Accepting the challenge
A challenge was posted to critique each term depicted in the acronym, DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion).
I view DEI as a radical political ploy to create unrest. Diversity discerns between color, ethnicity, religion and sexual preference. Equity is not equality. Equity punishes those who actually work toward positive outcomes by rewarding those who don’t. Inclusion unless you are Christian, Jewish, conservative or Republican by forcing approval and engagement with policies and lifestyles that are considered to be toxic and best to be avoided.
My viewpoint is not original; 77.5 million U.S. citizens came up with it first.
Camille Hattrup
Troy
Medicaid expansion
When discussing Medicaid expansion, it is a misleading half-truth for Idaho legislators to state that there are, “70,000 able-bodied people on the expansion” for two major reasons.
First, as an example, some of the able-bodied are developmentally disabled and you often see them already working the required 20 hours a week in places such as grocery stores, bagging your groceries. They work hard. Many are not able to drive, so they walk or ride a bike to work. These able-bodied workers are not “unfit,” which they would have to be unjustly declared by a doctor to qualify for Medicaid as per House Bill 345. They have difficulties and need Medicaid expansion services and HB 345 could kick them off assistance.
The second misleading half-truth tries to make Idahoans think we would immediately save money with all 70,000 able-bodied people removed. If working the required 20 hours while developmentally disabled, they will not be removed from the declared “70,000 able-bodied” and Idaho would not save the money assumed by the half-truth statement. If declared as unfit they won’t work at all and Idaho pays more.
Idahoans voted and they support Medicaid expansion and so should our legislators.
Susan Scully
Lewiston
Governed by billionaire?
As a third-generation Idahoan watching from my family farm, I’m troubled by what’s happening in Washington, D.C. Our elected representatives seem perfectly comfortable letting Elon Musk make government decisions despite never facing voters at the ballot box.
The same politicians who rail against “unelected bureaucrats” are now taking orders from an unelected billionaire. They campaign on accountability but hand their responsibilities to a tech CEO who wasn’t chosen by any of us.
These representatives collect their taxpayer-funded paychecks while outsourcing their thinking to someone who wasn’t on any ballot in our district. How is this acceptable?
They call federal employees “lazy” while actively farming out their own constitutional duties. The hypocrisy should concern every taxpayer and voter.
Our system was designed for elected officials to make decisions on behalf of their constituents, not to surrender that power to whoever has the most money or social media followers.
I value self-reliance, limited government and the Constitution. That’s exactly why I’m asking: When did we decide government by billionaire was better than government by elected representatives?
Jaclyn Brock
Lenore
