In the ’70s, when oil was a fraction of the cost it is today, the U.S. government insisted that Americans conserve and reduced the speed limit to 55 mph.

Today, when British Petroleum (BP) admits to faulty maintenance, the Middle East is in crisis, our government leaders are oil men, the oil companies profits are tantamount to consumer rape and you are lucky to find gas for under $3 a gallon … no one is telling us to conserve fuel!

So, I decide to try a little experiment. I drive a quad cab Hemi Dodge — a bubba truck. I’m lucky if I ever get better than 14 mpg on the interstate. To test the impact of the 55 mph speed limit, I try it. Results? It added 15 minutes to my journey but improved my gas mileage to 22.3/mpg! Doing the math, I realized that is a $54 savings each week, simply by slowing down. What a concept.

I’m sold on it, but why aren’t others? Why isn’t anyone in our state or federal government at least asking us to conserve fuel? If they aren’t going to lead us, we have to lead ourselves and conserve as best we can. Slow down, conserve and cut the Bush/Cheney oil retirement fund!

Lisa Zentz, Waverly

Can’t see street islands

I am not personally overjoyed with all of Lincoln’s street islands. Some are necessary to direct traffic, but the way they are neglected, they are a hazard.

It is not difficult to see that they are not always seen by the bent over and broken direction signs at the end of the islands. Late in the day as the light is fading and after dark, that old gray cement hump in the middle of the street is hard to see.

I suggest that rather than bickering about construction and widening the streets, we try to make what we already have safer. Spend a little of the millions we spend on streets on paint for the curbs of the street dividers or islands. As dividers, it would be more appropriate to use white rather than yellow as it would be more visible, for safety’s sake.

Wm. M. Lovelace, Lincoln

Unwise tax decision

Once again, Mayor Coleen Seng shows that she is out of touch with the taxpayers of Lincoln. Buried in her diatribe against Ken Svoboda (Local View, Aug. 21), she complains that he “flip-flopped on property taxes … proposed maintaining the current property tax levy … checked which way the political winds were blowing and changed his mind.”

Are we to believe that the mayor was not planning to use the full levy based upon an average 17 percent increase in taxes until Ken Svoboda agreed? Please. It appears he used his good sense and decided that such a horrendous increase just may cause a hardship on the taxpayers in this city.

I have polled my friends and neighbors to see if their properties went up drastically, as did some of ours, and they said no, some even went down. If that is the case, and the average increase is 17 percent, does this mean that those of us who got hit with 38 percent increases are really funding the mayor’s proposed budget increase? Our total property tax bill will increase 20 percent if the levies are kept as is. Only one of our four (25 percent) property tax protests resulted in a reduction, not the reported 60 percent success rate of other protesters. Maybe those responsible for spending my tax dollars got a 20 percent increase in their incomes this year, but we did not.

I vow to actively campaign against any of these elected officials who voted to use this tax windfall instead of making wise budget decisions and finding ways to trim their wish lists. I have worked in state and local government for many years, and there are a plethora of areas which could be cut.

Christina L. Peterson, Lincoln

Mosquito fogging needed

I would like to commend the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department for their effort in trying to regulate our mosquito population, which has exploded in the past few weeks. In a recent letter, a writer said that she got very sick from inhaling the pesticide spray (fog) in 2003.

My question is, why was she inhaling anyway? And if you see the fogger coming or going, why not roll up your window of your car, and wait for a few minutes for the fog to disappear.

She also said that she has not seen a mosquito and has not been stung. Maybe she ought to go outside in the morning or evening. After one hour outside, I bet her opinion about the spraying would change and she would be saying, “Bring on the fog.”

Suna Grabowski, Lincoln

Enjoy stolen tomatoes

I laid on my belly to plant them. I had to have someone else dig the holes. It hurt to pull the weeds for three months, but I watered them every other morning when it got close to 100 degrees to keep them alive.

Whoever stole my tomatoes, I want you to know that you made my little girl cry. I hope you enjoyed the fruit of your labors.

Ken Plugge, Lincoln

Comment is obscene

Sen. Ron Raikes, a gentleman I formerly respected and admired, was quoted in a Nebraska newspaper saying a teacher salary of $101,000 “is just obscene.” While not wishing to address the Plattsmouth situation that caused the quote, I have just a few questions for Raikes:

At what level does a teacher salary become obscene? For example, does the Lincoln teacher, possessor of an advanced degree and 30-plus years of teaching experience, reach the obscene level at $96,800? What is it about that extra $4,200 that kicks in the obscenity designation?

Mr. Raikes, are you guilty of gender or age discrimination when you inaccurately describe the teacher as an “80-year-old lady”?

Most significantly, how did you determine that $40,000 would be an appropriate salary? A teacher with 51 years of experience and having a master’s degree would make much more than that in most Nebraska school districts.

To answer at least one of my own questions, it would appear that Raikes is disparaging the age, gender and teaching level of the teacher in the story.

I can give you much better examples of what is obscene. A society is obscene if it values professional athletes and pop singers more than it does teachers. Five members of the New York Yankees earn at least $101,000 for every single game the team plays, even if they don’t play. The Rolling Stones are averaging more than $3.2 million for each of 45 concerts in 2006. These entertainers and athletes earn more in a few months than a teacher could in a lifetime. That is obscene.

A starting teacher in Nebraska earns poverty-level wages at most schools. That is obscene.

And Raikes is an embarrassment, making inflammatory comments and being manipulated while insulting teachers everywhere.

Joe Gallagher, Lincoln                       

Readers’ ‘right to know’

In his recent letter to the Journal Star, Larry Neal cited proof by “respected statisticians” that “the respected paleoclimatologist who invented” global warming had it all wrong. This was revealed during House hearings, producing astonishing evidence of the total ignorance of scientists in the use of statistical methods. The global warming theory had “become so influential that nobody is supposed to question it, especially policymakers.”

But in a later paragraph: “That isn’t to say there’s no global warming, just that we ought to be careful about how we deal with it.”

Now a reader has to be confused: What about that statistical triumph? Are we getting hotter or not? Well, the problem seems to be that “the fix will cost U.S. taxpayers a trillion dollars.”

Now, that’s an inconvenient truth. The administration can’t just go and raise taxes to save the world from doom — that’s bad policy. It would antagonize voters.

Instead, hold House hearings, hear the other side, find a wedge issue the opposition can depend on. In a pinch, doubletalk, but get to the heart of the matter for your supporters: A trillion is a lot more important than a wrong-headed policy.

Blame the Lincoln Journal Star for its recent editorial which called the hearings more “hot air” on a closed issue. Take the high ground: Sneer that the paper is “opposed to asking questions and questioning the public’s right to know.”

Now let them know who you are and on which side of the truth your policies are: Larry Neal, Deputy Staff Director, House Energy and Commerce Committee. Coming down on the side of the public’s right to know.

Warren Gilbert, Lincoln