In response to “Voter ID battles churn in key states” (Sept. 24):

We should be trying to get more people to vote, not fewer

Republican efforts to enact strict voter ID legislation are touted as necessary to prevent elections from being tainted by potential illegal voters. The fact that a photo ID requirement would do nothing to stop traditional vote-buying scams, or that confirmed fraudulent voting has been seen about as often as Halley’s Comet, is ignored.

If one eligible voter is disenfranchised by these efforts, then our democracy has been gravely damaged. Voter fraud is not a problem in this country. Lack of participation in the electoral process is. But that seems to be the Republicans’ goal.

Michael A. Clark

Charlotte

ID hasn’t slowed gun crime; why would it slow voting?

When the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791, voting was limited to adult free male landowners. The right to keep and bear arms was bestowed without property ownership restrictions.

Since then, voting rights have been expanded while the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms has been saddled with statutes and regulations that restrict ownership and use of firearms. To suggest that a photo ID would somehow repress voting rights is paramount to saying that our voluminous gun laws have prevented gangs and criminals from using guns to commit crimes.

Jim Champion

Matthews

In response to “‘Bible-believing Christians’ are turning against the poor” (Sept. 24 Forum):

Christians help poor by giving them a job, not a handout

Bible-believing Christians believe every American should look for ways to help those in need. In addition, we believe that the best way to help the poor is to create economic prosperity. This will create more revenue for taxation that can be redistributed to the poor, but more importantly it will create jobs that will allow the poor to become employed and pull themselves out of poverty.

You don’t create prosperity by expanding entitlement rolls.

Dana Pressley

Charlotte

---

In response to “Bottom line: More people getting benefits under Obama” (Sept. 24 Forum):

There will always be taxes; question is how to spend them

Elton Shoemaker is yet another example of the Fox-based reality that should worry anyone who’s paying attention to our government. “Redistribution” is also called “taxes,” and it was generally agreed long ago that “we the people” would pay them for the common good.

What is at stake is how that redistribution works. The Romney camp wants more to go upwards to those who already have quite a bit. The Obama camp wants more to be spent on jobs, like teachers and first responders.

Chris Porier

Charlotte

Letter writer cares little for

the disabled – or the truth

Elton Shoemaker’s letter not only shows disregard for disabled members of our society, but also disregard for fact. He mentions Social Security benefits for dependent children. These are only available to children of deceased and disabled workers who themselves have paid enough into Social Security to be eligible for benefits. He singles out veterans’ benefits earned by those who “were never closer than 10,000 miles to combat.” Eligibility for veterans’ benefits requires a veteran to be injured while on active military duty. He also cites workers’ compensation as an “exploding” government benefit. Problem is, workers’ compensation benefits are provided by private insurers through the private marketplace.

Jon R. Moore

Charlotte

---

In response to “Prognosis: Profits” (Sept. 23):

Carolinas Healthcare should be taxed according to its profits

I’m incredulous that a not-for-profit hospital such as Carolinas Healthcare can generate $300 million annually in operating profit, have $2 billion in reserves, along with $1 billion worth of property holdings and yet receives a favorable tax status as a non-profit. This sounds like a hugely profitable enterprise and should be taxed accordingly.

Elizabeth Lee

Charlotte

---

In response to “Mitt Romney in Fantasyland” (Sept. 22 Ruth Marcus column):

Equating ‘society,’ ‘government’ reveals flawed mindset

It is becoming increasingly obvious that we will never get our debt and deficit issues under control as long as the media characterize any cut in a program as mean-spirited or against the middle class. In quoting the Brookings authors who say it is “a heroic assumption that everyone can be a Horatio Alger with no help from society,” Ruth Marcus immediately assumes society equals government. As long as that is the thought process, our economic future is doomed.

Richard Jerge

Mint Hill