Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Proposed transit tax
is unsupportable
Re: “Lawmakers advance transit tax hike bill” (Page A1, June 4).
Here we go again, Sacramento just can’t stay out of everyone’s pocket.
It’s no wonder businesses are moving their headquarters out of state. Our state sales tax is already the highest in the country.
Sometimes the government has to act like a business, and when demand goes down for mass transit, then operations must be scaled back. Why run near-empty vehicles? It’s always about supply and demand when making business decisions.
Living in the Bay Area is expensive enough. State Sen. Scott Wiener should keep his extreme left-leaning decisions to where he lives in San Francisco and stop telling everyone else what to do.
Bruce Krutel
El Granada
Instead of rail project,
add a lane to I-5
Re: “High-speed rail is worth cost, effort” (Page A6, June 4).
Mr. Eittreim voices his support for California’s high-speed rail. The intent was to provide ground-based, fast transportation between the Bay Area and Los Angeles. It’s frightfully expensive and not progressing well.
It would have been less expensive and faster to simply add a third lane to Highway 5. By adopting the German Autobahn concept, removing all speed limits, it would permit drivers to access either region in just a few hours.
The advantage of having one’s vehicle in Los Angeles or the Bay Area cannot be overemphasized.
The fear of high-speed accidents can be mitigated by adhering strictly to safe driving practices and maintaining vehicles properly.
James Thurber
Half Moon Bay
Clean energy tax credits
must be preserved
Re: “$14 billion in clean energy projects have been canceled in the US this year, analysis says” (May 29).
Clean Energy Tax Credits must be maintained or we face the loss of jobs and economic growth in addition to increased pollution. In their article, Alexa St. John and Isabella O’Malley of the Associated Press lay out the benefits of the clean energy investments and the enormity of the potential cancellations.
As the Senate version of the budget reconciliation bill is being deliberated, we are fortunate that both Senators Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla are strong advocates for clean energy credits and have been actively ensuring that California has benefited. California’s clean energy sector has attracted over $11 billion in investments and created thousands of jobs.
Virginia Van Kuran
Palo Alto
Change in U.S. leaders
would reassure allies
Five countries bordering Russia are withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention, the treaty banning anti-personnel mines. Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland feel national survival might require using land mines.
These countries’ reasoning is simple. The war in Ukraine proved that Russia wants to expand its borders militarily and they fear that they are next after Ukraine. Mines are a barrier to invasion.
The downside to using mines for defense is that they are lethal for generations, exploding long after a conflict ends. Recognizing this, the majority of nations signed the Ottawa Convention.
The key to reversing withdrawals lies in American politics. These small countries fear that President Trump and the United States would not defend them against Russia. Voting him and his associates out of office can restore confidence in the United States and eliminate the desire for countries along the Russian border to rearm with land mines.
Susan Hartt
San Jose
Instead of further cuts,
let’s raise revenue
In his cartoon, Michael Ramirez (Page A6, June 4) indicates that the key to reducing the national debt is to “cut spending.”
Yes, that’s a simple answer. Equally concise is “raise revenue,” which would be an easy thing to do if the wealthiest among us paid their fair share, instead of using the federal government as a personal piggy bank (looking at you, Elon).
Cutting spending typically means shredding the safety net for those most in need of support, while cutting taxes for billionaires and their buddies. Which one is more in keeping with American values? These days, unfortunately, that’s an open question.
Doug Edwards
Los Altos
Trump’s wavering on his
oath justifies removal
Related Articles
Letters: Donald Trump’s cuts to research will set the U.S. back
Letters: Government must end payouts to Elon Musk
Letters: Fear and anger, not age, separate the GOP and Democrats
Letters: Even with leverage, would Trump use it against Putin?
Letters: State’s leaders are the cause of our high cost of living
In President Trump’s MSNBC interview with Kristin Welker last month, he answered, “I don’t know” when asked if it was his duty to defend the Constitution (in regards to deportations).
Excuse me? He twice vowed to do it, but didn’t know. Is there not a 25th Amendment for this blatant breach of contract? Where are the voices of everyone in America — especially of Republican officials — demanding his immediate removal from office?
Give us a break, for God’s sake. What will it take to rid us of this menace to humanity?
Robert Wahler
San Jose