Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.

 

Let's not publicly fund these despicable & barbarous practices

To The Daily Sun,

Nick Vazzana is a partisan liberal/progressive whose one sided letters I typically read with a grain of salt. However, his "defense" of Planned Parenthood in the face of extremely disturbing videos of Planned Parenthood doctors callously describing the harvesting of fetal tissue from late term abortions is beyond the pale.

Have you no shame, Mr. Vazzana? Are abortions on demand in all circumstances the only possible position that you can accept? I submit that the callous disdain for human DNA tissue regardless of whether it is susceptible to life outside the womb is disgusting and revolting, and cannot be masked by the common cliché of a woman's right to choose.

The country is split fairly evenly over abortion rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has permitted abortion in early stages of pregnancy for over 40 years. However, the technology of today, with ultrasounds and heartbeats, should give a person some hesitancy to terminate a pregnancy, even should a woman choose to do so with her conscience and her doctor. But when the pregnancy advances to the late stages and the fetus is crushed in certain ways to harvest body parts, I submit that many people of good faith draw the line.

It is entirely reasonable to request that taxpayer dollars not be spent on Planned Parenthood because of the processes that have been exposed. Public funding for women's reproductive rights can be made to other organizations who do not engage in such controversial, and I would say despicable and barbarous practices.

Richard R. Gerken

Meredith

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 483

It's been too easy &inexpensive for companies to send jobs overseas

To The Daily Sun,

Thank you, Mr. Rottenecker, for your recent letter about a topic so important and yet so often avoided by most of the presidential candidates: what to do about all those U.S. manufacturing jobs lost overseas and what might be done to keep here those we still have.

Hereʼs a modest proposal which I sent to Sen. Kelly Ayotte a few months ago.

It has been too easy and too inexpensive for the U.S. companies Mr. Rottenecker listed to move their manufacturing operations overseas or to Latin America in search of cheaper labor and/or other costs. As another example, in the 1980s, the Big Three automakers moved much of their manufacturing across the Rio Grande and to other places in Latin America. Tens of thousands of middle-class Americans lost their jobs. Hundreds of companies supplying parts and other goods to the Big Three lost business, and cities like Detroit and Flint, Mich., lost tens of millions of dollars in tax revenues.

Some argue that those cities, the Midwest region, and the American middle class have yet to recover what was lost when the Big Three shut down their American plants. How many millions of dollars had been given to the Big Three in subsidies, tax breaks, and taxpayer-supported infrastructure projects? Not a penny of it had to be repaid by those corporations before they pulled out.

So I urged Sen. Ayotte to sponsor legislation that would do the following whenever an American manufacturing company planned to move their operations overseas:

1. The IRS would do an audit to insure that the company paid the highest corporate tax rate (currently 39 percent) for the year prior to their exit. By this law, the company would forfeit the right to claim any exemptions or to pay a lower rate.

2. The dollar amount of any and all local, state, and federal subsidies, tax breaks and taxpayer-paid beneficial infrastructure would be calculated and presented to the company for repayment in full.

3. Except for profits and other liquid assets, the company would forfeit other property on American soil. This would include manufacturing plant(s), raw materials, every machine, piece of equipment, tools, furniture, and supplies — down to the last roll of toilet paper in the janitorial closet. Such forfeiture is justified because the loss of manufacturing jobs represents a threat to our national security. Too extreme?

Contact a German company like BMW or Siemens and ask if, by law, it can leave the home country.

4. The employees whose jobs are being lost would be given the opportunity and help to organize, assume ownership of the above assets, and to resume production as a cooperative.

Of course, even if my proposal were to become law, I realize that American companies would still leave the country. However, I believe it only right and fair that they should have to pay a cost for doing so.

Mike Dowal

New Hampton

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 472