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

•••

The Star Tribune Editorial Board acknowledges that nonprofits "still have to run sound businesses" but nevertheless wants the state attorney general and state legislators to investigate hospital billing practices after it was reported that Allina refused to provide nonemergency treatment for patients with $4,500 or more in medical debt ("Allina billing practices should spur probe," editorial, June 12).

It is possible to feel sympathy for those who are having trouble paying their debts and at the same time recognize that hospitals, even nonprofits, have to get paid for the services they provide, or they go out of business.

I see no benefit to be gained from an investigation. The hospitals are doing what they have to do to operate responsibly. What would the Editorial Board recommend as a better approach? Would it force hospitals to provide free health care to those who don't pay their bills? Under that system, a lot more people are going to find a way to be unable to pay.

James Brandt, New Brighton

•••

Peggy Joyce Rolloff, St. Paul

Opinion editor's note: Allina announced June 10 it was pausing its practice of denying nonemergency care to patients with unpaid bills.

In reading Stephen Young's column in Wednesday's Star Tribune, I kept waiting for the writer to reveal the sarcasm and irony in his words ("The beginning of the end for the American republic?" Opinion Exchange). For was it Merrick Garland who cried "Havoc!" and loosed the dogs of lawlessness, or was it the Jan.-6-will-be-wild guy? And for the record, no modern historian regards Shakespeare's plays as reliable witness to the events of antiquity.

James Watson, Maplewood

•••

Like all others who take such a line, he avoids any mention of the evidence alleged within the indictment or its source, and with unintended comedic effect seeks to redirect our attention to ancient Rome as depicted by Shakespeare. Perhaps just a bit off the subject?

And who are the so-called "ethical capitalists" of the Caux Round Table for whom he claims to speak? Is it truly more than just Young alone who sees the defendant as a last stand for virtue?

Those familiar with legal ethics know that prosecutors are expected to administer criminal justice fairly. So it would have been unethical not to seek charges against Trump given prior prosecutions of others who have committed willfully defiant acts that are both against the law as written and could jeopardize national security.

Fortunately, the opposite of his conclusion is understood by an infinitely larger roundtable of virtuous and ethical citizens: The great risk is that the republic falls with Trump, not against him.

Michael Friedman, Minneapolis

•••

If constitutional law attorney Marshall H. Tanick wants to make a case for absolving America's Donald Trump malady, he might first consider the word "law" within his personal description? ("A solution to the Trump saga? Try the Agnew angle," Opinion Exchange, June 14) And the law, in several pending cases against Trump, in my seasoned opinion, should play out to its multiple conclusions, rather than Tanick's suggestion: the Agnew "get out of jail free" card, agreeing to give up running or retaining office.

Two simple reasons for following court actions to their conclusion. For my generation, Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew poisoned aspects of our democracy, ignoring laws and souring many of us to the system of privilege supporting the wealthy and powerful. A third alleged criminal, our chronic liar, would simply motor-mouth onward, condemning the judicial system as corrupt after his exoneration, deal or pardon, and then head back to the golf course — in triumph.

The second more obvious reason: Trump lost the election of 2020 and has an ever-shrinking base of support. Tanick should know in a democracy that "we the people" must be allowed to decide who will represent us in the highest office. Despite Tanick's fear that Trump might win in 2024, let that election stand as the current definition — and perhaps chronic condition — of "we the people" in a faltering democracy.

Steve Watson, Minneapolis

A June 14 letter writer stated that he believes Trump caused much of the current situation himself and that he will be found guilty of at least one charge against him.

After much rambling off-topic, he then illogically concluded that Trump will be re-elected and pardon himself. "That will be justice, finally, for Trump against all the folks who are against him simply out of hate."

Those folks would "hate" anyone who pledges that "no one will be above the law" regarding protection of classified information and then allegedly hides classified documents in his own bathroom and lies about it.

Sally Thomas, Edina

The headline on Tuesday read that billions of dollars of COVID relief funds were stolen or wasted ("Billions in COVID aid stolen, wasted"). Sadly, I was not surprised. Not surprised because the government is notoriously bad at handling money. Inept when it comes to collecting revenue (our taxes). Careless when spending money and handing out benefits. That's half of the problem.

John Crea, St. Paul

The June 14 column on Minneapolis schools' declining enrollment raises the prospect of closing schools and recaps a similar period in the 1970s and '80s ("Mpls. schools face a tough future"). The affordable housing shortage is another local issue frequently in the news, and a side effect of that '70s to '80s period was the conversion of unused school buildings into apartments. In 1979, Minneapolis' Whittier School, built in 1903, was converted to affordable apartments by nonprofit developer PRG. These Whittier apartments still offer stable housing in the city today.

Losing schools is a blow, but reusing the land and buildings to address another community need is a strategy leaders should consider.