Possible gas tax is immoral
It has come to my attention the Commonwealth is considering a pilot program to charge motorists a “per-mile” fee to replace the current gasoline tax.
If true, I believe that any transition from gasoline taxes to a tax based on mileage traveled to be faulty and to be immoral, for the following reasons:
• The government’s tracking of miles traveled by its constituents is intrusive and a violation of the people’s privacy rights. This concept is magnified all the more if the government uses GPS technology, smart phone applications and/or technical readers at various locations throughout Pennsylvania.
• Many people drive both in and out of the commonwealth’s borders. Thus, the question that remains to be answered is: “How will the State of Pennsylvania determine the mileage of any vehicle driven in and out of the commonwealth?”
• The ability of the State of Pennsylvania to correctly monitor the miles traveled is questioned for reasons such as but not limited to malfunctioning odometer and accurate and/or bona fide responses by vehicle operators.
• While this new tax on vehicular miles traveled is meant to be a substitute for the gas taxes currently utilized, it is my fear that this may not be the case.
In light of the above, I urge the citizens of Pennsylvania to contact their representatives to express their positions on this issue.
Enough of Clintons, Obama
This is a reply to the letter in the Aug. 24 edition by Marcia Levin, the 79-year-old Democrat who wrote that Trump is ignorant and bigoted.
Marcia, Marcia, Marcia. Where have you been for the 16 years of Bill Clinton and Obama? Yes, you are out of touch and a Democrat leading us into oblivion. The Clintons have been left off the hook of justice for many years.
Daniel J. Hudson
Unions politically one-sided
If you don’t think the Democratic Party and the labor unions in Pennsylvania are in bed with each other, explain this. The AFL-CIO announced its endorsements across Pennsylvania. The union is backing 161 Democrats and 10 Republicans. That seems fair.
White’s stance on opioids?
During a recent appearance at the Somerton Civic Association, state Rep. Martina White touted her efforts to combat the abuse of opioids and ensure the safety of our community.
I applaud her for recognizing the serious threat posed by opioid addiction. However, Rep. White voted against an amendment to House Bill 176 establishing a statewide grant program to promote police-assisted addiction recovery programs. Rep. Dave Frankel, the amendment’s author, explained, “Individual police departments across the country and in Pennsylvania are looking for ways to help citizens into drug treatment; state government should be there to provide resources, training and guidance to help them.”
Part of the program will provide training for local police departments on the use of Naloxone. According to a 2008 study by the Journal of Addictive Diseases, “Naloxone, an opioid antagonist with no abuse potential, has been used to reverse opiate overdose in emergency medical settings for decades.”
If people are ready to seek help for their addiction or are on the verge of death because of overdose, police officers should have every resource they need to help. I’d like to know why my opponent disagrees
Candidate, 170th Legislative District
Be respectful to each other
On July 5, I attended the meeting at St. John Neumann Nursing Home about the expansion of the home. The overriding concern was the additional parking lot that would enter and exit on Greymont Street.
This is of great concern, but what transpired at the meeting was very difficult. There were certain people who were obnoxious and disrespectful of not only the presenter but their own neighbors. Their insistent interrupting and calling out not only led to a chaotc meeting, but one that bore little fruit.
I hope the next meeting will be more civil. Did not Ghandi do more with peaceful protests than riots? I know that each of us need to look at ourselves and ask; how can I be more respectful?