Cutting early education

As a former Head Start director and public school administrator, I fear that cutting a billion dollars from the Head Start program and closing the Department of Education will inevitably lead to closing our schools and simply sending our children out into the fields. What sort of nation does this?

Nora Palmer-Gould

Lyme

Why donate to Republicans?

I am writing in response to the recent opinion piece by Bill Hamlen (“All but a few political donations from Dartmouth go to Democrats”; April 23). I think it is an excellent examination of how one can fiddle with numbers and suggest they are evidence of something that isn’t necessarily true.

For example, he emphasizes that his research shows over 97% of political donations “from Dartmouth” go to Democrats. What he does not say is how many individuals that represents, and I would caution readers not to jump to the conclusion (he seems to be hoping you will assume) about the overall political preference of all people working for the college. And let’s be clear: since he singles out and then dismisses custodians and food service workers (as if their dollars don’t count) he is clearly focusing on faculty.

But of even greater importance are the questions he ignores completely. Why are employees of an academic institution, especially one with a tradition of conservatism, so reluctant to give their money to Republicans? Why are people who engage in research, who study economics, history, the arts, sciences, international relations, engineering, languages, area studies, comparative literature, government (the list goes on and on) unwilling to support Republicans running for office? Why are those who teach critical thinking, science, and intellectual inquiry giving their hard earned dollars to Democrats?

The truth is that the Republican Party has abandoned fact-based science and instead promotes misinformation about diseases and public health. They routinely seek to deny basic human rights, stifle voter participation, ban books, give tax benefits to the most wealthy and limit free speech. They have made a mockery of international agreements, attacked bipartisan legislation, and aligned themselves with authoritarian governments. It makes complete sense that educators do not want to see them elected.

And this brings me to my final question. Why is someone, primarily identified as an unsuccessful candidate for office, given so much more space for his musings than the writer of a regular letter to the editor?

Deborah H. Bacon Nelson

Hanover

The writer is chairwoman of the Hanover/Lyme Town Democrats.

Our vaccine-skeptical future

Vaccine-preventable diseases are becoming more common in the U.S. In 2025, there have been more than 800 cases of measles, in a nation that was declared measles free in 2000. Two children have died; a third is under investigation. Given the historical cases-to-death ratio has been 1,000:1, how many more cases have occurred but not been reported? More than 7,000 whooping cough cases have occurred this year. There have been at least 500 deaths due to influenza in North Carolina. Increasingly, people are choosing to delay or forego immunizations.

This trend predates RFK Jr. being named the Secretary of Health and Human Services, but he and his Children’s Health Defense organization were major vaccine deniers prior to and during COVID. From his new bully pulpit he has continued to be a Merchant of Doubt. He endorsed the measles vaccine, but immediately followed it with a strong warning that parents know all there is to know about vaccines (suggesting undescribed dangers); promoted Vitamin A as a cure (no supportive data); said measles has been occurring all the time (no supportive data); and said those who died had underlying illnesses (no supportive data).

In addition to sowing doubts, he has decreased the availability of vetted information, diminished the capacity of the CDC to collect and disseminate data, and cancelled or put behind closed doors formerly public meetings of vaccine advisory groups. This is all from someone who railed against perceived lack of transparency.

Vaccine mandates are under attack. Maybe there are circumstances when risk-based policies make more sense. But such a policy, done correctly, requires time, data and open discussions among scientists, health professionals and the public. I fear, however, that this administration will try to accomplish this through an executive order rather than a more open and inclusive process. If so, resources to support care and education for people damaged by vaccine-preventable diseases will be needed, and short timelines to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. will be necessary to have the iron lungs we will need.

Paul Etkind

Grantham