Dallas, TX
Letters to the Editor — Dallas Zoo, Fairfield State Park, NCAA athletes, vouchers
Dallas Zoo: Asset bigger than city
Re: “Dallas Zoo is ready for a big leap — We can rally behind a new leader and bond proposal for a transformation,” by Bobby Abtahi, Lois Finkelman, Joan Walne and CW Whitaker, Wednesday Opinion.
As eloquently supported by the piece authored by Abtahi, Finkleman, Walne and Whitaker, it’s imperative that the Dallas Zoo receive the requested $30 million in 2024 city of Dallas bond funding. As it will unlock at least another $70 million in support from other sources, this is a huge opportunity that should not be missed.
But, the Dallas Zoo is an asset for and benefits the entire city and the region. While it is located in southern Dallas, its draw and support extends far beyond. As such, its position should be strengthened to become a solid national destination to benefit the entire city.
It is my hope that the zoo continues its upward trajectory and is fully embraced as the asset its supporters recognize.
Michael Grace, Duncanville
Who benefits from Fairfield property
Re: “Fight for park is over — Texas won’t use eminent domain to take property from developer, ending saga,” Wednesday news story.
As the state relinquishes its fight for eminent domain on the Fairfield Lake State Park, Shawn Todd says that it is a tribute to the Freestone County elected officials “who stood with unwavering resolve against“ the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. But who really deserves the tribute? Try Todd Interests and all the money it will reap. Try the elected officials and all the property tax money they will have. And try the multimillionaires who will have a place of their own to associate with their own.
John Thorngren, Shady Shores
Michener book had NCAA solution
Re: “Baker wants new tier to pay athletes — NCAA president aims to level playing field of uneven athletic budgets,” Wednesday SportsDay story.
For anyone thinking the NCAA proposal to pay college athletes is new, they should take the time to read James A. Michener’s 1976 Sports In America. I would refer them to Chapter 7, titled “Colleges and Universities.”
Way back in 1976, Michener laid out a proposal of dividing America’s colleges and universities into a four-tier system that would allow payment to the highest-level players and treat those schools as almost minor league farm systems. Elite players would be drafted by the schools in the highest tier and be compensated accordingly.
Lower tiers would operate in a more traditional sense and be geared to true student-athletes. So, the latest NCAA proposal is hardly new nor groundbreaking, just a different approach to a decades-old problem that has been conveniently ignored for years.
Dennis Radabaugh, Far North Dallas
‘Separate but equal’ school vouchers
Re: “The conversation that might have been — Two giants of civil rights gave speeches at the same event. What would they have said to each other?” by John McCaa, Sunday Opinion.
McCaa’s column regarding Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington piqued my interest as I wondered how these two titans of oratory would be engaged in today’s culture wars regarding Christian nationalism, populism, equal rights, states rights, immigration, to name just a few.
The point that caught my attention was the reference to Plessy vs. Ferguson in which the Supreme Court created the “separate but equal” doctrine for education that proved to be nothing more than America’s own version of apartheid — segregation on grounds other than race.
Texas’ struggles with voucher programs and state funding of private/parochial education through direct subsidies to families who have already chosen or plan to choose private schools over public education present a potential “new separate but equal” doctrine based on simple economics and controlled admissions programs.
Those who can afford the total cost get a subsidy to attend a private school and the poor get to attend public school. The unintended consequences of approving vouchers may create a new “separate but equal” doctrine for Texas — rich vs. poor, rural vs. urban.
Approval needs to come from the people, not politicians.
William Garnett Buck, McKinney
Rejecting white supremacists, enablers
I am reminded of The Dallas Morning News’ stand against the 1920s Ku Klux Klan, which slunk away partially because of the opposition by The News and then Texas Gov. Dan Moody.
Today, the paper needs to take a similar strong stand against those who are by definition white supremacists but also against their enablers and other persons effectively acquiescing their support of attacks on the rule of law, our democracy and the U.S. Constitution.
Charles Guittard, Austin
Unfounded climate fears for kids
Re: “Children deserve to know,” by Cynthia Stock, Nov. 30 Letters.
To a State Board of Education member who doesn’t want children to think the world is ending tomorrow because of climate change, Stock suggests, “Not tomorrow, maybe, but what about 10 years from now?”
Environmentalists have warned about imminent disaster for my entire life. We were to run out of food and energy by 2000 and be poisoned by pesticides and acid rain. The next ice age had arrived. Now, heat will kill us. Isn’t the apocalypse always just 10 years away?
Children should be taught facts, not fears. The climate has changed thousands of times, naturally. Present-day warming amounts to a few degrees. Urban heat islands are unrelated to any greenhouse effects.
Most importantly, extreme weather deaths are down about 98% from a century ago, thanks in large part to affordable energy from fossil fuels.
Dire predictions about the future, without proof, do not qualify as scientific knowledge. Extreme man-made warming, like creationism, is simply a belief and does not belong in science classes or textbooks.
Ken Ashby, Dallas
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com