By what measure is America on 'the right path'?
Re: March 30 commentary, "Pleasant surprise: Trump has the US on right path," by Nicole Russell
Nicole Russell says the U.S. is on the right track.
Voters wanted the economy to get worse?
We wanted the richest, most powerful nation to start a global trade war, send the stock market down, raise inflation and hurt low-income U.S. citizens the most?
We wanted Canada, the EU, Greenland, Denmark and Panama to be our enemies? And wasn't Russia's war going to be over on Day 1?
We wanted to have unelected billionaire Elon Musk lower taxes for billionaires by firing air traffic controllers, cutting U.S. AID and letting diseases like Ebola go unchecked, axing NOAA technicians who keep weather alert systems running, firing tax collectors and thus raising the U.S. debt, and cutting Social Security and Medicare?
We wanted to join Russia in being against the Paris Climate Agreement and in not backing the United Nations resolution condemning Russia's aggression?
We wanted to pardon Jan. 6 insurrectionists who attacked police?
Don Hammond, Austin
On the subject of income taxes, Democrats in particular have been demanding that certain groups — usually the very rich — must pay their "fair share" of taxes.
A couple days ago, I saw President Trump's chart of tariffs imposed on us by other countries, compared to our tariffs on their imports to us.
My opinion? It's high time the United States started collecting our fair share of tariffs.
Kenneth K. Ebmeier, Round Rock
First they came for women's reproductive rights, but I'd gone through menopause so I remained silent; then they came for the federal workers, but I'm retired so I remained silent; then they came for Blacks, but I'm white so I remained silent; then they came for the immigrants, but I'm a American citizen so I remained silent; then they came for the Muslims, but I'm a Christian so I remained silent; then they came for those on Medicaid, but I have Medicare so I remained silent; then they came for public schools, but my grandchildren are in private schools so I remained silent; and then they came for the universities, but I already have a degree so I remained silent.
But now they're coming for my Medicare and my Social Security and I'm afraid there'll be no one left in this country to speak up.
Sharon Austy, Fort Worth
The Texas Legislature is off to a busy start, and rather than tackling the important issues facing Texans, my legislators are busy playing the culture wars.
Rep. Ellen Troxclair is busy promoting her bill discriminating against people in the transgender community. Sen. Donna Campbell is concerned about Pride flags in classrooms and making sure students learn about the horrors of communism. Both support voucher bills that many Texans do not want.
In the meantime, Texans are struggling with housing affordability, water shortages, healthcare and our deteriorating education system. Why won't you tackle real issues that matter to Texans?
Karen Santhanam, Cedar Park
Re: March 30 commentary, "Texas needs action to reverse literacy rates," by Amber Shields
This piece needs to be reviewed by the governor, lieutenant governor and Texas lawmakers who favor voucher legislation. The opinion indicates the need for early child development for 3- and 4-year-olds. It also supports the tracking of literacy skills.
A better idea is to create a state fund for employers, nonprofits (including religious organizations) and parents: a 'Super' Day Care/Early Development program for 3- and 4-year-olds. At the end of pre-K, students would be assessed for attending 'Super' kindergarten or regular kindergarten. The 'Super' kindergarten curricula would be half kindergarten/half first grade. The curricula for 'Super' first grade would be half first grade/half second grade, and so on, through 12th grade. Parents along the way could always select to place their children in regular classes.
Bernard Schiff, Austin
Re: March 27 article, "Georgetown district may fire librarian"
My husband grew up on a farm in West Texas. His greatest joy was to go on Saturdays to the library, where he would check out five books. Andy's books were his greatest treasures throughout his life. He went on to become a Texas historian, teaching at Lamar University for 40 years. He wrote Texas history books for junior high, senior high and college students. They are all still used in Texas schools.
After reading about Georgetown High School threatening to fire librarian Susan Cooper, I would like to thank her for having the courage of mind and heart to stand up, risking her job, refusing to carry out a book-removal order for 150 books per House Bill 900. Susan refused to comply to a "book ban."
Thank you, Susan. You honor so many teachers, myself included.
Sally Anderson, Meadowlakes
A conference promoting eugenics and fertility was held last weekend in the University of Texas' AT&T Conference Center, on the Austin campus where I proudly served as a faculty member for 42 years. No words can fully describe the shame I feel.
To be clear, I do not believe UT or the conference center are legally required or otherwise obligated to rent space to racist individuals and organizations. The conference organizers cannot advocate that they simply are entitled to free speech. Hate speech is not free speech.
I fear in our current political climate, where colleges and universities are being attacked, institutions are easily pressured by outside political forces to do things they normally would see as wrong. My hope is that in the future, UT and other universities will stand up to these pressures. But for me there is no Hook 'em Horns today.
