LETTERS

BOB DOLE AND BILL CLINTON

What an incredible piece "Two Men, Two Visions" was! I thought the election was just a contest between two political animals and that there wasn't really a helluva lot of difference between them. With your brilliantly conceived and beautifully written article [ELECTION '96, Nov. 4], I learned about everything that was at stake in the contest. At an important moment in American history, I found your report informative, uplifting and inspiring. NORMAN L. MARTIN Los Angeles Via E-mail

As a truly undecided voter, I was disappointed by "Two Men, Two Visions." It should have appeared as a Time editorial. You showed pictures of the young faces of Bill Clinton's supporters vs. the older ones of Bob Dole's. You pictured the smiling, hopeful face of Clinton vs. the stern, bitter face of Dole. Then you drew several biased conclusions, such as Clinton's wanting to be more like us and Dole's wanting us to be more like him. MIKE PALMER Katy, Texas

Thank you for the concise yet detailed picture of the choice between Bob and Bill. In the frenzy of the 30-second sound bites and campaign ads we were subjected to on TV, it was rather difficult to attain a meaningful electoral perspective that reached beyond the next round of the assaults on our intelligence. Your piece did justice to the presidential race. STEVE LEVINSKY San Diego

Your cover was just another example of how the media dismissed the candidacy of Ross Perot, who was the preferred presidential choice of millions of Americans. Perot was the only one who could have led our country to real reform. MIKE OWEN Dallas

We Americans have got through the democratic process of the election and effected change in our country. We occasionally have a hard time finding balance in the political arena. The pendulum swings too far to the right or too far to the left. Yes, our government can get too big, too bloated, too arrogant. However, I would hate to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As frustrating as it can be, I would prefer to keep our system and fight Big Government. With knowledge and citizen participation in elections, we can reshape government to benefit all Americans, not just the elite. WENDY TASSIN Poway, California

Two men, two visions, but no choice. Both candidates were helplessly chained to the politics of Big Money. We need leaders who can make the tough choices for our common good without worrying about what the National Rifle Association, the American Association of Retired Persons or other special-interest groups might do. We need a $1,000 limit on campaign contributions for individuals, corporations and political-action committees. The millions in "soft money" that flow to candidates must be stopped with laws and manpower that will deal out swift and sure punishment. DOUG WITTMER Topeka, Kansas

The words THE CHOICE implied that readers would be treated to a fair-minded and balanced assessment of the two candidates. Instead, I saw Dole's 15% tax-cut labeled as "a turkey," and his candidacy declared DOA a week before the first votes were counted. Perhaps a more accurate cover would have been a single image of Clinton with the headline OUR CHOICE. TIMOTHY L. ROPER Bethesda, Maryland

Congratulations on the terrific compilation of political information in the chart showing where Dole and Clinton stood on key issues. I wish the two big candidates could have been forced to debate only on the clear outline of issues you highlighted. We might have got a much better idea of where both of them really stood. MEL BULGERIN Eau Claire, Wisconsin Via E-mail

COVERING THE ISSUES

Thanks very much for your state-specific congressional-election guides [ELECTION '96, Nov. 4]. Sadly, I learned more from the insert on my home state than I did from the local media coverage and the appearances and ads that the candidates spent millions of dollars on. Excellent work. I am also continually amazed by the district-specific congressional facts you print from time to time. They are an oasis of truth after months of exaggerated figures and lies from candidate to candidate and party to party. Three cheers for technology and hard work! CHRISTOPHER KIRCHNER Philadelphia Via E-mail

THAT MONEY IN SWISS BANKS

The Nazi plunder of Jewish property, possessions and capital was horrible but almost "understandable" [WORLD, Oct. 28]. Victors have got the spoils for millenniums, but Switzerland's masquerade as a neutral safe haven to lure and then steal $3 billion to $7 billion in victims' assets was unprecedented, vile treachery. The Swiss banks should feel humiliated that more than 50 years have passed without their addressing the disposition of Jewish wealth. WILLIAM P. SAUNDERS Bloomfield, Michigan Via E-mail

Fifty years is a long time to obstruct justice. The Swiss are worried about their world image? Ah yes, this is the benign country of chocolate, precision timepieces, army knives, downhill skiing, Heidi and William Tell. Hogwash! The Swiss are the people who do business with and protect organized crime, petty dictators, drug dealers and, simply, fiscal terrorists. If the people in power really wanted to do the right thing, it would be easy. The consortium of banks and government would allocate a certain sum of money (far less than the $7 billion figure you mentioned, of course), set up a commission to screen the recipients, prepare a list of survivors and first-generation children, seek information on financial need and disburse all the money. No documentation other than who was a survivor and who is in need would be required. Until this situation is resolved, people should treat Switzerland the same way they do Libya, Iran or any other outlaw nation. BILL CASELLO Ann Arbor, Michigan Via E-mail

