Letters to the Editor

United Way funding discriminatory groups

Johns Hopkins University is in its fourth week of the United Way Campaign to raise $1,100,000 from its faculty, staff and students. The United Way is a charitable organization that funds organizations that provide services to people. One of these organizations is the Boy Scouts of America, an institution that openly discriminates against homosexuals and atheists. JHU maintains the following non-discriminatory policy statement: "[JHU] does not discriminate on the basis of religion, [and] sexual orientation in any program or activity." That JHU actively runs a campaign for United Way and even allows employees to have contributions directly deducted from their paychecks is supporting an organization that runs contra to its non-discriminatory policy.

The Johns Hopkins administration needs to rethink its active involvement with United Way and instead work with other non-discriminatory charitable agencies.

Praveen Kankanala '03

Bush's popularity not based on Sept. 11

I find the seventh item on Charles Donefer's list in his column of Nov. 7 appalling. First of all, the statement that Bush's presidency was "faltering" prior to Sept. 11 is patently inaccurate. USA Today, The Washington Post and The New York Times had the President's approval ratings hovering in the mid-50s from his inauguration all the way up to Sept. 11, a figure that is on par with most other presidents of the latter half of the twentieth century, including Clinton.

Moving past that, the most disgusting element in this column is the implication that Republicans somehow sought to benefit politically from the murder of 3,000 fellow citizens. Neither the Bush [sic] nor the Republican party asked for that horrible event to happen, and the American people were united behind their leadership, not a particular party. It's a cheap shot at the President to add "on his watch" to the end of the article, insinuating that he did not do all he could; Mr. Donefer would do well to remember that that the plans for attack were long in the making, and former-President Clinton had the opportunity to eliminate the threat of Osama bin Laden during the mid-'90s.

Zachary Scott

Leiman's plans won't help Charles Village

David Leiman's condescension for the very neighborhood and city in which he lives does nothing to solve the problems behind crime. His solution for drugs and poverty is gentrification, building a bookstore and more restaurants. If concern is so great, why aren't more students involved in bettering the community? The positive impact pro-active [sic] students could have in volunteering or mentoring is immeasurable. Leiman needs to understand Charles Village is more than simply Hopkins students. What resident wants their neighborhood, and perhaps home, demolished because we need a Cheesecake Factory? A family that owns a house on Guilford will still live here when Leiman, and his disdain, graduate and move on. Leiman's assertions that Charles Village is a "run-down and violent community" and people live here for "lack of alternatives" are insults to the people of this neighborhood.

Charles Village has some of the most desirable property in Baltimore; check local listings for how many houses are for sale. In DC Metro stations there are ads for Baltimore -- featuring Charles Village! It is this attitude of arrogance and superiority that continues to isolate Hopkins from Baltimore, and vice-versa. Elitism does not make anyone safer. Instead of complaining about Baltimore, leave D level and experience Baltimore, not just Fell's or the Harbor! Safety is important, prompter 24-hour shuttles and individual precaution will help. But Hopkins can't solve the fundamentals behind crime by building Mr. Leiman his bowling alley. No one is so enamored with bowling as to go off heroin.

Katherine Elsasser