Letters to the Editor | July 12, 2024

I disagree with Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s unilateral and arbitrary decision to select July 15 as the effective date to transition to full-time, in-office work without first negotiating or codeveloping a clear and comprehensive plan with our union. This is a mistake or a purposeful affront to our bargaining rights as workers. Caregivers should not have to choose between working and caring for their loved ones because of the administration’s failure to maintain hybrid-remote work arrangements. Jobs are important, but our loved ones are irreplaceable.

I have been my mother’s primary caregiver and advocate for nearly 20 years. My situation is not unique: According to a new report, there are 48 million family caregivers in the U.S. who help their older parents, spouses, and other loved ones live independently at home instead of being forced into costly and understaffed nursing homes. An astonishing 61% of us are also holding down jobs.

While working a remote-hybrid schedule since March 2020, I’ve assisted nearly 700 low- to moderate-income constituents by drafting subordination agreements, mortgage satisfactions, and other documents to increase and preserve affordable housing. This all happened in very time-sensitive and stressful settings when low-income homeowners were in the middle of selling or refinancing their homes. I worked for the constituents who needed our office while the hybrid work arrangement worked for my mother and for me. Our city government offices work because we work.

My challenge to the Parker administration is to support the underpaid and overworked working-class city employees by respecting our bargaining rights and providing sufficient time to access the financial and community-based resources required to provide adequate care for our loved ones so we can participate in the workforce with peace of mind.

Nia Turner, Local 1971 steward, AFSCME District Council 33

Liberal newspapers, columnists, political consultants, and donors throughout the country have recognized President Joe Biden’s increasing mental decline — most recently reflected by his debate performance, but also evidenced by numerous misstatements and stumbling conduct over the past two years — and called for him to withdraw from the presidential race. Some Democrats in Congress have followed suit.

The Inquirer Editorial Board appears to stand alone in its two recent editorials in attacking former President Donald Trump after the debate, going so far as to call for Trump — not Biden — to withdraw from the race. However much the board despises Trump, whether justified or not, this is not about him. This is about whether Biden suffers from serious mental and physical decline and is incapable of waging a presidential campaign or serving a full four-year term. If The Inquirer believes Trump should be defeated, it should be candid with its readers and fulsomely address Biden’s decline, not whitewash or deflect it.

Once upon a time, The Inquirer engaged in investigative journalism. Biden lives in our backyard. Why isn’t the paper investigating evidence of Biden’s decline, as the New York Times and CNN are doing? Why isn’t The Inquirer reporting on the views of the six Democratic Congress members from Philadelphia, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery Counties and the Lehigh Valley, who have interacted with Biden on a personal level over the past years? Why didn’t The Inquirer, not CNN, uncover a Philadelphia radio interviewer who was spoon-fed her questions by the Biden campaign post-debate?

It is unlikely that “God Almighty,” to use Biden’s words, will intervene. The Inquirer’s readers — whether supporting Biden, Trump, or even Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — deserve clarity in its reporting and more honesty in its editorials, and not Trump hate.

Bruce S. Marks, former state senator, Bala Cynwyd, marks@mslegal.com

Pennsylvania’s proposed school voucher program is a misguided policy that violates the separation of church and state while diverting desperately needed funds away from public schools. The voucher program would funnel taxpayer dollars to private and religious schools that are unregulated and free to implement faith-based curricula and discriminate against students and staff. According to an analysis done by the Washington Post earlier this month, this is already happening across the country via the largest voucher programs. The entire philosophy completely defies the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state by using public money to advance religious education.

Voucher proponents claim they provide a “lifeline” for students trapped in failing schools. However, with only $100 million allocated, the program would serve fewer than 10% of the 250,000 eligible students, leaving the vast majority behind in underfunded public schools. Beyond that, the programs today do not collect any demographic information about the students who benefit from them, so officials don’t have any way of demonstrating efficacy. Rather than uplifting a small fraction, we should focus on adequately and equitably funding all public schools, as mandated by the Commonwealth Court.

Natalie McKnight, Glenside

A few weeks ago, I visited Japan with my son as an overdue graduation gift. We spent three days in Tokyo, with 37 million people in its metropolitan area, and two days in Kyoto, a city of 1.5 million inhabitants. Both cities impressed us with their cleanliness and how their citizens behave, showing the utmost respect to each other and to visitors. There are no trash containers on the streets or in public spaces. Everyone is responsible for storing and disposing of trash in their homes. We walked and traveled by bus and trains and we saw no piece of trash on the streets or side roads.

What are we missing in Philadelphia? Why aren’t we able to clean up our roads and parks and sidewalks and walkways? You walk here, and garbage greets you everywhere. Have we ever imagined the benefits of cleaning up? How business could boom, and how flocks of visitors would be rushing to come and enjoy our amazing history? It’s time to seriously act and clean up Philadelphia — street by street, alley by alley, corner by corner. Make the city shine, and people will come back.

Stelios Tsinontides, Ambler

Sen. John Fetterman has earned respect by revealing his mental health struggles. He’s shown his voice can attract attention and open minds. That’s why we’re asking him to do more on another vital issue he has experienced: distracted driving. Fetterman’s driving record includes police finding him at fault for a high-speed crash in June when he rear-ended another car. He also has two previous speeding tickets for violations of at least 24 mph above the speed limit, which resulted in him taking a driver’s improvement course. Some of his former aides said he made video calls or read his phone while behind the wheel.

We Save Lives wants the senator to serve as a positive role model to everyone, especially teens, by publicly taking the pledge not to drive while distracted. By signing the pledge — available at wesavelives.org — he would be on the record agreeing that distracted driving is socially unacceptable. It’s critical teen drivers receive this message right now.

A recent analysis found Pennsylvania saw a 16% increase in teen summertime driving deaths year over year. Nationwide, researchers say distracted teen drivers cause nearly six out of 10 moderate to severe crashes. Fetterman talks openly and lovingly about his children, so we know he understands the critical role he has in their lives. Parents are the number one influencer of their teens’ driving attitudes and behaviors. By changing the culture and activating parents, we aim to significantly reduce the number of teen driving crashes and fatalities. We ask Sen. Fetterman to join us in this lifesaving work.

Candace Lightner, founder and president, We Save Lives

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 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.