The U.S. attorney wants to reform a good law

Act 111, instituted in 1968, is a Pennsylvania legislative action that allows police and fire departments in the commonwealth to fairly arbitrate contractual issues and concerns with municipalities when an agreement cannot be made. Police and fire departments are not permitted to strike.

An independent arbitrator listens to the facts and circumstances of the contractual issues from both sides. The arbitrator makes decisions based on argument. This is a fair and impartial way to settle collective bargaining agreements between police and fire departments.

For U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan to express concerns with Act 111 is nothing more than an insult to every law enforcement agency in Pennsylvania ("U.S. Won't Indict Murphy for Contract With Fire Union: Deal Requires Former Mayor to Assist in Push for Reforms," June 27). For the U.S. attorney to blame Act 111 for a politician's ambition to continue with his political future is misconduct, which should be addressed.

Ms. Buchanan has stated she would make herself available to officials interested in improving Act 111. What Ms. Buchanan should do is make herself available to help law enforcement officials prosecute criminals and help local law enforcement.

I believe Ms. Buchanan should leave Act 111 alone, or is she looking to enhance her own political ambition?

DENNIS J. LYNCH
Patrolman
Penn Hills Police Department
Secretary
Penn Hills PD Police Advisory Board
Penn Hills

---

Many great homes

Why is it that every article printed about housing in Oakland focuses on the rundown student apartments owned by absentee landlords who do not address code violations and who over-occupy their properties? I think it is because that is what people expect to read about housing in Oakland. However, I have another point of view -- one that was not represented in the June 18 article "Oakland Living Can Be Under Par."

I am a longtime resident of Oakland, having moved into an apartment my junior year while at the University of Pittsburgh. In the years since I graduated, I've lived in two nice apartments in Oakland and bought a home on Parkview Avenue.

My street is a mix of student apartments and owner-occupied dwellings, and we all get along pretty well. There are a number of young professionals buying homes in the neighborhood -- not all of whom work at an Oakland institution. We are here because we love urban living, and we think this area is good now -- and we are going to work to make it great in the future.

I would welcome anyone from the PG to come talk with one of us to get the other side of the story.

KATE MAURIN
Oakland

---

Shop owner's right

In response to Tony Norman's June 13 column "Cheesesteaks, With a Side of Bigotry": Mr. Norman's personal attack on Joey Vento and his sandwich shop smacks of bigotry. This has nothing to do with Hispanics or any other immigrant group "changing the complexion and ethnic balance of the neighborhood."

The fact is, this is America, where English is the official language. All immigrants should learn and speak English. Joey Vento has a right to place these signs in his sandwich shop.

In case Tony Norman hasn't been keeping up on current events, illegal immigration is out of control in this country.

As for the Statue of Liberty, she should not be holding a torch; she should be holding a stop sign.

MARIE C. BARKOVIC
Center

---

Not unreasonable

In response to your June 22 editorial "Cheesesteak Politics," let me say first that even though I am a registered Republican, I do not support Rick Santorum nor will I vote for him. I feel that he will do anything if he believes it will enhance his chance for re-election.

However, I do have to take issue with the premise in your editorial that Joey Vento in Philadelphia is discriminating on the basis of race or national origin.

One cannot change one's race or national origin, but one can learn to speak English. That is all Mr. Vento is asking.

SUZAN SEAMANS
New Milford, Pa.

---

Tired talking point

In response, to the June 22 letter penned by Sam Sinderson ("The Liberal Media and Other Leftists Do Not Want Us to Win This War"), I must submit that the premise of his entire spew was based on either misinformation or his total misunderstanding of the insanity of war.

Stating "the left apparently hates America" is, by far, a declaration of his hatred of 50 percent of this country. Mr. Sinderson, liberals do not hate America because they do not desire to fight the scourge of terrorism in the only way you would know how to do it, but us lefties, Americans, would rather discourage the slaughter of all people who are dying in this "military blunder" known as Iraq.

It is such a shame that you cannot open your eyes to see that the talking points of the "con" machine do nothing more than split this country.

As far as hatred for President Bush, that talking point is getting very, very old. It is not a hatred of President Bush; it is just that we have finally understood what his administration stands for: winning at our soldiers' costs ... simple.

JOE BRANCATO
Whitehall

---

Dangerous tradition

Stupid Pittsburgh left! I'm not referring to those liberals among us -- that rant can wait.

Pittsburgh -- what a great place. Birthplace of two of my three children. I have many treasured memories of my eight years there. It didn't take long for me to fall permanently in love with the Steelers, whether they were appearing in AFC championships or suffering losing seasons.

Since returning to my native California, I continue to root for the Steelers with other fans at "The Graduate" in my hometown of Chico. The Steelers always get one of the big screens, just like those Bay Area teams.

I fondly remember many aspects of my time in Pittsburgh -- I can even get nostalgic for shoveling snow, no longer one of my duties. But hands down the most irritating thing I recall about Pittsburgh was that stupid left turn people make in front of you, when you have the right of way.

Perhaps there actually is a connection between the political left and that pre-emptive left turn -- maybe it's that same sense of entitlement. Drivers figure they're owed that turn, they deserve it, they would have to wait too long for the long line of cars, and so you're obliged to give them the right of way.

No helmet and no license aside, a left-turning driver's failure to yield is what caused Ben Roethlisberger's recent accident. I'm not condemning the poor lady involved in the accident; it's an indictment on a whole driving mind-set in the city -- now is the time to right the "Pittsburgh left."

KURT A. JORGENSEN
Chico, Calif.

---

A great photo

I usually take the photographs in the paper for granted, not giving them a second thought. However, on Page 1 of the Local News section on June 21, your paper had a photo of a blue heron that had just caught a fish in the North Park Lake.

What a great picture Bob Donaldson took! The shot really ought to win an award. It is outstanding.

The photograph has enlightened me to take more notice of others in the future. Bob Donaldson's photos surely enhance the paper. My compliments and thanks to him.

JACK ROSEMAN
McCandless

---

Battle not over

In regard to your report of the Presbyterian General Assembly's reaffirmation of traditional sexual standards but allowing exceptions in cases of conscience, thus opening the back door to gay ordination ("Leeway on Gay Clergy," June 21 National Briefs): I disagree with the assumption that "the decision concluded a hard-fought struggle ... between liberals and conservatives" in the church.

The struggle is far from concluded. To paraphrase naval hero John Paul Jones, "We (conservatives) have not yet begun to fight." I assure you that every effort will be made to overturn this ill-advised action in the intervening two years before the 2008 General Assembly.

JOSEPH M. HOPKINS
New Wilmington

---

Don't change what marriage is, but acknowledge same-sex unions

Let's call a spade a spade. Disregarding the ethical and moral aspects of the subject, the definition of marriage is the union of a man and woman. It should stay that way.

No one objects to the definition of "fraternity" as a group of men or the word "sorority" as a group of women. Let's not change definitions but create a new special word for same-sex unions that may have the same financial and social benefits. Give these unions their own unique term.

MARTHA B. PEREGO
Oakland

---