Letters: Readers address DPS, auto news

Lansing reaction typical

What will it take for the state House and Senate in Lansing to wake up and quit blaming the DPS teachers who resorted to drastic measures to call attention to serious issues within the school system? The conditions at issue are not only the oversized classes, but the deterioration of the schools themselves. Mold, mice, water damage, etc.

Yet what Sen. Phil Pavlov and some of his colleagues do but talk about introducing a bill on sickouts in coming weeks? Just another bill to address the teachers in lieu of addressing the problem.

It’s a typical response from Lansing. We wonder what’s wrong in up there.

Thomas Summer,


Look to EM, not sickouts

Re: The Detroit News’ Jan. 12 editorial “Fire DPS strike ringleaders”: I became inflamed upon reading the maligning of dedicated public servants who must take extraordinary action to bring attention to the plight of the state’s most vulnerable.

You decry the loss of a couple days of school while children experience Third World educational conditions.

There was no mention of the situation caused by the Emergency Manager. It is on his watch these conditions are permitted and the deficit balloons. It’s pointed out that he has authority to fire the teachers, but who has the authority to fire him?

Michigan has made pawns of Detroit students. When will the state learn that ignoring their needs when they are most receptive and malleable contributes to problems of poverty, crime, hopelessness, the cheapening of human life. Where is the News to expose these conditions?

The proper response is to address the conditions, examine solutions and provide a level playing field for students and teachers across the state. No one is expendable by reason of where they receive their education.

Larry Alcantar, Detroit

Buyers want EVs

Re: Henry Payne’s Jan. 7 article “Disconnect grows over electric cars”: The writer misleadingly asserted that government regulators, not consumer demand, are driving the production of electric vehicles. While regulations play an important role, consumer demand is growing and for good reason.

In December, when gas prices were the lowest they’ve been since 2009, U.S. consumers bought more electric vehicles (EVs) than in any month ever; 13,650 drivers bought or leased a new EV. The fourth quarter of 2015 was the best-selling quarter ever for.

Many people want to drive a car that is lower in greenhouse gas emissions. Also, EVs are fun to drive. The top three cars on Consumer Report’s list of the most satisfying cars are electric. The affordable Nissan Leaf, mid-range Chevrolet Volt and luxury Tesla Model S all rank above conventional gasoline-powered cars.

Low gas prices aren’t a match for the savings on gasoline and maintenance, the convenience of at home charging, and the cleaner air that comes with a switch to electric vehicles.

Robert Gordon, Ann Arbor

Prices of future today

Re: Detroit News columnist Kaitlyn Buss’s Jan. 13 column, “Collision coming on fuel standards”: Toyota executive Jim Lentz complains the truck prices might need to $85,000 in the future to meet new fuel efficiency standards. His exact quote was “Who wants to pay $85,000 for a truck.” Well, I believe some trucks cost pretty close to that number now.

Lynn Martin, Warren