Letters to the Editor | Jan. 3, 2024

I applaud Jennifer Stefano for her column on John Fetterman. Good ideas are not limited to one political party. The vast majority of people want politicians to work together for the good of the country, so why does that happen so little? Both parties are guilty — when Donald Trump came into the White House, he tossed lots of Barack Obama’s policies for no reason other than they happened under Obama’s watch.

I abhor Trump, but not everything he did was bad. Joe Biden tossing Trump’s border and immigration policies just because they were Trump’s was a mistake.

How can we citizens get the message to our politicians that it is OK to keep what is working, even if the idea comes from a different political party?

Lee Tabas, Haverford

I applaud Jennifer Stefano’s praise of John Fetterman’s willingness to break with party orthodoxy and his support of Israel’s right to defend itself. Her point that the views of most people cannot be neatly pigeonholed is a good one.

However, I must take issue with the examples she used on the Republican side. Mike Pence did perform his duties on Jan. 6, 2021, and Mitch McConnell did condemn Donald Trump’s actions on that day. However, both men have said that they would support the Republican nominee in 2024 — even if it is Trump. Furthermore, McConnell had the opportunity to vote to convict Trump in his second impeachment and didn’t take it. If he had voted for conviction and had brought an additional nine Republicans with him, then Trump would no longer be eligible for office.

Had McConnell shown the courage Stefano attributes to him, then we wouldn’t be facing various constitutional crises and the possibility of an authoritarian takeover in 2024. A better example of that courage would be Liz Cheney.

Bill Fanshel, Bryn Mawr

The front page of The Inquirer on Dec. 30 featured two prominent articles directly above each other. The larger one discussed the deaths of at least 30 civilians in Kyiv, Ukraine, from a series of Russian missiles. The article immediately below it, in slightly smaller print, discussed the tens of thousands of Palestinians who have fled to Gaza’s south to avoid Israel’s air and ground offensive, which has claimed some 21,500 civilian lives so far. Each story is tragic. Each focuses on innocent civilian casualties of war. What struck me was the prominence the Ukraine article received over the Gaza story. I am an American Jew and a committed supporter of Israel’s right to exist in peace. However, I am troubled by the plight of innocent Palestinian citizens who have died so far during the current hostilities. Although there is no proper humanitarian scorecard to compare innocent civilian deaths in Ukraine with those in Gaza, every one of them is tragic. Was I wrongly imputing some sort of comparison favoring Ukrainians over Palestinians in the placement and type size of these two articles?

Benjamin Zuckerman, Philadelphia

To those who reject a cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war in favor of waiting for Hamas to negotiate or surrender, I ask: What is your plan in the event that Hamas continues to fight? The current rate of Gaza civilian deaths is twice the death rate of Hamas militants. Should Israel continue to bombard Gaza until all the estimated 30,000 militants are dead? That could mean 60,000 civilian deaths from military strikes alone, to say nothing of anticipated deaths from starvation and disease. Is that what it means to want peace? Why are so many U.S. citizens and taxpayers silent in the face of this carnage? Will 60,000 dead and countless more wounded Palestinians avenge the deaths of 1,200 Israelis — will that be enough? How long can this be passed off as national defense?

Michele Guy, Boyertown

Practically all of the available data confirm that virtually every economic measure is “trending up,” unemployment, down. Our economy is recovering, if not booming, at the macroscale. Yet sites like NextDoor are replete with mothers unable to buy Christmas gifts for children, longtime renters evicted by soaring rent increases, GoFundMe sites for lifesaving medical care. We claim to be a religious/ethical nation, yet our body politic underrates the charge that we be “our brother’s keeper.” Ten states won’t expand Medicaid; two states are refusing federal grants for children’s summer lunches, with one politician sneeringly saying the program smacks of “welfare.” Middle-aged people who have worked for decades find themselves unemployed and unable to find jobs commensurate with their past lives. This disparity threatens our nation, witnessing the divide between red and blue, haves and have-nots. If we do not force our politicians to live up to our attested morality, we should fear for our future.

Stephen Phillips, St. Petersburg, Fla.

The story of Glynn Simmons, who was initially sentenced to death and later exonerated after serving 48 years in prison for a crime he hadn’t committed, should convince death penalty proponents that it must be abolished. Unfair trials sometimes happen when prosecutors don’t turn over exculpatory evidence, police minimize failures in lineup identifications, police coerce witnesses to lie, witnesses lie for other reasons, and/or defense lawyers fail to give their clients effective counsel. A long sentence allows the truly innocent an opportunity to prove it. Although exoneration is rare, it does occur.

Do Americans want our jurisprudence to be on par with that of China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Kuwait, North Korea, and a dozen other undemocratic countries that still execute criminals, or with every other Western country that abolished capital punishment decades ago?

Paul L. Newman, Merion Station

Reading about Glynn Simmons, who was exonerated after 48 years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit, makes me remember the reason Philadelphians twice voted for District Attorney Larry Krasner. When an innocent person goes to jail for a murder they didn’t commit, that is a life stolen. Is that not a crime? Although it is counted as a murder solved, does that promote public safety or justice? A case must be prosecuted based on actual evidence. Jailing any powerless person to get a conviction will not keep us safe. Krasner follows the evidence.

Carol Tenneriello, Philadelphia

When asked by a questioner what was the cause of the Civil War, Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley gave a very cleverly worded but ultimately vague response about government that could be interpreted as a dog whistle to appease a racist base that sadly even today sees little wrong with slavery.

Sorry, but Haley cannot have it both ways. Freedom for those who held enslaved people captive is the antithesis of freedom for the enslaved. I believe Haley knows this, but could not muster the courage to say so in front of her supporters. Haley fails to mention that many states in the South seceded because they felt their “freedom” to enslave human beings was being threatened by the nonenforcement of fugitive slave laws in the North and the growing sense of moral outrage among abolitionists and others of good conscience who were justifiably concerned about the loss of freedom for enslaved people.

Anthony Ciampoli, Voorhees

The Roosevelt Boulevard subway has been under consideration for generations. Every time the idea comes up, it gets shot down for the same reason: The citizens of the Northeast don’t want to share in the worst aspects of urban life. Who wants substance users and homeless people camped out around a subway station at Cottman Avenue and the Boulevard?

SEPTA’s ridership has dropped drastically since the start of the pandemic. Does the authority really have any idea what the demand will look like in several years? Is this really the best time to expand the transit system? Couldn’t the construction money be used for more pressing problems? Many of the city’s schools are so old they could be included on bus tours along with Independence Hall, the Betsy Ross House, and the Christ Church Burial Ground.

No, Philadelphia does not need a subway up Roosevelt Boulevard. At least not now.

Mike Egan, Plymouth Meeting

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in the Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.