Editor’s note: Here’s some of what’s on the minds of The Daily Signal’s audience, straight out of the ol’ inbox. Please don’t neglect to write us at firstname.lastname@example.org.—Ken McIntyre
Dear Daily Signal: As one of the principal organizers of the defeat of Washington state’s “comprehensive sexual health education bill” in 2018, I am writing to thank you for Michael King’s commentary about Massachusetts, “In a Blue State, Parents Beat Planned Parenthood’s Sex Ed Push.”
This “comprehensive” sex ed bill will be up again in Washington (backed by Planned Parenthood and our state superintendent of education), so I appreciate The Daily Signal’s covering the efforts in Massachusetts.
I founded the Washington Women’s Network (now called the Network-WA), a women’s advocacy organization focused on defeating Planned Parenthood’s legislative initiatives (and others threatening conscience rights and the safety of women and children).
We are the only group that successfully defeated anything directly related to abortion in our now all-Democrat state, and were one of the three principal organizers of the effort defeating the sex ed bill last year.
The Slavic church communities, the Family Policy Institute of Washington, and the Network were the three organizers that turned out a massive crowd of constituents. We also “branded” the opposition and prepared first-rate professional testimony, all from women.
Many thanks for raising the profile of this fight.—Peggy O’Ban, Tacoma, Wash.
Student Debt and Higher Education
Dear Daily Signal: Mary Clare Amselem writes in her commentary article about student loan costs and how taxpayers will be liable for the money (“More Evidence Emerges That Federal Government Is Funding Worthless College Degrees”).
In my opinion, the main issue is overlooked or left out on purpose. The educational institutions in our country have created for themselves a very lucrative welfare system.
They get rich charging outrageous fees that obviously have no market value and then have figured out a way to stick the taxpayer with the bill. The story is: Why don’t educational institutions have to follow the free market system like everyone else?
The professors threaten to leave the country? Let them leave. Let the institutions collapse under their own weight. They are nothing but giant trees that look good on the outside but are rotten to the core inside. Let them topple.
We are actually paying for our children to be trained out of the American system by progressive Marxists.—Dan Philabaum
I recently enjoyed Daniel Davis’s podcast interview with author Richard Vedder on a topic that normally doesn’t get the in-depth discussion you gave it (“The Unintended Consequences of Student Loans”). Most just talk about student debt and how we can give more money to a failing system so colleges can raise their prices.
I graduated high school in Billings, Montana, in 1962. My dad was a truck driver and I was first in my family to graduate college. We had two colleges in town, Eastern Montana and the private school Rocky Mountain.
Eastern charged about $90 a quarter and Rocky $300 a semester. A job for teens paid about a dollar an hour. Do the math. College was affordable for everyone.
When my own four children went to college, we had the Financial Aid Form that basically rewarded colleges: Charge what you want and we’ll find a way with grants and loans to make up the difference.
Government and more money are not the answer.—Bob Shillingstad, Hayden, Idaho
Regarding Walter Williams’ column, “Fraud in Higher Education,” many factors are at work in the degradation of a college-level education, and in K-12 education as well, for that matter.
From the corruptions of our national moral character to the self interests of educators whose unions conspire in collaboration with the FDE, educators have kidnapped American youth and now hold them ransom for personal gain and political leverage.
But what is the primary mechanism that liberal agents within the educational establishment depend upon to maintain their strangle hold on the American mind?
It’s quite simple, really. Take away the public financing of higher education. Privatize our colleges and universities and require students and their families to pay “out of pocket” for every course taken.
Suddenly, both parents and students would refuse to pay for what Professor Williams correctly labels “nonsense courses.” As long as someone else is paying the tab, who cares if there is no pea under the shells?—George Davis
The Road to Socialized Medicine
Dear Daily Signal: I’m a recent subscriber and just wanted to let you know that it is so refreshing to hear the truth and to know what is really happening, not having to endure the biased opinions of the left-wing media.
I am an American currently living in Canada under socialized medicine, and believe me, everything you’ve written about it is absolutely true.
Our taxes are sky-high (13% sales tax). Many people cannot find a family doctor who will treat them, and as a result our emergency rooms are jammed and even some of those who should be admitted are not because of lack of space.
It is popularly known as hallway medicine. People wait months to visit a specialist and for some specialists whose treatments are not considered “urgent,” such as orthopedic assessment, the waiting time can be a year. One usually waits several months to obtain an MRI scan.
Some of the services that were covered in years past no longer are covered, and patients must pay out of pocket. Some patients who are very ill travel to America or elsewhere, if they can afford it, to receive treatment. Understandably, many doctors are very frustrated.
I am grateful for the medical care that I do receive, and, thankfully, I enjoy good health. But my advice to America is: Don’t go down the road to socialized medicine.—Sherry Small, Canada
On Cutting Government Spending
Dear Daily Signal: Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, sounds great on your podcast on cutting federal spending, but I’ve heard this theme for decades (“Sen. Joni Ernst Wants to Cut Absurd Washington Spending”).
