We have lived in Southern California since the mid-1960s and have seen how the influx of Hispanic immigrants has changed things. Nobody is punishing them, unless it is their own Mexican government (``Punishing Immigrants,'' Nov. 3).
It is true that things need economic improvement south of the border and perhaps we could and should help with that. But immigrants (legal and illegal) that have seen how the economy works here have the opportunity to return and to make things better for the citizens of Mexico.
Proposition 187 is the first legal opportunity the voters have had to address the issue of illegal immigration. Citizens are not objecting just to Hispanics. They are objecting to anyone who thinks there is a ``free lunch'' for them here. It seems the federal government has refused to help financially with this problem until the state of California stops making it so attractive for them to continue coming here illegally.
We feel that those children whose parents were here illegally at the time of their birth should not automatically become citizens. If the two of us were living in Mexico illegally, how many Mexicans would be willing to pay our medical bills and educate our children gratuitously? Sallie and Wendell Danielson, Garden Grove, Calif.
Turned off by sensational news
In a long conversation recently with a news director at a Washington television station, I had explained my disgust with the TV news coverage, arguing that I felt they were taking the easy way out by overreporting the sensational rather than seeking out the upbeat news for some balance (``Demanding a Better Press,'' Nov. 3). They are blowing the violence and tragedy out of proportion.
I also pointed out that I was speaking not only for myself but for my family, friends, and fellow workers. We are turning off the news in disgust. I was told that we did not represent the viewing public and that it was up to the news media to decide what is news. I was shocked and appalled by his attitude and demeanor.
As the author states: ``Some editors and TV news directors argue that they are simply meeting an insatiable public demand...'' I say, stop insulting us. Harriet C. Maloney, Bluemont, Va.
Nuclear waste, long-term problem
The article ``Take Nuclear Waste Off States' Hands,'' Oct. 27, plays down the fact that there simply are no safe long-term storage or disposal methods for spent nuclear fuel. Good intentions and billions of dollars do not change the laws of physics and geology. The cost of constructing, fueling, operating, decommissioning, and dismanteling nuclear plants may be significantly higher than the value of the energy obtained over the operating life of the plant in many cases.
This is especially true if the cost of long-term storage or disposal is included. Investors in nuclear power expect to make a profit over the operating life of the plant, but this can be done only if long-term cleanup and nuclear waste storage is left to the taxpayers. Larry W. Linnell, Towanda, Pa.
A barber shop bond with dad
I read the article ``Enthroned on the Barber's Chair,'' Oct. 25, with great delight. What great memories of going with my dad on a Saturday morning to pay a visit to ``Shorty'' the barber.
Suddenly, I found myself back in the Little Rock barbershop reading the latest ``Superman'' comic book, waiting with great expectation for my turn in the ``king's throne'' and the splash of the sweet-smelling barber's powder around my neck signifying the end of another haircut with Dad. Thanks for the journey back in time. Robert M. Moore, Coronado, Calif.