Just when I thought I could hear no dumber legislative proposals, our valiant misguided state politicians have topped themselves once again. A bill sponsored by Sen. Stacey Campfield, R-Knoxville, and Rev. Vance Dennis, R-Savannah, calls for a 30 percent reduction in temporary assistance for needy families benefits to parents whose children are not making satisfactory progress in schools.
The state Department of Human Services has withdrawn previous opposition to the bill, and it has cleared committees of both House and Senate after being revised to give parents several ways to avoid the reductions. The basic idea is that kids need a carrot-and-stick approach. Or more likely, a whip.
The kids need to be afraid their parents won't eat. Studies have already showed that hungry children cannot concentrate in school and putting more pressure on children to score higher on tests to keep benefits is counterproductive and shows a lack of empathy for those less fortunate.
While I understand these politicians think they need some incentives to get parents involved in their children's education, punishing the children by sending them to bed hungry is not the way. Not a shining example for our state or the people in office supposedly representing their constituents.
JOSEPH S. HODGIN, Cleveland, Tenn.
In reference to a letter that stated Charles Krauthammer's April 1 column on the Mideast peace process was definitely biased and incorrect, I must take sincere umbrage.
One of the most valuable tenets of reading Krauthammer pieces is his unfailing and consistent use of dates, times and specifics (a mini history lesson, if you will) which allows the reader to review and fact check.
The letter provided no facts to refute Mr. Krauthammer. I encourage interested readers to review Mr. Krauthammer's column. He is right on the facts. I find it a frequent occurrence among young political science students that they are short on knowledge and long on opinions.
Most serious followers of this administration's Mideast peace policy find it a rehash of prior plans and probably going nowhere.
MARGARET STALEY VEIGAS
W Road not intended for recreational use
The W Road skateboarder was a fun photo in Wednesday's paper. However, I would urge you to remind readers that while the road is indeed closed to thru traffic, residents of the W still use the road for access to and from their homes.
I would hate for an accident to occur because people assumed the road closure sign indicated the W Road was open for recreational pursuits.
PATTI H. DENNIS, Signal Mountain