Letter to the editor: rhine bridge

Letter to the editor about your bnn article from july 20, 2012:
"rheinbrücke: groh accuses splett of window dressing"

the article makes me ponder about our profession of politicians. mr. groh says smoothly: the fact check clearly confirmed the need for a second rhine bridge, but state secretary splett came to a different interpretation. this statement surprises me a lot because recently many voices have been expressed in favor of the new rhine bridge. parties, associations, clubs, citizens' initiatives and others have spoken out whose concerns (including the subjective ones) are apparently not taken seriously.
the word fact check implies that there are facts that need to be assessed and evaluated and our representatives are probably not in a position to do that. in the past at school they would have said: not doing homework - sitting - six. this raises the question of what training a politician needs in order to do his job properly - or can anyone simply become a politician without the appropriate exams?
as a newly qualified professional citizen, i hope that the men and women in politics are at least able to interpret cross-checked facts objectively and democratically. this apparently difficult and sensitive topic should become a subject in the training concept of politicians (keyword sensitivity model).
like plato, i would also ask prospective qualified politicians the very current calculation task expressed by prof. weibel (during the professional citizen diploma celebration at the zkm) to understand the negative numbers: "if three people get on an empty bus and five get off, how many people have to get on so that the bus is empty again?


with kind regards greetings

wolfgang oberacker
(dipl. profi bürger)

oberacker natur technik
gellertstr. 12
d-76344 eggenstein/karlsruhe
tel 0049-0721-706002
fax 0049-0721-7818622
info@oberacker.de
www.oberacker.de