Letters to the Editor | April 2, 2026

Peco’s union workforce has long been the backbone of our ability to safely and reliably serve Southeastern Pennsylvania. As a recent letter writer noted, the men and women of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 614 show up every day — and in the most challenging moments, including severe storms and extreme weather — to restore power and keep our communities running. Their skill, dedication, and professionalism deserve recognition and respect.

That is why we are committed to reaching a fair and equitable agreement that honors their contributions while ensuring we can continue investing in a safe, resilient, and affordable energy system for our customers. Like many industries, we face rising costs and the need to modernize our infrastructure to meet growing demand and evolving energy needs. These realities require thoughtful stewardship of resources.

Our goal in these negotiations is balance: competitive wages and benefits for our workforce, continued investment in grid reliability and safety, and keeping bills as low as possible for the families and businesses who depend on us.

We value our partnership with Local 614 and remain focused on good-faith discussions that will allow us to move forward together — supporting our employees, our customers, and the region we all serve.

Nicole LeVine, senior vice president and chief operating officer, Peco

There is an easy and inexpensive solution to the problems foreseen by school closings: Buy modular classrooms.

They are much less expensive than building from scratch or even renovating.

The buildings go up much faster if modulars are combined to make a full school. They can become permanent schools or be disassembled if they need to be moved.

There is no “win” in closing schools with small populations due to the close and safe environments and community stability they provide now, even if the building itself is outdated or irreparable.

I’ve seen it work while I was principal of Northley Middle School in Aston when we used modulars to accommodate rising enrollment.

Ernest Angiolillo, Philadelphia

The Inquirer Editorial Board railed against the politics of Pete Hegseth, arguing that his statements calling for “Maximum lethality, not tepid legality” violate international law. I also find Hegseth’s politics to be repugnant and reprehensible. My question is: How is he significantly different from his predecessors? We can find a clear answer to this question by looking at the career of Air Force Gen. Curtis Emerson LeMay.

LeMay was the architect of the six-month firebombing campaign of 67 Japanese cities in the Second World War. Large sections of those cities were burned to the ground, and hundreds of thousands of civilians died as a result. Then, the U.S. Air Force dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

LeMay was also involved in the massive bombing campaign in the Korean War. The large majority of the buildings in North Korea were destroyed as a result of that bombing campaign, and millions of Koreans lost their lives.

Later, LeMay argued that the Air Force was about “bombing Vietnam back into the Stone Age.” President Lyndon B. Johnson named LeMay’s bombing campaign “Rolling Thunder.” President Richard Nixon named the general’s military operations “Linebacker One” and “Linebacker Two.” LeMay also argued in support of using atomic bombs against Cuba.

So, while I find Hegseth’s politics to be repugnant and reprehensible, a brief look at history informs us that very little of what he is doing is new.

Steven Halpern, Philadelphia

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.