To answer letter writer Sarah Beyne’s question in her Monday letter (“Is it a stunt or a plea?”): Busing migrants north is a political stunt, and a very cruel one at that.
Personally, I welcome our share of migrants. We here in the great blue north will take care of them and help them, not let them drown in a river. But unloading a bus of unsuspecting migrants in flip-flops and T-shirts in freezing weather is inhumane, at best. I don’t understand why it isn’t criminal.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott should be held to account.
— Martin A. Pierce, St. Charles
I simply could not believe the misdirection in the Tribune editorial on Jan. 12, “Temperatures may not top zero on Monday. For God’s sake, hold those buses, Gov. Abbott.”
I was astonished by the lack of understanding and quite frankly questioned the intent of the editorial. It should properly be titled, “Temperatures may not top zero on Monday. For God’s sake, fix the border issue, President Biden.”
Common sense and logic tell us the root cause of the problem is the number of migrants crossing the border every day. There is nothing wrong with legal immigration, as those individuals have followed the law and should be treated accordingly. That is not the case with illegal crossings that have created this so-called migrant crisis that we read about almost every day.
This is a border crisis — plain and simple. The responsibility lies with President Joe Biden — plain and simple. He has been absent on this issue since he came into office. Any and all tragedies from illegal immigration are clearly his responsibility.
— Mike Siemann, Naperville
Josele Mendoza, 41, from left, and his wife, Heidi Sarmiento, 45, both of Venezuela, walk with other migrants to the city’s landing zone after traveling from Glen Ellyn to the Ogilvie Transportation Center in the early morning hours of Jan. 5, 2024, in Chicago. The migrants were not accompanied or transported from Ogilvie Transportation Center but were given a sheet of paper with walking directions to the city’s landing zone for migrants. (Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune)
I found Steve Kelley’s political cartoon of Jan. 22 to be an entitled pity party. The implication that since illegal immigration is costly, we are now in the same situation as the poor migrants, I found at best laughable and at worst tone-deaf. I wonder if any one of us, warm in our homes, well fed and adequately clothed for the elements, would switch places with them. I think not.
Seeing this situation with empathy and compassion rather than vilifying people in a very difficult situation might serve us all well.
— Traci Harris, Oswego
Paul Vallas’ Sunday op-ed (“Mayor’s ‘mansion tax’ plan is a regressive tax increase in search of a program”) is rich in data and warnings about the cost of a “yes” vote for the Bring Chicago Home initiative. It is also predictably one-sided. Here is what is missing from his piece.
Vallas notes the increased cost to taxpayers without acknowledging what the homelessness crisis is already costing us. Numerous analyses conclude that the costs borne by publicly funded entities such as the police and fire departments and human health services outweigh the costs of housing someone on the public’s dime.
Vallas anticipates lost jobs. He pretends not to know that a typical prerequisite for employment is permanent and stable housing. Would housing tens of thousands of Chicagoans not augur increased employment?
Vallas refuses to acknowledge the roughly 68,000 unhoused Chicagoans living among us. He mentions “homelessness” in his first sentence but does not offer a single mention of anyone experiencing homelessness or housing instability. (With what I assume is unintentional irony, he applies the word “suffering” only to the nebulous Loop “market.”) This type of erasure evinces our collective view of homelessness: We decry the unhoused people living on the street, in parks and in tents (especially in summer and around big city events); we blame the city for doing nothing; and then we breathe a sigh of relief when the evidence of homelessness is again made invisible.
There is a moral cost of doing nothing. Chicago has the challenges of other big cities: Rising housing costs and a reduction in affordable rental units have worsened what has long been a crisis. Bring Chicago Home is not a perfect initiative. None is. But it is something to do about a problem about which we have simply not done enough.
Vallas won’t face any consequences for his punditry and cherry-picking of facts. His profusion of numbers doesn’t actually have to tell the whole truth; we don’t (and shouldn’t) expect that from politicians. This is not true for the numerous housing-first organizations in Chicago, which rely on factual reporting, deep analyses and accuracy to maintain their stature, funding and continued existence.
Who to believe in this case? The answer is clear to me. Bring all Chicagoans home.
— John Cunningham-Elder, Chicago
Thank you for publishing the op-ed by state Rep. Kam Buckner, “Chicago should pass on DNC if it gets no federal housing help” (Jan. 23). Buckner reminds us in his piece how the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. came to Chicago in order to press the issue of affordable housing with then-Mayor Richard J. Daley. Unfortunately, despite a lot of publicity, King left Chicago with a lot of promises and very little progress. It is worth reminding readers how long the fight for affordable housing has been going on.
Buckner suggests some great steps that the city can take, such as changing neighborhood zoning away from single-family homes only to a mix of multiple-unit dwellings, too. The federal government can fund mortgage support and the rehabbing of old buildings. All of these are wonderful ideas worth exploring.
