Let this tragedy unite us
Another tragedy, another shooting, another life lost. Political assassination is the term being used to describe what happened to Charlie Kirk.
And the next day, Sept. 11, we remembered the horrible terrorist attacks of 2001.
I recall that day, as I’m sure many others around the United States and the world do, as a day of unity among Americans. As I drove around later that day, horns were honking, and it seems people were waving little American flags from their car windows.
Do you think in these days of extreme political division and radical statements coming across the various social medias, we can ever feel that unity again?
Comments coming on thoughts of this terrible assassination should be carefully worded, not blaming one side or the other for the incident.
Joy Peeler Mount Dora
Political violence is never the answer
No one should have to die due to their opinion, beliefs, political party, race or religion. Though it happens time and time again, and all too often. Presidents Abraham Lincoln (1865), James Garfield (1881), William McKinley (1901) and John F. Kennedy (1963) all died by an assassin’s bullet. And by the grace of God, both Ronald Reagan (1981) and Donald J. Trump (2024) survived assassination attempts. Both Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. were assassinated in 1968.
And now, conservative activist Charlie Kirk, 31, has tragically died by an assassin’s bullet. Why can’t people of differing opinions have a civil conversation and simply agree to disagree? Though my fear is that this assassination culture is here to stay. There will always be at least one extremist who believes that death is the only answer for those who differ. But in the meantime, my hope is that the shooter is caught and punished to the fullest extent of the law — death.
JoAnn Lee Frank Clearwater
Utility commission serves utilities, not customers
Guest columnist Ronald Brise (Sept. 7) thinks the Public Service Commission is operating just as it should. My view is that the PSC is operating for the benefit of the utilities it regulates and their shareholders, as well as the major corporate clients. The everyday resident customers of the utilities, who have no power over the franchise agreements by which they are served (the utility is a monopoly), were mostly locked out of the secret meetings where the rate increases were negotiated. As the saying goes, “if you are not at the table, you are on the menu.” Our consumer representative to the PSC, the Office of Public Counsel, was not included. There were no transcripts available, so our only recourse is to sue in state courts.
The PSC has effectively been “captured” by its regulated utility companies. The governor appoints the five commissioners, and they do his bidding, to serve the utility companies they regulate. The companies make huge campaign contributions, through dark-money industry groups and PACs, to the governor and GOP. Of the rate increases negotiated by FPL, fully 50% went to stockholder dividends. These utility companies operate in a no-risk environment – all of their costs are paid in full by their customers’ monthly electric bills. The FPL return on equity is approved at 11%; some argue that it should be much closer to the zero-risk return of about 5%. Tell our state legislators to put the “public service” back into the PSC!
Tom Caffery Orlando
Trump tariffs ignore economic risks
President Donald Trump’s tariffs continued to add billions to U.S. coffers. In July, customs duties brought in a record $29.5 billion, according to the Department of the Treasury.
Who pays and where does the money go? Simple math – the U.S. importer pays the $29 billion at the dock to the U.S. government for the goods. Next, importers supply the wholesalers and retailers. They, in turn, supply retailers, manufacturers or distributors, who in turn either eat the increased cost or pass the cost on to consumers.
Regardless of who pays the $29 billion, eventually the cost must pass on to consumers.
Tariffs are a tax on you and me. Do not think we’re getting a deal to charge importers tariffs.
Tariffs have historically been used as a scalpel to keep foreign and domestic production in balance among international producers. Trump uses tariffs as a bludgeon with total ignorance of the economic implications.
Marty Sullivan Winter Park
You can submit a letter to the editor by sending it by email to insight@orlandosentinel.com or by filling out the form below. Letters are limited to less than 250 words and must be signed (no pseudonyms nor initials).You must include your email address, address with city and daytime phone number for verification. Letters are subject to editing for clarity and length.
