Letters to the editor: July 6
Roe v Wade at risk
Roe v Wade, 1973, legalizing abortion, is at risk if Trump replaces Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court before the November election. Fifty years of work went into that bill. Women in poverty and of color would suffer the most; it would be back to coat hangers to abort.
Losing Roe vs Wade must not happen, and we must take action. Here’s how: Urge our senators not to move forward with any Supreme Court nominee until after the election. We want all senators to hold that line. In 2016 Mitch McConnell refused to even hold a hearing for Obama nominee Merrick Garland even though the election was nine months away. Senators can follow his non-action as they did in 2016.
Call our members of Congress: Rep. Greg Walden, 1-202-225-6730; Sen. Jeff Merkley, 1-202-224-3753; and Sen. Ron Wyden, 1-202-224-5244. Women’s very lives are at stake if we do not act. Be of stout heart and strong voice to help our sisters.
Limit further harm
First, let’s end the free ride enjoyed by climate polluting corporations with a Clean Energy Jobs Bill. We must limit further harm to the basic systems that provide us with a livable environment plus healthy air, water, and food. Already six Oregon counties are drought emergency areas and wildfires are burning. When Southern Oregon’s smoke season begins it will further impact our region through reduced tourist revenue and impaired health.
Some candidates are committed to transforming Southern Oregon into a high-tech economy by promoting renewable energy, energy conservation and efficiency, job training and a healthy environment. For our future, elect Pam Marsh, Michelle Blum Atkinson and Jeff Golden to the Legislature and Amy Thuren and Lanita Witt as commissioners.
Good government requires good representation; let’s also send Jamie McCleod-Skinner to Congress.
Louise D Shawkat
Wake up on EMFs
The governor of California recently vetoed a bill to install 5G towers in that state, while in Oregon (at least in Ashland) we rely on the ancient federal ruling from 1996 that tells us we don’t need to consider our health or environment when making decisions about cell towers. Of course the 1996 ruling was made long before adequate research on the subject.
Does the present controversy about EMFs remind anyone of the tobacco industry, their false claims, government complicity and years of damage to our health? How long will it take to wake up about the issue of radiation?