Readers Respond

EPA lead rule suffers setback

“There is no need for a better ‘test kit,’ as highly reliable and affordable X-Ray Fluorescence technology has been in use for decades. There are many consultants who have XRF machines, and lead inspections are inexpensive. XRF testing produces no damage, while ‘test kits’ and chip sampling involves producing widely scattered damage (12 to 15 sample locations for a typical room in a house).

“The reality is that lead-based paint is rare in residential buildings constructed 1960 to 1978, and is not everywhere in older buildings. EPA’s big mistake was not requiring that the buildings be inspected, so that procedures for dealing with lead-based paint are only used where it is actually present.”

— F. Stephen Masek

On the President and the budget fiasco

“This fiasco, as you would call it, is all of their making. The President needs to tell the American people that if we default on our loans, the rumble would be worse that the last recession we had. We cannot continue politics as usual. They need to make decisions based on what the country really needs. He needs to tell the people that the Senate, the House of Representatives and he are going to cut their wages, go on Social Security (as we have it) and stop paying the retired congressmen their full salaries. That would be a good start.”

— John Stokes

“There should be no compromise on guaranteed benefits for low- and middle-class America. He needs to stay true to the values that got him into office. It has been well proven that tax breaks and corporate tax loopholes do not create jobs in America. There is no shortage of upper class in this country, but a shortage of middle class. It’s time to stand up for all Americans — not just executives, bankers and corporations.”

— Frank Douwes

“What he should say is: ‘You’re absolutely right Republicans, my policies have not worked up to this point, and raising taxes during these economic times is nuts. Therefore, I will recommend no new taxes, we will create a balanced budget amendment, and we will reduce spending to a percent of GDP that both parties will agree to.’ ”

— Mike Doogan

“How many households in the U.S. do you suppose can go out and spend way above their incomes and then go ask the boss for a raise, because of their spending habits? Where do the members of Congress lose this theory from their home to the Capitol building? It isn’t how much money you take in that is the problem, it is how much you spend that gets you in trouble. Washington, D.C., is a prime example of this.”