Letters to the Editor

Readers write about nanotechnology, kids in science, RV fillup costs, and Hillary Clinton in the media.

Nanotechnology bill takes steps to ensure safety

The May 20 editorial, "Safeguards on nanotech," mischaracterized the legislation (H.R. 5940) approved May 7 by the House Science and Technology Committee.

This bill amends certain aspects of the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), the federal multiagency research and development program authorized in 2003. It does not actually authorize funding for any part of the NNI and certainly does not reduce the level of funding authorized for environmental, health, and safety (EHS) research.

Recommended: Could you pass a US citizenship test?

On the contrary, the bill assigns responsibility to a senior White House official to ensure that a detailed implementation plan for EHS research is developed and executed.

The bill will strengthen and provide transparency to the federal research effort to understand the potential risks of nanotechnology.

Rep. Bart Gordon
Washington

Chairman, House Committee on Science and Technology

How to improve science's kid-appeal

In response to the May 16 article, "Can competitions raise 'cool' factor of math, science?": As this story observed, many students are still not drawn to the existing math and science options.

There are more than 6 million children in after-school programs in the United States (and 15 million more would participate if a program were available, according to the Afterschool Alliance). Only a tiny fraction of this population sees math and science as something they could be doing outside of the classroom. Meanwhile, evidence suggests that students have to be interested in science and math (not just good at it) if they are going to pursue it, and that interest is often linked to knowing someone like them who does science as a career.

There are many exemplary programs connecting young people to science and technology. I encourage your readers to support their local after-school programs and science centers in bringing fun science not just to competition winners but to all the students who we will need as future science and engineering workers.

Jason Freeman
Berkeley, Calif.

Director, Coalition for Science After School

In response to the May 16 article about using science and math competitions to lure more students into these fields: A name change would go a long way. "Science Fair" is probably not going to pique the average teenager's interest, but "Science Smackdown" just might.

Additionally, prizes provided should be relevant to the typical student. The true nerd will compete just for the fun of it and be satisfied winning a savings bond, but there are many others who find the chance to win a Nintendo Wii or an Xbox 360 much more attractive.

Ralph Gutierrez
Redondo Beach, Calif.

Hard-core RV-ers shop around for gas

Regarding the May 12 article, High fuel prices curtail RV trips – just a little": In April, we left Maine for a seven-week trip down to the Florida Keys and back. We planned the trip months ago and "conservatively" budgeted $3.50 per gallon, just in case prices went up before we left. We were pretty surprised to see prices hit that and climb higher while on our trip. We haven't made any changes to our itinerary yet but we might if the prices continue to climb.

We are actively shopping for the best gas prices now, so, if you own a gas station and you want our 75-gallon gas tank to be filled at your place, lower your prices!

Angela Hoy
Bangor, Maine Clinton's candidacy not subject to media

Regarding the May 10 article, "Clinton's still in the race – and competitive, aides say": The news media's barrage against Sen. Hillary Clinton's forward quest for the nomination has been almost completely negative and filled with the miasma of the airwaves.

The voters all need to be heard from every state. It's not equitable or fair, in a race this close and so strongly felt in the hearts of voters on both sides, for one candidate to quit prematurely simply because media pundits all seem to parrot each other. That kind of negative influence and manipulation has nothing to do with First Amendment rights and the kind of spirit of a self-governing nation our Founding Fathers envisioned.

It's very clear that Clinton could very well win the popular vote, hence the confidence of the superdelegates.

Patricia Siler
Newport Beach, Calif.

The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number. Any letter accepted may appear in print or on our website, www.csmonitor.com. Mail letters to Readers Write and Opinion pieces to Opinion Page, 210 Massachusetts Avenue, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail letters to Letters and Opinion pieces to OpEd.

Share this story:

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...