Letters to the Editors

Israel has done well by Ethiopian Jews

© St. Petersburg Times, published October 3, 1999

Re: Short of the promise, by Bill Maxwell, Sept. 26.

After reading this article, I can see why foreign countries get their hackles up when American journalists criticize them! I would dare say that Israel has made greater strides integrating Ethiopian Jews into its society in 15 years than we have in 136 years (I am using the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation as my point of reference).

To wit: Israel's Operations Moses and Solomon were humanitarian undertakings brought about by Ethiopia's rampant famines. We brought Africans over as slaves to furnish cheap labor for an agrarian economy.

It is interesting that the Israeli Defense Forces are taken to task regarding promotions for their Ethiopian troops. If memory serves, our African-American troops were segregated until approximately 1948 when ordered to integrate by our then commander in chief, Harry S. Truman. Although minority representation in the officer ranks is better in the U.S. Army, our Navy and Air Force are woefully lacking a proportionate number of African-Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans.

In summary, Mr. Maxwell, look to the woes of our nation before criticizing others!
-- Bruce A. Solomon, Valrico
An outrageous diatribe
Bill Maxwell is a fine writer. When it comes to writing about Israel, however, he is an enigma. While he has been known to have professed an affection for Israel (and, indeed, is currently studying Hebrew in preparation for another stay there), his writing has been decidedly one-dimensional and mean-spirited.
His latest diatribe regarding the Ethiopian Jews airlifted to Israel in one of the world's most amazing rescues is by far his most outrageous (Short of the promise, Sept. 26).
As one who spent some time in Ethiopia in 1967 as a Fulbright fellow, I believe that my credentials allow me to make some clarifying comments. I had the opportunity to visit remote Falasha (the pejorative term used for Ethiopian Jews at the time) villages outside Gondar and elsewhere. Ethiopian Jews were the poorest of the poor, the most primitive of the primitive. In one village, I noted an absence of young men. Upon inquiry, I was told that a number were attempting to walk through the Sudan in hopes of reaching Israel.
Today, the last remnants of Ethiopian Jews are eagerly awaiting their turn to join their fellow Jews in their Jewish homeland. If things are as bad for these black Jews, would they leave their homes and possessions for Israel? I think not.
Maxwell chooses to ignore the fact that Israel has absorbed fellow Jews from many lands and cultures -- from Arab lands, from Russia, from India, from Iran, from Europe, from the United States, etc. Israel has been described not as a melting pot but as a pressure cooker. Every group has had its difficulties. The Russians certainly have had theirs. I daresay very few chose to return to their native lands -- least of all the black Jews of Ethiopia.
If the Arab countries were as hospitable to their brother Palestinians with whom they have a common culture and language, the Middle East problem would not be as acute as it is today. Yet Maxwell has the chutzpah to criticize Israeli Jews for their initiative to bring their black brothers home.
Norman N. Gross, president,
Promoting Responsibility in Middle
East Reporting, Palm Harbor

Not a free speech issue

Re: Lift the limits on campaign gifts, by Robyn Blumner, Sept. 26.

I have repeatedly seen in the pages of your newspaper civil liberties advocate Robyn Blumner defend all manner of obscenity, pornography and civil defiance in the guise of free speech protection. Now she tells us the campaign financing system -- which the vast majority of polled Americans considers corrupt, which three ex-presidents and the majority of members of both houses of Congress agree is corrupt -- shouldn't be reformed at all; there should be no limit to how much money can be poured into political campaigns by wealthy individuals, corporations and trade unions.

If I were planning a run for the Senate or the presidency and faced the prospect of raising the $30-million needed to buy a Senate seat or $60-million to buy the White House, I would be shedding tears of gratitude for Blumner's advocacy. I would dream of setting all the Fortune 500 companies in competition with each other to increase the paltry few millions that most of them already give -- all the while, of course, assuring the media and voters that no contribution, no matter how munificent, could ever influence a single vote of mine.

Blumner is wrong, of course. If we remove the corrupting flood of money, the politicians will still find ways for their messages to be heard, albeit (mercifully) more briefly. The present practice of mounting a punishing, 18-month campaign blitz is in nobody's best interests, neither politicians' nor the electorate's. Remove also the need for politicians, once in office, to spend a major part of their time raising the millions of dollars needed for their next election campaign. Shorten the length of campaigns and pay for them with public financing machinery already in place.

A free speech issue? Baloney.
-- Joseph H. Francis, St. Petersburg

Don't misrepresent reform

It is disheartening that you are repeating the big lies circulated by the foes of campaign finance reform about the Shays-Meehan bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives

Contrary to Robyn Blumner's claims (Lift the limits on campaign contributions, Sept. 26), the bill will not prohibit "people from giving generously to their favorite political party." People will still be able to give that party up to $20,000 per year, a sum that is surely "generous," considering that Florida's median household income for 1998 was only $27,483.

Nor will Shays-Meehan limit "what advocacy groups from the Sierra Club to Mothers Against Drunk Drivers can say about candidates and public officials near an election." Advocacy groups will still be able to say whatever they like whenever they like. But if $10,000 television or radio ads are timed and targeted to influence the election of a specific candidate, the groups will not be able to hide who's bankrolling the ads.

Reformers do not believe that people or groups with the money to broadcast their opinions should not be heard, as Blumner charges. But we do believe that such wealth should not be used to buy undue influence.
-- Deborah Goldberg, senior attorney,
Brennan Center for Justice, New York
University school of law

Don't expand commission

Regarding your editorial of Sept. 26, A change for Pinellas, I would like to add my personal comments. First of all, I am a Realtor and a member of the Greater Clearwater Association of Realtors governmental affairs committee, but I am writing this as an individual and not a representative of the committee.

For your information, the committee unanimously voted to oppose the referendum that will increase the current Pinellas County Commission to seven members with four district representatives and three members at large.

There is no need for more government! There has been no citizen demand to increase the size of the County Commission. Even the commissioners themselves have indicated there is no need to increase the size of the commission. Why should the citizens be forced to pay more than a half-million dollars in additional budget allocations each year? Why are we spending approximately $400,000 to even have this referendum on the Nov. 2 ballot? More government is only more taxes -- and we don't need it!

I fully support the "Five is Enough" arguments and also the old adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
-- Robert G. Burdewick, Dunedin

Tired of the moaning

Re: Welfare's learning curve, Sept. 26.

I would like to say how sick and tired I am of hearing people moan and groan that the welfare system is failing them. First of all, welfare is to "help," not to support people and pick up all their bills.

I was a full-time student in an Orlando Institute five days a week, five hours a day, and I also had to have a full-time job. I also have two children.

In the article, Tammy Grubb says that she wanted to get her GED. Why should the state pay for her mistake of not staying in school in the first place? How greedy can a person get?
-- Ray Ferrio, Pinellas Park

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.