Political scorecards have no place in The Examiner’s news section

Re: “Candidates graded on transit issues,” July 27

It is appalling that you would highlight as “Today’s Top Story” the issuing of a scorecard by a small organization identifying the level of support for the Purple Line by Montgomery County primary election candidates. Allowing one group to plant its political scorecard in your news section violates good journalistic practices.

Most local candidates support the Purple Line. Those such as Ike Leggett, a Purple Line supporter who is running for county executive, should be applauded for also advocating ways to mitigate damage to the trail and the neighborhoods it would impact if the Purple Line were ever built.

Right now, however, the Purple Line has no funding for implementation nor an agreed-upon alignment.

Mier Wolf
Member, Chevy Chase Town Council

Stem cell veto is a play on ignorance, theocratic move

Re: “How Bush’s stem cell critics are spreading disinformation,” July 26

The promulgation of disinformation plays directly on people’s (and editors’) ignorance.

Some facts: 591 entities representing all U.S. scientific, medical and educational institutions — and many religious groups — wrote in favor of stem cell research. The National Institutes of Health’s home page says, “Human embryonic stem cells are thought to have much greater developmental potential than adult stem cells.” Find me a scientist who doesn’t believe this.

On the pseudoscience side is Dr. David Prentice, a professor of life sciences who has claimed that adult stem cells have “cured patients with 67 different diseases.” Really? No!

NIH’s 2006 budget is $28.6 billion and is the lifeline of research in the U.S. But no funds can be given to anyone who conducts embryonic stem cell research.

So it’s OK to fund Viagra, but not scientific cures? Even Iran has more permissive policies!

Who lives in a theocracy?

Kathleen Ann Griggs
Vienna

Salary disclosure is arrogant invasion of privacy

Re: “Fairfax Co. government salaries launch Examiner Citizen Action Network” editorial, July 25

I was appalled as I read this editorial concerning the idea of publicizing the personal salaries and benefits of all government workers in a public database. What arrogance — and what a meager benefit at the cost of the privacy, protection, and personal well-being of the public employees who do the hard and thankless work of keeping government functioning.

The idea that an analysis of the personal financial information for every public employee is an appropriate method to evaluate the workings of the government is false and frivolous on its face. Judge government by its performance, not by invading the privacy of every employee. Pontificate about the salaries of senior managers, if you must. But for the sake of all that is decent and compassionate, do not invade the privacy of every public worker.

The insulting and arrogant attitude exuded in the editorial is that government employees are not worthy of privacy. The idea that some unique insight can be gained from this information that is worth the cost is false and naive.

When an individual who appears on The Examiner database is the victim of violence or identity theft, will The Examiner accept responsibility and be held accountable for providing the information that permitted it? The fact that the privacy information is legally available does not make it right for you to aggregate it and make it easily available. Where is your sense of public and civic responsibility?

When will the pay and benefits records for all employees of The Examiner be available online so that the public can analyze them? How is it possible to evaluate The Examiner’s performance in areas such as gender and ethnic employment practices, abuse of overtime pay or favoritism in promotions without it?

I protest this as one of the most grievous and arrogant initiatives I can remember. I cannot believe you are serious.

Editor’s note: Public employee compensation data has long been public in every state and the District of Columbia.

William Hicks
Burke