Your report was too one-sided. Although I am in no way connected to the Swiss banking business, I am convinced that no bank in the world would just pay out money to an individual without being sure that the receiver was entitled to it. Besides, the Swiss banks would probably be happy to get rid of the Holocaust funds as soon as possible since the matter is beginning to ruin their reputation. It is unfair to hint between the lines that many of the Swiss bankers, lawyers and accountants dealing with Holocaust fortunes must be crooks.

You imply there was a close criminal relationship between Switzerland and the Nazis. I lived through that period in daily fear of the Nazi war machine. The Swiss population, the government and the army had a strong anti-Nazi attitude. However, our country was tightly surrounded by Nazi armies and, owing to enormous psychological and military pressure, was forced to accept a certain economic modus vivendi in order to survive. HANS J. ROSSI Basel, Switzerland

Those of us who fought in the European theater of operations in World War II were told that if we parachuted into Switzerland, we would be interned for the rest of the conflict. However, the Germans were able to move freely in and out of Switzerland before and during the war and used the country as a rest-and-recuperation area. Everyone knows that the secrecy of the Swiss banks allows people to hide money that was accumulated by questionable means. ROBERT H. DODD North Palm Beach, Florida Via E-mail

THE POPE'S VIEW OF EVOLUTION

It is timely that Pope John Paul II has accepted that humans evolved from an earlier life-form [RELIGION, Nov. 4]. The Pope's view that the possession of a God-given soul is the distinguishing feature that makes humans special, however, has now become more difficult to accept. Once evolution is affirmed, it is not possible to know where along the line of hominid evolution humans were infused with a soul, because evolution is a process of gradual change, and there is no specific point at which hominids became humans. It would be easier, in the absence of the belief in evolution, to view man as a special creation of God's and in possession of a soul. BRUCE W. ELLIOTT JR. Boston Via E-mail

The Pope did not "bless" any one of the several theories that explain the mechanism of evolution, as your subtitle, "The Pope gives his blessing to natural selection," declared. Darwin's theory of natural selection is only one, albeit the best known, of several scientific theories supporting the mechanism of evolution. Other theories, such as Lamarckism (discredited) and punctuated equilibria, attempt to render intelligible the fact of evolution. If the Pope did bless something, it was not the theory of natural selection at the expense of other scientific theories. Instead he blessed evolution. T. BAH TANWI IV Richmond, Virginia

A creationist spokesman is quoted in your story as stating, "[John Paul] would say man's dignity does not suffer even if God used the process of evolving him from pond scum..." Genesis 2: 7 states that God used dust to create human beings. Dust, pond scum--if our dignity depends upon the materials God used, we're out of luck either way. JANET L. KITTLAUS Evanston, Illinois Via E-mail

STUDYING GENESIS

I was very impressed by your report on the revival of the study of the Book of Genesis [RELIGION, Oct. 28]. I am amazed at just how far our society has progressed in the span of a few years. Not that long ago, it was proclaimed that God was dead. We seem to have turned the corner to run smack into the obvious truth that, indeed, God does exist. ARMANDO TREVINO Houston Via E-mail

Why do intelligent people still spend their time discussing fairy tales written by ignorant men about 2,000 years ago? Genesis' main lesson is to emphasize man's dismal failure in trying to create God in man's own image. The book's only relevance today is to the Jewish people, whose culture produced Genesis. Apart from its value as literature, Genesis has no meaning for the rest of us. As long as we keep giving this mythology a divine image, it will be impossible for modern man to transcend the dark ages we still carry in our minds. RAFAEL A. MIRABAL Caguas, Puerto Rico

There are betrayal, jealousy and greed in the Bible, and some heroes are messed up big-time. But one finds that these human qualities are used to show God's great faith and teach the lesson that every human is sinful and in need of God's saving work--including all of us today. GREG HASSELDAHL Deshler, Nebraska

In his essay "Science and Original Sin," Robert Wright puts forth as scientific fact a genetically based theory of psychological egoism. It is a weird piece of dogma. Although no sane person would deny that we humans harbor some pretty horrible tendencies and that these have some genetic basis, it does not follow that we are biologically driven to commit the seven deadly sins or that when moved by compassion, "we are in some Darwinian sense 'misusing' our equipment of reciprocal altruism ... into (unconsciously) thinking that the victims of famine are right next door and might someday reciprocate." I believe that there is such a thing as human character for which we, by our choices, are at least partially responsible. Wright could never prove his position, and I wonder what evidence he could cite for it. ALAN PASKOW Professor of Philosophy St. Mary's College of Maryland St. Mary's City, Maryland Via E-mail

