LET­TERS TO THE ED­I­TOR

The Kansas City Star - - Opinion -

A pick with bounce

I must ob­ject to the Star’s NCAA bracket pro­jec­tions. (March 16, 1B, “We un­veil our own March Mad­ness bracket”) Blair Kerkhoff and the sports staff picked New Mex­ico State to win the Western Ath­letic Con­fer­ence tour­na­ment and ad­vance to the NCAA Tour­na­ment.

Was The Star not fol­low­ing our city’s team, the Univer­sity of Mis­souriKansa­s City Kan­ga­roos? Is The Star not aware that the Kan­ga­roos were on a hot streak? Did The Star for­get the lead­er­ship of UMKC’s se­niors and the over­all prow­ess of the team?

This would have been the year of the Roos!

- Jim Walsh, Over­land Park

Stay the course

An open let­ter to U.S. gov­er­nors, sec­re­taries of state and other elec­tion of­fi­cials:

Many states have taken ac­tion dur­ing this pan­demic. There have been quar­an­tines and closed busi­nesses, and in many states pri­mary elec­tions are be­ing post­poned. I am con­cerned about the prece­dent of the de­lay of these elec­tions.

The United States has over­come many things — war, drought, re­ces­sions and de­pres­sions — all while main­tain­ing a thriv­ing repub­li­can democ­racy with the elec­tions re­quired of it. The coun­try held elec­tions while the na­tion was split in two dur­ing the Civil War. The threat of COVID-19 does not reach the same level as the Civil War.

This is not the first time the na­tion has dealt with a pan­demic in a ma­jor elec­tion year. The United States held midterm elec­tions dur­ing the 1918 Span­ish flu out­break.

I im­plore you to take pre­cau­tions, but do not can­cel or post­pone elec­tions, be­cause that could lead to the degra­da­tion of all our na­tion’s elec­tions.

- Kil­lian Becker, Kansas City

Keep feed­ing them

Lunches could be dis­trib­uted from school buses dur­ing the school shut­down for the coron­avirus pan­demic. Con­tin­u­ing to pro­duce lunches and de­liv­er­ing them from buses (or other ve­hi­cles) would pro­vide work for school kitchen work­ers and for the bus driv­ers.

This would be one way to get meals to chil­dren who de­pend on school lunches for good health.

- Doyle E. Yeater, Ray­more

Tak­ing ad­van­tage

Sun­day’s story “On­line sellers find ac­counts sus­pended af­ter clean­ing out store shelves” should have been on the front page in­stead of 12A. It should be a felony to prof­i­teer in these sit­u­a­tions. Peo­ple like this make Sen. Bernie San­ders look bet­ter all the time.

What hap­pened to the ex­cess prof­its tax we had back in the 1950s? The last one ex­pired just af­ter Pres­i­dent Dwight Eisen­hower was elected, I be­lieve.

- Ge­orge Hook, Lee’s Sum­mit

Fu­ture at­ti­tude

Here’s a sil­ver lin­ing among this chaos: Every no­tice, alert, an­nounce­ment and ad­vi­sory that we have re­ceived from busi­nesses and gov­ern­ments be­gins with the claim that our health and safety (along with their team mem­bers’, of course) are their first pri­or­i­ties.

I re­call pre­vi­ous in­stances when I didn’t get a sense that was the case.

Af­ter this has passed, we’re go­ing to need each other like never be­fore. Maybe that ap­proach will re­main.

- David Burger, Lenexa

If we pay out ...

Be­fore our gov­ern­ment gives $1,000 or $2,000 to each per­son or fam­ily as has been pro­posed, we should con­sider that not ev­ery­one wants or needs money to live dur­ing the COVID-19 emer­gency, while lots of other peo­ple may need more than is pro­posed.

Here are my sug­ges­tions:

As Italy has done,

● sus­pend rent, mort­gage and other bill pay­ments for peo­ple without in­come un­til the cri­sis passes.

Ex­clude So­cial Se­cu­rity ● ben­e­fi­cia­ries and peo­ple re­ceiv­ing gov­ern­ment pen­sions who do not work or are not seek­ing work.

Ex­clude peo­ple who

● are work­ing at home or else­where for pay and whose in­comes have not been cut.

Ex­clude pay­ments to, ● and raise taxes on, sin­gles or cou­ples whose net in­come for 2019 was at or above $300,000.

Ex­clude peo­ple with

● net in­comes in 2019 at or above $100,000. Hard­ship ap­pli­ca­tions could be con­sid­ered for those who do not have cur­rent in­come or have ex­tra­or­di­nary med­i­cal ex­penses.

Ask ci­ti­zens if they

● want a dis­tri­bu­tion be­fore send­ing one. The money not needed could be used to in­crease pay­ments to those who do need it.

Dis­trib­ute any money ● in more than one pay­ment.

- Jen­nifer Ran­dle, Over­land Park

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.