I cannot help but be struck by the inconsistent positions taken by the current administration regarding the support for, and enforcement of, the law. In justifying the separation of children from parents at the border, the administration states that this is not an optional policy choice, but is an obligation under the law; it is merely enforcing the law as written and only Congress can make any changes (“Anger Builds Over Trump Border Policy, June 19). In the same edition of the paper, there is an editorial regarding the policy announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions that the Department of Justice will no longer support or defend the provision of the Affordable Care Act that requires insurers to cover pre-existing conditions (“Health Care Flip-Flop: Trump’s Pre-Existing Condition Reversal”).
Apparently, according to Sessions and the president, enforcement of the ACA is optional, but enforcement of the immigration law is mandatory. Until now, I had been unaware that the president and the Department of Justice had the power to selectively and arbitrarily decide which laws are worthy of supporting and enforcing. This is today’s example of the hypocrisy and dishonesty that have come to represent how this administration governs.
Susan Mattson
Grantham
During the six weeks from April 19 to May 31, immigration authorities in Texas took 1,995 children from 1,940 migrant parents facing criminal prosecution for illegally crossing the border.
In defense of this policy, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has quoted St. Paul the apostle, specifically “his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.” But why cite only the words of St. Paul? Christ himself showed great respect for the law when he calmly allowed himself to be tortured and crucified by the authority of the Roman empire, thereby showing that no matter how cruel any law may seem, it must be obeyed.
The present law has a telling Biblical precedent — not in Paul’s letter to the Romans but in the Gospel of Matthew, where we are told that to protect his throne from the newborn King of the Jews, Herod ordered the slaughter of all male infants in Bethlehem, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Jeremiah: “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more” (Matthew 2:16-18).
Of course the children who our own authorities have seized from their mourning and weeping parents, including at least one mother whose nursing infant was reportedly wrenched from her breast, have not been slaughtered. They merely have been traumatized by a separation that may never end and put into cages in Texas where the summer heat now averages 100 degrees. This is our way of telling the world how much we Americans prize both Christian teachings and family values.
James Heffernan
Hanover
What would a successful immigration policy look like? It would be consistent with American values, responsive to our needs and enforceable. Separating children from their parents, denying DACA youngsters a pathway to citizenship and shrinking the number of refugees are not policies consistent with our values. Family values are American values and should apply to people of all skin colors.
Our economy needs immigrants — indeed, it thrives because of immigrants. They grow GDP, pay more in federal taxes than they cost, and while the cost of educating their children is more than low-income immigrants pay in state and local taxes, the multiplier effect of their economic activity is a net fiscal gain locally.
In New Hampshire, immigrant entrepreneurs provide almost 21,000 jobs; in Vermont, almost 7,000 jobs. Immigrants contribute to a healthy replacement rate, a factor needed for economic growth.
Those appalled by the cruel and unethical practices of the current administration do not advocate open borders. Spending $25 billion on a border wall will not improve enforcement. A rational immigration bill that provides for the legal entry of the temporary workers our economy needs is a far better solution.
Illegal immigration became a problem when the Hart-Celler Act of 1965 ended the “bracero” program — a government guest worker program from the 1940s that had permitted millions of Mexicans to work legally in the United States — and failed to provide adequate numbers of temporary visas for the agricultural sector. America needs foreign workers, skilled and unskilled. Recently, some 1 million permanent immigrants were approved, the majority were family-based. A country of more than 325 million can easily absorb that number; there is no need to limit family-based immigration, as the administration proposes. Doing so would weaken our economy and damage our image abroad. But what would we think of ourselves and our ancestors, most of whom were not wealthy, titled English speakers with university degrees?
Evangeline Monroe
Quechee
I am a Democrat and as such I enjoy reading well-documented critiques of President Donald Trump’s close associates. Nonetheless, I was very disappointed that the Valley News chose to reprint what seems to me to be a muckraking article from the New York Daily News on the front page (“Giuliani Denies Alleged Affair With CEO of Woodsville Hospital,” June 13).
That Trump’s personal lawyer may be having an affair is hardly newsworthy. However, to identify his partner in this alleged affair seems to me to be irresponsible and totally unnecessary.
David E. Berlew
Hanover
Please tell me the Valley News has not hired a propagandist from Sinclair Broadcast Group to compose its headlines. On May 31 the lead article was introduced with: “Trump Eyes Reproductive Health Policy: Administration Promotes Changes to Women’s Health.” On June 13 we saw this one: “Summit Yields Hope.”
Way to sugarcoat it.
To reflect what the articles actually said, it would have been more accurate to give them headlines like these: “Trump Eyes Reproduction Policy: Administration Promotes Limits to Women’s Health Options,” and “Summit Yields Uncertainty.”
Otherwise, this is Orwell’s 1984 newspeak come true.
Rebecca Kvam Paquette
Hanover
I understand the need to cut costs to survive in an extremely challenging environment, but was nonetheless disappointed to learn that the Valley News will soon come in a narrower version (“To Our Readers,” June 13). I’ve seen this change destroy other local papers. A different feel, a cheaper look and, more important, less room for news, sports, letters, comics, etc., will all degrade the quality of this fine newspaper.
Peter Guest
Fairlee