Note: The following are several letters received and published recently in The Palm Beach Post.
High gas prices no nuclear deterrent
I find it funny that people like [President Donald] Trump, Florida Sen. Rick Scott and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio say that the higher price of gas is worth it to protect us from nuclear threat. Obviously, they are narrowly speaking about the elusive threat coming from Iran. But the truth is, Russia owns more nuclear warheads than we do and they are our enemy, aren’t they? China and North Korea both own multiple nuclear warheads, and I believe they have been called our enemies. It seems short-sided and hypocritical for these people to brag about how higher gas prices are now keeping us safe. But of course, it makes good sound bites on TV, for them.
Kay Jones, Greenacres
Scott should be worried about gas prices?
I see that Sen. Rick Scott isn’t happy about the gas prices, but feels that the high prices are worth it to protect us from an imminent nuclear threat and allow us to “live in freedom and democracy.” Then he adds, “I don’t know what the price tag is, but it’s worth it.” I know when I go out to purchase goods, I also have no idea how much it costs. Isn’t this the way everyone conducts their lives?
Also, I am confused because at the beginning of this war we were told a nuclear threat had become a thing of the past due to the genius and courage of our president. So which statement is true? If we are lucky, we will wind up with a deal with Iran that will be similar to the one that the president scuttled in his first term. Except now the Strait of Hormuz is a big obstacle to a final deal. Just like the first deal we did. Oh wait, the strait wasn’t an issue in the original deal. Ships passed freely back and forth. We can kiss those days goodbye. We can also probably say goodbye to gas prices going back to where they were pre-war.
Irwin Solomon, Boynton Beach
US needs a new ‘Spirit’ on mass transit funding
We all need to shed a tear that Spirit Airlines was allowed to financially collapse. Spirit provided affordable travel for thousands of passengers daily. Americans have subsidized highway construction and upkeep for generations, to the benefit of car companies, road construction companies, trucks, and all drivers, and the word socialism does not get into the picture. We need to think seriously about government “partnerships” with all kinds of public transport in the interest of moving people cheaply and efficiently. Spirit Airlines is a missed opportunity. In addition to a Spirit Airlines scenario, we need also to think about mass transit, high-speed rail, local and regional busses and in our high tech age, door-to-door service. If this new technology was “free,” as in government-subsidized fares, would we reduce congestion and chaos in cities and on highways? European countries, China and Japan might provide some examples.
Donald Hoffman, Boynton Beach
Go after the parents to curb E-bike mishaps
Your recent article about a California man now fighting for his life after a teenager driving an e-bike hit and critically injured him has prompted some consideration. The teenager’s mother has been charged with felony counts of accessory and child endangerment, and misdemeanor counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and loaning a motor vehicle to an unlicensed driver. Yes. That’s one way to address the rash of kids irresponsibly riding these motorized vehicles on our streets nowadays. Prosecute the parents.
Bob Verrastro, Palm Beach Gardens
Redistricting simply disenfranchisement
As I see it, the U.S. Constitution allows every state to reapportion their representatives. It appears that Texas, California, Virginia and now Florida have re-read this to believe that they can redistrict every couple weeks if they wish to. They had their chance once after the 2020 census. You do it once, and that’s it. You cannot do it again and again just to pad your representatives. What is going on now is they are denying their citizens of voting the way they wish. They are losing their representatives. They are being disenfranchised, and they are being discriminated against totally.
Ed Bowers, Palm Beach Gardens
Gerrymandering sparks anger, confusion
Gerrymandering redistricting of the congressional maps has turned the state of Florida from purple to blood red with the mark of [Gov. Ron] DeSantis’ pen. Promises made and promises kept to whom? Many of us in District 21 have been moved to District 22 with the stroke of a pen and the GOP in Tallahassee. This move was backed by Republican supermajorities and designed to disenfranchise more Floridians at the ballot box. They must do something to boost their chances of winning because their dreadful leader is failing miserably. This gerrymandering appears to be an attempt to circumvent the Fair Districts Amendments approved by voters in 2010. This re-districting war was waged to assure President Trump would win more seats so that his destruction of democracy can continue with more of his sycophants in place. The Save America Act was a big slap across the face of the American voter. Now re-districting will further remove their choices at election time. That is, if all voters are even allowed in a voting booth in November.
