Letters To Various Politicians
	Dear Senator Ortiz, I saw you on MSNBC and would like to applaud your efforts regarding taxing soft drinks. It's about time those of us that have made choices for a healthy lifestyle shouldn't be forced to carry the financial obligation of those that don't. I agree with the study you cited that soft drinks do encourage obesity, and this obesity leads to future health problems. These future health problems increase the overall cost of health care and contribute to the already over-burdened work load in the health care field. After this tax, a tax on candy, chips and junk food. Subsequently, those that have made a choice to live in cites that have smog (ie: Los Angeles, etc.) should also be taxed. Unlike the study about soft drinks, there is no disagreement among any doctors that smog has a detrimental effect on a person's health. The cost of smog-induced health problems shouldn't be financed by those that have made better choices in life. Thanks for your time and concern. Dave Cushman Tarzana, CA. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Dear City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, I appreciate your concern over your constituents needing a newly renovated building for one stop building permits. Too bad you don't have any concern about how hard your constituents are working to fund the over priced projects the city council force your constituents to finance. Spending $470,000 to renovate a building that is going to be razed in two years is a pure waste. Do you feel your constituents are willing to pay a "surcharge" just for a nicer building? Upgrading the quality of the service by the city employees would be of more use to your constituents, was any consideration given to this issue? The city doesn't have enough money to hire more inspectors but can force your constituents to pay for a "temporary" renovated building? Please reconsider your position on this issue and bring some common sense back to the government! Thank you for your time. Dave Cushman -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Dear Representative Robert Wexler, During your time questioning Judge Starr, you mentioned that "the people" made it clear during the last election that the people wanted this impeachment talk to end. "The people" wanted OJ Simpson to be found guilty but under the law he was found not guilty, what the people want can't override what the law clearly says. Follow the law and not the public opinion. If you are so concerned about following the wishes of the public, EACH AND EVERYONE of your constituents hates the IRS, listen to them and end the harrasment and extortion. If Judge Starr broke the law in his investigation, he should be put in jail along side with the President. Why should the President not be incarcerated, citizens (maybe your constituents) who have lied about "sexual matters" have been, where is the equal justice. If lying about sexual matters under oath IS NOT a crime, be the fair and honest person you proclaim you are and release ALL others in jail for the same offense. The message "the people" really sent was that due to the way the government strips rights from the citizens, wastes taxpayer money and generally ignores the wishes of its citizens, "the people" would rather have a professional wrestler in office than a professional politician. That's the real message the people tried to send. Thank you for your time. Dave Cushman -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Dear Mr. Brown, I read your comments about the Latrell Sprewell incident in the Los Angeles Daily News and couldn't believe what I read. In a civilized society there is NEVER any excuse to resort to violence. For you as a Mayor to say "Maybe the coach deserved choking" was shocking, uncalled-for and out of line. I was taught as a kid that "Sticks and stone will break your bones but words will never hurt you." Even if Coach Carlesimo was verbally abusive, violence is not the answer. Not only were Latrell's actions uncalled-for, I believe they are illegal. Asking Rev. Jesse Jackson and the NAACP to investigate the league's actions belittles the real racial injustices that are going on in the world today. Dave Cushman P.S. I'm sure Ted Kaczynski felt he was justified in his actions. Are you standing up for his rights? ---his reply--- From: Willie_Brown@ci.sf.ca.us Date: Tue, 16 Dec 97 12:04:26 PST To: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Sprewell Comments Dear Mr. Cushman: Thank you for emailing to express your concerns over the Latrell Sprewell incident and my response. Let me begin by saying I firmly believe there is no justification for violence of any nature in our society. Violence in the workplace - or anyplace else - cannot be condoned under any circumstances. My comments reported in the media were taken out of context. As a former defense attorney, I was trying to imagine what might have motivated Mr. Sprewell, what might have been going through his mind to precipitate such an attack on his coach, how he might have justified it to himself. At no time have I ever believed that Mr. Sprewell's attack on his coach was justified; it was not. I have clearly and publicly stated this on many occasions. Did I believe Mr. Sprewell deserved a 10- game suspension for his unacceptable action? Absolutely. Did I believe he deserved a one-year suspension from the NBA? That question was more difficult to answer. I had to ask myself, and others: was due process observed in this case? Did Mr. Sprewell receive a fair hearing? Was he allowed to formally present his point of view? Due process only works if it is applied consistently to everyone. My point has been that Mr. Sprewell deserves the opportunity to formally present his point of view and explain the circumstances surrounding his attack. The players' union has since requested and been granted an arbitration hearing. If, after the hearing, it is determined that the punishment fits the crime, then Mr. Sprewell should be prepared to pay the consequences. Without due process, we have no real freedom. Thank you again for contacting me. Mayor Willie Brown