But should Chicago refrain from hosting the Democratic National Convention this summer until the federal government helps it solve its housing problems? I understand that Buckner feels it would be hypocritical for the city to host. I get that. But what city in the nation has solved its housing problems? Where would be a less hypocritical location?
Perhaps he and the other delegates could make federal housing support a plank in the DNC’s platform for the 2024 elections. Perhaps voters across America could show their support for such plans by telling their delegates how they feel. This would be a better way to go.
— Jan Goldberg, Riverside
Thank you to William R. Coulson, Regional Transportation Authority board member, for voting against the ridiculous new ticket structure Metra has come up with (“Metra takes step backward,” Jan. 21). For riders who don’t own a smartphone, Metra has created a very difficult situation.
I ride from Chicago’s western suburbs (BNSF Line) to downtown several days each week, and the 10-ride ticket was the perfect solution. Now, I will be paying cash on the train for a one-way ticket each morning and will have to purchase a one-way ticket for the return trip home. However, since Metra has also decided to limit the value of the one-way ticket to only a three-hour period, I cannot purchase the one-way ticket in the morning as I’m walking through Union Station. Instead, as I’m rushing to catch the evening train home, I will need to stop and make the purchase, hoping and praying that there will not be long lines or malfunctioning machines. More likely than not, I will be missing my train on a regular basis and will have to wait 30 minutes or more for the next one.
Thanks, Metra, from those of us who cannot afford or who do not have the need for a costly smartphone. You have pretty much left us standing out in the cold.
— Teresa Figueroa, Berwyn
At a City Council meeting, Mayor Brandon Johnson backed calls for a cease-fire in the war in Gaza. Wouldn’t it better serve the citizens of Chicago if Johnson called for a cease-fire to the shootings on the City’s South and West sides?
Passing another symbolic resolution on the war between Israel and Hamas will do little to aid in the crisis and nothing to resolve the gun crisis in Chicago.
— Bruce R. Hovanec, Chicago
It seems to me like Chicago’s City Council has bigger fish to fry than debating the wording of resolutions dealing with Hamas. In my judgment, aldermen’s efforts and resources would be better spent addressing the multiple burning issues confronting Chicago.
From my perspective, Johnson’s midterm grade is a D-minus. It’s time to redirect the conversation to our own backyard, not the fiasco in the Mideast.
— Bruce Nathanson, Glenview
I am responding to the recent Tribune article “Legislators return to face funding issues” (Jan. 16) regarding the debate over the structure of Chicago’s first-ever elected school board.
I was particularly struck by Illinois Senate President Don Harmon’s comments indicating that he is waiting for “clear direction” from the mayor of Chicago, the Chicago Teachers Union and Chicago Public Schools before pursuing the Senate’s proposal to have all 20 board members elected to two-year terms in November or the House’s proposal, which would have 10 members elected in November and empower the mayor to appoint 10 members and the board president in December.
While I understand Harmon would seek input from these voices, his reliance on them alone makes the same mistake our city has been making. This approach conspicuously leaves out those who have the most to gain or lose in this massive transition in governance: parents and students.
The history of public education in Chicago is marred by decisions made without sufficient input from those most affected — CPS families. The creation of an elected school board was supposed to rectify this disconnect, bringing democratic representation and family voice to a system that has long been criticized for its top-down approach. However, the current debate seems to be following the old playbook: keeping family voices outside the decision-making room.
Springfield legislators must remember that they are elected to represent all constituents, not just a select powerful few. For decades, families have advocated for a voice in the governance of CPS. Families are the foundation of our city’s education system, not politicians and bureaucrats. Their exclusion from this conversation is not only a missed opportunity for richer, more informed decision-making but also is antithetical to the very principles of representative governance.
As we stand on the verge of this historic shift in how we govern our schools, our elected leaders must recognize that families are not just passive recipients of education policies but also are active and essential participants in shaping them.
We urge Harmon and our state legislators to seek the insights and preferences of CPS families before making any decision. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. Let’s bring families to the table.
— Blaire Flowers, chair, Kids First Chicago Elected School Board Task Force
Imagine my surprise when reading an op-ed by former Gov. Bruce “I hate unions” Rauner and finding myself in agreement with him (“Unions in Illinois are taking away school choice,” Jan. 24).
The Chicago Teachers Union is set to destroy the best thing about Chicago Public Schools — the selective-enrollment high schools. Last year, the five best high schools in the state were Chicago schools. How are these schools the problem? Oh, I see — they actually perform, so they gotta go.
If you dumb down these schools, the middle class will leave. These schools are a lure and should be duplicated, not decimated.
— Scott Silberman, Chicago
Join the conversation in our Letters to the Editor Facebook group.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
visit website
