Make us your home page
Your letters >

Protest of cell phone tower on school property calls out for logic

Cell tower protest calls out for logic

I have a question for all those who object to a cell tower on school property. Do you and your children have cell phones? How much time is spent texting and talking on your cell phone?

I have two daughters, both have cell phones as do most teenagers these days. They spend more time texting and talking on the cell phones than anything else they do.

Is it not reasonable that we are exposed to more radio waves by using a cell phone than by a tower where the waves will be 100 to 200 feet above the ground? How many of these people have a microwave in their home? Are you not exposed to the waves from that?

Are any of these people willing to pay more in taxes to make up the $70,000 the district, and school will not get without the tower. The information I have is that of the protesters there, only two had children in the school. It is my opinion that the quizzical looks were from people wondering why the protest, not because of lack of information.

When a cell tower was installed at a Meadow Point club house, I saw none of the protest from residents close to that location. I hear complaints from people I know about the lack of service in that area. Maybe that's why this tower was approved by the School Board.

Jack Wright, Zephyrhills

Re: Oct. 30 column by Dan DeWitt

Brown-Waite's votes define her

I think calling U.S. Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite mean-spirited was extremely kind to a woman who in the past has done so much for helping to empty the U.S. Treasury for the war in Iraq, sending wads of cash to Halliburton and Brown and Root to be squandered on defective, deadly showers at the U.S. compound and doing little for local residents.

This mean-spirited party rubber stamp hasn't had an original thought until her recent call for the president to ask her permission to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. Yet she continues to seek newspaper space ahead of her next election 12 months from now. It would be wise for those of us who still have a roof over our heads, a job and decent health care, to check out a politically neutral Web site ( and place it in our favorites file for reference.

The site rates the voting record of Congress on every piece of legislation. The Web site also can be used to read each piece of legislation so that we might become familiar with the bill and why it affects the middle class.

For instance, she recently voted against a bill, HR 3548 — the Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009, a bill that would have given shareholders of a publicly traded company an opportunity to vote on the gigantic compensation, pay and golden parachutes given to CEOs of those public corporations.

Why would she do that? The legislation would give shareholders a voice in company pay policy?

Our junior and senior high school students will be interested to note that the Web site also indicates that our congresswoman recently voted against HR 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. This bill would end the subsidies given to lenders that write student loans. Instead, it allows the Treasury to issue the loans directly to students, eliminating the middle man and saving $87 billion, to be used to increase the amount available to loan, plus increasing the Pell grants from $5,350 a year to $6,900 by 2019.

By the way, you don't pay back Pell grants, you keep the money, get a good education and become a taxpayer and, perhaps, an employer, so you can continue to make a difference in the lives of the next generation of taxpayers. Why did she vote nay? She was probably told to, but who knows?

Dave Mulholland, Spring Hill

Protest of cell phone tower on school property calls out for logic 11/04/09 [Last modified: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 6:57pm]
Photo reprints | Article reprints


Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours