Letters: Amazon bid shows necessity of mass transit

As we revel in the news that Indy is one of 20 finalists for Amazon’s HQ2, let’s take a moment to consider one thought: Had the request for bids come out a few years ago, we probably wouldn’t have made the cut.

One of the requirements Amazon stipulated is direct access to mass transit, such as rail, subway or bus lines. The system we’ve had for decades – and still have today – wouldn’t qualify, but, fortunately, progress is underway thanks to Marion County voters, who approved a tax increase in 2016 that’s allowing the Marion County Transit Plan to be implemented. Nearly 50 miles of bus rapid transit on three lines and 70 percent more local bus service will dramatically improve Marion County’s public transit system. Route improvements, including greater frequencies, start next month.

Making Amazon’s Top 20 shows that this progress is already having an impact, but we cannot let up. We still have a long way to go to have a truly regional transit system. As it stands now, only Marion County has embraced the transit plan. To continue to compete for projects like Amazon’s, we need a regional system – we need to make sure that discussions about expanding transit in surrounding counties bear fruit.

The good news is that the bid for Amazon has caused many people in this area to recognize how critical mass transit is to our region’s economic future. Now that we’ve got people’s attention, let’s show them how committed we are to competing for the biggest economic opportunities by building out the vision of a truly regional, 21st century transit system.

Lori Kaplan

Executive Director, Central Indiana Regional Transportation Authority (CIRTA)

Pence's policies don't reflect welcoming attitude

On Jan. 15, I read an article about Second Lady Karen Pence redecorating the vice president’s residence in Washington, D.C. I enjoyed reading about how she is bringing our Hoosier heritage to the nation’s capital and making it a welcoming home. 

I couldn’t help but think about how it would have been nice if the vice president’s policies had been this welcoming when he was governor. 

I am outraged by the policies Mike Pence left behind in Indiana and his continued deafening silence as vice president on the rampant racism, sexism and xenophobia in the Trump administration. 

While he was governor, Pence’s policies treated LGBTQ Hoosiers like second class citizens. His Religious Freedom Restoration Act was such an extreme license to discriminate that it drew national attention and lost $60 million of economic benefit for our state.

In the area of reproductive health, Pence’s policies are not evidence-based. In fact, many have been proven time and again to be ineffective—such as abstinence-only sex education. Pence’s extreme anti-abortion law, HEA 1337, was built to shame women for making the decision to end a pregnancy, including the mandate for an ultrasound prior to an abortion and requiring burials or cremations for fetal tissue.

In response to an HIV outbreak in rural Indiana, Pence delayed implementation of a needle exchange program before implementing them — with an expiration date. And he attempted to block Syrian refugees from finding safe haven in Indiana, until the courts struck his effort down. 

These policies are not designed with Hoosiers in mind. Mr. Vice President, public policy should be made to serve the public. While you are in Washington, touting that Indiana still feels like home, you would do well to remember that there is no room in the law for your personal religious beliefs.

Christie L. Gillespie

President and CEO, Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky

Why economic incentives benefit Indiana

As a principal at McGuire Sponsel, I work every day with companies looking to grow and expand their operations in different locations throughout the country. My clients and I study a variety of tax credits and incentives offered at both the municipal and state level, and as a proud Hoosier, it is fantastic to see Indiana become the model for success. 

Some have criticized Indianapolis and the state of Indiana for its willingness to provide financial incentives in its pursuit of Amazon and other major companies. The reality is that our state would have no chance to attract such employers without competitive incentives, favorable regulations and low taxes.

Our leaders have shown their eagerness to collaborate, to partner for the greater good of the region, and responsibly utilize all economic development tools available to be as competitive as possible. These officials should be commended for cultivating an environment where it becomes hard for any company to remove Indiana from a list of contenders. 

Amazon HQ2 would be a victory for the ages, driving a transformational impact to all corners of our economy. However, even if another location is chosen, many more companies are ready and willing to take their place. 

Steve Brunson

Indianapolis

Reject spending bill that doesn't protect Dreamers

Passing a spending bill without DACA protection robs our country of one of its greatest resources -- immigrants, and the talent, work ethic and culture they bring with them. 

Most U.S. citizens are descended from immigrants, many of whom faced few or no legal obstacles in coming here. They often came here to escape war, famine and discrimination at home -- the same reasons so many come to the U.S. today. Many bring their children with them in the hopes that the children will have a better life here. Who are we to insist that these children do not deserve the same chance that our ancestors gave us? 

