Arctic deserves more protection
The fire continuing to rage on the stricken tanker offshore of Shanghai should give pause to all with concern for the ocean, especially those who depend on sensitive, remote waters such as the Arctic. For now, the tanker's cargo of light fuel is ablaze. But response crews have voiced concerns about the looming fate of the heavy fuel oil or bunker fuel that powered the tanker. Heavy fuel is the dirtiest kind of oil and highly persistent if spilled. A large heavy fuel spill into the waters of China's largest fishery would compound the tragedy of the tanker's missing crew. High seas, poisonous fumes, explosions and winds have hampered rescue and response efforts this week.
China's calamity highlights efforts underway to prevent heavy fuel oil spills in other sensitive, but far more challenging waters. International consideration is currently being given to phase out the use of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic where communities depend on marine life and spill response is negligible. If spilled, heavy fuel oil would remain for long periods and could spread widely if entrained in moving ice. This dangerous fuel is already banned under international rules for Antarctic waters. The Arctic deserves the same international precautions.
— Sue Libenson
senior arctic program officer
Pacific Environment
Anchorage
Alaska women, supporters made state's abortion rights possible
I am writing to correct Shannyn Moore's column in Sunday's ADN (Jan. 14). Moore writes "Abortion was decriminalized by a Republican majority in the Legislature three years before Roe v. Wade because of our constitutionally granted 'right to privacy.' "
I was chair of the Alliance for Humane Abortions, the ad hoc organization that sprang up in response to Sen. John Rader's bill in the Alaska Legislature. The Alaska Constitution's "right to privacy" provision may have been a factor in its eventual passage but I don't recall that. What I do recall is the hard work of hundreds of Alaskan women and some men over the four months it took to persuade a majority of the legislators to pass Rader's bill. At the outset, no one expected Rader's bill to pass. When Rader first introduced it he could not get a single cosponsor. Our technique was a statewide massive coordinated letter-writing drive. We produced more letters than Alaska legislators had ever received.
When Rader first brought the bill to the Senate floor, it was defeated by one vote with one senator absent. Rader immediately got on the phone to Hawaii's attorney general because Hawaii had just passed the country's first liberal abortion law. Hawaii's AG dictated the Hawaii bill to Rader and he immediately introduced it. Shortly thereafter, Gov. Keith Miller appointed Kay Poland (a Catholic and adopted) to the Senate seat of her seriously ill husband. Our letter-writing campaign continued. When Rader brought the bill back to the Senate floor it passed 11 to 9 with Kay's vote. The House passed it 29 to 10. And then Gov. Miller vetoed the bill.
Our efforts redoubled. And at the override vote the bill passed. The reason that bill passed, three years before Roe vs Wade, was the hard work and combined voices of Alaska women and our supporters.
— Helen Nienhuser
Anchorage
Lisa is a tough one to figure out
Sen. Lisa Murkowski is a conundrum. Just when you think you have her pegged as a tool of the party that tried to defeat her, she exemplifies leadership by denouncing the reprehensible comments of the Racist in Chief. She has always been a supporter of a woman's right to choose.
But then she supports a tax bill which will put billions in the pockets of corporations and the wealthy while adding over a trillion dollars to the national debt; all in trade for opening ANWR to oil development.
Whether or not the jury is still out on our enigmatic senior senator is for you to decide.
— Glenn Oksun
Anchorage
FCC wrong on net neutrality
The Federal Communications Commission vote to disband the Net Neutrality protections on Dec. 14 cannot stand. Members of congress must use the Congressional Review Act to pass a Resolution of Disapproval reversing the FCC's vote. I would also ask that you inform the public of your intentions on this subject, as there is no way for the public to support your decision to combat the FCC decision on net neutrality.
The FCC's Dec. 14 decision willfully ignored the outcry from tens of millions of people, and it abdicated the FCC's responsibility to protect the internet from ISP blocking and discrimination. The FCC has injured our economy and free speech in just one action, all without so much as a single public hearing. Freedom of information, cybersecurity, internet safety and facilitation of ideas will be put to an extreme detriment if this decision is allowed to continue.
We need members of Congress to stand up for the open internet and for the digital civil rights of their constituents now. If they use the CRA to pass a Resolution of Disapproval to overturn the FCC's December 14 "Restoring Internet Freedom" vote, they can restore a sense of security for internet users.
— Joshua Olson
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@adn.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@adn.com