Letters to the Editor

Let all vote, even non-citizens working here legally. But require ID.

Let all who pay taxes vote, but require ID

In response to Our View “Voter ID no better with age” (June 8 Editorial):

Everyone who is in this country and working legally should be allowed to vote. Why should it matter if they’re citizens or not? They’re members of our community, they pay taxes. But everyone should be required to show ID before voting.

Similarly, let all the illegal immigrants stay if they haven’t committed any other crimes. But require them to tell us who they worked for illegally, so we can prosecute the real criminal – their employer. And yes, build the wall to prevent a stampede.

Mark Kuniansky, Charlotte

Voter suppression is a real possibility

Here are questions/concerns to be considered regarding the voter ID bill:

▪ Will it be free for all? Some people cannot afford to pay.

▪ Will it be easy to get one? If a person needs to travel for miles to an office only open 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays, they may not be able to get one due to a job.

▪ How would this work with absentee ballots?

I understand the bill put forward contains no details such as these and voters are being asked to sign a “blank check,” so to speak. These arguments could be a form of voter suppression.

John Glass, Matthews

Focus on helping people get photo ID

Why wouldn’t everyone want a photo ID? I am asked all the time to see mine. If you travel, use a bank, buy a car, etc. you are asked for it.

How about helping those who do not have one get one? It’s really not that hard.

Dick Meyer, Charlotte

It’s Lewinsky who should apologize

In response to “Bill Clinton owes a personal apology” (June 6 Forum):

Bill Clinton does not owe Monica Lewinsky an apology. Monica Lewinsky should be apologizing to Hillary Clinton for having an illicit affair with her husband.

Helen Finley, Charlotte

Booted off CMS stage? Get over it

In response to Peter St. Onge’s “At graduation, an unhappy stage exit” (June 7 Opinion):

Is Jim Puckett really dangling revenge and implied possible funding cuts over no longer being allowed on stage at graduation? Is he that petty and does he think graduates really care about shaking politicians’ hands?

Get over it and move on. Take the high road like Julie Eiselt.

Chris Phillips, Mooresville

Better uses for ‘In God We Trust’ money

In response to “NC lawmakers back ‘In God We Trust’ signs in schools” (June 8):

Lenore Kerner
Lenore Kerner

The N.C. House voted overwhelmingly to require signs in public schools touting “In God We Trust,” to the tune of $25,000.

Do you realize how much food, how many school building improvements, how much help for the elderly, and so on, that North Carolina could buy for $25,000?

Really?

Lenore Kerner, Charlotte

We’ve come a long way, let’s not forget

In response to “Whose advice we need this graduation season” (June 6 Opinion):

I regret that Rabbi Judy Schindler’s column was so negative. She seems to overlook what is both good and great about our country.

She mentions 9/11, but does not mention those brave firemen who gave their lives trying to save as many as possible. She speaks of global warming and the environment but does not reference how far we have come.

She fails to address the fact that we are still the beacon of hope to many around the world.

In our pursuit of freedom for others we have lost many of our soldiers on foreign lands. We are happy to pass the torch on to our next generation of leaders, but let’s not forget we have come a long way.

Jim Beatty, Charlotte

A taste of dairy industry quid pro quo

In response to “If it’s not from a hoofed animal, it can’t be called ‘milk,’ farm bill says” (June 7):

Arnie Grieves 2016
Arnie Grieves

It seems some of our Republican representatives in Raleigh are confused by various products that contain the word “milk” and are looking to rectify their bewilderment by creating a narrow definition.

Their confusion is puzzling since the term “almond milk” has been in use since the 14th century.

But perhaps there is a simple explanation. Could it be that these legislators milked the dairy industry for campaign contributions and the proposal to restrict the use of the word “milk” is merely a quid pro quo?

Arnie Grieves, Charlotte

  Comments