GOP is willing to spend on its own agenda

Do I detect some hypocrisy with the U.S. House of Representatives?

All the whining, all the condemnation of federal government spending, cutting social programs that support the poor and needy such as Meals on Wheels for the elderly. But spending on a federal program to add 20,000 more border agents and to build a border fence that will cost millions of dollars is OK?

It was my understanding that the right wing of the Republican party opposed increasing the federal government in their concern for the taxpayers.

Apparently their concern is only with those issues of federal spending that suit their agenda and millions spent on "border security" are fine in increasing the big government they all hypocritically condemn.

Geneva Keith Ulm

Retired, Tucson

Need for cheap labor drives immigration

Re: the June 22 article "More from India cross AZ border, officers say."

The article was not a surprise. The fact is it's about labor. Something or someone is attracting more cheap labor from Asia.

During the settlement of the Imperial Valley in California there were times when "cheap Mexican labor" was replaced by an influx of workers from the Philippines, Japan and China. During the Great Depression many from the dust-bowl regions in the country found their way to the lettuce and fruit fields.

This may be the beginning of another replacement labor force for employers to get cheap labor, since the heat has been turned up so profoundly on our neighbors to the south.

These Indian immigrants are downtrodden, very poor, urban dwellers who - like their other poverty-stricken brethren from around the world - are willing to work for a pittance under poor conditions that are still light-years from what they would face at home.

Ronald C. Quintia

Oral and maxillofacial surgeon, Tucson

Pro-development mantra still reigns

Re: the June 23 guest column "To join the big leagues, Tucson must take advantage of its opportunities."

Si Schorr failed to mention his signature project in his recent guest column. When he served as an assistant city manager he was one of the principal architects of urban renewal. The "road taken" never measured up to the rhetoric of revitalizing downtown. Instead the cultural heritage and vibrancy of downtown were destroyed.

The Mexican American community in the oldest barrios paid a high social cost and over 850 families were displaced. Numerous turn of the century Sonoran-style adobe homes were bulldozed in our barrio.

Now with the El Rio Golf Course/Grand Canyon University debacle one can see that his mantra of "development trumps social cost" is still intact after 45 years.

Pedro M. Gonzales

Barrio Viejo resident, Tucson

Hybrid vehicles are dead-end options

Re: the June 24 editorials "Are hybrids the best choice for car shoppers?"

I was amused while reading your pro/con editorials. These two pieces present a false choice for the future of the automobile.

The hybrid is an expensive and needlessly complicated vehicle. We need two engines, conventional gas powered and an electric motor? And those batteries! Just more stuff to go wrong. And the diesel? Check out the emission control system, including the urea tank that must be monitored. More complexity.

No, the good old gasoline engine is the way to go. Continual improvements, already on the road and more to come, make these dead-end alternatives unnecessary.

David A. Neal

Retired automotive analyst, Oro Valley

Seems like Orwell was prophetic

We now have cameras on virtually every corner, our phone records and emails are no longer private, our president is telling government workers to turn in any activity they don't approve of and over half the country thinks this is OK?

Is it time to move Orwell's "1984" from fiction to nonfiction, or even history?

Steve Alverdes

Oro Valley