Readers Write: SNAP benefits abuse, presidential debates, the Twins, the environment

It never ceases to amaze — Republicans expect programs like food stamps that benefit the poor to run flawlessly but consistently look the other way when wealthy individuals and corporations game the system ("500K children would lose free school meals under Trump plan," Aug. 1).

Just because some uptight schmuck decides he or she wants to prove that millionaires can collect food assistance doesn't mean that those who genuinely need such assistance should be made to jump through additional bureaucratic hoops in order to feed themselves and their families.

Suppose there is some minuscule minority of SNAP recipients that might not legitimately qualify for the program — so what? What are they doing with their ill-gotten food — eating it? Big deal! Is that the most pressing injustice currently playing out in the country?

How about a tax cut that blows a $1.9 trillion hole in the national debt and that provides the highest cuts to the wealthiest taxpayers? How about a provision of that same bill that allows a drastically slashed corporate tax rate to continue in perpetuity but sunsets the small benefit available for middle-class taxpayers in 2025? How about the wealthiest U.S. corporations repeatedly paying zero annual taxes?

And, here's the big one: How about a bloated Department of Defense budget that for years was declared "un-auditable"? There's every reason to believe there is lots of real money being wasted there that could be spent providing food, shelter and healthcare to our citizenry rather than being squandered on boondoggles, pork barrel and miscellaneous graft. But both Republicans and Democrats repeatedly turn a blind eye to our nation's most profligate "sacred cow." Maybe it would seem more urgent if the malfeasance directly benefited the poor?

Shame on CNN and the Democratic National Convention for how the recent Democratic debates were presented.

CNN clearly was playing to get ratings from the very beginning by the way it conducted introductions, as if it were Monster Truck event.

Having the debates in front of an audience causes the candidates to form their answers to play for applause, instead of giving well-thought-out ideas. There is no valid reason to have the debates in front of an audience except to get the candidates to play up to applause. The moderators didn't give enough time for policy- or idea- driven answers.

Now of course I understand that media is only as nonpartisan as the companies that own them, so I can't logically expect CNN to have actual journalists, but the DNC has proven again just how out of touch it is with its base by playing to emotions instead of intelligence.

It's as if it is an offshoot of the Republican National Convention and is trying to get the current occupant of the White House elected again.

For many like me, slowing the speed of the Earth's warming has seemed about as possible as Superman reversing its polarity by flying around it in a reverse orbit. Until now. Widely reported around the world, 1 trillion trees planted over the next decade could suck up nearly 830 billion tons of heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. That's about as much carbon pollution as humans have spewed in the past 25 years. Can't be done? Don't tell that to the citizens of Ethiopia, who recently planted 350 million trees in one day.

I implore our elected officials to match the leadership of Ethiopia and make Minnesota a leading voice in a global effort of planting trees to save our planet.

Rising global temperatures are a serious issue, so thanks to the Star Tribune for informing us. But please don't minimize climate change by including pictures of happy people enjoying a swim. Rising temperatures may not seem as dramatic as tornadoes or hurricanes, but the impact on the environment and our way of life will be devastating. It will not be a day at the beach for any of us.

In a recent letter, "Nuclear power alone won't save us" (July 30), the writer correctly asserts that all carbon-free and low-carbon technologies must be developed and deployed as fast as possible if we're going to have any chance at all of escaping climate catastrophe.

With respect to nuclear power, France went nuclear in the 1970s and 1980s. Today French consumers pay almost the lowest price for electricity in Europe. Scientific American reported in 2015 that we could go 100% nuclear globally in 34 years, a bit optimistic in my opinion. But no other technology can scale up that fast globally.

Some analysts argue renewables can never meet more than about 30% of demand because their inherent intermittency will begin to destabilize the grid above that. Maybe that's why fossil fuel companies are voicing support for renewables; in a renewables world, with little or no nuclear, they'll always be around to provide the base load.

We know it takes time, it takes money and it takes political will leading to government action. Maybe that's where we should concentrate our energies. We need the government, all world governments, if we're going to escape disaster. We have the know-how, we have the money. From 2001-2018, we squandered nearly $6 trillion dollars on tax cuts, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. That money could build 1,000 nuclear power plants; it would take about 500 nuclear plants to satisfy electricity demand in the U.S. (we have 98 operating reactors now producing 20% of our electricity).

It's ironic to me that while the Minnesota Twins are exciting and fun to watch for the first time in forever, the TV announcers sound bored as if the Twins were in the midst of another 90-loss season.

Has anyone told the broadcast team that these guys are good? Listen to the home run calls to get the best sample. Other announcers have a dramatic change in inflection when something good happens. These guys act like everything is old hat!

We've begged to have a winning team in this town and now we do! It sure would be nice to match their greatness with a little enthusiasm!