PAYING FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION

As the mother of a severely disabled daughter, I was astounded by the hatred displayed by the South Dakota county where the family of disabled student Jonathan Maynard lives [EDUCATION, Nov. 4]. The residents of this town dislike the fact that money for the required special education comes from the local school district, resulting in a sizable increase in their property taxes. All children, no matter how profoundly disabled, have a right to be educated. Perhaps the parents of nondisabled children should tally up the amount of their property taxes and compare it with the costs that must be borne by the families of disabled children. They range from medical care and insurance to the emotional toll that results from raising a disabled child. Comparatively, those property taxes are a small price to pay for a fair education. JACQUELYN K. TAPTTO Lawton, Oklahoma

Though the costs may seem exorbitant in the short term, effective early intervention for many disabilities can so significantly improve a child's potential that the services the child requires are greatly reduced as he progresses through school. The true expense of special education can be measured only by looking at the long-term costs of caring for a special-needs child once he becomes an adult. Institutionalization for an autistic person is a far greater expense than the provision of the costly but effective home-based behavior-modification programs so many families are demanding that their school districts provide. NANCY DALE FELLMETH Fair Oaks, California

Schools that try in good faith to serve children with disabilities face major budget pressures by federal mandate and fear costly litigation. Parents who want education for their needy children grow mistrustful of schools' bureaucratic buck passing and turn to the courts and Washington for help. Enough is enough. Special education's vested interests should stop refusing to cooperate and help us pass legislation for positive change in the next Congress. RANDY ("DUKE") CUNNINGHAM U.S. Representative 51st District, California Washington

LET THE COMPUTER DO THE DRIVING

The story on computer-controlled or driverless cars [TECHNOLOGY, Nov. 4] failed to bring up a point that has always disturbed me in the push for intelligent-vehicle systems and so-called smart highways: the engineers and automakers are so intent on looking for easier and faster ways to get from Point A to Point B they forget what makes them worth visiting in the first place. Trying to cram more cars on today's urban highways doesn't warrant the investment of billions of dollars if our cities and towns are to be transformed into vast parking lots and our countryside is to be devoured by people trying to build homes away from an auto-dominated wasteland. The U.S. needs to start searching for transportation alternatives that serve people and communities, and it should not be new, expensive computer-controlled automobiles. MICHAEL KINDE Milwaukee, Wisconsin Via E-mail

CAMPAIGNING IN THE NUDE

I was happy to see the item about, and photograph of, Boss agency models' turning their backs on fur and posing nude to show their support for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PEOPLE, Nov. 4]. It reaffirmed that there really are people nuttier than I. I am not at all impressed by the models' plan to take off their robes. It actually sounds rather narcissistic. If these people want to do something sacrificial, they should shave all the hair off their bodies. That would demonstrate to the world their ability to empathize with the animals whose "rights" they are defending. RAYMOND J. HERMAN Baltimore, Maryland

Perhaps activist groups like PETA do have to "get more shocking each time" they sponsor an event. Their campaigns are always good for a chuckle. But when models refuse to wear fur, it's more than just a publicity event; they willingly give up paid contracts because they believe it's wrong to slaughter animals for fashion. It doesn't matter to me how they say it--naked or clothed--the message is the same: fur stinks. KATHLEEN SNOW Orinda, California Via E-mail

MUTANT FROGS

The implications described in your story about abnormalities in frogs are tremendously frightening [ENVIRONMENT, Oct. 28]. Most people do not even make the connection that environmental problems have a direct impact on the quality of their lives, that the exponential increase in cancers may be due to the high pollution levels we have generated since the Industrial Revolution. If frogs in five disparate areas are now hugely deformed with different abnormalities, given the fact that the level of pollutant concentration increases in traveling up the food chain, what will happen to our children and grandchildren? Pesticides, acid rain, global warming and increased ultraviolet light have an effect on all creatures of the earth. KRISTIN MATTSON Tampa, Florida

If this story is the best "science" can come up with, we had better get some new scientists. Perhaps we should ascribe sunspots or the dark of the moon as additional reasons for mutations. Soon we'll be back in the Middle Ages. Surely one question would be, Has this happened to other aquatic life? If not, why just frogs? I can tell you that abnormalities have occurred in humans forever. Look at the fossil records. DONALD BRADLEY Plainfield, New Hampshire