China is flooded with US dollars; seems to me it stands to reason that help this debtor nation (USA) out with some development projects like this one. It will put some people back to work so they can make payments. Of course, the profits go back overseas, but isn't that tit-for-tat?

How about by pet dogs?

Dear Chairman Obey:

Suggestion: Reduce the $30 billion for Highway Infrastructure to the "$8.5 billion needed to maintain current systems." Transfer the extra $21.5 billion to public transit, electrifying rail, installing vehicle charging stations at all public facilities, and designing a new Continental high speed rail system following the inspiration of Eisenhower's Interstate Highways (build anew rather than upgrade the then US Highway system).

Highways are perpetuating our problems. Yet this draft of American Reinvestment will perpetuate our highways. Starting NOW, highways should take 2nd fiddle in terms of funds received for "improvements."

I hope you will take this to the Appropriations Committee and work for this modification.

(I can't figure a way to email this to the Committee: I'm not from Obey's Wisconsin District, and the Appropriations Committee has no email address listed. Can anybody help in forwarding this?) Richard Dunn

Now we need some researcher to hook up a big bag to the roof of one of our average 20.1mpg vehicles and collect all the CO2 and other emissions from the tailpipe.... Then you could take it and sequester it! Voila! Global warming solved. Or....would the bag burst before you got to the end of the street???

Remember the dismal days of the '90s, when Apple was tanking and Windoze was taking off? We still have a feeling we hafta fight harder... Count me in as a fan of these excellent critics. Dr Mac (New Mexico)

The second big reason Macs cost less is that you don't have to buy anti-virus software (much less waste hours running them). In the eleven years I have worked on "sick" Macs as an independent technician, I have never found a single virus.

Richard Dunn/Dr Mac

Los Alamos, New Mexico

Here's his plank (http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/energy):

Dramatically Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 90% by 2050

20% by 2020, 80% by 2040 -- ten years faster than scientists say is necessary because we must lead the world, and we can't afford the possibility of backsliding and inaction.

We will start with a market-based cap and trade system for greenhouse gas emissions to create incentives for the electric and industrial sectors to make significant reductions in their carbon emissions. Economists say the world can protect itself from drastic climate change at a cost of 1-3% of our economic activity. We can afford to protect the climate. Given the risks of catastrophic climate change, we can't afford not to do it.

Richard Dunn