Roads, words, citizenship

‘Mayor Bob’ would stick

Regarding “Grand Parkway branded in honor of the former mayor” (City/State, Saturday): I suggest we call it “The Mayor Bob.” Branding the Grand Parkway as the “Mayor Bob Lanier Memorial Parkway” will catch on about as well as did the rebranding of a section of FM 1960 as the “Cypress Creek Parkway.”

Referring to it as “The Lanier Parkway” is also forgettable. But a father telling his family “I think I’ll take The Mayor Bob” sounds about right to me. Lee Bachman, Houston

Word games

Regarding “Trump has become GOP obstacle in talks about a secure border as shutdown looms” (City/State, Saturday): Holy cow! Well, here we go. As Yogi Berra would say, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.” President Trump and House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi are entering a period of haggling over the meaning of the word “wall.” It’s unbelievable. However, it’s quite believable. We’ve been here before in 1998 when President Clinton said, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” This clearly demonstrates that indeed things can change in Washington, D.C. They get worse and with very little effort. Milt Heflin, Houston

Keeping off the grid

Regarding “Citizenship question dooms 2020 Census” (Outlook, Monday): Columnist Esther J. Cepeda makes a strong point that anyone, citizen or not, should be wary of participating in the U.S. census. If I have an address, a gender, an income, an occupation, a marital status or an age that a government that cannot be trusted doesn’t like, I should fear it will be used against me whenever the mood strikes.

She gives us many reasons for leaving off the citizenship question, but can’t that same reasoning be applied to all the data respondents provide? Given today’s divisive politics, the less anyone knows about any of us, the better. Jim Proctor, Livingston

DACA bargain

Regarding “Border debate can’t happen under threat” (Outlook, Monday): Undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children and raised for all practical purposes as loyal Americans are currently protected from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

These people arguably should not be punished for the sins of their parents in flaunting our immigration laws. But Democrats seem insistent upon providing them with a path to citizenship. On the other hand, Republicans quake at the thought of their acquiring the right to vote.

By way of compromise, why can’t these folks be protected from the hardship of deportation while maintaining the rule of law regarding acquiring citizenship by granting them permanent resident status? Then if they want the right to vote, they can apply for citizenship by going through existing channels. Tom Moore, Katy

Venezuela consensus

Regarding “Military force in Venezuela is ‘an option,’ Trump says (Nation/World, Monday): It appears as though four of our important government figures — President Trump, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, national security adviser John Bolton and U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo —strongly desire regime change in Venezuela and are hell-bent on achieving it.

Aside from such an effort being none of our business (though oil executives might disagree), just a cursory glance at the history of failures in Iraq, Syria and Libya should deter such a goal.

It makes more sense for our country to be an honest broker to foster negotiation and compromise between the government of Venezuela and the opposition. We can do this along with the United Nations and avoid the violence that would result in tragedies on both sides. Shaun Smith, Houston