Opinion editor's note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Matt Gaetz has withdrawn his candidacy for the position of attorney general ("Gaetz drops out amid allegations," front page, Nov. 22). But the public information about his sex conduct clearly seems to justify criminal charges against Gaetz. The U.S. Department of Justice apparently chose not to bring criminal charges, though the rationale for that decision has not been disclosed. But why city and state violations have not been charged remains a mystery. It appears that the charges of prostitution and sexual abuse of underage girls are very well documented. And the number of criminal events may be substantial. Surely, there should be prosecutors looking at charging these violations, and it is likely that other defendants were involved.

Thomas Wexler, Edina

The writer is a retired judge.


•••


So the nation will be deprived of the Gaetz attorney general confirmation hearings. Good thing we can still look forward to Donald Trump's inevitable appointment of Homer Simpson to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Anthony Brown, Minneapolis


•••


Bowing to his virtually certain nomination rejection by the U.S. Senate, Gaetz has withdrawn his nomination to be attorney general. It's also virtually certain that Gaetz didn't do so of his own volition, but rather at the behest of President-elect Trump. Trump abhors any sign of weakness and any sign that he's not all powerful, and a Senate rejection of Gaetz would have been just such a display. Still, Gaetz not being the AG is a good thing for the country, whyever and however that came to pass.

Ken Derow, Swarthmore, Pa.


LETTERS

Our inbox is open

First, welcome, Noor Adwan! ("Thoughts from a letters editor at intermission," column, Nov. 22)

And second, I must defend letters editor Elena Neuzil. I wonder if the writer from Woodbury has been keeping track of the names of writers and how often they are published? (Readers Write, Nov. 25) I seldom notice the same name twice, and the views and topics presented seem to be varied. In fact, I've noticed quite the opposite from what the Woodbury writer suggests. Especially with the addition of new contributing voices in commentaries, there seems to be greater variety of contributing writers in the paper. What I take note of are the locations people are writing from, and those locations seem to be expanding.

I give presentations at churches encouraging people to contribute letters to the editor on issues they care about, and I always remind people that the editor can only publish letters they receive — not the ones we write in our heads. So if someone has a gripe about what gets published, they need to submit more letters themselves.

Lisa Wersal, Vadnais Heights


•••


Bravo to the Woodbury letter writer. I also sincerely hope the letters section begins casting a wider net. Reading from the same old pseudo-columnists so often has become tiresome — if I read them at all once I see the names. It may be more time consuming for the editors to comb through for other contributors, but it seems like more in keeping with the spirit of the section.

Stewart Hanson, Excelsior


•••


A recent letter writer complained that "about a dozen writers" dominate the letters section, ostensibly drowning out other perspectives. I would be curious to see his tabulations. I'm a retired researcher/statistician and a bit of a bean counter myself, so let's do the math.

If 12 people were able to publish a letter once a month (an extraordinary feat to accomplish), in 12 months' time, they would have published 144 letters.

How many total letters would have been published in that same period of time? If we calculate seven or eight letters a day (let's say 7.5), times seven days a week, times 52 weeks in the year, that equals 2,730 letters. 144 letters is approximately 5% of those 2,730 letters — hardly an overwhelming amount — with nearly 95% of letters coming from other voices.

I get a letter published now and then myself. I've had two so far this year, and if this letter makes it to print, it will be my third. I submitted about six other letters during the year that were not chosen for publication. From my experience, I would say that getting published 10-12 times a year would require remarkable diligence and timely submissions, though one would still not be a dominating voice on the opinion pages.

Louis Asher, Vadnais Heights


VOTER PARTICIPATION

Reschedule Election Day

Let's change Election Day to the Friday after Thanksgiving. That would solve a few problems at once.

It's been widely argued that Election Day should be a national holiday to better enable as many people as possible to vote in person, but employers have been wary of needing to bear the expense of this additional paid day off. However, the day after Thanksgiving, while not formally a national holiday, is already a day off for many. Given the long-sought benefit of creating a new national holiday to make voting easier, the most painless solution for employers would be to have it on the day when employees' work is likely be the least motivated and efficient anyway.

What about retail workers, you may ask? Well, Black Friday has rightly been criticized for its imposition on Thanksgiving given its early start for shoppers and especially for employees. With the Friday recast as Election Day, stores would be disinclined to maintain their emphasis on this one shopping day, given the competition for media and public attention. They could instead put the third day of the four-day holiday weekend to good use, perhaps designating it as "Super Sale Saturday." It's likely that those fond of the new election results will be in a good spending mood, and those in distress about them will love a distracting day at the mall.

Perhaps most importantly, having the election right after Thanksgiving may also help inspire some American cohesion on the eve of what has become an intensely polarizing event. Our sense of belonging provided by family and friends, and celebrated with a group feast that is unique to American culture in all of its diversity, may emphasize the good will that we should hold toward each other, no matter our perceived differences.

Michael Friedman, Minneapolis


POLITICAL DIVISION

The elephant in the room

Andy Brehm's lengthy Nov. 25 reconciliation piece, "Here's one way we can help heal our divided country," lacks the substance of the problem that is nine years old: no mention of the felon and alleged sexual predator who has laid out plans to bully the nation. Without this, Brehm, the aspiring peacemaker, remains a part of the national problem. No justice, no peace.

Steve Watson, Minneapolis


•••


I agree in principle with Brehm's statement that we shouldn't let political disagreement fracture friendships or otherwise interfere with our interactions with our fellow human beings. But it sure seems odd to hear that advice from someone who supports Trump, the rottenest apple in the barrel when it comes to name-calling, revenge-seeking and encouraging violence against anyone who disagrees with him. More so than any other single actor, Trump is responsible for the climate of hatred and vindictiveness that Brehm laments.

Steve Schild, Falcon Heights


MINNEAPOLIS

We've room for one more

The gentlewoman from Byron, Minn. is very concerned with the Minneapolis City Council, the Third Precinct, Lyft and Uber, and the Minneapolis Labor Standards Board (Readers Write, Nov. 25). My gosh. It is wonderful for someone from so far away to show such great concern in how Minneapolis chooses to govern itself. Might you be moving to the city soon?

Dave Sonsalla, Waconia