Readers Write: The new year, vaccines, Rethinking I-94, ethics, the Electoral College

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In honor of former President Jimmy Carter, I offer my top 10 opportunities for our leaders to do the right thing in 2025:

Jim Durda, Minnetonka

As the first case of polio in Martin County, Minn., in 1955, I am appalled at the president-elect’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s positions on many public health issues are anti-science and dangerous to the health of our nation. Childhood vaccines have saved countless lives and prevented the suffering of many children. We need a strong leader to continue to endorse these lifesaving vaccines. We have many respected scientists in our great country who are qualified candidates for this critical position. Mr. Kennedy is not among them. He is not qualified — just ask his family.

I did not vote for the president-elect as he did not meet my standards for a qualified candidate based on his personal history. But he was elected, so now we as citizens need to assist him in placing qualified people to work with him to run our great nation. So far, he needs a lot of help so I would encourage everyone to assist him by providing thoughtful suggestions on experienced and qualified staff. Contact your senators and ask for qualified appointments.

Donald Post, Apple Valley

I was disappointed to learn that MnDOT plans to remove the boulevard conversion options (called at-grade A and B) from further consideration in the “Rethinking I-94″ process in St. Paul and Minneapolis (“MnDOT: Keep I-94 a freeway, scrap parkway,” Dec. 21). It’s a perfect opportunity to enhance the livability of Minneapolis and St. Paul rather than to continue the harmful impacts of an unnecessary highway through the center of the Twin Cities.

The boulevard options have many potential benefits, including reconnected neighborhoods, reduced pollution, improved transportation options and new land for businesses, parks and affordable homes. They also have broad community support. The at-grade options scored most favorably in MnDOT’s community survey. The City Councils of Minneapolis and St. Paul have also passed unanimous resolutions that demanded that MnDOT continue to study innovative alternatives. MnDOT should not prevent our community from considering these options!

I urge all officials involved to support the continued study of the at-grade A and at-grade B options in the next phase of the Rethinking I-94 project. If MnDOT moves forward with removing these options at this stage, municipal consent for the project should be denied and state funding for the project should not be granted.

Arlene Mathison, Minneapolis

The writer is a volunteer for Elders Climate Action - Twin Cities and formerly worked at the University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies.

Several letter writers in the Dec. 27 print edition of the Minnesota Star Tribune castigated Rep. Michelle Fischbach for voting to block release of the House ethics report on Matt Gaetz (”We will remember this,” Readers Write). Some suggested that voters in her district hold her accountable. While I wholeheartedly agree, I’m afraid the writers’ sentiments reflect the wishful thinking of times past when people actually cared about that sort of thing. The Republican presidential nominating process and, ultimately, the presidential election demonstrated clearly that honor and character are simply not important to a significant segment of the voting public. Donald Trump won in Fischbach’s congressional district by 36 percentage points. As a sad reflection of current times, it seems highly unlikely that Rep. Fischbach will suffer any repercussions for attempting to shield the deviant Gaetz.

Doug Norris, Brooklyn Park

A pair of Dec. 26 letters assert that eliminating the Electoral College and moving to a popular vote model would be a disadvantage to rural voters (”Rural voters need the Electoral College,” Readers Write).

But the latest election directly contradicts this idea. Kamala Harris dominated voting in urban areas but Donald Trump won the popular vote. Electoral College defenders often treat different areas of the country as monolithic. The reality is that while the parties are stronger in different parts of the country, there are many Democrats in rural areas and many Republicans in urban areas. Trump won because he narrowed the gap in urban areas while running strong in rural ones.

Beyond this, one also has to wonder: Why is it better to have a system that is an advantage for rural areas versus urban areas? There often seems to be an idea that rural areas are inherently more virtuous or patriotic than urban areas and that’s simply not the case. There are good and bad people across the country. Every vote should count equally, no matter where the person lives.

One of the letters said that the Electoral College was created to gain support from the rural South who feared “bullying” by the industrialized North. This is a very dubious assessment. At the time of the American Revolution the North was not highly industrialized and was still relatively agrarian. Though historians are split, a better explanation is that the South fought for the Electoral College because much of their population was enslaved people. Indeed, the Electoral College used the same methodology as was used in the composition of the House of Representatives, counting slaves as three-fifths of a person. One can argue if this was the true reason for the Electoral College, but it is undeniable that four of the first five presidents were slave-owning Southerners.

Craig Hewitt, Crystal