Reduce Pa.’s career politicians, expenses

After reading about our illustrious state politicians and the unique check-and-balance system they use to justify their spending of the taxpayers’ money for meals, lodging and any expenses they incur while “on the job,” I am submitting the following comment (March 23, “Ban on Meal, Lodging Perk for Lawmakers Introduced”).

We should be able to reduce the number of Pennsylvania career politicians and, therefore, have a somewhat tremendous savings in the cost to operate our state. In my view, they are a part of the “whitecollar” criminals who legally steal from Pennsylvania citizens by claiming reimbursement for meals, lodging and whatever else they can claim as work-related, or by padding their expenses because they do not have to account for them by submitting receipts.

By reducing the number of our government politicians, we could substantially reduce the cost and maybe even have a better form of government. To reference an old saying, “Too many hands in the soup tend to spoil it.”

If this comment offends the politicians who have morals and utilize them, then I apologize to them. To the others, I say, “we the people” did not vote for politicians to live a somewhat lavish lifestyle supported by our tax dollars. We voted them into office because we felt that they would perform their duties morally and not go along with the program because that is the way it was done in the past.

What these politicians are doing is legal thievery. When does it stop, or are we continually going to have our government operate on a status quo mentality?

MICHAEL PHILLIP

Munhall

A business decision

When I read about the bill introduced by Rep. John Joyce, R-Blair, dubbed the “GRINCH” bill — for Guarding Readers’ Independence and Choice Act — to stop taxpayer dollars from funding attempts to censor children’s literature, it was the proverbial last straw (March 27, “Joyce Offers Bill to Stop ‘Canceling’ Kids Books”).

Not only did this straw break my back, but also it is being used as a diversion while our democracy is broken. Mr. Joyce isn’t upset about his party’s passing restrictive voting laws to circumvent the popular vote and the will of the people. He is not upset about the mass shootings and the need to pass new gun laws, sensible gun laws that all other democratic, industrialized nations have. He isn’t upset about the unrest in our country and that we have become the Un-united States of America.

Mr. Joyce is upset that a private company decided of its own accord to stop publishing six of over 36 books that it thought portrayed people in ways that were “hurtful or wrong.” This is not cancel culture. This is a company, Dr. Suess Enterprises, making a business decision.

I thought Republicans were for less regulations. Am I to understand Mr. Joyce wants the government to be able to regulate a business decision a corporation makes? No taxpayer dollars were used for this; again, it was a business decision made by a business. This is just another nonsensical thing to get people riled up, a diversion so people won’t pay attention to the important things being done to ruin our great country, the United States of America. A rewriting of Mr. Joyce’s “Oh, the books they will ban” blurb, more succinctly is “Oh, to what lengths will they go.” SHARON WILEY

Penn Hills

A safer country

Instead of public officials and congressional men and women extending their prayers and condolences, they need to be proactive and do something to stop these mass killings. The U.S. Constitution was written in 1788 and confirmed in 1789 with the U.S. military to protect our country. We don’t need or want a militia of citizens carrying guns and assault weapons. We have the U.S. Army and statewide National Guard to protect our citizens.

It’s time to stand up to Congress and the National Rifle Association and make it safe to go to schools, churches, synagogues, movies, grocery stores and shopping centers. It’s time to clean out and expose all the negative states and local officials and make our country safe.

I wonder if any legislator would have a family member or relative shot or killed would they still refuse to support gun control or background checks? It seems they’re only concerned with re-election and themselves. It is long overdue to expose these people who seem to have no decency or caring for other human beings. LAWRENCE ADLER, M.D.

Squirrel Hill