For the Feb. 14 issue
By:
Bush’s affirmative
action fight ironic
To the editor:
The Bush administration has filed a brief before the United States Supreme Court against the University of Michigan’s affirmative action admission policy. It is ironic since George W. Bush was the recipient of an affirmative action policy at Yale. After the University of Texas Law School and other schools turned him down because of low SATs and undergraduate grades, Yale graduate school accepted him. He benefited from the school’s legacy policy because both his father and grandfather were influential alumni.
East Windsor
Resident questions
lack of war dialogue
To the editor:
I have noticed a very loud silence in the air. I am a teacher, and the faculty room banter continues to focus on instructional techniques, errant students, lousy cafeteria food, and the best way to get ink stains out of clothing. I am a parent, and at my daughter’s indoor soccer games, we enthusiastically discuss the coaches’ decisions, recent movies of worth, and the weekly ordeal of food shopping in mega-stores determined to hold us hostage for hours on end. My regional newspaper continues to report on fiscally dysfunctional school systems and local crime; it publishes letters of indignation and thanks. What I do not hear; what I do not read are opinions, dialogue, heated discussions, or even casual comments about our situation as Americans teetering on the precipice of war.
Has out inner-ostrich taken over? I don’t think so. I think we’re afraid to begin a dialogue because we have a sneaking suspicion we won’t all agree and we don’t want to make ideological enemies of our friends. I think most of us are deeply conflicted and ambivalent. We are all survivors of the trauma of Sept. 11 and we want so desperately to believe in our country’s leadership. We listen to their speeches and they seem so certain of their positions. There is a big part of me that wants to believe that they know more than I do, and that I should leave it entirely in their hands. In a real way, I want to absolve myself from the responsibility of my own point of view.
Unfortunately, try as I might, I just can’t stop the nagging questions in my head. I have so many: Why are so many countries disagreeing with our direction toward a war with Iraq? Should we dismiss them as misguided? Is it wise to act so aggressively without the support of most of the worlds’ population? Is the "War on Terrorism" synonymous with the war on Saddam Hussein? We seem so certain of victory over Iraq. What will we do with that volatile country afterwards? Where is Osama Bin Laden, and is our country continuing to act aggressively to disable his "regime"? Does the government’s focus on Iraq in any way dilute its attention on North Korea? Are we the aggressors? Is this the best and only solution, or are we making a terrible mistake?
I can’t honestly say what I believe, right now. I am only certain of my feelings of sadness and of dread. I suspect there are many who are feeling similarly. I need to hear the voices of my neighbors, my co-workers, and my friends. As an American, I find this awful silence most appalling, most frightening and most unnatural.
East Windsor
Greenberg letter
misrepresents judge
To the editor:
A letter written to the Herald by Evan Greenberg which was published in your paper (Feb. 7) claiming that I misrepresented the ruling by Judge Lenox regarding access to Twin River’s books and records must be answered in light of the fact that the judge’s letter of opinion of Feb. 13, 1996 will clearly show that I am correct in what I wrote in my letter to the editor of Jan. 31.
To begin with, Evan states as follows: "In Judge Lenox’s opinion, which Mr. Wally so brutally mangles, Judge Lenox writes ‘There is no basis for denying the board its right to reasonably restrict access to documents such as those which are of confidential nature of which would impose an unreasonable burden on the Association. Judge Lenox further stated that to allow unfettered inspection of sensitive materials would unnecessarily expose individuals to disclosure of personal and private matters perhaps merely to satisfy the curiosity of the examiner or for unlawful or vindictive purposes.’ "
What Evan forgets to mention is that Judge Lenox also stated (about resolution 95-3, the access to the books and records resolution which is what that lawsuit was about) is that the resolution separates trust documents into permitted, confidential and board discretion categories and establishes standards under which beneficiaries may review those categories.
Evan’s comments above try to demonstrate that the judge’s findings apply to all categories of documents. That is not true. The judge’s finding that Evan cites applies only to confidential documents. Furthermore, Judge Lenox also said about confidential documents, "on the other hand the legitimate purpose of an applicant for inspection of (confidential) documents coupled with a demonstrated need will ordinarily outweigh the privacy issue."
Additionally, Judge Lenox found, in his letter of opinion dated Feb. 13, 1996, that the vouchers written to support the checks the administrator writes are indeed permitted documents and agreed with the plaintiff’s position "that the Trustee has a duty to keep clear and accurate accounts and to permit inspection of Trust property accounts and vouchers." The judge further stated in his letter of opinion "that the administrator shall keep the books and the vouchers accrediting the entries made thereupon which shall be made available for examination by all the co-owners at convenient hours."
Is there any reason why we shouldn’t have access to the vouchers (to support the checks the administrator writes) so that we can make sure for ourselves that only Twin Rivers’ bills that have been duly authorized by the board are being paid?
As an example, I would like to find out who authorized all of those checks written to a political action committee in 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 when Evan Greenberg was a board member. I don’t believe that Evan can produce any minutes showing the board’s authorizing all of those checks, as they are legally required to do. How many other bills have been paid that have not been authorized by the board?
East Windsor

