Final installment

Dear Editor:

This will be my final installment in the weekly discussion with Douglas Lyon about our opposing political views.  The exchange of letters has been enlightening, but we are approaching a point of diminishing returns.  A few summary remarks should suffice to provide closure.

I would like to apologize to Mr. Lyon for misspelling his name in my previous letter (COURIER, September 30th). That was a mistake on my part, as he points out in his letter of October 7th. Meanwhile, on substantive political issues, Mr. Lyon continues to commit errors of distortion and evasion.

On the issue of health care, Mr. Lyon refuses to acknowledge any distinction between proposed reforms and his hot button term, "nationalized health care." Honest debate about health care reform is effectively undermined by the incessant noise and distraction of misleading labels. Mr. Lyon employs this political tactic repeatedly to avoid serious discussion of complicated problems.

On the issue of balanced budgets, Mr. Lyon narrowly focuses on only one side of the balance sheet, and he does not respond at all to my point about the California rule which allows just 34% of our legislators to override the vote of 66% on funding necessary to balance the budget. This rule is a significant cause of the problem, but some stalwart conservative partisans clearly prefer an imbalanced budget to greater democracy.

Finally, Mr. Lyon's attempt to associate himself with our Founding Fathers is ludicrous. The founders of the United States of America were a dynamic mix of political radicals, liberals, and pragmatists who worked together to establish a new and responsive form of government based on expanded democracy.  It is absurd as well as amusing that 220 years later, conservative critics in the political boondocks are trying to claim proprietary solidarity with the revolutionary leaders who founded our country.  We can only wonder how Ben Franklin would have commented on this ironic development.

Dave Nemer
Claremont