fb pixel

Log In

Reset Password

Letters to the Editor, April 6

Wake-up call for Medford

The MT article reporting the closure of the Post Office lobby, especially the graphic quotes from citizens, should serve as both a warning and a wake-up call to voters, property owners and business owners in Medford.

The warning comes in the form of the law of unintended consequences. When a community allows liberal progressive policies and mindset to infiltrate the day-to-day activities of society on behalf of a few, the majority of law-abiding citizens suffer. The current, so-called “progressive” policy decisions have resulted in the takeover of a public park, a church property and various public buildings in our community. The chances of encountering belligerent, intoxicated persons, piles of human waste and other affronts has become a daily occurrence in our valley, especially Medford.

The wake-up call comes in the form of who is causing the root of the problem. Our elected officials, especially the Medford City Council, and the city manager and the police chief are the problem. They have collectively turned a consistent blind eye to the troublemakers.

We must take back this valley from the miscreants. Voting is a responsibility. We must vote out all incumbents and elect representatives, not politicians. Vote wisely, my friends.

Ted Krempa


Conservatives dump Trump

Conservatives are abandoning ship. In the March Atlantic, two senior fellows at the Brookings Institute, Jonathan Rauch and Benjamin Wittes, known for their conservative views, urge conservatives to vote a straight Democratic Party ticket to save the nation and the Republican Party from Trumpism.

They offered a simple logical syllogism:

(1) The GOP has become the party of Trumpism.

(2) Trumpism is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law.

(3) The Republican Party is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law.”

Their thesis, essentially, is that Trumpism poses such a severe threat to the Republican Party and the nation that it must be thwarted. And the only way to achieve this is to reject Republican candidates throughout the ticket.

Republican candidates are therefore on notice that they are not only running against Democrats, whether progressive, liberal or moderate, but are also running against conservatives. The implication is clear: any Republican candidate in 2018 is assumed to be running as a Trumpist and comes with the entire assembly of baggage that Trump presents — from racism through sexism, xenophobia, science denial and anti-environmentalism to exploitation of public lands and workers for the benefit of the wealthy.

Trisha Vigil


Who are we talking about?

The following quote, the first sentence of an AP article which appeared on the front page of your March 28 edition, brings to mind some interesting questions. “The 2020 U.S. Census will include a question about citizenship status, a move that brought swift condemnation from Democrats, who said it would intimidate immigrants and discourage them from participating.”

First, what do Democrats mean when they say immigrants? Surely they don’t mean the more than 12 million green card holders who are in the country legally. What would discourage them?

Does that then mean they’re talking about the folks who are in the country illegally? Which leads to more questions. If a primary purpose of the Census is for apportionment of members of the House of Representatives, wouldn’t it be reasonable to know how many people counted in the Census are legally eligible to vote in those elections? If, as the Democrats keep telling us, voter fraud is negligible or even nonexistent, mightn’t this information prove their case?

But the Democrats don’t want this question asked. Does this mean they already know the answer?

John F. Howard


Misusing the Second Amendment

The time has come to decide if the Constitution is a living, breathing document, open to change. The outdated Electoral College brought forth a sleazy shyster of a president, while the majority of the population unanimously voted otherwise, and the Second Amendment desperately needs clarification.

Our Founding Fathers could not have foreseen the internet with its widespread fake news, or that anyone could buy a gun that has the ability to fire semiautomatic rounds of ammunition, resulting in terrorist attacks on schools and other places in the United States.

Splitting hairs over whether the AR-15 is an assault weapon or blah, blah, whatever excuses the proponents of not regulating guns, does no good as the tragic occurrences of murder and terror continue. Banning any weapon that can fire repeatedly, or any attachment thereof, and creating a database that networks between law enforcement and mental health would aid in organizing a comprehensive way to track gun owners.

The right to bear arms is a very ambiguous statement that leaves much up to interpretation. Honing in on the misuse of guns with the ability to shoot repeatedly does not dishonor the Constitution. And 200-plus years later, the Electoral College is no longer needed.

Kathy Lambie


Another of our rights

A well regulated artillery being necessary to protect the citizenry of the state, the right of the people not to be slaughtered shall not be infringed.

Sandra Scase


Trial of the century

Are you aware of the “trial of the century”? Twenty-one youth plaintiffs are proceeding to trial to prove that the U.S. government has violated their fundamental rights to a climate system capable of sustaining human life and that we need a national science-based climate recovery plan (www.ourchildrenstrust.org). Our children are leading the way.

Smoky skies troubled us last summer,while reducing snowpack will likely bring drought this summer. You have given your children a love of nature and appreciation for the beauty of our natural environment. But, how will our next state senator address the environmental challenges facing us?

While children are leading the way, we all need to be informed and support the best person to represent our district. Voting for an environmentally sensitive candidate is one way to support our children.

Seven candidates are running for Oregon Senate District 3. But which ones will protect our environment, and which ignore it while serving polluters?

SOCAN and eleven other local nonprofits are presenting an all-party candidate forum on environmental challenges from 7-8:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 11, at the Medford library. Please bring your questions for the candidates present, and listen to their answers. Please be an informed citizen, and then vote.

Louise D Shawkat


Our own tax reform

I think it’s time for Oregon to join other states and have its own income tax form. It may have been efficient originally for Oregon to borrow from the federal forms. Today, it creates problems.

For those using the federal standard deduction it is absurd to have to fill out Schedule A and to file it in Oregon “as if” it were part of the federal form. The Oregon form would be simpler without all the “additions” and “subtractions” that have be made to the federal form.

Other simple changes could improve the Oregon form: It’s OK to use bold print to separate different subject areas and it’s OK to use bold lines to surround boxes to be checked. ASC items should be consolidated with the rest of the form. I think the Department of Revenue could make these changes without legislation.

Michael Sanford


Golden has it all

I’ve lived in the Rogue Valley for 21 years. I appreciated Jeff Golden’s insightful interviews when he hosted The Jefferson Exchange on JPR and now Jeff is running for Oregon Senate!

He is not taking any money from special interest groups — even those groups whose positions he agrees with, even though this puts his campaign at a financial disadvantage. I’d certainly like to see more women in office, but I am not going to vote for someone only because she is a woman, especially one with ties to those special interests.

Jeff does his homework, knows the issues, has worked with governmental agencies and will work for us.

All the candidates are well-intentioned, but I feel only Jeff has the right combination of a progressive vision, experience and dedication to hard work that we need and that he is most electable in the general election. Please help elect Jeff Golden!

Barb Barasa


Letters to the Editor, April 6