Richard Cherwitz, Camas, Wash.
Re: March 28 article, "'One tough grandma' mourned"
Reading your article on the passing of Carole Keeton, I was reminded of her well-known traits of toughness, willpower and single-mindedness. I thought it worth noting that she was also kind, enthusiastic and infectiously funny.
I'll never forget one day when I was asked at the last minute to join her as she read a proclamation for renowned Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges. Although there were only four of us in the small room, she projected her voice and read with great enthusiasm, making him smile again and again. Afterward, she talked to him about his time in Austin with considerable interest. He told me later that it was one of the most sincere and enjoyable presentations he had ever experienced.
We'll all miss an authentic and joyful tough grandma.
Paul Leche, Austin
Re: March 30 column, "Tiny school district has a lesson for Texas," by Bridget Grumet
I was pleased to read this column as it points out how school districts and communities can be invested in the success of their students. The Louise Independent School District has focused on this need to ensure not only the academic success of their students, but also their social and mental well-being.
April Cubriel is both school counselor and chaplain and balances her counseling of students, focused first on the needs of the students and, 'if wanted,' a Christian context. In the Louise community, the superintendent says '85% to 90% of the families attend church' and are 'homogeneous in terms of our Christianity,' so this context is appropriate. However, Ms. Cubriel embraces an educational environment where all students can be successful, regardless of 'all our differences.'
David J. Jones, Austin
Sen. John Cornyn should review the history of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. That law is credited with exacerbating the Great Depression by creating a global trade war. Is Cornyn prepared to repeat history at the expense of his constituents?
As an intelligent man, he knows tariffs are not paid by the supplying nation. They are paid by the receiving companies and subsequently passed onto consumers, otherwise known as Texas constituents.
If the Senate advances an extension of the 2017 tax cut bill — or any tax cut bill — in the face of a rapidly rising national debt and the confusion resulting from the "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" dismissal of important segments of our federal bureaucracy, it will be those legislators currently in office who will be held responsible.
They should think real hard before toeing the party line on this issue.
Warren Craig Hackler, Austin
Social Security isn't a handout. It's a promise that millions of us older Americans have paid into with every paycheck. The Trump administration is dismantling an essential program, closing offices, cutting hotlines and spreading misinformation to justify these attacks. As an elder we deserve dignity, not broken promises.
Ukraine is the canary in the mine. We must not allow Ukraine to fall. Russian aggression must be stopped. If Russia wants peace, it will go home.
Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz of Texas need to stand up for Social Security and Ukraine.
Karen Langley, Manchaca
How to submit a letter to the editor
Send letters of no more than 150 words by using our online form at https://bit.ly/3Crmkcf or send an email to letters@statesman.com.
We welcome your letters on all topics. Include your name and city of residence; we do not publish anonymous letters.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: By what measure is America on 'right path'? | Letters to the Editor
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump says his administration is working with Harvard on ‘mindbogglingly HISTORIC' possible deal
'Many people have been asking what is going on with Harvard University and their largescale improprieties that we have been addressing, looking for a solution,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'We have been working closely with Harvard, and it is very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so.' Advertisement 'If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' Trump added. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up A Harvard spokesperson did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday afternoon. Trump's post came roughly an hour aftera federal judge in Boston In May, Harvard filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security after the agency revoked the university's certification to enroll international students and process their visa documents. The university argued the move was unlawful retaliation for refusing to implement the administration's changes to its policies on campus protests, admissions, and hiring. Within hours of the lawsuit, a judge issued a temporary order blocking the agency's action. Advertisement Citing broad concerns with university leadership and the climate on campus at the nation's most prestigious university, the Trump administration has escalated pressure on Harvard over the last few months, opening several federal investigations, freezing billions in funding, pushing to strip the university of its tax-exempt status, and attempting to bar it from enrolling international students. Alyssa Vega can be reached at
Chicago Tribune
23 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Senate parliamentarian deals blow to GOP plan to gut consumer bureau in tax bill
WASHINGTON — Republicans suffered a sizable setback Friday on one key aspect of President Donald Trump's big bill after their plans to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other provisions from the Senate Banking Committee ran into procedural violations with the Senate parliamentarian. Republicans in the Senate proposed zeroing-out funding for the CFPB, the landmark agency set up in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, to save $6.4 billion. The bureau had been designed as a way to better protect Americans from financial fraud, but has been opposed by many GOP lawmakers since its inception. The Trump administration has targeted the CFPB as an example of government over-regulation and overreach. The findings by the Senate parliamentarian's office, which is working overtime scrubbing Trump's overall bill to ensure it aligns with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule' processes, signal a tough road ahead. The most daunting questions are still to come, as GOP leadership rushes to muscle Trump's signature package to floor for votes by his Fourth of July deadline. Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Banking Committee that drafted the provisions in question, said in a statement, 'My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee's provisions.' For Democrats, who have been fighting Trump's 1,000-page package at every step, the parliamentarian's advisory amounted to a significant win. 'Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill,' said Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Banking Committee, who engineered the creation of the CFPB before she was elected to Congress. Warren said that GOP proposals 'are a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk–all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires.' The parliamentarian's rulings, while advisory, are rarely, if ever ignored. With the majority in Congress, Republicans have been drafting a sweeping package that extends some $4.5 trillion tax cuts Trump approved during his first term, in 2017, that otherwise expire at the end of the year. It adds $350 billion to national security, including billions for Trump's mass deportation agenda. And it slashes some $1 trillion from Medicaid, food stamps and other government programs. All told, the package is estimated to add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over the decade, and leave 10.9 million more people without health care coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's review of the House-passed package, which is now undergoing revisions in the Senate. The parliamentarian's office is responsible for determining if the package adheres to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who was considered one of the masters of Senate procedure. The rule essentially bars policy matters from being addressed in the budget reconciliation process. Senate GOP leaders are using the budget reconciliation process, which is increasingly how big bills move through the Congress, because it allows passage on a simple majority vote, rather than face a filibuster with the higher 60-vote threshold. But if any of the bill's provisions violate the Byrd Rule, that means they can be challenged at the tougher 60-vote threshold, which is a tall order in the 53-47 Senate. Leaders are often forced to strip those proposals from the package, even though doing so risks losing support from lawmakers who championed those provisions. One of the biggest questions ahead for the parliamentarian will be over the Senate GOP's proposal to use 'current policy' as opposed to 'current law' to determine the baseline budget and whether the overall package adds significantly to deficits. Already the Senate parliamentarian's office has waded through several titles of Trump's big bill, including those from the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Energy & Public Works Committee. The Banking panel offered a modest bill, just eight pages, and much of it was deemed out of compliance. The parliamentarian found that in addition to gutting the CFPB, other provisions aimed at rolling back entities put in place after the 2008 financial crisis would violate the Byrd Rule. Those include a GOP provision to limit the Financial Research Fund, which was set up to conduct analysis, saving nearly $300 million; and another to shift the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which conducts oversight of accounting firms, to the Securities and Exchange Commission and terminate positions, saving $773 million. The GOP plan to change the pay schedule for employees at the Federal Reserve, saving $1.4 billion, was also determined to be in violation of the Byrd Rule. The parliamentarian's office also raised Byrd Rule violations over GOP proposals to repeal certain aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act, including on emission standards for some model year 2027 light-duty and medium-duty vehicles.
Los Angeles Times
34 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Court blocks Louisiana law requiring schools to post Ten Commandments in classrooms
NEW ORLEANS — A panel of three federal appellate judges has ruled that a Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in each of the state's public school classrooms is unconstitutional. The ruling Friday marked a major win for civil liberties groups who say the mandate violates the separation of church and state, and that the poster-sized displays would isolate students — especially those who are not Christian. The mandate has been touted by Republicans, including President Trump, and marks one of the latest pushes by conservatives to incorporate religion into classrooms. Backers of the law argue the Ten Commandments belong in classrooms because they are historical and part of the foundation of U.S. law. The plaintiffs' attorneys and Louisiana disagreed on whether the appeals court's decision applied to every public school district in the state or only the districts party to the lawsuit. 'All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution,' said Liz Hayes, a spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which served as co-counsel for the plaintiffs. The appeals court's rulings 'interpret the law for all of Louisiana,' Hayes added. 'Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms.' Louisiana Atty. Gen. Liz Murrill said she disagreed and believed the ruling applied only to school districts in the five parishes that were party to the lawsuit and that she would seek to appeal the ruling. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' order stems from a lawsuit filed last year by parents of Louisiana schoolchildren from various religious backgrounds, who said the law violates 1st Amendment language guaranteeing religious liberty and forbidding government establishment of religion. The mandate was signed into law last June by Republican Gov. Jeff Landry. The court's ruling backs an order issued last fall by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles, who declared the mandate unconstitutional and ordered state education officials not to take steps to enforce it and to notify all local school boards in the state of his decision. Law experts have long said they expect the Louisiana case to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, testing the conservative court on the issue of religion and government. In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a similar Kentucky law violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says Congress can 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion.' The high court found that the law had no secular purpose but served a plainly religious purpose. In 2005, the Supreme Court held that such displays in a pair of Kentucky courthouses violated the Constitution. At the same time, the court upheld a Ten Commandments marker on the grounds of the Texas state Capitol in Austin. Cline and Brook write for the Associated Press.
