Better transit options available
Re “Invest tax dollars in roads, not public transportation” (Viewpoints, Feb. 14): I can personally and honestly say that public transportation is one of the worst ways to get around. To this day, I still remember the horrors that I faced when I took the bus to and from school. Most of the time, the buses were late, unclean and unsafe (drug addicts, indecent individuals, etc.).
As a female young adult attending Cosumnes River College, riding public transportation poses many dangers. These days, I seldom take public transportation because of other available options. Gas is cheap, and Uber is just more convenient. At the touch of my fingertips, I have the ability to summon a ride almost instantly. Uber uses comprehensive background checks and offers more privacy for riders.
Personally, I’d rather not deal with all the negative aspects of taking public transportation. Government really can’t compete.
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Sacramento Bee
Alyssa Centeno, Lodi
Overhaul of mass transit needed
More government funding clearly hasn’t made commutes more efficient or safer for riders who use Sacramento Regional Transit. Inadequate policing, infrequent ticket checks and numerous delays have made frequent light-rail users such as myself very concerned about the future of public transportation.
It seems to me that ride-sharing networks such as Uber and Lyft are giving government a hard time. It’s time for government to adapt to these changes by making large-scale overhauls that could attract users with the same qualities that are making them flee to these private sector alternatives.
I don’t believe dissolution of public transportation is the answer. However, California lawmakers and taxpayers should be hesitant to continue subsidizing the flaws of a mostly unreliable public transportation system.
Mehrzad Pashutanizadeh, Folsom
Use qualifications to pick candidate
Re “Clinton and Women Voters” (Forum, The Drawing Board, Feb. 14): People should consider supporting Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination because of her qualifications and what she stands for, and not because of her gender.
Those who say women should vote for Clinton because she’s female are as irrational as those who advocate voting against her because she’s female. The New York Times has said that Clinton is, “one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.” All candidates should be evaluated by their qualifications and their visions for the future of America.
Margaret DeMott-Feldman, Sacramento
Tobacco is worse than marijuana
Re “Marijuana policies undermine health” (Forum, Another View, Feb. 14): The idea that marijuana and tobacco are equally bad for you is ludicrous.
Consider: A tobacco smoker typically smokes a cigarette by himself. For about 15 minutes he continuously has tobacco smoke in his lungs. Not much later he will fire up another cigarette.
Most marijuana smokers will take a quantity of marijuana equivalent to a quarter-inch of a cigarette. This gets put in a pipe or rolled into a small joint. The smoker takes about two or three puffs and is done. Most of it is left unsmoked for later or the next day or next week.
Marijuana does not have the weird chemicals companies put in tobacco, and pot does not contain nicotine. If marijuana is a gateway drug to heroin then so is mother’s milk.
Gabriel Lewin, Davis
His agenda is transparent
Re “Sacramento’s next mayor has a full plate” (Editorials, Feb. 14): The editorial said that the candidates for mayor of Sacramento need to be transparent about their agenda. Darrell Steinberg has been refreshingly transparent about his vision for the city. Almost every day, he can be seen meeting with voters at the farmers markets or at coffee shops, sharing his vision for Sacramento.
The editorial lists homelessness as one of the issues that Steinberg has been vague on. Steinberg’s plan to work on Sacramento’s homelessness crisis is crystal clear. The Bee wrote about Steinberg’s plan a few weeks ago. Steinberg used his relationships within the Capitol to move the Senate to propose a $2 billion bond to build homes for homeless people with mental illnesses.
Mary Ellen Shay, Sacramento
Candidate is clear on policies
The Sacramento Bee’s editorial board urged candidates for mayor to be clear with voters about their agenda. I’ve known Darrell Steinberg for many years and watched as neighbors and congregants approached him with questions on a wide range of issues. Invariably, Steinberg offers a thoughtful, detailed response, clearly stating his vision, his position on an issue and how he arrived at it.
Steinberg is a man who loves public policy and loves to engage with his constituents. He has a long and impeccable record of accomplishments and is a leader who will be transparent, open to new ideas and effective in implementing policies benefiting Sacramento.
Steven Belzer, Sacramento
He has vision for Sacramento
The Bee’s editorial on the mayoral race is right: Sacramento needs a mayor willing to talk with voters and share his vision for our community. Only one candidate fits the bill. Darrell Steinberg is in our community every day, talking with voters, listening to all opinions and engaging in meaningful conversation about Sacramento’s future.
Interested in learning Steinberg’s opinion on Sacramento’s infrastructure? Ask him about it at our downtown farmers market or at his weekly open houses. Steinberg is deservedly developing a reputation for being the most open politician in Sacramento.
Steinberg will bring bold solutions to the challenges facing Sacramento and he is more than willing to share his ideas with the community.
Nadine Westcott, 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.