DART could use surplus
Re: “DART to give cities $234M — When agency’s 13 members will receive funds is unclear; Dallas’ cut to be $111 million,” Oct. 27 Metro & Business story.
The idea for DART to return the surplus to the cities may be good politics, but it is not good business. Spend more on maintaining the existing equipment, spend more to improve the cleanliness of the vehicles, give free access to all citizens 65 or older, provide a larger and more present security operation, give free rides to all students, including college-level, based on identification, and make the fleet more energy efficient with a goal of zero emissions.
We need fewer cars on our roads, and DART is the best way to get started in that direction. Giving it back to the member cities is a waste, in my opinion.
Goebel H. Vaughn, Plano
Texas makes voting so hard
Re: “Texas tumbles further in access to voting, report finds — State ranks 46th in ability to cast nerd, researchers say,” Oct. 27 Metro & Business story.
The Texas Legislature needs to understand that making voting more difficult hurts all parties, not just the opposition. I read the report that Texas slipped a spot — from 45th to 46th — in the voter access rankings, but I didn’t need a study to tell me about my personal experience.
I moved to North Texas from Utah in the summer and was surprised I needed to register to vote by pen and paper. I was even more surprised that I never received a response. Voting was about to open, so my wife, who submitted her application the same time I did, checked her status online. She was registered. I was not. And by that time, it was too late for me to do anything about it because the Lone Star State closes voter registration a full month in advance of the election.
There’s nothing to suggest easier voting access leads to adverse outcomes. It’s notable that Utah, a red state, sits in the top 10 in the ranking, flanked by blue states above and below. Mail-in ballots, online registration, same-day registration — it’s common sense, and the outcomes prove their efficacy.
I was going to affiliate as a Republican, but if this is the process the majority party wants, I’ll happily go elsewhere.
Christian Sagers, Denton
GOP is all talk on mental health
So far in just 2022, there have been about 570 mass shootings in the United States. These include the massacres in the supermarket in Buffalo, NY, the elementary school in Uvalde and the Fourth of July parade in Highland Park, Ill.
Each of these senseless and horrific violent acts has forever changed the lives of those killed and injured as well as the friends and family members of those killed or injured. After each of these bloodsheds, there has been widespread public outcry for our government to take action with commonsense gun control legislation to address age minimums, background checks, waiting periods and assault weapons.
The Republican Party has been unwavering in its coordinated efforts to block all such measures. Instead, its leaders have steadfastly maintained that the problem is not one of guns, but one of mental health.
On Sept. 29, the US House did something about it. On that day, the House passed the Mental Health Matters Act that expands access to mental health services in schools throughout the country. However, for all of their rhetoric about the mental health crisis, only one Republican, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, voted in favor of this bill.
O’Rourke must explain
Okay, Beto O’Rourke, I’ll bite. I’m a Republican and will vote for you if you can do just one thing. Give us a definitive solution as to how you are going to solve the power grid problem.
And not by bad-mouthing the opposition. Not by merely saying “we need change.” Not by making empty promises you know won’t be able or willing to keep.
We can work on the rest of the promises later. I agree, we do need change, but I refuse to trust someone who believes solving problems involves throwing a handful of tacks against a wall and expecting us to pick them up.
So tell us, what exactly are you going to do so differently and how? You see, we vote for you and we get the same. Just another view of the fence.
Michael Campione, Plano
Connect maternal mortality dots
Re: “Giving birth is riskier in Texas — Maternal mortality rate above average US, data delay lingers,” Monday Metro & Business story.
Thanks for printing Emily Caldwell’s story, but I wish you had connected the dots.
Dot: Our Texas government believes it is “moral” to force pregnancy on women who don’t want and/or can’t afford to raise a child.
Dot: Unwanted pregnancies are highest among people living in poverty.
Dot: Most people living in poverty are more likely to be people of color.
Dot: Women in poverty frequently cannot get birth control or health care for themselves or for their fetus.
Dot: About 700 women die from pregnancy-related complications each year. About 1 in 3 pregnancy-related deaths occur one week to one year after delivery.
Dot: In Texas, it is “moral” to choose the life of a fetus over the life of the mother.
Steve McCluer, Far North Dallas
‘Thou shalt not kill’
Every time I read one of the many stories or letters supporting the availability of abortions, I cannot help but wonder just which part of God’s Fifth Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” does the writer not understand?
Willard Zimmerer, Farmers Branch
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here.
We are now accepting reader nominations for the 2022 Texan of the Year. Please submit your entry here.