Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Vote no onpricey Prop. 1
Re: “Newsom’s Prop. 1 for mental health deserves support” (Page A8, Feb. 18).
Sunday’s Mercury News editorial advocates for Proposition 1: “Proposition 1 is pricey. It’s complex. It’s a bold but imperfect approach to managing the state’s worsening mental health crisis.”
After looking at the 68 pages of this proposed law in our Official Voter Information Guide, we beg to differ with this recommendation. Such a complex law saddles the citizens of California with paying approximately $310 million annually to repay the bond. How much money has already been devoted to alleviating the mental health crisis and homeless problem with little tangible result?
We say “Vote No on Proposition 1.” A simpler plan that uses money wisely is needed. The text of this proposed law is far longer than the Constitution of the United States.
Zelek Herman and Jane BuechelPalo Alto
Loss of landlineswould hurt rural areas
Re: “AT&T looks to pull the plug” (Page A1, Feb. 8).
The loss of landline service will be devastating for Californians living in rural areas without access to reliable cellular service.
Here in Monterey County, there are areas of Carmel Valley where cellular service is nonexistent. Likewise, nearly 100% of the Big Sur area has no cellular service and the cost to provide it is enormous and economically unfeasible for cell providers. Landline service is an essential need for these communities.
Finally, VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) for producing emulated dial tone service is not acceptable as it’s based on internet service and the audio quality of VOIP-based calls is inferior to that of regular copper-based landline service.
I urge the PUC to reject AT&T’s application to curtail landline service.
Mark CarbonaroMonterey
Landlines providecrucial redundancy
Re: “AT&T looks to pull the plug” (Page A1, Feb. 8).
I am an emergency medicine pharmacist involved in neighborhood preparedness and Community Emergency Response Team. AT&T should keep landlines for emergency preparedness and response.
While mobile phones provide convenience, they are far from an all-encompassing mode of communication. California has miles of both coastline and mountains where cell phone reception is compromised. Service outages are common in disasters as cell phone towers are taken out of service. As a responder on the state and federal medical disaster teams, I am well aware of these shortcomings.
I urge the California Public Utilities Commission to deny AT&T’s application to discontinue traditional landline phone service. One of the major tenets of emergency preparedness and disaster response plans is redundancy. Do not allow AT&T to remove this redundancy in communication.
Sandra BardasMenlo Park
Gaza, not Israel,needs security buffer
Re: “Analysis shows destruction along Gaza Strip’s border” (Page A4, Feb. 2).
There was an interesting juxtaposition of two articles on Feb. 2 (“Analysis shows destruction along Gaza Strip’s border,” and “Britain may recognize a Palestinian state before a peace deal”) detailing the wanton and devastating destruction that Israel is imposing onto the residents of Gaza.
It is self-evident to any unbiased observer that it is not Israel that needs protection from the Palestinians, it is the residents of Gaza who need protection from Israel. It is understandable that Israel wants to build a security buffer zone, but I would expect it to be built on their side of the border.
Jerry GudemanSanta Clara
Reject Trump’s disdainfor servicemembers
I’d like to say a word to our Republican friends. Before you send in your vote for Donald Trump please consider all the deceased servicemen and women who gave their lives to secure your right to vote for him. They are not “suckers and losers.”
It has been 57 years since I last saw my father. When did you last see yours? Not so long ago, I hope. You could vote for Nikki Haley. At least then we would know that your candidate isn’t a civilly liable rapist. Just a thought.
Robert WahlerSan Jose
Verdict recognizes gunowners’ responsibility
Re: “Jury finds school shooter’s mother guilty of manslaughter” (Page A4, Feb. 7).
The mother of a school shooter in Michigan has been found guilty of manslaughter in the death of four students, and the father will be tried next.
Related Articles
Letters: Best suited | Congressional seat | Garvey website | The right position | Celebrating Pizarro | Best decisions
Letters: Newsom stunt | Straining taxpayers | Interested in Putin | Advertising hypocrisy | Paying their share
Letters: Vote for Green | Oakland government | Transit bill | Trump threat | Send message | Real failure
Letters: Solar is key | Bad actors | A better VP | Trump and courts
Letters: Ignoring roots | Carbon capture | Trust Esteen | Vote for Cabaldon | Marines’ lives
This verdict recognizes that owning a firearm is not merely an individual choice but a potential threat to everyone who lives in the vicinity. It embodies the notion that when personal “rights” conflict with public safety, public safety must come first, as in the banning of secondhand smoke no matter how inconvenient to smokers.
The epidemic of gun violence from which the United States suffers (alone among our peers in the economically developed world) is almost exactly recognizable as “the secondhand smoke” of the Second Amendment. This verdict raises its voice against the “sacrosanct” view of an unrepealable Second Amendment (and its Heller and Bruen interpretations) in favor of the vast majority of Americans’ dream of and desire for — our demand for — a less gun-ridden society.
Don VeithSunnyvale