Lame duck Congress could do a lot of damage
Re: “GOP must vow repeal if Obamacare passes,” Editorial, March 1
If conservatives are successful and achieve control of both Houses of Congress in November, I am concerned that an enraged lame duck 111th Congress would push through a tidal wave of hurtful liberal legislation between the time of the election and the convening of the 112th Congress. Those who lost their seats in November would have nothing else to lose. President Obama would sign such legislation into law and, unless we achieve a veto-proof majority in the 112th Congress, we would be stuck until we got (hopefully) a new conservative president in January 2013. Just being focused on a takeover of Congress in November is not good enough. We need to focus beyond the election.
George W. Lynn
Millersville, MD
Taxes may be low, but many Texans live in poverty
Re: “Low-tax Texas beats big-government California, “March 7
Mr. Barone is correct: Texas has no state income tax. But it has a sales tax rate that is higher than just 10 states. It also uses tolls to pay for those “gleaming highways” and the state ranks 43rd in health status behind Vermont, the healthiest state. Texans’ minimum wage is amongst the lowest in the U.S., and in 2007 their poverty rate was exceeded by only eight other states. Almost a quarter of Texans have no health insurance and their high school graduation rate is pitiful, particularly among African-Americans and Latinos. Texas is not an idyllic state. Tolls, local taxes, and few support programs mean hard-scrabble living for many.
Jane S. Jones
Washington
Malkin only one to see conspiracy in judicial nomination
Re: “Obama’s guide to blustering, bullying, and bribing,” March 5
Since 2001 I have headed the environmental community’s “Judging the Environment” project, which focuses on federal judicial nominations. Michelle Malkin spreads a smear and blames the victims as she details unfounded suggestions that Scott Matheson’s announced appellate court nomination was somehow tied to a potential health care vote by his brother, Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah. Utah Republican Senators Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett both debunked this conspiratorial fantasy. The Salt Lake Tribune “laughed the … suggestion off the table.” Malkin lays “full blame” on the White House for underestimating how irresponsible critics would create “perception of a judgeship-for-Obamacare-vote deal” that she admits “is, of course, horribly unfair to Matheson, who seems more than qualified.” She also erroneously claims that “there was no action” for nearly a year while this judgeship was vacant. But every judicial nominee selection triggers months of FBI and American Bar Association vetting before a public announcement. Paul Cassell, a very conservative former U.S. District judge appointed by President George W. Bush, wrote: “Given that the ABA was evaluating Scott in roughly January, one would expect an announcement roughly six weeks later – exactly as happened here. … Unfortunately for conspiracy theorists, the facts show that the Scott Matheson nomination has nothing to do with the health care debate.”
Glenn Sugameli
Staff attorney, Judging the Environment