DACA gives America the opportunity to showcase our compassion, our willingness to embrace diversity, and our determination to prove the U.S. is a land of limitless opportunity. DACA individuals contribute to our economy and our identity as a nation. Our success comes in part from dreamers past who made new homes here and imbued American society with their ingenuity, intelligence and determination. Today’s Dreamers deserve that same opportunity to make their mark here, so I implore Sens. Todd Young and Joe Donnelly to please reject any spending bill that does not include protection for DACA.

C.J. Koenig

Indianapolis

Brooks shouldn't play blame game

In her e-mail to constituents about the government shutdown, Rep. Susan Brooks was quick to play the blame game. She fails to recognize the Democratic senators who voted for the cloture resolution, including fellow Hoosier Joe Donnelly. She never acknowledges her Republican colleagues in the Senate who voted against cloture. The entire Congress is accountable for doing its job (or, in this case, not doing it).

The president sowed confusion and dissension with his conflicting statements about DACA and the Dreamers during the continuing resolution debate. In early December, Brooks joined other representatives in a letter telling Paul Ryan, "Reaching across the aisle to protect DACA recipients before the holidays is the right thing to do." The holidays passed without that happening, so adding protection for the Dreamers to the continuing resolution would have been a sensible win, supported by over 80% of voters. As long as Brooks is assigning blame, who was it that failed to follow through on DACA and the Dreamers?

Republicans control majorities in the House and Senate, but ramming through unpopular legislation on a one-party vote is not good governance. In the U.S., shared governance involves full participation and compromise to carry out the people's business. Rather than trying to duck her responsibility by blaming others, we urge Brooks to get back to work.

Rebecca McElfresh

Jim Armstong

Indianapolis

Hollywood, journalists are biased in favor of liberals

Many people have a different take on the movie "The Post."  We can start with Steven Spielberg.  How many fundraisers did he have for Hillary Clinton and how many dinners with Barack Obama?  He's a major fundraiser for the Democratic Party.  Ditto for the two main stars, Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep.  Hollywood donates over 90% of its political donations to Democrats and leftist causes.  They also don't tolerate dissent. 

It's very easy to see where this movie is going before it starts.  And, it doesn't disappoint.  In a nutshell, the movie demonstrates the arrogance and narcissism of the media.  Cursed with superior virtue and ethics the reporters have to save us by going to war against the government.  Where was that attitude between 2008 and 2016?  Sure, it's a movie and Hollywood gets "creative license", but time and time again we see which way that slants.  If you want to pass a movie off as a true story, you need to reel in the creative license. 

Matt Tully thinks most journalists would agree that it's their job to be honest and provide credible and relevant information.  And, they are unfairly criticized for honest mistakes.  Really?  Does Brian Williams, Dan Rather, Brian Ross, Andrea Mitchell or Jim Acosta ring a bell?  These people aren't making innocent mistakes; they are intentionally manipulating what people think.  Amazingly, Brian Williams is still employed by NBC.  So much for credibility. 

Tom Gregg II

Zionsville

Journalism has skewed to the left

Matthew Tully's column on the ethics of journalism makes several good points about the responsibilities of the media. At the same time, his position and that of the Carmel journalism students he cited missed a couple of salient points.

Twenty of my 24 years in the Army were spent as a member of the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service. Our mission was to serve military and U.S. civilians with information and entertainment in foreign lands. And, although we were not considered true journalists, we used news materials that had already been provided to all other Americans at home. So we were exposed to techniques, attitudes, biases and opinions of recognized journalists at home. All that seemed pretty much in keeping with the generally accepted journalistic standards of the time. In 1968 however, when the "most trusted man in America", Walter Cronkite, openly denounced our government and our military because of our involvement in Vietnam, everything changed. Since that time, the mainstream media has felt perfectly at ease to develop prejudices and broadcast or print them with abandon. 

The problem as I see it is, journalism students of today don't seem to see (or are not taught) how the history of American journalism has been skewed to the point that most reporting is more opinion than fact and seems to concentrate on the negative without giving at least some time to the positive.

In fairness, American media is a business and the bottom line is the bottom line. Controversy sells and no one, it seems, makes a name for themselves by reporting "good news."

I'm not sure what the solution is. History, of any kind, seems to be something educators are loathe to teach and our "institutions of higher learning" are leaning so far left it's doubtful young minds are getting a very fair and balanced look at the world around them. The sad part of that is, the American people are not being served the way they deserve.

Garry Lyon

Fishers