Readers write: Letters to the editor, March 15, 2017

Murkowski needs to look into
faces of Alaskans at town hall

ADN's recent article about how to contact our congressional delegation included the statement that they generally don't use the town hall format.

My, how times have changed. In past years, Sen. Murkowski hosted town halls around Alaska to criticize the Affordable Care Act and President Obama. She even had props — once wrapping the health care bill in a belt, apparently to illustrate just how dang big and complicated it was.

Now the wind has shifted, and the questions are tougher. Will she vote for (or tacitly approve) the GOP plan to block-grant Medicaid and eliminate health care for thousands of Alaskans? Is she for or against Planned Parenthood?

Last year she opposed a hearing and a vote for Obama's U.S. Supreme Court pick. This year, she explained her approval in committee of President Trump's controversial education czar by saying all presidential nominees deserve a vote. Why the change?

And what exactly does she think of this new president?

With more state work periods scheduled in mid-March and mid-April, I hope Murkowski will come home to hold open town hall meetings. No matter which way the political winds are blowing, she needs to look Alaskans in the eyes.

— Bruce Scandling
Juneau

Conservatives rise to climate challenge with CO2 dividends

In a time of such divided politics, it is refreshing to see Congress working together across party lines to address one of the biggest issues facing our generation. The Climate Solutions Caucus is a group composed of 14 Republicans and 14 Democrats, working together to find solutions that will work for our nation.

One of the ideas embraced by fiscal conservatives of both parties is putting a price on carbon dioxide through a fee and dividend program. A group of Republican statesmen, including James Baker, George Shultz and Henry Paulson, recently published "The Conservative Case for Carbon Dividends" for the Climate Leadership Council, a policy organization. It's subtitled "How a new climate strategy can strengthen our economy, reduce regulation, help working-class Americans, shrink government and promote national security."

The plan would require fossil fuel companies to pay $40 per ton for the carbon their fuels emit when burned and would return the proceeds as dividends to all Americans, increasing "the disposable income of the majority of Americans while disproportionately helping those struggling to make ends meet." You can read the plan on the council's website at clcouncil.org.

Since Alaska is an energy-producing state, its oil, gas and coal industries would be affected. However, leaders in those industries, including our current secretary of state and former head of Exxon Mobil Corp., Rex Tillerson, have spoken in favor of a carbon tax, because it is much easier to plan for than a regulatory approach.

Individual Alaskans would benefit from the dividends returned by the plan. And all aspects of Alaska — people, economies and ecosystems — would benefit from limiting climate change damage to our permafrost, oceans and coasts.
In the last paragraph of the piece, the authors say, "With the privilege of controlling all branches of the government comes a responsibility to exercise wise leadership on the defining challenges of our era, including global climate change." We should encourage our government at all levels to rise to this challenge.

— Martha Raynolds
Fairbanks

HB 115 makes good sense

I support a modest state income tax like the one proposed in House Bill 115.
Adding state worker jobs for the purpose of collecting a state income tax makes good sense to me. Tax-paying voters are more often engaged in legislative and government decisions about state budget spending and cuts. That's a good thing.
About one-third of Alaska wage earners do not live here and do not fully contribute to our state economy.

Many local governments rely on their existing sales taxes. Adding a state sales tax on top of existing local sales taxes will harm those communities and their governments.

— Sherrell Holtshouser
Anchorage

Protect PFD, tax the income

I was surprised by (and enjoyed) John Havelock's commentary, (ADN, March 8). It was totally out of step with almost all of our executive and legislative branches. Had anyone taken his ideas seriously, I'm sure he'd be running for his life.

I happen to agree with him. It is not really a radical notion that we should pay taxes for things like schools and universities, roads and state buildings, ferries and police; it's the right way to do government. When you buy that ticket, you get a voice. We've shown that citizens who get a free ride tend to resemble spoiled children by acquiring a sense of entitlement. Although our state has some of the highest per capita costs and needs, we are the laggard in paying taxes of any kind. And none of this diminishes the need for oil tax and credits reform.

When we tax ourselves, it should be a progressive tax. Siphoning off part of the dividend or failing to inflation-proof the Permanent Fund is a regressive tax. I agree with Havelock that we should protect the dividend and tax the income.

— Steve Gibson
Homer

'Trumpcare' needs makeover

The effort of Republicans in Congress to promote their health care bill is, to borrow words from a well-known Alaskan, like putting lipstick on a pig.

— Shirley Fraser
Anchorage

Tweets, words confuse voters

On May 18, 2016, my letter to the ADN, appealed to Donald Trump to conduct himself like Dr. Seuss' Horton who said, "I meant what I said, and I said what I meant." I thought it important for a man seeking the Republican nomination to be reminded of those words of wisdom.

Now he is president and his White House spokespersons Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer are appearing on television and print attempting to clarify, interpret and alibi his comments. They remind us he often puts quotation marks around his words, may be kidding, etc.

What?

As our president, it is imperative that he be thoughtful, precise, measured and crystal clear when he speaks. We, as Americans, are often confused by his rants and tweets. Foreign leaders whose first language is not English don't often comprehend intonations, nuances or sarcasm. In this age of instant global messaging. President Trump's lack of language skills and further lack of discipline are extremely dangerous.

— Mary Navitsky
Anchorage

Wisdom for White House

I was told by a very wise woman that this is a "put up or shut up world." If President Trump or his advisers have any reliable information there was "wiretapping" of Trump Tower in 2016 they should be able to bring that information forward or they should take the wise woman's advice and shut up.

— Ann O'Reilly
Anchorage

Choose health care over nukes

I fully support single-payer health care. However, it needs to be taken a step further. Every U.S. citizen deserves the same quality of health care as a U.S. lawmaker. What a concept: Use taxpayer dollars to treat our fellow countrymen as human beings instead of commodities. Rep. Paul Ryan would probably have cardiac arrest just thinking about it.

How are we going pay for this? Well, for starters, instead of investing $1 trillion to revamp a nuclear weapons arsenal that can extinguish life on Earth, many times over, we invest in health care! I'm sure there are trillions more in the bloated federal budget that could be diverted for the same purpose. A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon we are talking about real money.

What's good enough for the U.S. Congress should be just as good for the people they serve.

— Douglas Hope
Anchorage

The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.