same failed “excess profits” tax tried in 1980, which backfired. The Congressional Research office found that the “excess profits” tax reduced domestic oil production by 3 percent to 6 percent and increased oil imports from OPEC by 8 percent to 16 percent.

Oil companies’ profits, such as ExxonMobil’s, make an inviting pinata-like target for intellectually confused or cynical politicians. But Exxon’s profits, relative to revenues, are less than Microsoft’s and many other corporations.

Slapping an additional “excess profits” tax on oil companies that already pay a 35 percent corporate rate is a certain formula for still higher gas prices.

Jim Hartman

Berkeley

The Examiner gives preference to letters containing fewer than 150 words. Please include name, phone number and city of residence.

To add your voice

By e-mail: letters@examiner.com

By mail:

Editorial Page Editor

The Examiner, 450 Mission St.

San Francisco, CA 94105

By Fax: (415) 359-2766