Clare Goyette, West Palm Beach
Did Chief Justice Roberts just turn back the clock?
After our Civil War ended, the so-called Reconstruction period started, part of which included Union soldiers posted through the southern states to enforce the rights of the former slaves. Reconstruction ended in 1877, the same year that the famous Jim Crow Laws were enacted and ended in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
In 1965, the Voting Rights Act was passed, which the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 started dismantling. The first attack did away with the requirement that certain states with reputations for voter suppression must review changes that affected voting rules. More recently, the Court allowed gerrymandering to go wild. Are we headed back to 1877? Chief Justice Roberts has a reputation of being the architect to weaken the Voting Rights Act.
David Clendining, Loxahatchee
Circuit judge’s mifepristone ruling off-base
Once again a court decision has been made that is woefully lacking expertise on the subject. U.S. Circuit Judge Stuart K. Duncan wrote for the recent ruling blocking mail order access to mifepristone: “The agency’s progressive relaxations of guardrails likely lacked a basis in data and scientific literature.” Let’s go around the fact that there is plenty of data and scientific literature on the safety of this drug and see what kind of research or medical degree this judge has to make this decision. Oh right, none. This is the standard operating procedure for conservative thinking: If the science doesn’t fit the narrative, ignore the science. This is the same type of thinking of anti-vaccine advocates make. Science is based on fact, not belief or opinion.
Mike Hundley, West Palm Beach
Think America first regarding federal funds
What could $25 billion do here at home? That figure — roughly the cost of military action abroad — takes on new meaning when applied to everyday needs in communities like Palm Beach County. With $25 billion, Medicaid could cover more than 3 million Americans a year, and SNAP could feed over 12 million people for an entire year. Housing vouchers could support more than 2 million households, keeping millions of families stably housed. Mental health and community-based services could reach up to 5 million people, strengthening public safety at its roots.
These aren’t abstract numbers. They represent health care for working families, food for children, and stability for those on the edge. In a county where affordability, housing, and access to care remain real concerns, the question isn’t whether we have the resources—it’s whether we choose to use them to improve lives. Budgets reflect priorities. Right now, it’s fair to ask if those priorities align with the needs of everyday Americans.
Rosalind Murray, Boynton Beach
Holding one’s breath for that ballroom invite
I was very excited to learn that “We The People” are going to help fund the new gold ballroom. We’ll be part of the billionaire’s club who already agreed to fund the room. Apparently, there are some hidden costs and overruns that need funding. We’ll be shaking hands, toasting and chatting with the financial giants of the world. It’s remarkable, when you really think about it. This apparent huge gold edifice in Washington, D.C. will be a place we can all gather to enjoy a lavish diner, music and dancing. I can’t wait to get my invitations.
But then, I had another thought. Did we the people actually agree to help fund the new room? How much will we each have to contribute? How will the White House decide who will be invited and for what event? After all, there are nearly 330 million of “we the people.” It’s going to be awfully crowded on the dance floor. Maybe we should reconsider fund the ballroom. But, can we the people? Do we have a say in how the government uses our money?
Joel A Elin, Lake Worth
Join the Conversation: The Palm Beach Post is committed to publishing a diversity of opinions. Email us at letters@pbpost.com. Letters are subject to editing, must not exceed 200 words and must include your name, address and a daytime phone number to confirm the letter is for publication. We only publish names and cities with the letters.
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Post readers fume over high gas, e-bikes and redistricting | Letters
Reporting by Palm Beach Post / Palm Beach Post
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
