Print edition: 
Government's role should be limited
Based on an Eagle letter, I now should refrain from protesting programs in which I participate, even if they were imposed on me by others in what others deemed to be my best interest ("Selfish protesters," Nov. 8 Letters to the Editor). I refer to Social Security and Medicare and income-tax deductions for mortgage interest. I did not choose to pay taxes into these programs or allow these deductions.
What is to become of my right to freedom of speech? Am I not free to suggest that the laws currently on our books be enforced?
A properly functioning government will provide those items that benefit all but cannot be obtained by each and every one of us individually. Roads, police protection, fire protection, military protection and such belong on the list. Health insurance and numerous other existing entitlement programs do not belong there.
Because of the nature of human beings, government also tries to prevent the choices of individuals who exhibit no signs of having any common sense from imposing on the basic rights of others. For example, all should be able to enjoy a good night's sleep without having to endure aerial shells exploding over our homes for several weeks in June and July ("Let freedom ring," Nov. 8 Letters to the Editor). Far too many of us believe in doing whatever we want, regardless of the impact of our actions on others or whatever laws are in place that say otherwise.
L.M. HOLZMAN
Wichita
Right to care
For the past 20 years, my family and I have been unable to afford health care insurance. Thankfully, we have never needed the services of a hospital and have paid for the health care we have received out of pocket. But never a moment passed during those 20 years that I did not live in dread of an illness or injury that would require hospitalization for myself or a member of my family. That dread continues until this day.
I call upon my representatives in Congress to agree that quality health care for all of our fellow countrymen — young or old, rich or poor — should be a right in this the greatest of all nations that we ask God to bless each and every day. It should be a right that recognizes human life as being sacred, and to be preserved and uplifted in recognition of our Creator's love for each and every one of us.
STEPHEN COOK
Wichita
Dishonest politics
I am 75 years old and a registered Republican, but I did vote Democratic in the past election because this country needs change and has for many years. I have never seen such an uncooperative attitude as the Republican Party has displayed since the election. I am especially ashamed of Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard.
GOP lawmakers don't want the American public to have a health benefit similar to what they enjoy — and have lied about the reform plan to the public for many months. What happened to honest politics?
It is my hope that the American people will wake up and get rid of all present Republicans and some Democrats next election.
CHARLES PARKS
Rose Hill
Thanks for vote
Recent letters have chided Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, for voting against the House health care reform bill. I want to thank Tiahrt for voting against this poorly drafted, ill-conceived 2,000-page proposal. Thanks for standing up for freedom.
We all agree there needs to be some reform in the health care system. But we have never seen a government-run program that improved anything in this area.
Look at the war on poverty of the 1960s. Today there are more poor Americans than in the 1960s, yet we have spent trillions of dollars to eliminate poverty. Today, the U.S. government has more than $11 trillion in debt. It has more than $60 trillion in unfunded obligations for Social Security and Medicare.
There is no way we can spend yet another trillion dollars to make things better in health care. We cannot spend our way into prosperity. That's been tried many times but has never succeeded. Government cannot solve the problem with health care; government is the problem.
Free markets have proved overwhelmingly their power to improve the lots of all social classes. Let's get the government out of the way so the free market can work. Then we will have real reform.
JIM BENAGE
Bel Aire
Ending abortion?
With apologies to Jonathan Swift, I want to put forth a modest proposal that should end the abortion debate once and for all: The U.S. Supreme Court should overturn Roe v. Wade. After that, women can do what they did pre-Roe — seek their abortions in secret, from underground providers or from medical doctors who will do what they call a "D&C" procedure or an "appendectomy." Or these women may use home methods to self-abort.
This move will allow leaders of anti-choice groups such as Operation Rescue or Missionaries to the Unborn to brag that they've ended abortion in America. It also will take the profit motive away from groups that target abortion providers to raise money for their leaders. Most important, it will stop the targeting of abortion providers.
Of course, such a move would imperil women who discover in the third trimester — when women most need the services of a competent practitioner — that they are carrying damaged fetuses who can't live outside the womb. It will imperil women to have to seek the services of providers who care more about the money they can make than about the welfare of the women they treat. Those women whose lives are threatened by carrying a pregnancy to term will just have to take their chances.
That's OK. As we've seen from the House of Representatives' health care reform bill, women are expendable.
DIANE WAHTO
Wichita
Upside down
I'm having a little trouble with this picture: More than 130,000 veterans are homeless (Nov. 10 Eagle), yet we have been bailing out Wall Street with hundreds of billions of dollars for activities of greed and avarice.
Some of these veterans fought in conflicts and saw unimaginable things, sacrificing mind and body believing they were doing what's right for America. What did these Wall Street types sacrifice? They conspired with accomplices in Washington, D.C., to eliminate regulations to further rob the American people.
Yet whom do we rush to help? If there is a more upside-down picture than this, I don't know what it is.
CRAIG BATSON
Goddard
Buy American
Shame on you if you bought a foreign car with your Cash for Clunkers American dollars.
DALE FELIX
Wichita
Costly for farmers
I disagree with the notion that "Kansas farmers would gain from cap-and-trade" (Nov. 8 Opinion). Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack made numerous unsupported assumptions, but I will focus on just one.
He stated: "USDA's economists found that the opportunities for farmers and ranchers in a cap-and-trade program will outweigh the potential costs." With all due respect, I contend these economists have failed to account for a wide range of unintended consequences.
A Heritage Foundation study concluded: "Higher gasoline and diesel fuel costs, higher electricity costs, and higher natural-gas-derived fertilizer costs all erode farm profits, which are expected to decline by 28 percent in 2012 and average 57 percent lower through 2035."
Further, Vilsack stated that "the centerpiece of the legislation is the creation of a market that will offer opportunities for nonpolluting sectors, such as agriculture, to sell offsets to industries that emit greenhouse gases." Recent Environmental Protection Agency findings indicate that emissions from many agricultural operations certainly will fall within its purview as regulators of greenhouse gases. Examples would be methane from feedlots, carbon dioxide from tilling of soils, etc. So I'm not buying for an instant the "friendly" attitude the USDA economists have toward our farmers.
DENNIS HEDKE
Wichita
