(click on ads for more details)

I read with interest the article on VET vs. pollution and the commentary on Light Rail in your recent edition of the Jefferson Review. Last week I received a call in Kansas City from the University of Kansas requesting answers to a survey on vehicle emissions testing.  The questions seemed slanted in favor of VET in Kansas and Missouri.  For instance:  would I be in favor of a pollution testing machine in designated places (at government expense, of course) because of the many elderly and children who are affected by fumes from cars?  Since I had read your article, I realized that behind this survey were other issues which had nothing to do with the welfare of our citizens.

The Light Rail plan is also being touted in Kansas City.  Some believe it could create a more vibrant community and be a cost-effective alternative to traffic congestion in our city.  Others call it a trojan horse because they believe it is really a redevelopment plan in disguise, using tax payers' money--$793 million dollars for a completed total of $1.4 billion.  Only 15,000 people would benefit.  The plan will be on the ballot August 7.  I was glad to have read the Mancini article to hear what those in other cities think about light rail.

Thanks, Jefferson Review, for keeping us informed!  

Carolyn Camoriano