On Dec. 16, Sen. Amy Klobuchar posted on Instagram: "I'm not scared to take on Big Pharma," implying that America's pharmaceutical companies constitute the Big Bad Wolf. Three days later, the senator posted, "The best way to protect yourself against COVID is the vaccine. And if you haven't yet, get a booster." Am I the only one who sees the contradiction in those two posts? I understand that prescription drug prices in this country are sky-high, and I fully support Klobuchar's proposal to let Medicare negotiate for lower prices. What I do not understand is how Klobuchar failed to explicitly concede that during these past two years of the pandemic, the so-called Big Bad Wolf put everything it had into developing safe vaccines and boosters in record time "at the speed of science" because our lives literally depended on them.

I am not so cynical as to assume that Pfizer, Moderna and other pharma companies worked their tails off solely for the sake of profit. Rather, I assume that they were — and still are — working for the sake of keeping us out of the grave. And I am not so naive as to ignore the fact that the pharma companies stand to make big profits, although that was never a given. It's called capitalism.

Janet Johnson, Minneapolis

Here we go again. The state is projected to have a budget surplus and immediately some folks start screaming, "Give it back!" They claim it is their money, and they want rebates and tax cuts.

When the state is running a deficit, how come these same people never step up and demand to pay a surcharge for state services?

State budgets are not at all like our personal finances. They are exponentially more complicated. We complain when there is a deficit, we complain where there is a surplus, but it is impossible to balance a state budget to the penny.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had intelligent, reasonable state legislators willing to work together examining the role of state government and the entirety of the state budget/taxation process, and then do what is right for the state, not their political futures?

•••

As the governor and legislators prepare to negotiate how our large state surplus will be spent, I'm shocked to learn that one option is not mentioned first and foremost: protecting our children in public schools.

We've become numb (or indifferent) to the nation's youth being wounded and killed on school property. It won't happen at our school; a tornado won't strike our community; we certainly won't get in a serious auto accident. It won't happen to us. So, we learn of another shooting, shake our heads and move on with our lives.

Every shooting is a tragedy that could be prevented with basic security measures in place on the school property, every school day. I was sure funding for the "hardening" of public schools on the state and/or national level would be a priority after the terrible injuries and loss of young lives at Sandy Hook Elementary School. But as in every school shooting, the grieving parents received "thoughts and prayers."

Kent Peterson, Maple Lake

Does Barack Obama deserve credit for a nearly 140% increase in the Dow during his eight years in office? No, that was going to happen regardless of who was president because of the devastatingly poor economy just prior to him taking office. Does George W. Bush deserve to be blamed for the housing collapse and economic downfall in 2007-08? No, that was going to happen regardless of who was president because of the excessive borrowing on homes people could not afford.

The two most powerful factors that determine how our economy is doing are: supply and demand for goods and services, and Federal Reserve monetary policies. The president can stimulate the economy somewhat with massive tax breaks or deficit spending, but these are short-term factors and pale compared to the first two elements.

So let's stop praising one president or blaming another when the economy goes a particular direction. It's popular, but it offers little value in understanding economic outcomes.

Richard Jansen, Cumberland, Wis.

For those angry at Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia for voting against the Build Back Better bill, you may want to keep in mind several facts ("Manchin delivers big blow to Biden bill," Dec. 20).

Second, his extraordinary influence comes from the Senate races the Democratic Party lost in Maine and North Carolina in 2020 — two races it should have won if it weren't for the perception that the Democratic Party was both soft on crime and committed to a huge expansion of government and the higher taxes that would come with it.

Third, Sen. Manchin is from a state that voted for Trump by 40%. He will not be open to a progressive view of government. He has been clear on this for months. You want to overcome his influence? Thank him for giving you control of the Senate, and focus on Senate races in more moderate states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Finally, the United States is not a progressive, left-of-center country. This was proven by last months' election results. And remember Sen. Bernie Sanders lost twice to get the Democratic nomination for President. Set more realistic expectations.

The Democratic Party should focus on inflation, crime, border security and voting rights that prevent states from overturning election results in 2022 and 2024.

Jim Piga, Mendota Heights

Thank you, Sen. Manchin, for the first sensible thought to come out of Washington for over a year. I only wish it could have been Minnesota's senators who made such a thoughtful decision.

Richard Burton, Ramsey

•••

With all the hand-wringing and doomsday predictions after Sen. Manchin scuttled President Joe Biden's agenda, remember we would not be in this place if one — just one — Republican could support the common good of their constituents. The party of "no" leads nowhere.

Mary K. Lund, Minnetonka

Donald A. Newell Jr., Chippewa Falls, Wis.