Abigail Spanberger
Voting in the upcoming gubernatorial election will require voters to choose the path for economic health in Virginia.
Democratic candidate and former U.S. Rep. Abigail Spanberger paints herself as a moderate who would work with both sides to make Virginia prosperous and safe. Her voting record, the one she tried to move away from by quitting her job as the representative for the 7th Congressional District two years ago, indicates that she would repeal Virginia’s “right-to-work” law and defund the police. Neither of these positions would help this state.
She has insisted that she wouldn’t fully repeal the laws that allow Virginians to work without the threats or intimidation of labor unions, but that she wants to revise them. More disguise for an agenda to increase the power of those who want to cash in on Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s efforts to attract businesses to this state.
Unions don’t care about workers. They care about unions and the power to increase dues-paying membership so they can advance their agenda. This is not the way Virginia was built, and Spanberger wants to do away with a worker’s right to choose whether or not they wish to join.
She has taken a lot of union money, thereby earning the endorsement of several unions, including the Virginia Police Benevolent Association. When you vote for who will lead this state for the next few years, ask yourself if you want economic prosperity or beleaguered businesses that choose to move elsewhere.
Richard Timberlake, Williamsburg
Firearms
It is time to get the federal government out of the business of personal firearms. Amend the Constitution to make states responsible for personal firearms. That includes the assignment of liability for gun manufacturers.
I am not an attorney, but I assume from there states can assign responsibility to areas such as counties and cities, etc. If the residents in the various districts want less or more controls on firearms, they have a better chance of success through their local ballot box than the federal government.
It is time to move on from blaming the Constitution and allow the people in each state to embrace guns in a way that serves the residents’ interests.
John Perryman, Virginia Beach
Pro-life stance?
A central tenet among elective conservative Republicans is the unwavering stance against abortion, a significant issue in health care policy. As a Catholic, I do not support abortion; however, I oppose the removal of a woman’s constitutional right to this important health care issue.
Yet, what many conservative Republicans do not acknowledge is that their actions demonstrate a focus on the “pro-gestational” period rather than genuinely supporting the lives of new citizens.
Most troubling is the reality that firearms have become the leading cause of death among children in the United States. Despite guns exceeding the country’s population, conservative lawmakers do little to ensure the safety of children. They push for funding cuts or reductions to essential programs such as SNAP, Medicaid and Medicare, and even fail to assist the homeless youth.
Efforts to dismantle the federal Department of Education further highlights this inconsistency. Shifting budgetary responsibilities to states, many of which lack adequate resources, threatens to undermine the foundational role of public education, which is crucial to a functioning democracy.
President Donald Trump has also targeted “Research 1” universities, aiming to halt research activities, especially in the medical field, even though funds have previously been allocated. These policies jeopardize academic tenure and weaken free speech, a key principle of constitutional government.
While the label “pro-life” suggests comprehensive support for all citizens, these examples reveal that conservative Republicans often fail to support new citizens beyond the gestational stage.
David N. Camaione, Virginia Beach