Kirk's energy plan on the mark

Sharon Sanders' recent letter to the editor is false and ill-informed. It is amazing for its utter lack of a single valid point in its long and rambling attack on Mark Kirk's energy record.

She derides Kirk's legislation to provide tax credits for employers that subsidize mass transit for their employees as a "Band-aid." I'm sorry, but I think potentially removing thousands of cars from our highways, allowing the remaining cars to move more freely and use less gas, is more than a mere Band-aid. That's why his plan was praised by both environmental and business groups alike.

She goes on to claim that Kirk hasn't supported ethanol. Yet Mark Kirk has held press conferences at district ethanol gas stations to raise their profile and just this week proposed landmark legislation to drastically increase ethanol R&D to move from inefficient corn-based ethanol to very efficient non-food based ethanol. He also voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement that exempts member countries from ethanol tariffs.

What has the candidate that Ms. Sanders supports, Dan Seals, done to solve America's energy crisis? Nothing, other than a cynical campaign stunt that wasted more gas than it gave away due to the massive traffic jam that it created. What ideas does Dan Seals have to wean us off foreign oil? He has none; his campaign Web site doesn't have a single sentence dealing with energy policy. Mark Kirk has done infinitely more than Dan Seals to solve our energy crisis, Ms. Sanders, and people who support glass candidates shouldn't throw stones.

Diana Chen

Vernon Hills