Letters to the Editor | Feb. 16, 2023

By delaying the destruction of unidentified manned or unmanned aircraft as soon as possible, the U.S. Department of Defense and the president place our people in harm’s way and fail to protect our sovereignty. They also open the door to follow-up intrusions, such as the second balloon that penetrated our borders. It was imperative that the Pentagon take out the Chinese surveillance balloon sooner. According to international law, a country has every right to deny access to its airspace. If such an unidentified flying object was carrying an explosive or biological weapon, whoever launched it could have caused mass casualties by detonating it upon reaching a heavily populated area. Without the Pentagon being able to immediately confirm that the balloon had no detrimental payloads, one needs to ask why the balloon was not destroyed when it hovered over vacant lands. During the 9/11 crisis, the military protocol was to shoot down any aircraft that did not properly identify itself and did not communicate its intent. I would ask the president why he and the Pentagon did not enact such a policy to protect the American people and secure our airspace sooner? More importantly, we need to take notice that an unmanned aircraft easily breached our airspace without immediate detection. Such a breach demands a thorough examination of our surveillance systems.

Matt Drozd, retired lieutenant colonel, U.S. Air Force, Pittsburgh

I applaud the Biden administration and the Environmental Protection Agency for their momentous efforts, but what I didn’t see in the $1 billion being awarded to help clean up 22 toxic waste sites across the country is earmarked funding (our tax dollars) to hold polluters accountable. Too often, violators amass millions in profits while disregarding laws and regulations meant to protect communities and the environment. Even if it wasn’t a law at the time, burying hundreds of 55-gallon drums of toxic waste is a crime against nature and an unknowing population. Pouring Agent Orange or paint byproducts into a river, or running a belching smokestack at night so no one sees its discharge, is also reprehensible. These heinous acts are committed because the responsible way to dispose of these chemicals costs more. I could go on with examples. Every perpetrator knew these acts were wrong at the time and should be held accountable, financially and criminally. Laws or no, these acts were never OK. Not in 1950 or whenever.

Barry Beck, Turnersville

The importance of Congress passing the ABLE Age Adjustment Act cannot be overstated. The legislation is part of SECURE 2.0, a retirement measure included in the year-end spending package. A priority for disability advocates, it extends the age of eligibility for ABLE accounts from 26 to 46 and gives an additional 6.1 million Americans with disabilities more retirement savings opportunities. As an ABLE account owner who works full time as a mechanical engineer, and receives Medical Assistance for Workers with Disabilities, I understand firsthand the challenges facing workers with disabilities. The passage of the ABLE Age Adjustment Act enables more people with disabilities who require some level of support (through public benefits such as Medicaid) the opportunity to work, save, and pay for things that we need and want in life. I’m thankful to Sen. Bob Casey and leaders from both parties for supporting SECURE 2.0 and the expansion of the ABLE Act.

Simon Cantos, ABLE National Resource Center ambassador, Blue Bell

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.