Saturday letters to the editor

• Lawmakers too laissez-faire about immigrants

Most S.C. lawmakers have not taken a realistic stand against illegal immigration; they don’t seem to be concerned that immigration laws are not being enforced or that a large number of illegal immigrants are on hand.

Illegal aliens are not only lawbreakers, they bring many costly problems with them: contagious diseases, possible terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals. They also drain our resources.

Ultimately, by this breakdown of law and order, they will destroy our culture and republican form of government.

They are being enabled by greedy employers who have no concern for their own descendants’ welfare or safety or for that of others.

The first line of defense must be to identify and enforce heavy penalties against all employers of illegal aliens; the state Legislature has the power.

Any lawmaker opposing this course of action should be identified and removed from office in the upcoming primaries and general election.

JOHN McDADE

Inman

• Palmetto Health Richland hospitable

We hear so many complaints about our hospitals that I wanted to share a very positive experience.

Recently, I had to go to Palmetto Health Richland’s emergency room for treatment. It was, under the circumstances, a highly satisfactory experience. Everyone — from valet parking to the front desk, nurses, doctors and CT personnel — could not have acted in a more professional, courteous way. We in Columbia are so fortunate to have such a hospital and caring staff, and I want to commend them for their service.

CARRIE WHATLEY

Columbia

• Common-law marriage can exist without judge’s ruling

Rather than dispelling some of the “myths” with regard to common-law marriage in South Carolina, a recent article, “Common-law marriage may be on last legs in S.C.,” merely added to the confusion and likely did a disservice to some citizens of this state.

The article stated, “Despite the myths surrounding common-law marriages, only a judge can determine whether such a relationship actually exists.”

Anyone may assert the existence of a common-law marriage regardless of whether there is an existing impediment. By the same token, a couple can enter any county courthouse in this state and obtain a license to marry, even though both parties may be legally married to someone else at the time. This is likely not a widespread problem, but it is not all that difficult to lie about one’s current marital status in order to obtain a license. It is common practice for the public to assume that a marriage is valid, regardless of the circumstances under which two people were married (ceremonial, common law, etc).

Administrative determinations concerning common-law relationships are routinely made by both state and federal agencies in South Carolina. While I do not purport to know the procedures followed by every agency, the ones with which I am familiar do not require a couple to provide a judicial determination of a valid marriage, nor do these agencies seek such a determination.

There are, of course, times when a judicial determination is necessary. If the validity of the marriage is later questioned by one of the parties to it, then a judge must make a determination. If the parties later seek a divorce, a determination of validity is always necessary. But the fact that a valid marriage existed is standard language in divorce decrees, regardless of how the marriage was obtained.

MIKE BROWN

Lexington

• Retreads aren’t sole cause of rubber on road

Jim Riente’s letter, “Flying retreads add to dangers on road,” unfairly blames retreads for all the tire debris on our highways.

In fact, although most people, including Mr. Riente, believe retreads are the cause, much of the tire debris on S.C. highways comes from tires that have never been retreaded.

Improper tire maintenance is the cause of most rubber on the road. Tires that are driven underinflated, overloaded, mismatched on dual wheel positions, have faulty repairs, have less than the legal amount of tread remaining, etc., will come apart, and it doesn’t matter whether they are retreads or new tires.

Retreaded tires are safely used by school buses in South Carolina, commercial and military airlines, fire engines and other emergency vehicles, small-package delivery services such as Fed Ex, UPS and the U.S. Postal Service, and commercial vehicles of all sizes.

To blame retreads for tire debris on our highways is the same as blaming an accident caused by a drunken driver on the vehicle. The blame is simply misplaced.

Retreaded tires offer motorists and public-sector fleets a safe, environmentally friendly and economical alternative to higher-priced new tires. Although they look round and black, retreads are very green and save Americans more than 400 million gallons of oil every year, while keeping millions of tires out of landfills.

HARVEY BRODSKY

Managing Director

Tire Retread & Repair Information Bureau

Pacific Grove, Calif.

• ‘State’ article victimized victim

I am writing to question the reason behind the front-page article, “Harsh life, sad ending” (April 19), an account of William Seely’s battle with mental health issues and brushes with the law.

