Readers write for Sunday, June 27

Tom Emmer is right ("States need veto on federal power," June 20). The federal government continues to grow on a mind-boggling scale and poses a threat to liberty in Minnesota.

But Emmer's proposal to allow Minnesota to opt out of federal laws is going nowhere, as David Lillehaug shows before going overboard by painting Emmer as dumber than a fifth-grader and keeping intellectual company with slaveholders and segregationists ("Then why even call it a union?").

Lillehaug pulls no punches by suggesting that a member of the party of Lincoln is betraying Abe's legacy. Lincoln, however, defended a constitutional order based on a government of limited and enumerated powers that protected the natural rights of all its citizens. People have a right to be free from arbitrary laws that deny them basic liberties and the fruits of their labor.

Therefore, the better approach for Emmer and advocates of limited government is to demand that politicians at all levels abide by Lincoln's principles when enacting or enforcing laws, as well as to demand that judges enforce state and federal constitutional limits on government power. Only then will we truly have the "new birth of freedom" that Emmer seeks and that Lillehaug should believe in.

JASON A. ADKINS, MINNEAPOLIS

• • •

Emmer believes that "Minnesotans should have a say in the laws that govern them." He also says that "our Legislature should have a voice in whether federal laws should be made to apply to Minnesotans." What he means is that he (if he's elected governor) and others in the Legislature should have more say than I do. I already have a say in the laws that govern me, because I vote. I don't want my vote to be diluted by having my voice routed through the Legislature or governor. If Emmer believes things should work as he proposes, he has the right to seek to have the U.S. Constitution amended. I will fight against the change he may seek, but that's my right, too.

• • •

At Emmer's invitation, I took a close look at "encroachment of the federal government into the minutia of our daily lives" over the past week.

I flew on a commercial airline regulated by the feds and got courteous help resolving a boarding issue from some TSA staff. I landed at an airport governed by state and city appointees and rode home inexpensively on a light-rail train overseen by a similar entity.

I dealt with a city inspector regarding some improvements to a property we are selling and waited for the county to review the deed transfer. I attended two games at a ballpark funded by a combination of local public and private interests. I volunteered at a homeless shelter run by a nonprofit that works very closely with the county and rode with kids to visit the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum.

I took an old television, computer printer and used motor oil to a county-run disposal site, where I left them, free of charge.

I paid taxes on beer and fuel to just about everyone.

So much for federal encroachment in my life's minutia. Rep. Emmer must lead a much more adventurous life.

CHARLIE QUIMBY, GOLDEN VALLEY

Many thanks for the column by Nick Coleman on the House of Commons apology on Bloody Sunday offered by British Prime Minister David Cameron ("A brutal error and, finally, an admission," June 20). It was every bit as dramatic as he describes.

However, it would be a mistake to say that the killings by the paratroopers that day were an error or to say that the British have come to terms with their past in Northern Ireland.

MICHAEL J. CUMMINGS, ALBANY, N.Y.

DFL gubernatorial candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher says she knows who she is "fighting for" ("Banking on people power," June 20). Why are politicians so proud and quick to say they are "fighting" for me? The dictionary defines fighting as taking part in a physical struggle or battle. I know most politicians would like to see themselves cast in some mythic and heroic battle posture. But those who have attended the last day of dealmaking at the Legislature know it is clearly neither mythic, heroic or even worth fighting for.

Fighting also implies anger with your opponent, and perhaps the reason so little gets done in our political system is our politicos are always fighting for something or with each other, instead of trying to do what is best for the majority of citizens. Isn't it time we tell our friends running for public office to take their virtual gloves off and start real and meaningful dialogues for the common good?

JAMES V. GAMBONE, ORONO

Once again, Brett Favre is playing the "definite maybe" game. If he were a true star and dedicated football player, he would make a decision and stick to it. It makes him, Coach Brad Childress, the Vikings and the league look ridiculous. It's a good thing not all football players act so selfishly and foolishly.