2/9 Letters: Trump abused his position and Tillis wants to give him a free pass

Sen. Thom Tillis

Regarding “Thom Tillis: Why I voted to acquit Trump,” (Feb. 7 Opinion):

Sen. Thom Tillis’ op-ed was revealing in that he chose to emphasize the filtered, incomplete version of the facts. There was much more to delve into than that “perfect phone call.” The American people deserved greater access to all the relevant documents and witnesses.

Tillis and other lawmakers have bought into President Trump’s rhetoric that the impeachment hearings were an unnecessary waste of time and resources. I argue that to ignore an overreach of power and suppression of critical information is too slippery a slope to navigate and establishes a bad precedent.

It should make no difference if abuses of power or obstruction of justice took place on Day 1 or Day 1,001 of an administration, or even with an national election just months away. No president who abused his position deserves a free pass.

Greg Bruhn, Raleigh

Sen. Richard Burr

Sen. Richard Burr explains his not guilty vote for Trump as not wanting to overrule the will of the people. Did he forget that 3 million fewer people voted for Trump than for his opponent? Did he see the polls that showed that the majority of Americans thought that Trump should be removed from office? Burr has ignored the will of the people.

Holly McDonough, Durham

Is that pro-life?

It’s disappointing to hear some state leaders taking such a cavalier attitude toward the infant mortality gap and repeating the same old mantra that the state cannot afford Medicaid expansion.

Yet in every legislative session in the past few years, we’ve seen round after round of tax cuts that have mainly benefited the state’s wealthiest citizens and big business. But there is no money for health initiatives that might save babies’ lives.

What’s even more disappointing is that so many of our legislators and their supporters call themselves pro-life, yet when it come to providing resources to help the lives of born children, especially disadvantaged minority children, our pro-lifers are silent. The message from them seems to be, if you get pregnant you’re going to have that child. As for what happens after birth, it seems pro-lifers could care less if it means spending money.

Walter Weathers, Durham

NC budget impasse

The state budget impasse is a major threat to the health of all of us in eastern North Carolina, not just the poor.

The failure of the legislature and the governor to expand Medicaid, fund our medical school, and support our medical center is having lasting, serious effects on everyone who needs health care.

We are fortunate to have a superbly managed Vidant Health System, but it can’t survive if it has to provide free care to an increasingly aged and sick population when illness is the main cause of bankruptcy, when low salaries make it difficult to recruit and retain nurses, physicians and other personnel.

Yes, health care is complex, a major challenge to our political leaders, but that is why we elect them to address the difficult problems. In health care, neither side has met its responsibilities. The right step would be to have an immediate special session to resolve this life-endangering issue.

As a physician and soldier, I took solemn oaths that rule my actions. It is time for our legislators to do the same, to do their best to restore health care to our citizens.

Dr. Walter J. Pories, Greenville

Retired Army colonel

State of the Union

After the divisive drama that played out during Tuesday’s State of the Union, I have a recommendation. Let’s go back to a written State of the Union message, which would be less political and more informative. Presidents from Jefferson to Taft delivered their messages that way.

Frances G. Dennis, Cary

Disbanding CACs

Regarding “Raleigh ends Citizen Advisory Councils in a bold step to listen better,” (Feb. 5 Editorial):

I agree that Raleigh’s Citizen Advisory Councils did not provide the best forum for community engagement, but at least they were something. Now there is nothing. I am wondering why City Council summarily disbanded them before having a viable alternative.

According to council member Saige Martin, who made the motion to disband, the vision is to “revolutionize our civic engagement process to ensure an inclusionary, participatory, democracy in which residents have multiple opportunities to engage as partners and co-creators of the future of our city.” Easier said than done.

The council has created a huge void with no immediate plan to fill it. What kinds of changes to the city will the council enact while this void exists?

MaryJane Selgrade, Raleigh

Citizen input

Not only was it disheartening that the Raleigh City Council abolished the CACs, but the clandestine way in which they did it was even more discouraging. Evidently this council wants no dissent. The CACs served Raleigh well and their existence is one of the reasons that Raleigh is a desirable place to live.

Alan Tharp, Raleigh