To the Editor:
According to national polls, many believe that when he was president Donald Trump was better with economic policy than President Biden. What is forgotten is that Mr. Trump’s tenure was mostly before Covid.
The populace forgets that the pandemic resulted in multiple supply shortages and labor disruptions, which were major contributing causes of inflationary pressures. Republicans blame government spending but discount the disruptive effect of Covid.
President Biden’s policies have brought jobs, economic growth and a reduced inflation rate. Unfortunately he has not been able to offset all the residual economic effects of the Covid pandemic.
Gilbert J. Wise
New York
To the Editor:
To paraphrase what James Carville said many years ago, it’s still the economy, stupid. President Biden has been the most progressive and effective president of my lifetime, yet insecurity still haunts millions of people on his watch because of the high costs of housing, food and transportation.
Being one financial setback away from being homeless can make even a chaotic would-be strongman like Donald Trump seem like an acceptable alternative when he promises to fix everything immediately.
That the housing shortage and inflation have antecedents in the bursting of the housing bubble almost two decades ago and in the more recent Trump tariff– and pandemic-related supply chain disruptions matters little to those living on the edge and looking for a lifeline today.
Kurt Davis
Placerville, Calif.
To the Editor:
What President Biden has done is to restore a sense of normalcy in government. He is working on things that affect our lives rather than our temperament.
While Donald Trump rails for revenge, Mr. Biden builds infrastructure and tries to promote good will. What is really needed is a populace that wants normal versus turmoil. A government that keeps a lid on things rather than a government that wants to break everything and then not bother to put the pieces back together again.
Mr. Trump and his MAGA followers want a world unhinged. I want normal. I want MANA, as in Make America Normal Again.
Chris Green
North Falmouth, Mass.
To the Editor:
Re “Passing Years Cloud Memory of Trump Term” (front page, March 6):
I can’t decide if I’m more shocked, more alarmed or more depressed by the “collective amnesia” that Americans are said to be experiencing about the sheer awfulness of Donald Trump’s presidency. I mean it’s not as if we’re talking about, say, 1950. We’re talking about just a few short years ago.
But it does bring to mind two famous quotations. One is “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The other is “Every nation gets the government it deserves.”
I truly hope that, when the chips are down, the American people will prove smarter than this. A lot smarter than this!
Nancy Stark
New York
5 Nobel Laureates, on Building an ‘Extremely Large Telescope’
To the Editor:
“Good News, and Bad, for Astronomers’ Biggest Dream” (Out There, Science Times, March 12) concludes with a question to Linnea Avallone, chief officer for research facilities at the National Science Foundation: “Did she see a risk to the United States not funding an Extremely Large Telescope of its own?”
Dr. Avallone replies, “That’s a good question, better answered by astronomers.”
As recent U.S. physics Nobel laureates for discoveries in astronomy, we affirm that yes, the United States’ longstanding scientific leadership in astronomy is at risk if the National Science Foundation does not invest in its Extremely Large Telescope Program — and soon.
Congress, too, on March 5, “strongly encouraged” a plan to consider a two-hemisphere, two-telescope program. These tools could provide American space scientists with collecting area and observing time comparable to the only European extremely large telescope under construction, while being superior in terms of all-sky coverage and overall instrumentation.
Implementing bold science leadership, trailblazing discoveries, attracting top scientists and shaping technology yield immense societal and economic benefits for the U.S. — and the dangers of losing our leadership position in the world of highly visible science are troubling.
Andrea Ghez
John C. Mather
Saul Perlmutter
Adam Riess
Brian Schmidt
Radiation Exposure Killed My Dad
To the Editor:
Re “‘Oppenheimer,’ My Uncle and the Bomb’s Lasting Secrets,” by Ariel Kaminer (Opinion, March 12), about her uncle’s death from radiation exposure:
My father was a radar-constructing engineer who tracked nuclear bomb blasts from the earliest days in New Mexico to a ship off Johnston Atoll in the Pacific. At age 51 Pop was diagnosed with lymphoma and given six months to live.
He was fortunate to have doctors who realized that it was radiation exposure. The only treatment was surgery. He was otherwise incredibly healthy and was able to not only survive, but also become a willing subject for new treatments such as chemotherapy.
He lived 21 years with the cancer until it overtook his brain and the rest of his body. My handsome, strong father shriveled away to almost nothing and died.
Later we learned that other crew members and engineers on the Mariner (his tracker ship) had suffered with similar cancers and had died long before Pop did.
I couldn’t bear to watch “Oppenheimer,” much as I could never visit White Sands, though I lived in New Mexico for years. I appreciated Ms. Kaminer’s piece and only wish Pop were here to read it.
Kate Schwartz
Evanston, Ill.
End the Filibuster
To the Editor:
Re “Is End Near for a Favored Tactic: The Senate Filibuster?,” by Carl Hulse (Congressional Memo, March 14):
However the filibuster was used in the Senate in the past, it has been clear for many years now that it is the primary tool of legislative inaction. Over and over again, both political parties have used it to completely obstruct major policy goals of the party in power. The minority party then runs in the next election on the lack of accomplishment of the other party.
The American people deserve more than continual legislative gridlock. Let the party elected to power enact legislation to achieve its goals and then give the public the chance to endorse or reject them in the next election. That’s what true democracy is about.
Harlan Kosson
Pittsford, N.Y.
How to Listen to Classical Music
To the Editor:
Re “American Maestros Are Scarce at Home” (Arts & Leisure, March 10):
A quote from the Baltimore Symphony’s music director, Jonathon Heyward, succinctly identifies the crux of the problem for American classical music audiences: “We have to continuously think about ways to better relate to an American community.”
Orchestral conductors and their public relations staffs need to communicate to general audiences how to listen to classical music. Simply put: A listener merely needs to bring their ears to a concert and decide how they personally relate to the performance.
No prior knowledge is necessary. Just listen.
Potential listeners need to come to concert halls feeling less intimidated. And a caveat for the newer listener: Skip the arcane program notes, which serve only to promote more discomfort in the terra incognita of the concert hall.
Bruce Lewis
Sharon, Mass.
The writer is a professional pianist.