Don't litter Chicago River with digital signs
At Friends of the Chicago River, we wholeheartedly agree with the Chicago Sun-Times’ June 26 editorial “Digital signs along the Chicago River? The idea is all wet.” The mayor and the City Council should quickly nix this misguided proposal, which has gone as far as being discussed at a City Council Subcommittee on Revenue.
Our city leaders should take care not to pit economic growth against the value of nature and environmental health. Studies over the past two decades show that spending time outdoors and near water, such as our world-renowned Chicago-Calumet River, boosts the immune system, lowers blood pressure, reduces stress, improves mood, increases focus, accelerates recovery from surgery or illness, increases energy levels and improves sleep. Our beautiful riverfront and public parks are sanctuaries of respite away from the challenges of urban life, including the deluge of advertising clutter. Living in the city does not need to be devoid of living in nature.
Digital advertising billboards would also mar the beauty of the Chicago Riverwalk. As the editorial insightfully notes, “Along with the lakefront and our park system … the river is one of the things that make this city special. People seeking the experience of being on the river shouldn’t be greeted by garish digital signage winking, blinking and flashing at them.”
Let us not litter the riverwalk and our public parks with digital advertising, which will also contribute to harmful light pollution, a significant threat to birds who use the river and parks to nest and rest, and as a migratory flyway. Rather, let us commit ourselves to smart public policy that enhances the health benefits of being outdoors along our majestic river and the river itself.
Margaret Frisbie, executive director, Friends of the Chicago River
SEND LETTERS TO: letters@suntimes.com. To be considered for publication, letters must include your full name, your neighborhood or hometown and a phone number for verification purposes. Letters should be a maximum of approximately 375 words.
Conservative court poses dangers
The Supreme Court again delayed a definitive decision affecting abortion in Moyle v. U.S. This ruling does not settle that an abortion ban by a state should not have precedence over the federal mandate that hospitals must appropriately care for any person presenting themselves to an emergency department.
I once had a miscarriage, just past the first trimester, and was hemorrhaging so significantly that I needed an emergency procedure. Had this occurred in Idaho while the Supreme Court was intervening on this issue, it may have been considered an illegal abortion.
I have no doubt those current Supreme Court justices, handpicked by billionaires and the Federalist Society, are wedded to empowering their religious views over our health care needs. The MAGA-sympathetic justices unsurprisingly ruled to dismantle or disallow federal regulations that offered protections we have hitherto entrusted to our national government for clean air and water and against securities fraud. We need the government to limit actions by the wealthy and monopoly corporate interests.
Whoever wins the presidency may have the opportunity to appoint several Supreme Court justices. It is imperative that we the people vote this November in such a way as to strengthen institutions to protect all of us, and not give the minority's views dominion over our collective freedoms.
Geralynn Kahn M.D., North Center
Trump’s a threat to the country
On June 23, you published a letter to the editor from William Dodd Brown ("Will Donald Trump ever wake up and see the light?") That publication decision is a serious disservice to your readership and harmful to the entire country.
Entertaining the possibility that Trump "will see the light" effectively dilutes and even sanitizes the threat Trump poses to this country. We’ve had nine to 10 years of Trump and, before that, his vulgarity and depravity were well-known. "Seeing the light" is not even a possibility.
The 45th occupant of the White House is an individual possessed of not a single virtue, dispossessed of not a single vice. Endorsing (at least tacitly) the hope of some astounding transformation of his character is irresponsible. A parent would not take that chance selecting a babysitter. Newspapers should shun that consideration. The electorate should similarly exercise the most exacting standards when filling the office of the presidency in this nuclear age.
MAGA wants a bigot in the White House. They can try to disguise that truth and protest that accusation all they want: Nothing else matters to them, civically.
MAGA needs to be called out. Their agenda, shared with the agenda of the morbidly rich, is one of maximizing inequality. Hate, even when unprovoked, is overwhelmingly powerful and explanatory, historically. "Bigot" and "bigotry" are the most underutilized words in our current political lexicon.
MAGA is willing to disregard every transgression, and Trump knows it: 100%, they’ll vote for him even if he murders an anonymous individual on 5th Avenue. And 45’s assessment even understates his support: MAGA is sticking with him despite his continuous efforts to hang our democracy.
Gregg Mumm, Oak Park
The problem with EVs
A McKinsey & Co. survey of American electric vehicle owners reveals nearly half are likely to switch to internal combustion engine cars on their next purchase. The biggest reason: poor U.S. charging infrastructure. Norway is doing better: 87% of new car sales there are electric vehicles. That puts Norway well ahead of the U.S. America doesn't do very well at infrastructure, along with national health care, mental health services, housing for the homeless, reducing gun violence, government-paid higher education, promoting peace over war. But the U.S. is tops in further enriching the rich with tax cuts to go along with woeful enforcement of tax laws. America ignores that wise aphorism: Those who die with the most money still lose.
Walt Zlotow, Glen Ellyn