The administration is considering a plan to end all humanitarian aid to Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Somalia, and Zimbabwe. These programs survived the initial USAID purge precisely because they were judged to be lifesaving by the administration’s own standards. However, an internal State Department email now suggests these cuts are moving forward because “there is no strong nexus between the humanitarian response and U.S. national interests.”
Foreign assistance accounts for less than 1% of the federal budget, yet it is vital for meeting the basic survival needs of people facing starvation. As a former senior State Department official noted, “If we don’t deliver this, people die immediately.”
Beyond the moral imperative, cutting off aid presents serious national security risks. When humanitarian support vanishes, terrorist groups often rush to fill the vacuum, distributing food to bolster their local legitimacy and recruitment efforts.
Rep. Mike Turner and Senators Bernie Moreno and Jon Husted should ask State Department officials to provide a more detailed explanation of these potential aid cuts and clarify their impact on U.S. national interests in these countries. We cannot afford the human or security costs of walking away.
Tito Odenigbo
Centerville
Emphasize rehabilitation over punishment
Your front page article on Feb. 28 indicated that Dayton Correctional Institute has the lowest level of staffing in Ohio.
Prisons certainly need correct staffing. What concerns me is the remedy being proposed by lawmakers, HB 338, known as Andy’s Law. Rep. Phil Plummer, a former sheriff over a jail, is advocating for more punishment and less rehabilitation in prison.
Most prisoners will get out. We need to focus on rehabilitation right away, and that includes education for higher level offenders.
In my experience at DCI, level of offense does not directly correlate to the behavior of the incarcerated person. Don’t punish everyone. Emphasize rehabilitation over punishment.
The Rev. Alice Diebel
Dayton
No property taxes will hurt Ohio
Ohioans think by abolishing the property tax, it will be a win win in their favor.
Think again.
That money is going to have to be replaced from somewhere, and that somewhere will come from you, in the form of substantial increases in income and sales tax.
Don’t fall for the line by abolishing property tax, “It will limit government overreach and support the family unit.” It will do the opposite.
The Ohio state legislature will be able to control and have power to dictate to Ohioans the funding of services like schools, police, firefighters, and local services. They will determine who, where, how, and what money is spent.
It appears the people trying to sell Ohioans on not paying property tax, are attempting to model Ohio after Washington D.C., and we have seen what a disaster this has been for Americans and the states.
Have people forgotten in 2018, Ohioans voted overwhelmingly for no gerrymandering, but we still have it. LaRose has always bragged about Ohio having the most secure elections, but yet he and DeWine capitualted to Trump’s wishes by banning the grace period for mail in ballots.
Does this sound like a legislature who should control local and state decisions?
Dana Pavlis
Dayton
Let’s go to the Indiana plan
A fairer way to replace the money from property taxes is to do what Indiana does and get the dollars from vehicle registration.
It decreases as the vehicle ages.
The higher priced the vehicle is the higher the fee is. This tax is fairer because every one pays not just the property owners.
Karen S Flaugher
Miamisburg
Time to give seniors more of a break
As a senior, it is a hardship paying property taxes.
Eliminating property taxes would keep people in their homes but what if this only applied to seniors? That would only be a fraction of lost revenue.
Or eliminate school taxes for seniors. We’ve paid for numerous generations of kids.
Give us a break.
Susan Norsworthy
Vandalia