• Newsletters
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Saturday, September 23, 2017
View complete forecast
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.

Letters to the editor

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.The Associated Press
Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:01 am
I would like to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If I look silly, that is my problem.I wish to amend the 17th Amendment, which had changed how U.S. senators are elected to office. This particular amendment was ratified April 8, 1913, and allowed the state citizenry the ability to vote for these legislators instead of by the state legislatures. U.S. senators originally represented these state legislatures. In general, I don’t have a problem with the 17th Amendment because it stopped the fighting at the state level when Democrats and Republicans were evenly split.

But, I would like, for U.S. senator voting, that states be divided by current state representative districts for this voting purpose and allowed one vote per district. That one vote is determined by who wins that district. And, for example, if wishful Sen. “A” gets five votes from large cities and wishful Sen. “B” gets five votes for the rural areas, then the governor breaks the tie. Or don’t have an even-numbered number of districts.

I don’t care to see a U.S. senator in office who only represents a few large cities in a particular state and not the rural areas. This amendment could bring the U.S. senators back to the original intentions of the founders: representing the state.

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two senators from each state, elected by the people with one decided vote per district thereof, for six years…”

If we want to stop the gridlock, break the lock. What have you got?

Roderic J. ConverseThe reasons courts have ruled “creationism” to be a form of religion, is because (1.) Creationism is both a false (old Earth) and foolish (young Earth) doctrine, and (2.) a grand measure of incompetence has been used in the courtroom to fight against evolution.

Both old Earth and young Earth (also intelligent design) fail to convey the truth of Genesis. God is both the author of Genesis, and the creator of science itself. Since God is the supreme intelligence, it stands to reason that Genesis is much more “scientific” than the worlds of creationism and theology have presented to mankind. Genesis is not a joke book. God was conveying the geologic history of Earth when he gave those six visions to Moses.

Without the understanding of the text, of course, a casual linear reading of the first chapter of Genesis will not seem scientific. However, when Genesis is read correctly (the seven non-linear days read in chronological order), the book is appreciated as the most scientific literature written before the fall of the Roman Empire.

Modern science may soon learn what Genesis has already proclaimed, which is that mankind has been on this Earth, in his present likeness, for more than 60 million years.

Does that qualify as “scientific”? The correct reading of Genesis is the only written documentation of the existence of prehistoric mankind, which signification is more ancient than the current theory of evolution will acknowledge.

Herman CummingsWith an eye to the looming fiscal cliff, Washington is making important decisions on whether taxes should be higher or lower — but many companies aren’t even paying what they owe. At least 83 of the top 100 publicly traded corporations in the U.S., such as Boeing and GE, use offshore tax havens to avoid paying federal taxes. This adds up to an estimated $1.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years.

There are some tough budget decisions ahead, but closing the offshore tax loopholes that let large companies shift their tax burden to the rest of us should be an easy one.

We can’t afford tax haven loopholes, especially now. We can’t continue losing $150 billion in revenue every year as the deficit grows and grows. The Indiana delegation should make sure that the conversation in Washington does not leave out this common sense step to draw down the deficit.

Alec Sprague, federal field organizer, Indiana Public Interest Research Group (INPIRG)


News-Sentinel.com reserves the right to remove any content appearing on its website. Our policy will be to remove postings that constitute profanity, obscenity, libel, spam, invasion of privacy, impersonation of another, or attacks on racial, ethnic or other groups. For more information, see our user rules page.
comments powered by Disqus