The only way to break the cycle is to mandate 5% spending cuts by every government department. No exceptions. Then you continue this until you have a balanced budget. Otherwise the deficit growth eventually will paralyze our country.—George Radford
Given the difficulty of reducing the Washington swamp, and federal employees’ rights under the Civil Service Act and government unions, reducing the size of government is nearly impossible.
It just keeps growing. I would think this could change very quickly, though.
Start to move the departments out of Washington to venues that are lower cost and not attractive to some in the Deep State. Places like the Dakotas and upper Michigan.
Moving these departments will be good for those local economies. A lot of older employees would drop out, allowing for smaller bureaucracy, better work ethics, and lower costs.
This would be great for the Environmental Protection Agency, Education Department, Energy Department, and others. Small offices could be kept in Washington. This would clean the swamp.
The government would run better and cheaper. Some government employees would find other employment, and today there is a need for qualified workers.
But these workers actually would have to go to work and be productive, a change in some habits.—Irwin Gross
This and That
Dear Daily Signal: I want President Trump to stay in power regardless. He has been very good on the issues that I think matter most, and those are the promoting, through his governing, of the moral and spiritual health of our society.
But I would like some clarity on something that I don’t think has been provided yet. Did Trump really ask Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden? That would look bad. And, if true, what are the good reasons to ask for that announcement?
Asking to do the investigation is fine, but asking for the announcement of it is different. But anyway, I wouldn’t turn him out of office for that.—Kent Veazey, Lake Charles, La.
Since its inception, the United Nations has wanted three things: an international court, a standing army, and the ability to tax the United States (“Greta Thunberg Is the Perfect Hero for an Unserious Time”).
Climate change, or rather the computer-generated model of climate change based on faulty data, is the U.N.’s current attempt to tax Americans, then the whole world.
Another attempt was the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST, wherein the atheistic U.N. would own all the mineral rights under the seas and the ability to charge any ship for sailing their seas, which are God’s seas.
Greta Thunberg may be a 17-year-old genius who has Asperger’s syndrome, but we shouldn’t pay one thin dime for countering climate change, not one penny.—Mary DeVoe
I am a retired college professor of sociology, social work, and psychology who is proud to have taught at West Virginia University, Slippery Rock University, and SUNY-Brockport.
I have become a “liberal/progressive” Republican, and I want people to know why.
1. Too many national Democrats who are women come across to me as being “anti-men” and as disliking men. Men’s lives matter too.
2. Research indicates that by around 2030 over 50% of the U.S. will be “nonwhite.” Too many national Democrats have been going overboard and are pandering in a big way to get the votes of all minority groups, including the future votes of legal and illegal immigrants. Their love affair with illegal immigrants is really all about wanting to get their votes one day. They really don’t care about these people as human beings.
3. Too many national Democrats come across as being anti-business.
4. Too many national Democrats no longer are prioritizing the economic and financial needs and struggles of our lower and middle classes, as well as our poor, our near-poor, and our senior citizens.
They no longer are fighting for our federal government to do more to help these at-risk groups. They no longer have their backs. I miss the liberal Democrats of the 1960s, who championed and fought harder for these at-risk Americans.—Stewart B. Epstein, Rochester, N.Y.
How Are We Doing?
Dear Daily Signal: Maybe I’m getting priggish in my old age, but I’m going to stop reading/taking The Daily Signal.
Looking back on a life that includes a profuse use of profanity, overuse of alcohol, etc., I have come to a point where I’m choosy about what I read.
And I’m just plain weary of reading the distasteful trash I come across in the comments I read below the articles in The Daily Signal. I appreciate the articles, but not enough to let you track dirt into my mind.—John Anderson
Editor’s note: Thanks for writing, John. Although we lack the resources to monitor all comments, we are more than happy to scrutinize those identified by our audience and to ban offenders as appropriate. We hope you’ll stick with us as we grapple with this issue.
I look forward to reading my e-mail from The Daily Signal. Thank you very much; it’s a GRR8 (great, LOL) way to stay informed. You’re the first “mail” I read.
Please keep doing what you’re doing. It is so much more informative than TV news. Thank you.—Rosalyn Wheelock
Thank you for your precise, informative Morning Bell email. I’m from Brazil and our media is also dominated by Soros lackeys, both when reporting international and local news.
Your daily bulletins are one of the resources I use to see “the other side of the coin.” Actually, to see a coin that is not counterfeit.
I especially appreciate the concise, precise, and clear way you express yourselves, which sounds almost “Portuguese” to my Brazilian ears. —José Carlos Solimeo, Brazil
Doing great! Thank you for news that’s relevant and sensible. I also appreciate your perspective on events.
I’m glad I discovered you guys. Keep it up, and watch your 6. We are dealing with unstable people here.—Tim Baran, Cheektowaga, N.Y.