Politicians, stop being an obstacle
To say I am disappointed that the state officials trumped (pun intended) the requirement for face coverings in the city and county jurisdictions would be an understatement. Gov. Ricketts, please follow the science and the advice of the medical professionals in our state. With schools about to open, anything less than mandatory face covering is a dereliction of governing responsibility.
Leonard Sagenbrecht, Omaha
We need police protection
Kristin Wipfler’s letter in the July 31 Public Pulse left me stunned. For her to say that she doesn’t feel safe in the city if she utilizes her First Amendment rights is ludicrous. To describe being arrested after disobeying a lawful order and after having been warned multiple times as being “brutalized” with “military weaponry” is farcical. I was “brutalized” by “military weaponry” in Vietnam. What happened to these protesters was mildly uncomfortable at most. It wasn’t the Bataan Death March. Quit trying to equate standing for a few hours in a hot jail cell as the equivalent of spending seven years in the Hanoi Hilton. So they gave them warm bottled water to drink. Get over it!
I fought for your First Amendment right, Kristin, and I want you to use it, but that doesn’t mean you have the right to have a loud conversation in a movie theater, yell “fire” in a crowded restaurant or walk down the middle of the street blocking traffic and infringing on the rights of other citizens to move about freely, and it certainly doesn’t mean you can disregard a lawful order from the police. If you want to defy authority, expect to get jostled around a little.
As for disbanding the police and spending the money on mental health services, all I can say is “WOW.” If you get a crook busting down your back door intent on rape, robbery or murder, you can call Health and Human Services, but I’m calling the cops. And if this criminal is intent on doing me violence, I expect that cop to do his Chuck Norris routine, not Dr. Spock.
Bruce Sprain, Glenwood, Iowa
Moderate Democrats’ views
Kara Eastman’s percentage of what Americans want (Pulse, Aug. 2) seems to be slightly in error. If these numbers are like current polls in America, they are too high, and if they are a percentage of Democrats they are close but still too high, because most moderate Democrats don’t think like Kara Eastman. Liberal Democrats do think like her.
Mike Dworak, Omaha
A costly anti-abortion bill
It’s deja vu all over again in the Nebraska Legislature. Sen. Suzanne Geist has resurrected her anti-woman, anti-health care bill, LB 814, which would ban a certain type of abortion procedure. This procedure — whose ban has been ruled unconstitutional in 10 other states and cost taxpayers nearly $10 million in plaintiff attorneys’ fees (not counting the cost to the states defending the unconstitutional laws) — is sometimes necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.
But the anti-abortion gang is oblivious to the personal and monetary costs of this unnecessary and burdensome legislation. They continue to be intent on attempting to take away constitutionally guaranteed reproductive rights no matter the consequences to the women and families seeking necessary health care.
The Geist legislation, if signed into law by the anti-abortion Gov. Ricketts, is an undue burden on the woman seeking the abortion and would cost the State of Nebraska hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend in court. It’s ironic that while the Legislature is struggling to find money for important issues like property tax relief and help to businesses impacted by the pandemic, it would even consider such costly and unnecessary legislation as LB 814.
Personal health care decisions should be left to individuals and their doctors, not unqualified politicians in Lincoln.
Randy Moody, Lincoln
A better time to vote
I agree with President Trump. We should delay the upcoming general election — to Saturday, Nov. 7. On Jan. 23, 1845, the 28th Congress passed legislation that selected “the Tuesday after the first Monday in November” as the day on which all states must appoint electors. This antiquated provision was enacted at a time when transportation and communication moved at a horse’s pace and gave rural farmers a day to travel to the county seat to cast their votes after observing the Sabbath on Sunday. What could be more anachronistic 175 years later?
We are one of the few advanced countries that does not vote on a Sunday (most choose this day), a Saturday or a designated national holiday. Why do we hold to an outdated practice that makes it difficult for working citizens to exercise the franchise in person? I am all for voting by mail, but let’s recognize 21st century reality and switch to Saturday or Sunday voting once and for all.
Peter S. Gadzinski, Omaha
Catch the latest in Opinion
Get opinion pieces, letters and editorials sent directly to your inbox weekly!