Letters to the editor: Birth control, Medicare, climate
Birth control
I urge Idaho legislators to support initiatives focused on granting six months of birth control access to Idahoans. This is an extremely important issue that affects our local communities for a variety of reasons. For me personally, birth control is a necessity for my body to regulate healthily. Without it, all other functions of life can become more difficult, like attending school. For other folks, birth control is a necessity for life decision making and planning. It is an individual’s choice of whether they want to use birth control and which option works best for them, and all people should have access to that choice. 6 months of birth control is needed in Idaho for rural folks who have to travel long distances to reach their provider. It is needed for busy parents that have to juggle multiple schedules. It is needed for working college students like me who struggle with finding time to complete all their errands. Every person deserves to have control of their body and have equitable access to contraceptive By supporting 6 months of birth control, Idaho can move towards ensuring that every Idahoan’s choices are respected.
McNay Miller, Meridian
Medicare
The Statesman’s Jan. 23 edition carries a story titled: “Trump opens door to cuts in Medicare.” This threat comes in spite of Trump’s 2016 campaign promise not to cut Social Security or Medicare. Voters served by these programs need consider: is this how we will make America great, by forcing the elderly to pay, with their health, for tax cuts given mostly to the wealthy. Younger voters should visualize what a society that neglects its aged population looks like. Is this the kind of community you want to live in? Is it what you want to create for your parents, your grandparents, and eventually for your own future?
Trump, of course, cannot accomplish this by himself. It takes Congress to go along. Unfortunately for Idahoans, our congressional delegation has shown itself all too willing to go along with whatever Trump wants. I would not trust any of them to stand up for Idahoans.
I am not surprised that Trump would break a promise; he has already broken so many. And no one should be surprised, if Trump and his enablers are reelected, to find their hard earned benefits endangered.
Dale M. Merrell, Boise
Climate
While I don’t live in Idaho, I initially mistook your Jan. 23 article, “Has climate change provided a ‘net benefit’ to Idaho? That’s one skeptic’s argument” for one from my home state of Massachusetts. Don’t you want warmer weather? people have asked me. Isn’t it fun to have seventy-degree days in January? Meanwhile, the storms we do have are becoming more violent. Local farmers can’t predict the seasons like they used to and are losing crops and money. As a serious gardener myself, I’m amazed at the changes I’ve seen just in my backyard. The idea that global warming will make things better is simplistic - as Jen Pierce alludes, we’re already moving through the comfortable transition zone where we can enjoy shorts in the winter and into drought seasons, fire seasons, and seasons where freak storms flood us out and wash all the topsoil away. We can’t ignore this or pretend it’s going to be good for us in the end, and in that end, we’re all in the same boat. I hope Idaho sets a good example for my own state and takes action against climate change.
Anna Gooding-Call, Danvers, Massachusetts