Editor, Times-Union: I must thoroughly disagree with many of the points raised in the Middlebury resident's letter in the Jan. 31 Times-Union that stated the IHSAA is in "good hands" and no taxpayer dollars are used in the operation of the athletic programs with it being my observation that the gymnasiums are built with taxpayer money supplied to the schools.
The letter writer also said attendance was down due to "cross-boundaries" whatever that means with attendance being down due to the class basketball tourney which has eliminated the great rivalries in the Warsaw, Plymouth and Elkhart sectionals and the resultant rivalries in the regionals. And these are just the tourneys in our area.
The IHSAA with the leadership of Commissioner Robert Gardner and the do-gooder 200 principals ruined the greatest high school basketball tourney in the USA. And, for what? Three more champions in lower classes to benefit approximately 30 more athletes out of the original thousands who participated.
I doubt that anyone remembers the three lower class champions of 1998 and 1999, but any true fan will never forget Milan, which led to the movie "Hoosiers" and gave our state a great public relations boost.
The ridiculous decision of the Rick Fox case in the '80s; the likewise stupid decision of the girl basketball player's transfer from Tippecanoe Valley to Warsaw with a perfectly legitimate reason; the Park Tudor cross country runner's transfer to a public school caused by economic reasons because of a parent's divorce; the Park Tudor tennis athlete's ineligibility ruling; South Vermillion's soccer player, serving his country during practice and was ruled ineligible for tournament play; and the Bishop Luers situation which has already resulted in more than $20,000 in fines against the IHSAA are just a few of the more well known bad decisions of the IHSAA.
Tippecanoe Valley's basketball coach, Bill Patrick, the best coach in our area if not the state, has publicly stated (Times-Union, Jan. 17) that class basketball is the worst rule change in his coaching career of 31 winning seasons, with no losing seasons and tells small school players that can't compete against larger schools. Purdue legend and great UCLA coach, John Wooden, also opposed class basketball but what do Patrick and Wooden know compared to the geniuses of the IHSAA?
Granted, the tourney has probably not lost money but the class basketball tourneys of 1998 and 1999 had from 30 to 40 percent lower receipts than the last single class tourney.
I doubt that very few, if any, principals raised the issue of class sports but such a move was prompted by Commissioner Gardner who, if he were a new CEO in a private company and sales dropped as in the case of the class basketball tourney, he and his policy staff would have been long gone.
Northridge, in the Middlebury writer's area, certainly has the talent to go to the final four in single class and could win the Class 3 state title, but their victory would not have the prestige that going to the final four, win or lose, would have.
The IHSAA, which at times, seems to be arrogant, dictatorial and with a "public be darned" attitude should listen to the fans who pay the freight, so to speak, and should their attitude continue, Commissioner Gardner and his policy-making staff should resign.
John Harman Plymouth
Government Snooping
Editor, Times-Union: The federal government says it's your "civic duty" to complete the 2000 Census form, but it's actually your patriotic duty to refuse to answer most of the government's snooping questions, says the Libertarian Party.
"Real Americans don't answer nosy census questions," said the party's national director, Steve Dasbach. "You can strike a blow for privacy, equality and liberty by refusing to answer every question on the census form except the one required by the Constitution: How many people live in your home?"
In an attempt to reverse declining response rates, Census Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt held a press conference to plead with Americans to view the once-a-decade census as a "civic ceremony."
The results of the Census, lectured Prewitt, affect "power, money, group interests, civil rights; in short, who gets how much of what." And that's exactly what's wrong with the census, countered Dasbach, and why Americans should boycott almost every question.
The U.S. Constitution says the purpose of the Census is to make an enumeration; that is, to take an accurate count of Americans for the purpose of apportioning Congressional districts.
But the federal government has gone far beyond that Constitutional mandate, and uses the Census to ask dozens of probing questions, including the color of your skin, the number of toilets in your home, your disabilities, and how many cars you own.
In fact, the long version of the census contains a whopping 52 questions, which is 51 more than the Constitution requires. But it's not just the questions that are offensive, but how the information is subsequently used.
As Prewitt noted, the census is all about "who gets how much of what," which is why Americans should refuse to answer those prying questions. The fact is, the information collected by the census is used to dole out an estimated $180 billion in taxpayers' money, to justify and expand wasteful government programs, and to allow the government to discriminate against Americans based on their racial or ethnic background.
In other words, census information is used to forge the chains that bind Americans to failed government programs, meddlesome bureaucracies and a sky-high tax rate. So, if you care about privacy, genuine equality and old-fashioned American liberty, it is your civic responsibility to just say "no" to nosy government bureaucrats.
We live in an information age. But the only information the government deserves on the census, beyond the number of people in your home is: None of your business!
Of course, any American who gives a "None of your business" response could face pressure and a $100 fine from the Census Bureau, the LP acknowledged.
Yes, it would be easier just to give the government the information it wants. But I think many Americans will realize that a $100 fine is a small price to pay for making a principled stand for privacy and freedom.
Daniel Stevens Kosciusko County Libertarian Party
Cemetery Fence
Editor, Times-Union: Too bad - Long new fence at the cemetery.
So sad - No more deer tracks in the snow to see.
Mary Jane Sprong Warsaw
Abortion Terminology
Editor, Times-Union: As I watched the Democratic debates last week I was struck by the terminology used by both Al Gore and Bill Bradley when referring to abortion. Despite discussing it in some length, the word abortion was never used. Instead I heard over and over the phrase "woman's right to choose," "the procedure" and "I am pro choice." Both took great pride in their "pro choice" stance. Why do they no longer use the word abortion when talking about it? Is it because they are trying to lull us to sleep over this horrible "procedure" which afflicts this country? Are they afraid to say the word abortion because they hope that eventually it will just fade from the vocabulary? There is no such a thing as "pro choice." You are either pro life or pro abortion, there is no other position to take and sugar coating the terminology and changing it will never change the fact that each year thousands of the unborn are killed by those who exercise a "choice" or have a "procedure."
