Dear Mr. Murphy,
Democrats tend to argue that any opposition to their platform is obstructionism, however a difference exists between legitimate debate and obstruction. Likewise, a difference exists between back-room dealing and compromise. For example, prior to the last election Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst supported Democratic Councilwoman Bridget Fleming's resolution to prohibit party members from serving on Southampton's land-use boards. However, after the election, she reversed her position. Yet because Ms. Throne-Holst replaced two Republican committee board members, The Southampton Press wrote that she addressed the issue of political influence while stopping short of pay-back.
If so, why did Democrats who supported Ms. Throne-Holst prior to the election oppose her "about-face" and why did Republicans praise it? Ms. Throne-Holst's alleged compromise gives the appearance of a back-room deal because it avoids a debate about the influence of money and private agendas on the land-use boards, and while I respect Ms. Fleming's argument, I cannot agree that all party members are inherently dishonest or that members of one party will counterbalance members of another party as proven by Ms. Throne-Holst's switcheroo.
Because the land-use debate was misdirected, I believe that Republicans missed an opportunity to appoint a chair with a modern understanding of the power of zoning. Unlike former Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, who understood that zoning is a vehicle essential to the economic success of the entire population, I'm afraid Ms. Throne-Holst gives the appearance of making decisions to further her own political career and little else.
Thank you for your editorial on the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. It is rare to see such a truthful analysis of this infringement on our personal lives in newsprint. While Americans are reeling under massive unemployment, always under-reported, now at about 17 percent, welfare recipients have seen an increase in their funding by 30 percent, while Social Security and military benefits have increased by 1.5 and 1 percent, respectively.
People tell me they're being cut back to 29 hours because the companies cannot afford the ACA, which cost so much more than the much better insurance they previously had. Then, try to find a doctor or hospital that will accept Medicare or the ACA.
The consequence becomes more evident with further shortages in doctors and registered nurses, hospitals unable to stay open with the loss of compensation.
In the meanwhile, the president has just delayed full implementation another two years so that the full ramifications don't hit before November's election, nor while he's in office.
Gee, it seems the Republicans asked for the delay last year and the president shut down the government rather than compromise with the Republicans. This will prove to be the worst legislation for our liberty, taxes and the economy of this country.
LYNDA A.W. EDWARDS
Spring is just around the corner in the United States of Amnesia.
After the daffodils arrive, get ready for record numbers of illegal aliens to arrive in our communities.
It's not that there's more work available, there is less work to be had.
New data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal the lowest rate of labor participation in 35 years.
So what's encouraging illegal immigrants to come here in record numbers? Amnesty!
House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) wants cheap labor, and President Obama wants cheap votes.
By pushing another mass Amnesty, they're ignoring record unemployment, a fragile economy, and the will of the American people.
The Washington elites promoting another Amnesty are counting on citizens like you to have a bad memory.
The elites know that Amnesty is not new. They also know that every prior attempt to "solve" the problem of illegal immigration with Amnesty has failed miserably.
Washington elites understand that you -- and the vast majority of American citizens -- do not support Amnesty.
The only thing that works is enforcement.
But, enforcing immigration laws -- and actually punishing unscrupulous employers -- makes politicians and the Washington elite cringe.
They want you to believe the mantra that "the system is broken," when in fact, we've not seen serious enforcement since the mid 1990's.
Henry Kissinger recently wrote that "The test of policy is how it ends, not how it begins."
Amnesty can only end badly.
It is a dagger pointed at the heart of America's embattled Middle Class.
If we allow yet another Amnesty to be shoved down our throats by the elites, life as we know it will never be the same.