So because state Rep. Paul Torkelson and state Sen. Scott Newman say it is a waste of taxpayer dollars, an environmental study exploring the viability of high-speed passenger rail service has been shut down ("GOP legislators halt study of high-speed rail," Jan. 9).
Perhaps money should be spent to send the two gentlemen to parts of Asia and Europe, where they could see world-class travel in action. In China, where I have traveled a dozen times, the growth of high-speed rail has been explosive and countrywide. China's farsighted approach to rail travel, coupled with its relentless approach toward 100 percent electric and hybrid vehicles, demonstrates a deliberate concern for both its populace and the environment.
With more than 24 nonstop daily flights between the Twin Cities and Chicago, plus Greyhound and Megabus, there is no question the demand is there for other options. To shut down even a study of high-speed rail is ridiculous and shortsighted.
As for our "I will build a great wall" president, Donald Trump would be better-served by promoting a grand initiative of countrywide high-speed rail. This is the legacy-maker that he should embrace. Much like President Dwight Eisenhower's initiative to build interstate highways, high-speed rail would be a phenomenal job creator while promoting environmental benefits. A wall is wasteful and superfluous. High-speed rail should be promoted for the benefit of everyone.
Steve Sitkoff, Minneapolis
• • •
What part of "we don't want it" doesn't state Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, understand? Based on his response in the Jan. 9 article, he must not believe Wisconsin officials are serious when they say that. Thankfully, there are responsible legislators who recognize a bad idea and are willing to terminate it. It appears that Democrats have no acumen for critical judgment in this area. Granted, mass transit is their panacea, with no regard to economic viability. Exhibit A is the Southwest light-rail proposal, now projected to easily eclipse $2 billion. The action by Torkelson and Newman is an encouraging development, as federal transit dollars should be prioritized for legitimate projects. They must stop comprising a slush fund to prove Democrats' disdain for the motor vehicle.
Joe Polunc, Cologne
TV POLICIES AT LIFE TIME
What's 'good' for adults might actually be good for kids
Minnesota-based Life Time Fitness recently decided, in the interest of the "health" of its customers, to ban cable news in all of its clubs across the country ("Life Time Fitness tunes out news channels for workouts," Jan. 5, with responses in Readers Write, Jan. 6, 8 and 10). Now if only Life Time cared as much about its customers' children's health.
I've heard from colleagues and friends alike that Life Time's Kids Academy is often a room where a large screen does most of the babysitting, playing movies and TV shows, not even movement/activity-based programs. This despite ample evidence that excessive screen time is unhealthy for our children's development. The updated American Academy of Pediatrics screen-use guidelines in 2016 cite evidence that increased screen time leads to decreased unstructured and creative play, interferes with sleep, increases the risk of obesity, is an indicator of poor executive functioning/performance in school, and can lead to language and speech delay. However, when one colleague of mine asked Life Time's corporate office to take TVs out of her club's Kids Academy, she was told that those decisions are made on a club-by-club basis.
