California School Bus Debate Rolls On

Re “Bus Company Lobbies as State Spins Wheels Over Budget,” July 19: Legislators should not preclude companies such as Laidlaw from bidding on provision of school bus services.

The purpose of school bus fleets is delivering kids to school, not transferring wealth from property tax-paying homeowners to bus drivers.

The principal reason that public transit agencies are constantly bankrupt is the high cost of union labor. Most agencies have no hope of recovering these unnecessary costs from the fare box, so management focuses on acquiring more tax revenues and not on fielding services that meet needs and attract riders.

Nonunion contract operators break this cycle. More contract operators means more transit service and more transit riders.

James E. Moore II

USC Professor of Industrial

and Systems Engineering

Los Angeles

*

State budget negotiations hit a wall over a moronic issue, namely, if the state permits schools to contract with private companies for bus drivers, must these drivers be given pension benefits?

Why would California consider any law that would force future retirees onto welfare?

For those in Sacramento who wish to lower taxes, get a clue. Pensions not only provide more dignity than welfare, but in the long run they cost the taxpayer less.

Michael W. Boggs

Los Angeles

*

I’ve voted Democrat for the last time because all they seem to be about is keeping union-backed laws on the books that favor only their membership, not everyone.

I always felt that being a Democrat meant working for the underprivileged, promoting education and making an impact on society. Well, it’s one thing to be a Democrat, but it’s something else to be used as a pawn in a smarmy scheme to hurt school districts.

Linda Reece

Arcadia