A brief history of Major League Soccer, the highest level of professional Soccer in the United States and Canada. Mike Nyerges
WRITING LETTERS OR OP-EDS: Letters of up to 200 words may be submitted by filling out the form at static.cincinnati.com/letter/ or emailing letters@enquirer.com. Include name, address, community and daytime phone number. Op-eds are submitted the same way except they should be 500-600 words and also include a one-sentence bio and headshot.
Recent reports of sexual harassment by members of Congress are disgraceful. What's worse, we learned that taxpayer money has been used to silence these victims and prevent them from telling their stories.
Enough is enough.
Members of Congress should not treat taxpayer dollars like a slush fund to settle sexual harassment charges and keep victims quiet.
That’s why I filed legislation that ensures victims of sexual assault and harassment aren’t silenced by non-disclosure agreements. My bill would release staff members from any current non-disclosure agreements, and ban these types of agreements going forward. Victims should feel empowered to come forward and share their story if they choose to do so.
This legislation would also prohibit members of Congress from using taxpayer dollars to settle sexual harassment claims, and it would require members who used taxpayer dollars to settle a previous claim to fully reimburse the U.S. Treasury out of their own pocket.
The House recently voted to require all House members and staff to complete mandatory anti-harassment training during each session of Congress. This is a small step in the right direction, but there is so much more to do and we have the momentum now to act.
Congress can and should come together, empower victims of sexual harassment to share their stories, and put a stop to taxpayer-funded settlements. This isn’t a Republican or Democrat issue. It’s simply the right thing to do.
Rep. Luke Messer, Shelbyville, Ind.
The writer is a congressman for Indiana's 6th Congressional District representing Richmond, Muncie and Shelbyville.
Tax reform would be simple if all paid their fair share
I laughed out loud when I read Jimmy Gould's statement about legalizing pot for those over 21. He said, "I think people want to have more control over their lives." That's better than the funnies.
Pat Riedmatter, Miamiville
True tax reform looks like a flat tax
I am a strong advocate for tax reform, but the current bills in the congressional conference are not that. They are just re-arranging the special interest lobby chairs on the deck of the Titanic after it hit the $20 trillion national debt iceberg.
True reform would be a simple flat tax for individual and corporate taxpayers, and the elimination of all subsidies, exemptions, credits, and deductions. Everyone with income would pay their fair share, even those on welfare, and tax policy would subsidize no business, farming, or social interests.
This structure would save billions in tax preparation costs. But it must then be accompanied by massive budget cuts to eliminate non-essential, duplicate, or wasteful federal programs, plus serious entitlement reform. The debt flooding of our ship of state must be stopped before it sinks into insolvency and chaos.
Mike Emerine, Cold Spring
Plenty of Democrats have defective Bibles
In his Monday article, pseudo-Republican, part-time preacher and comedian Phil Heimlich criticized President Trump, Vice President Pence, Roy Moore and the Republican Party in his "defective Bible" commentary in what he apparently thought was an amusing format.
I am curious as to why this "Republican" chose only Republicans as examples to critique. It seems as if someone in the Republican Party must have left a lump of coal in Heimlich's Christmas stocking. Surely, even Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer would agree that there are plenty of Democrats with "defective Bibles" that could have been referenced as examples.
Of course, the Enquirer was more than happy to provide a full page of its Opinion section for a "Republican" to criticize other Republicans.
I can only assume that Heimlich's own personal Bible is also defective and must be missing the verse that states ... "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."
Glenn Harmeyer, Colerain Township
Selfish requirements will be MLS's demise
As four eager candidates for the next two MLS “chosen” soccer teams breathlessly await a verdict, I can’t believe how our City Fathers have caved in to the League’s selfish and unnecessarily expensive demand that they must have their own exclusive stadium. Obviously, despite some ridiculous published numbers to the contrary, it would be far more economical and profitable for FC Cincinnati to share PBS with the Bengals gain some 30,000 additional seats. Even worse, I’ve seen no one point out that the MLS is already allowing this.
In Wednesday’s Enquirer, columnist Jason Williams asks, “Why didn’t MLS make exception for FC Cincinnati?” Well, it wouldn’t be an exception. The Seattle Sounders already share Century Link Field (capacity 69,000) with the Seahawks ever since it began sharing then --“ Seahawks Stadium” as a USL Team before being chosen as an MLS expansion team in 2009. And how have they fared? CenturyLink and the Sounders hosted both the 2010 and 2011 U.S. Open Cup tournament finals, both won by the Sounders. The Sounders broke their home field attendance record in 2013 with 67,385. And oh, yes, they’re the 2017 Western Conference Champions again.
How do you think little FC Cincinnati and its 21,000-seat stadium can compete with that kind of prosperity?
Todd Portune was absolutely correct in arguing for the existing stadium solution. The MLS “policy,” “rule” or whatever they call it requiring a separate soccer stadium -- while a larger Paul Brown Stadium sits empty over half of the year – is an egregious waste of everybody’s money. Such arrogance needs to be resisted, and I’m so disappointed our city and county weren’t resolute enough to do so by mounting a major challenge to such nonsense. We’re in the strongest bargaining position of any city right now because we have arguably the best and best-attended team to offer MLS.
Would their already struggling league really risk losing their smartest option in order to continue a policy that will absolutely not survive the test of time? MLS is inviting a future in which a more successful league of cities insisting on a better deal will rise from the ashes of their selfishness, and leave MLS playing second fiddle.
Tom Lippert, Evendale