Republican Party has nowhere to go
Re “Where does the Republican Party go from here?” (Forum, Oct. 16): Doug Elmets is right when he calls on the GOP to de-emphasize its social conservative agenda (although discard would be better), send a message of inclusion rather than exclusion, and defeat candidates who carry destructive messages.
He then, however, resurrects the myth that the party once stood for free enterprise, individual responsibility and limited government, when for decades it actually has stood for big business preferences, worker subservience and enhancement of the government-military-industrial complex.
In a world of climate change, overpopulation and dwindling resources, unfettered capitalism coupled with limited government can only end in planetary disaster. The Republican agenda will create a slow-motion environmental train wreck, and the agenda of most Democrats is only slightly better. We need clearheaded, science-based alternatives.
Dan Davis, Elk Grove
Couple suggestions for Republicans
A while back, I mused that the Republican Party in full decline would end up on blocks in an old barn. That fate has changed. The image now of its demise is a broken body lying behind a dumpster surrounded by instruments of self-destruction.
Lazurus-like reanimation will require a miracle of biblical magnitude. But not likely, as too many supporters declaring the Christian line have themselves assisted in violating the basics of religiosity and the principles of the party of Lincoln.
Just who has the salt to smack down Donald Trump and lead the party back? Though sullied and disgraced come November, unchecked, his rampage continues. Two suggestions: Find some common ground with President Hillary Clinton; and remember that his Achilles’ heel is his alleged wealth, genuine or not, without which he’s another babbling nobody.
Spencer P. Le Gate,
Fear executing the innocent
Re “Life sentences are the new illusion” (Letters, Oct. 16): As Gaston demonstrated in the Disney film “Beauty and the Beast,” appeals to emotion are an effective tool when advocating a position. The tool is so effective that prosecutors can use it to unwittingly convict innocent people in death penalty cases.
Deputy Attorney General Ward Campbell appeals to fear by implying that we need the death penalty because of the risk that life imprisonment might be declared unconstitutional. What he fails to mention is that the Supreme Court is about as likely to find life imprisonment unconstitutional as they are to find that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to personal nuclear weaponry.
My appeal to fear is simpler and far more probable. When a recent study indicates that over 4 percent of those sentenced to death were incorrectly convicted, I am concerned that in our desire to protect people from beasts we will execute the innocent.
Donald D. deRosier,
What’s wrong with cheaper drugs?
Re “How we judge statewide measures on Nov. 8 ballot” (Endorsements, Oct. 16): I don’t know why The Bee’s editorial board is opposed to Proposition 61. Right now, one pill for hepatitis C costs Medicare $1,000 but it costs $1 to make. Proposition 61 states that state agencies can’t pay more for drugs than the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs pays for prescription drugs. Vote yes on Proposition 61.
Donna Ellis, Sacramento
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.