Letters to the Editor | Nov. 25, 2025

As your recent editorial noted, the central sticking point in negotiations between City Council and the mayor on the best and fairest way to focus limited housing funds appears to be how to divide that pie between the neediest and those who have just a little bit more. One way of addressing this dilemma is to increase the size of the pie. This could be done, not by borrowing more, which would just jack up the already eye-popping amount we’ll have to pay back in interest, but by utilizing resources from the city’s $8 billion pension fund. For decades, our neighbors in New York City have directed 2% of the investments by their pension fund to local housing. As a result, the fund has produced almost 100,000 affordable units. One of the groups they invest in is the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust, whose sole purpose is to invest public and union pension funds in the construction and rehabilitation of housing. Let’s get some of our pension fund’s billions working here in the city, and reap the rewards of more affordable housing for all.

Pamela Haines, Philadelphia, pamelahaines1@gmail.com

I am troubled by potential funding cuts at the Environmental Protection Agency. I want my children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren to live on a planet where the air is safe for them to breathe, where fruits and vegetables are safe for them to eat, and where the water is clean and safe to drink. I’m sure all of you want the same. If we don’t do something immediately, the generations after us will not be able to turn things around because of the terrible things we have done — and continue to do — to the earth’s air, water, and soil. Our planet, and everything on and around it, needs our protection.

Please write your senators and representatives and ask them to make clear their strong support for the EPA when funding decisions are being made.

Becky Comer, Gilbertsville

We should press for a no vote on City Councilmember Isaiah Thomas’ proposed amendment to the resignation-to-run rule. If Thomas gets his way, Council members would be allowed to stay in office while running for state or federal elections.

This is just a step toward eventually letting city officials stay in their official capacities while running for another city office.

How about letting them use their own money, or campaign funding, to support their efforts while campaigning for a higher or different office?

Or maybe a compromise could be that they wouldn’t be paid their city salary if they run for local, state, or federal elections?

Michael Miller Jr., Philadelphia

I was both shocked and disheartened to learn that the City Council of Philadelphia, where I was born and raised, has recently passed a resolution declaring abortion a “human right.” This decision prompts serious reflection on the meaning of human rights and who they truly protect.

Human rights, by their very definition, are meant to be universal and encompass all individuals, including the unborn child. These children in the womb are among the most vulnerable members of our community, yet they have become the victims of an industry that regards the termination of their lives as necessary for controlling population growth in our city.

In light of this, I propose that our City Council consider a new resolution: to remove the long-standing moniker “City of Brotherly Love” from Philadelphia. It is a contradiction to celebrate brotherly love while simultaneously excluding and disregarding the rights of the most defenseless among us. How can we claim to embody brotherly love if we do not extend it to every member of our population?

Patricia Dowling, 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.