The tragic circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Seely are shameful and likely evoked feelings of rage and disgust in your readers toward the facility and staff tasked with caring for him. That Mr. Seely died under these circumstances alone and helpless only make the situation more heart-rending.

I am, therefore, wondering why further shaming of Mr. Seely post mortem was necessary by your portrayal of his life spent battling mental disease and the correlating social and legal issues that evolved over the years.

The article stated “Seeley was an only child, with no extended family to take care of him. A probate court had appointed attorney Robert FitzSimons as his guardian ad litem in 2000. Efforts Friday to reach FitzSimons were unsuccessful.”

Is this not the story line that should have been investigated? Where indeed has Mr. FitzSimons been since his appointment as guardian ad litem? Are other employees beyond the facility owner being investigated and charged with neglect? Were there other social service agencies that should or could have intervened?

Shame on The State for re-victimizing the victim.

ANNA EDMONDS

Columbia

• Knotts fan wrong about Club for Growth

Ignoring the facts, a Jake Knotts supporter recently made a statement in this paper about the non-partisan S.C. Club for Growth. His letter follows a consistent pattern by Sen. Knotts and his supporters: say almost anything to get him re-elected.

It’s no surprise they continue to slander good government groups and campaign opponents. The truth is that Jake Knotts has a terrible record on government spending, voted a liberal to the state Supreme Court and has continually put his own interests ahead of our state’s.

His main opponent in the race, Katrina Shealy, recognizes that Senate District 23 needs real leadership at the State House, and I hope residents of the district aren’t distracted by Jake Knotts’ campaign of misinformation.

FELTON SISK

Lexington

• The upside of climate change: opportunity and innovation

I was pleased to read Mike Fitts’ column regarding the opportunity for America’s industries and entrepreneurs to lead the way towards innovative new technologies that address global climate change (“Climate change can be addressed, if we get innovation into gear”).

In South Carolina, we have some particular advantages and challenges. The advantages include several prominent S.C. businesses that have joined the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (www.us-cap.org). The members of US-CAP are committed to national cap-and-trade legislation that will reduce greenhouse gases by 60 percent to 80 percent by 2050, in order to stabilize climate changes at a level that will minimize impacts to people and nature, as recommended in Mr. Fitts’ column.

These S.C. businesses include, BP-America, Duke Energy, DuPont and General Electric (whose Greenville factory already makes the world’s most advanced turbines to produce electricity).

South Carolina can also position itself to be a significant leader in alternative fuels, particularly from wood. Forests cover more than 60 percent of the state. The forest products industry is a major sector in South Carolina and a critical source of income for rural landowners. As the paper and pulp industry continues to lessen its presence, we have a huge opportunity to develop new uses and new markets for forest products as renewable energy sources.

The challenge that South Carolina faces is that even under the most optimistic scenario, we will experience significant climate-change effects in our lifetime, our children’s and our grandchildren’s.

The most dramatic effects are expected on the coast, where the best scientific studies predict that sea level could rise more than two feet by 2100. The effects on coastal communities, tourism and our incredibly productive coastal estuaries and wetlands will be significant.

Fortunately, we do not have to be sitting ducks; there are things we can do to be more prepared. The legislation now in the U.S. Senate, the Lieberman-Warner bill, provides that some of the revenues from the sale of carbon emission credits be used for climate-change adaptation. The legislation directs that 18 percent of the revenues go to adaptation of natural areas and wildlife habitat.

Based on a study by Duke University, this would bring major revenues to our state: an estimated $19 million for habitat adaptation in 2012, rising annually to $101 million in 2050, if the legislation passes this year. We can expect many attempts in Congress to re-direct this funding to a host of special interests.

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s support will be critical to passing the Lieberman-Warner bill, and he will play a key role in fighting to keep the bill’s provisions that direct funding to adaptation of our state’s productive coasts, wildlife habitats and natural areas. I appreciate his commitment to substantively addressing the global threat of climate change through national cap-and-trade legislation.

MARK L. ROBERTSON

Executive Director

S.C. chapter

The Nature Conservancy

Columbia