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

•••

It has been said that the true strength of a civilization is measured by how it cares for those most in need of support. If that's the case, we're in trouble. The governor's budget proposals threaten to cut vital services for people with disabilities, without so much as a conversation with the disability community. The idea that cuts to users will fix problems created by fraud and abuse by providers is misguided, especially when it's the users of these systems who are most harmed by the very waste and inefficiency the state seeks to address.

Making decisions without offering a seat at the table to those most impacted is a recipe for disaster. The disability community is ready to collaborate on finding real savings — if we're included in the conversation. How much is spent on court costs and appeals fighting with families trying to secure special education services or trying to get coverage for a piece of adaptive equipment? There's no shortage of ineffective programs that isolate, segregate and exclude; let's start there.

Gov. Tim Walz, we're still waiting for the call. Let's work together to find solutions that protect Minnesotans with disabilities, not cut the thin thread so many of our families are hanging on to.

Fatima Molas, Delia Samuel, Rufo Jiru and Maren Christenson Hofer

The writers are part of the Multicultural Autism Action Network.


•••


Republican Senate leader Mark Johnson decried Gov. Walz's budget as full of "budgeting tricks" ("Walz proposes cuts in sales tax, spending," Jan. 17). I have to wonder if Sen. Johnson would have similarly pilloried Tim Pawlenty's 2005 budget, wherein the former governor labored to disguise a 75-cents-per-pack cigarette tax increase by labeling it as a "health impact fee." It would be refreshing if the Senate leader did not treat voters as if we were toddlers who cannot remember anything beyond the last five minutes of our history.

Jim Stemper, Maplewood


PRESIDENT TRUMP

Let's look at the numbers

I read with interest the Jan. 21 letter "We're ready for a change" and couldn't help but think of the old Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcast media to present issues of public importance in a manner reflecting differing viewpoints. Unfortunately, it was abolished in 1987 during the Reagan administration; arguably contributing to our free fall toward "alternative facts."

As someone who spent over 35 years in higher education, where attribution — that is, the citation of source materials — is an ethical cornerstone, I was particularly interested in the writer's criticism of the Biden-Harris administration; criticism that left readers to wonder about the source materials and their accuracy.

For example, it was stated that mortgage rates have increased from "near zero before President Biden" to current levels. By simply Googling, I was lead to a 2024 Mortgage Reports article that states: "Rates plummeted in 2020 and 2021 in response to the Coronavirus pandemic. By July 2020, the 30-year fixed rate fell below 3% for the first time. And it kept falling to a new record low of just 2.65% in January 2021. The average mortgage rate for that year was 2.96%." Not "near zero"!

But perhaps the most ironic statement offered by this writer reflected on the Biden-Harris student loan forgiveness initiative, suggesting that 87% of Americans carried the 13% who received help with student loans. Why is this ironic? Well, aside from the obvious fact that the 13% also pay taxes, after Googling information on the impact of Trump's tax cuts, I was immediately directed to a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities that states: "Households with incomes in the top 1 percent will receive an average tax cut of more than $60,000 in 2025, compared to an average tax cut of less than $500 for households in the bottom 60 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center." As such, "As a share of after-tax income, tax cuts at the top — for both households in the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent — are more than triple the total value of the tax cuts received for people with incomes in the bottom 60 percent." So who's supporting whom?

If we're going to go back to the days of the Fairness Doctrine — which I would applaud — let's at least insist on well-researched and properly attributed facts, even if they're sourced back to Fox News.

Dan Haugen, Plymouth


•••


Ah, the mind boggles. A letter actually says "We thought it was time for common sense in government. We set about dumping the hyper-divisiveness, venality and staggering incompetence of the Biden-Harris legacy of failures." Say what? I had to reread that but it still says the same incomprehensible thing. Who has exemplified hyper-divisiveness, venality and staggering incompetence more than Donald Trump? He's practically got a patent on all three, and will probably be pushing gold spray-painted versions of them in his next shipment of "autographed" Chinese merchandise.

Steve Hoffmann, Anoka


HEADLINES

Golden Age?

I understand this paper's need to sit on the fence so as to not lose subscribers, either blue or red. But they should have tweaked the front-page Jan. 21 headline from "GOLDEN AGE" to "GOLDEN AGE?"

Neil Fagerhaugh, Hugo


•••


What an unfortunate and misleading pull quote dominating the front page of Tuesday's paper. Yes, I know the new president made this claim during his inauguration, but from the full body of his remarks and actions during the day, it's clear that things will be far from golden for most of us. The list is too long for this letter, but suffice it to say that anyone who cares about the impact of climate change, equity for women and people of color, worldwide health issues, lowered drug prices and a federal workforce removed from partisanship have nothing to celebrate, not to mention those who believe in jury-determined consequences for those who commit violence in an effort to undermine our democracy. Soon, only the billionaires will be celebrating as their wealth and power continue to grow. Students of history will understand what this return to the Gilded Age holds in store for our nation, its people and its reputation around the world. I grieve for all those who will suffer in the months and years ahead.

Cyndy Crist, St. Paul


•••


President Trump says we are entering a "golden age." The assembly of billionaires behind him at the inauguration illustrates that this will be an age when he who has the gold rules.

Paul Bloom, St. Paul


•••


I was disappointed to see the bold headline Tuesday morning, "GOLDEN AGE," as if good things for all are around the corner. It was followed by articles on the front page and the editorial page calling what is coming anything but golden. Trump used the words "golden age," but for whom? Not any of us who are not millionaires and CEOs. His speech, with its hostile tone, was really a statement that most of us will not benefit with the Republicans in charge and Trump in the White House. We will suffer: higher prices, citizenships challenged, our environment threatened, many laws ignored, compassion for regular folks ignored. A golden age is not ahead for most of us. Please be more thoughtful with your headlines. They send a powerful message each and every day.

Hope Esparolini, Minneapolis


•••


During Trump's inauguration speech, we were told that our country's "golden age" has started. I must disagree — we are in fact heading into a modern version of the Dark Ages where the role of science dwindles, being replaced by a greater adherence to a holy book that claims without evidence that the earth is 6,000 years old. And our leader is a man who thinks he's a king — expecting loyalty and spewing orders.

Mark Brandt, Minneapolis