Letters to the Editor | Aug. 26, 2026

As developmental and behavioral pediatricians at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia who care for children with disabilities, we know our patients are well served by Head Start — including the regulations that ensure their inclusion in the program. Head Start programs, which must reserve at least 10% of their enrollment slots for children with disabilities, serve many of our patients when other preschool programs fail to do so. As the article points out, many children will be harmed by the proposed regulations, and we argue that children with disabilities will be disproportionately negatively impacted.

Rates of suspension and expulsion from preschool for children with disabilities are high, and a local Head Start program may be the only place that can accommodate their needs. Head Start programs cannot expel children for their behavior, and must engage mental health and community support before considering suspension.

Developmental screening in trusted locations such as Head Start can identify delays, which, if addressed early, may resolve before a child enters kindergarten. Early intervention therapies for children ages 3 to 5 years old are delivered in preschools, including Head Start, allowing our patients to receive speech/language, occupational, or physical therapies. Head Start programs also help families coordinate care when their children need ongoing therapies.

Lastly, all children benefit from inclusion — by learning and playing alongside each other, regardless of ability or disability. Head Start provides our patients and their families with critical access to programs that help them thrive. We urge our leaders to reconsider.

Sarah Revak, Wilmington, and Kate E. Wallis, Philadelphia

The Phillies gave us an exciting ninth-inning, come-from-behind win Sunday — exciting because they kept getting on base and kept scoring before Kyle Schwarber’s walk-off home run. A friend of mine texted me, with a Philadelphian’s typically guarded optimism, “Phillies look to be peaking toward playoffs!” The media provided an extra-inning recap to revel in the moment. NBC Sports Philadelphia’s analysis noted the significance of getting runners on base to keep the pressure on the defense, while chalking up RBIs. The Inquirer was able to give us its great morning-after reporting, allowing those of us who watched the ending live to bask in the memory for a second or third time.

Wayne Williams, Malvern

Republicans claim to be the “right to life” party. They have not learned that being the pro-life party means they must protect their fellow Americans from birth until death. They have worked diligently to eliminate a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. They pride themselves on saving the lives of unborn children. Sadly, they are only the protectors of fetuses. When it comes to supporting life outside the womb, they have done little. The overhaul of programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program has resulted in roughly four million fewer people receiving food stamps. Funding cuts for childcare and social services have taken billions of dollars away from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Regulatory changes threaten the future of early childhood development efforts like Head Start. The Trump administration has implemented funding cuts that target senior citizens, starting with Medicare long-term and in-home care. The cuts contained in the One Big Beautiful Bill mean millions will lose health insurance, and rural hospitals will be placed in jeopardy.

We have to stop electing officials to both state and federal offices who claim to be pro-life and then put in place legislation that opposes safety net programs, health access, and commonsense gun laws — all of which sustain and protect life. When voters go to the polls in November, I urge them to think carefully about whether their senators and representatives deserve to be reelected. It is time to put in place elected officials who are not just pro-life in name only.

Celeste D’Alonzo, Marlton

Last week, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts once again stomped on the scales of justice by issuing a temporary order that allows construction of Donald Trump’s massive ballroom to continue. This ruling is in direct opposition to both a lower-court ruling and an appeals court ruling that directed that aboveground construction of Trump’s ballroom should be stopped, as the construction lacked congressional authorization for the massive project.

In the vast majority of dispute cases, and as directed in the prior rulings related to this case, most judges’ initial instructions would be for the parties to temporarily stop what they are doing (i.e., do no further harm). Unfortunately, Chief Justice Roberts decided to put his thumb on the scales and, with a wink, essentially said, “Hey, Donald, keep building.”

Roberts will claim that his “temporary” order does no harm and is only in place while the U.S. Supreme Court considers an emergency appeal. The problem is that he and everyone else in America knows it could take months for the case to be resolved, and meanwhile, taxpayer dollars are being spent every day on this unpopular Trump vanity project. Roberts and Trump know that by the time the court gets around to deciding the case, the ballroom will be substantially built, and it is unlikely to be torn down.

I find it interesting that in his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Roberts famously claimed that “a judge’s job is to call balls and strikes, not to pitch or bat.” Unfortunately, it seems Roberts needs to get his eyes checked, as he has a hugely distorted strike zone whenever Trump is at the plate.

Kent Kingan, Malvern

Thank you for the educational article in the Sunday Opinion section written by Cory James Young about President George Washington and how the complex relationship between enslaved and enslaver during colonial times is such an important part of our American history.

Perhaps one day we will learn the name of the American veteran who Washington enslaved, who died from battle wounds near Pennsylvania’s Fort Necessity. I can’t help but think that the research that led to the opening of the President’s House on Independence Mall in 2010 has been an inspiration to the work of Young, perhaps especially given the debate over how the government has changed it. Let’s keep learning, Philly.

Anne Patricia Minicozzi, Villanova

New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew, who represents Salem, Cumberland, Cape May, Atlantic, and parts of Gloucester and Ocean Counties, said the Republican Party will “get killed” in the 2026 midterms if it does not address rising healthcare costs.

“We need to deal with [healthcare] now because, No. 1, it’s the right thing to do, just morally,” Van Drew said on Nov. 7 on Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo’s Wall Street. “No. 2, we’re going to get killed [in 2026].”

A recent editorial from the New York Times provides one of the clearest explanations I’ve seen of how Republicans, including Van Drew, have slashed healthcare: They did it passively, by allowing the Affordable Care Act subsidies to expire, and they did it actively (with Van Drew’s vote) by slashing Medicaid in the One Beautiful Bill (although they cleverly provided that the cuts do not take effect until after the midterm election).

Van Drew knows cutting healthcare is immoral — he essentially said so himself — yet he followed Donald Trump’s orders and voted for these cuts in one of the poorest districts in New Jersey. Van Drew put his “undying support” for Trump above the interests of his constituents. In his words, Republicans deserve to “get killed” in the upcoming election.

Rich Hluchan, Cherry Hill

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.