Gov. Tim Pawlenty is acting responsibly by tightening our state policy on illegal immigration.
He has done the right thing and is not "posturing," as columnist Nick Coleman claims ("Election year is apparently a bad time to be an 'illegal,' " Jan. 8). After all, the No. 1 function of government is to protect its citizens, something Coleman does not seem to be concerned about.
I haven't talked to one Minnesotan who won't feel safer when the "illegals" are either removed or encouraged to go home on their own. American citizens are sick and tired of paying for the illegals' medical, educational, welfare and prison costs, and the human costs of violent crime, fraud and gang activity.
The cost of illegals in this country has been estimated at over $30 billion per year. The $30-billion-a-year savings could be used for bridge inspection and repair, of which Coleman has been so critical of Pawlenty and Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau.
I support everything Pawlenty is doing to protect Minnesotans from illegal aliens in our state. Minnesota need to become a nonsanctuary state for illegal immigrants.
JOHN SAMUELSON, SPRING PARK
Minnesota should stick with NCLB for another year As a Wayzata High School senior, I've seen the effects of the No Child Left Behind law in action. Our school, which is academically competitive, met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in 2005, and then failed in 2006. I was shocked when I found out we failed -- Wayzata is one of the best public high schools in the state.
Minnesota sets high standards for students. Other states have set lower standards on NCLB tests and realize their payback through meeting AYP, but it comes at the expense of their students' education. Our schools are getting punished through NCLB for keeping standards high.
While I think this isn't fair, I disagree with Republican senators who want to opt Minnesota out of NCLB ("No Child Left Behind: GOP senators want it to be history," Jan. 1). The law is up for renewal this year, and most candidates for the presidency have said they would either throw out NCLB or revise it when they take office. With one or two years to go before the law is either changed or gone, it would serve no purpose to opt out now. While federal funding is only a small percentage of the total education budget, $350 million would be a big loss. The administrative costs don't come close to the amount of money that would be lost if we chose to opt out.
With only one year left to go under NCLB, our decision to opt out would come too late to make a positive difference. Our state would lose money and gain nothing.
MARTHA GRAVE, MINNETONKA
A spill, and with it questions about storm drainage Perhaps the only positive thing one can say about last week's gasoline spill into sewage lines feeding the Mississippi is that the gas was unleaded. It is simply unconscionable that, in 2008, a leading municipality permits the channeling of black water into an essential, historic waterway.
To assume that storm drainage could not have been managed more responsibly by our state government and its constituents is a sheer disgrace and represents magical thinking of the highest order.
NEIL ROSS, MINNETONKA
Cardiac reality check Your Jan. 6 front-page article "State has healthiest hearts in the nation" states that "Minnesota's progress outshines the rest of the country." This refers to the American Heart Association's 2008 national report, in which Minnesota had the lowest rate of death from coronary heart disease in the United States: 90 per 100,000 population, compared with the U.S. national average of 150 in 2004. The credit for this is attributed to "healthy living and a top-rate medical system."
It is important to note that Minnesota's coronary heart disease death rate is significantly higher than the national average of countries such as: France, Japan, Italy and Spain (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data). The same can be said of Minnesota's infant mortality rate, which is higher than 29 other countries (OECD data), and other measures of health. All of these countries have implemented government-funded universal health care systems.
JOEL ALBERS, MINNEAPOLIS
Avoiding the anxiety of air travel Last September as I planned a trip to Harrisburg, Pa., I was well aware of the air travel fiascoes at Denver the previous Christmas and the severe delays, sometimes of up to several days, caused when flights are canceled. As a result I took the anxiety and uncertainty out of the trip by using a day and a half to take the train.
Traveling by train meant we could lock our luggage, carry wrapped Christmas presents, did not have to remove our shoes until we retired to our beds (we booked sleeping car accommodations), did not have to empty our pockets and remove our belts. No one was strapped in and everyone was free to walk about the train. Families with kids were able to take them in the lounge cars to sit at tables and play games. Dinner in the diner was community seating meaning you could find yourself sitting with a variety of people and enjoying good food served in a civilized manner. Unlike air passengers, train passengers actually talk to one another in the convivial setting of the lounge and dining cars!
When it takes one or two days to be re-accommodated after a flight cancellation, two days in a wide reclining seat with foot and leg rests or even a bed in a tiny room and decent meals beats a night on an airport cot or gate area seats hands down!
Americans deserve a decent alternative to flying or driving. Let's have more long-haul trains!
RUSS ISBRANDT, WHITE BEAR LAKE
