We need an EPA chief who respects science

As a voter for whom climate change is the No. 1 issue, I couldn’t be more pleased by your July 9 editorial pages.

In “Pruitt Was the Swamp,” the editorial board calls for a new Environmental Protection Agency administrator who supports the agency’s mission of protecting the environment, respects science and will not muzzle scientists. I would add that he or she should restore to its website the recently deleted information about climate change.

On the opposite page, the “As Others See It” column is an editorial from the Chicago Tribune that advocates a plan by the bipartisan Americans for Carbon Dividends that will collect a fee on carbon dioxide emissions and return it to the public as a dividend. I would support such a policy, though I prefer a slightly different proposal from the Citizens Climate Lobby.

I recommend that my fellow voters and our senators and representatives in Congress familiarize themselves with these policies and support them as they move toward legislation. The future of our nation’s security and the world’s climate depend on it. ALFRED B. (FRED) BORTZ

Monroeville

We welcome your opinion

In regard to the Post-Gazette editorial “Shave ICE?” (July 6), I have a suggestion for PG editorial director Keith Burris: It might be easier just to publish transcripts of Donald Trump’s rally rantings than have the PG editorial board take the time to re-write them in its own words.

Some Democrats want to abolish the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (which didn’t exist until 2003, yet illegal immigrants were still deported). Other Democrats want stricter guidelines in place for ICE so that we don’t have the myriad of problems caused by current ICE policies. We are more interested in manipulating emotions of people than in legislating reasonable immigration reform. We do want open borders, but we want fair and humane treatment of those crossing the border, even if they have to be deported again. We want our country to once again care about refugees, not look for loopholes to get rid of them as fast as possible.

There are ways to enforce the law without separating even the youngest of children from their parents. I don’t ever want to see a story like this again: “14-month-old boy separated from immigrant parents at the border, was returned after 85 days, covered with lice, had apparently not been bathed.” I include that not because I want to “manipulate emotions” but because as a human being with morals, I know that this should never be perpetrated on American soil by Americans prodded by Mr. Trump’s policies toward those coming from certain nations. DODIE SMITH Penn Hills

It is unconscionable that the Trump administration opposed the World Health Assembly’s resolution that promoted and encouraged breastfeeding in all countries around the world and, instead, sided with the $70 billion infant formula industry, ignoring proven evidence that breastfeeding is the best and healthiest choice for all babies. And then, to resort to blackmail by threatening those smaller countries that supported it with retaliatory trade measures and withdrawing military aid is unimaginable.

Adding to this travesty, Russia, a country that kills people for no reason, stepped in to introduce this resolution because it “feel[s] it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries, especially on an issue that is really important for the rest of the world.”

Interestingly, the Trump administration has a habit of choosing corporations over children’s health and welfare: 1) It removed the ban on chlorpyrifos, which can damage children’s brains. 2) It took kids away from their parents. 3) It is advocating using for-profit schools instead of free public schools. 4) It is removing children’s safety net programs.

The Trump administration is making it so hard to stand tall and be proud. TASSIA McCANN

Adams