Letters to the Editor

Neighborhood Harvest is a good fit for market

Neighborhood Harvest is an organization dedicated to harvesting fruit and nuts from people's yards in and around Ashland that would otherwise go to waste. We will only harvest fruit that has not been sprayed with pesticides.

At least 25 percent of what we harvest is being donated to local hunger relief organizations, 25 percent is for the volunteer pickers, 25 percent we offer to the home owner and the remaining 25 percent is sold and traded in order to support the organization.

Neighborhood Harvest received a letter from the Rogue Valley Growers & Crafters Market board that stated that NH was not welcome back to the 2010 market because "we weren't growing the food ourselves and the market is specifically for farmers and growers." Well, the produce sold is grown all over Ashland by Ashland citizens. Much of the produce goes to people in need and yards and sidewalks are cleaned up all over town.

Please help to reinstate this wonderful organization back into the RVG&CM family and insure its continuing viability. Please write or e-mail the board at any or all of the following and ask for reinstatement: info@rvgrowersmarket.com and saturday@rvgrowersmarket.com.

R. Ferrier

RVG&CM volunteer

Court's ruling hurts freedom of speech

On Jan. 21, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations should not have limitations on campaign financing. With this recent Supreme Court ruling, we are, subsequently, presenting our First Amendment rights to corporations on a shining, silver platter.

The Supreme Court's main argument is that "corporations are treated as persons and should be given constitutional rights meant for people," but corporations are not considered as citizens. They cannot vote or partake in any part of the electoral process. Should this argument from the Supreme Court allow them to make campaign contributions?

Solely, from this 5-4 ruling, our judicial system has insured that our freedom of speech will become far too expensive for anyone but the corporations to afford. Will the freedom of speech be of any value to any individual, when the almighty corporations can make political propaganda to show people the "truth"?

Judges are appointed for a lifetime so that their decisions will not be influenced by their desire to be re-elected, but it seems that their lifetime appointment has just made them delusional and prevented them from witnessing the consequences of their actions.

Sabina Augsburger


Oregonians wise to pass measures

In response to measures 66 & 67: Oregonians have historically denied raising taxes, and I'm not sure why, because it is making us rely on the very little money that other sources can barely provide.

I'm very happy to hear that we have finally voted in favor of the average guy by voting "yes" on of measures 66 and 67, instead of following our old path of making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Previously, large corporations only had to pay a small fee of $10 a year. How does it work that large and wealthy corporations only have to pay a measly tax of $10, when local businesses are getting pounded with taxes and in return can't afford to stay in business? It hurts me to see kids my age fighting this tax, just because of what their conservative, rich father said: "The rich are already being taxed higher rates, and thousands of jobs in Oregon would be lost."

I understand that Oregon is the second-most unemployed state, but in my opinion I'd rather have some rich folks go out of business, than our fire stations, police force, parks, etc., once again be pushed under the rug and funds further cut. I'm glad to see Oregonians making a responsible choice for the overall good of the state, and even though the measures barely passed, they will make a difference in communities throughout Oregon.

Alex Cotrufello


State needs a law to stop pot enforcement

I'd like to propose a marijuana law that can and should be passed through Oregon's initiative process. Now, even if a state law were passed "legalizing" marijuana, the federal courts would destroy it; marijuana is illegal because of federal law. But the people of Oregon can choose how to use their own money and resources.

We can ban the use of state, county or city money or personnel to enforce the illegal status of marijuana. Nobody in our state, except federal agents, could punish or incarcerate anyone for using or selling any form of pure marijuana. This is politically savvy as well because it could be promoted primarily as saving and generating tax-payer money, and absolutely not "legalizing" marijuana.

The federal government would be helpless to block this law, which would also expand Oregon's marijuana economy (creating lots of jobs) and make that economy safer and more positive.

I don't have the health or legal expertise to personally take on this project, so I'm inviting anyone who does to spearhead it.

Sean Lawlor Nelson


Share This Story