Anson Stevens-Bollen
Cover, Sept. 7: “If You Don’t Read This Paper, We’ll Squirt This Cat”
Nod to the icons
Your reference to National Lampoon’s hilariously iconic cover from the early ‘70s was not lost on me. I did not read the paper. Would you now squirt the cat, hard?
Scott Shuker, Santa Fe
Go ahead
I read your paper, but go ahead and squirt him!
Don Hill, via Facebook
Heavy Petting, Sept. 21: “An Obituary for the Worst Dog Ever”
Big dogs deserve love
I wonder if Jack Hagerman would have found Madeline’s behavior so adorable if she’d been a shepherd, pit bull, Rottweiler or any of the other larger breeds or mixed-breeds that already get a bad rap? I’ve rescued at least 30 dogs in my lifetime—two or three of which were over 50 pounds and could also be considered “the worst.” But, with the very first one, I learned that folks are far less tolerant of badly behaving big dogs. Yes, like Madeline, every dog deserves a loving home and committed person to care for them; each one also deserves someone who’s willing to work with them to alleviate or mitigate any fear aggression to ensure that he/she isn’t confiscated or euthanized.
C.E. Atkinson, Santa Fe
The Interface, Sept. 14: “Force of Nature”
Challenge for all
[Thanks] @votergirl and @SantaFeReporter for tackling climate change and the startup landscape. The #ClimateCrisis is everyone’s & every organization’s crisis What changing are you making?
Alexandra Merlino, via Twitter @bee wild outside
Online, Sept. 13: “Qualification Conundrum”
Don’t let it in
I (Heart) SFR but disappointed in the “both sides”-ing from this headline. Block/Wilbur are partisan hacks not journalists—full stop. @norasack did the right thing. Sometimes when media tries too hard for a “both sides” it lets in the crazy. Plz stop giving these people one iota of space.
Jake McCook via Twitter @jakemccooknm
News, Aug. 31: “Let There Be Less Light”
Show me the money
Good article by @SantaFeReporter. I have my doubts, however, concerning the city’s claims about energy savings from the conversion. I’ve put in an IPRA request; more than three months later, still no evidence they are even tracking it.
Michael Jacobs via Twitter @AbogadoMike
News, Sept. 12: “Cannabis Capitalism”
Cartel economics?
Retail prices will come down too as the cartels undercut the high state taxes. This has happened everywhere it’s been legalized.
John Puerner via Facebook
Online, Aug. 26: “NM Voter FAQ”
Vote yes #1 for better ed
New Mexico may be the Land of Enchantment, but we could be doing far more to make our state the land of opportunity. For decades, policymakers, business leaders, educators and advocates for economic and social justice have struggled, largely in vain, to position New Mexico as a great place to do business and create living wage jobs. State and local taxpayers have invested hundreds of millions into marketing campaigns, tax breaks, capital improvement grants and other development incentives targeted at industry. Why then, after so much effort and expense, do we still rank dead last on so many indicators of economic and social well- being? The answer is simple—short-term business enticements are no substitute for the long- term investments in our children’s education that we should have been making all along.
Targeted tax breaks make a difference at the margin—when a firm is trying to decide between New Mexico and Colorado; but they don’t help at all if New Mexico’s limited workforce and poor educational outcomes mean we never make the final cut.
But the tide may be turning in our favor. The last decade has seen a steady ramping up of our state’s investment in early childhood education. A massive body of research shows that investments in the early years pay the greatest dividends. Children who receive high quality services such as child care and NM-PreK enter school ready to learn and studies show that those early educational advantages translate into better jobs and higher incomes in adulthood.
With Constitutional Amendment #1 on the ballot in November, we have the opportunity to reconfirm our commitment to our state’s youngest residents and their families by increasing access to high quality programs and further professionalizing the early childhood workforce. Investments in young children pay dividends well into the future. However, Constitutional Amendment #1 will have short-term benefits too. Additional revenue for early childhood will enable the state to increase access to affordable child care, a critical support for working families that will increase the size and productivity of our workforce. Constitutional Amendment #1 proposes taking a very small percentage of New Mexico’s
Permanent School Fund—currently sitting at $26 billion—and investing it into early childhood education. The Permanent Fund receives revenue from royalties paid by oil and gas producers, thus the additional $150 million the amendment would generate for early childhood would not increase taxes paid by New Mexico families and would not come out of other programs. All it takes is for New Mexicans to come together and invest our own money back into our economy and back into our state. I’ll be voting yes on Constitutional Amendment #1 in
November because it is a common sense, low-cost way to support a critical component of our economy and because I’m ready to see New Mexico be the land of opportunity.
Kelly O’Donnell, Albuquerque
Read more about New Mexico’s general election at sfreporter.com/elections
