Letters for June 15, 2017

Vermilion is A-OK

Re “Vermilion, Not Pittsburgh,” by Jeff vonKaenel (Greenlight, June 8):

Jeff’s article, however interesting, paints a terribly bleak picture of a town where the situation has never been so bleak. The reason for the change in politics has more to do with the misrepresentations of reality of the person who became the “idiot in chief.” I believe the politics will change in the future when the dust settles and the realities sink in.

In the meantime Vermilion doesn’t need the great prevaricator for anything. The town was, is and always will be well. Heavy manufacturing was doomed from the start. Times have changed, and Vermilion is actually out in front.

Ron Tarrant

Vermilion, Ohio

Done diligence

Re “Children in debt,” by Matt Kramer (News, May 18):

I want to compliment the SN&R reporters, editors and publishers for their diligence in delivering such significant news and perspective not always available elsewhere. It is so vital to a better informed community and electorate. Thank you for your commitment.

Charlene Jones

Sacramento

All together now

Re “Rogue state,” by Robert Speer (Editor’s note, June 8):

Once again Robert Speer is on the mark in pointing out that we must “make the planet great again.” Faced with global climate change, global pollution and a global economy, national decisions increasingly impact all of the Earth’s peoples. “National sustainability” is an oxymoron. We must keep our eyes on the Earth’s ability to support life. Our national self-interest dictates that we demonstrate concern on a global level. We are all in this together.

Evan Jones

Sacramento

It’s fraud and abuse

Re “Count down,” by Raheem Hosseini (News, May 18):

Interestingly, there is another possible reason for the discrepancy between the actual counts of homeless people versus using the number of people getting a state benefit—fraud/abuse in the benefits program. The workers could be undercounting the actual homeless by 80 percent, or we have fraud/abuse on the CalFresh program of 80 percent.

I tend to think the 80 percent fraud/abuse number is the correct one—just like I believe the number of disabled parking placards is about 80 percent fraud/abuse. How is the CalFresh program audited? The state seems to do a horrible job of auditing all of its other benefits programs.

Bill Bixby

Sacramento