House bill stinks
I have been thoroughly disenfranchised and disgusted with the smell coming from Columbus over House Bill 6.
What was painted at the start as an honest attempt to save some communities, transition from old industries and find the route to clean air in Ohio has turned into a foul display of dirty politics.
Even with testimony running 20-1 against this energy bill, it looks like the stacked deck of committee members is set to see this through. Their mantra seems to be “subsidy for sun and wind — bad. Subsidy for fossil fuel or nuclear — good.”
My thanks to state Rep. Casey Weinstein of Hudson, as he got a FirstEnergy spokesman to admit the bill being debated was really an open door for any gas or old coal plants to join a taxpayer-funded feast of bailout money.
Can we please get past the partisan stuff to a real discussion about how we move to a future that will work?
And clear this smelly air in Columbus.
Thomas Collins, Garrettsville
Someone has to pay
Maybe instead of expanding college availability (free to everyone), we should consider the fact that not everyone is prepared for or should attend college. There are many apprenticeships and other avenues that lead to higher paying jobs that might be a better choice for some people. With that in mind, maybe if we adopted a college unit in high school that would let students test-drive the college option (available to all, not just the students who have the grades and want to go), then students would know whether it was a good route for their future, and we would save the ones who are not a good fit from wasting valuable resources that could be spent on something that would actually benefit their future.
Our leaders are talking about forgiving all college debt. I wonder: How does that help the millennials who are going to have to pay for this mistake? This hasn’t worked with the banking or housing industries and now we’re talking about upside-down car loans and college debt forgiveness. Isn’t there a saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?
Sue Rice, Munroe Falls
Not running scared
In the letter “Wrong question” (May 8), the writer fears that a single-payer health care system means “The government will tell you at what age you are to report to which nursing home barracks, and when to die.” This sounds like the “death panels” predicted for Obamacare, and the “they will come and take all your guns away” argument whenever gun restrictions are discussed. I wonder whether opponents of the single-payer system have the same apprehension about Medicare and whether they will avail themselves of the services when they retire.
Rob Gatian, Canal Fulton
Truth, brains, humility
I came across a November 2004 issue of Reader’s Digest that reported on a poll taken in May when George W. Bush and John Kerry were running for president. One question was about the qualities we look for in a president. The quality most mentioned was, “Say what they mean, mean what they say” (93%). The next was, “Never shades the truth” (85%). Others often mentioned were, “Demonstrates genuine humility” (70%), “Genuinely intellectual” (63%), and “Always speaks diplomatically” (47%). The traits least considered were “Independently wealthy” (5%), and “An outsider to Washington, D.C.,” (13%).
Considering the current occupant of the White House, have our preferences really changed that much over the past 15 years, and, if so, are we a better nation with this change?
Gary Sellers, Stow