tbo: Tampa Bay Online.
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
  • Home
Letters To The Editor

Letters to the editor: Poly folly continues

Poly folly continues

Regarding “Poly frosh will get full ride on tuition” (front page, Aug. 27):

Oh my; will wonders never cease? First we have a nonaccredited school forced on the state by the powers at the time in the state Legislature. Now, in order to compete, the school needs to pay the way for the first class? What am I missing here?

Due to the benevolence of the Florida Polytechnic University Foundation, they are looking to raise the money to pay the freight. The looming question is what happens if the foundation does not come up with the money after attracting the first class. What if they are not able to raise funds to pay for the first year or years two through four? What is Plan B, so to speak? Will these students be accepted if funds are not available to get them through the full four years?

I found it of interest that there also will be a graduate school there as well, and that it another story unto itself. All I can say is I wish the foundation luck in raising funds quickly. If only they had stayed under USF, all this could be avoided.

Frank Popeleski


Abuse of power

A recent letter defended some of President Obama’s questionable, and I believe unlawful, executive orders by giving a brief history of this presidential power, and the writer is correct — it has been used by many presidents. But contrary to what he implied, there is no direct granting of that authority in the Constitution.

When you consider the separation of powers, one of the main functions of the Constitution is that any executive orders should be used only to supplement a law passed by Congress or allow the president to act where no law exists. Executive orders should not be used to contradict or make direct changes to any law passed by Congress. To claim Obama has not done that sometimes, like with recent ones regarding “Obamacare,” is both misleading and patently false.

Daniel Montanez Jr.


Royals and peasants

The editorial last Sunday (“Fight Obamacare, not allies,” Our Views) suggests we should fight Obamacare. Why? It’s just beginning to have its desired effect.

Health insurance companies have gotten rich off their ability to insure the healthiest segment of our population and allow the elderly, children and people with chronic conditions to fund their own medical care or go without it. America’s workers are in the healthiest years of their lives ages 18 to 65. But who pays for the reminder of their lives? Obamacare is forcing insurance companies to cover more of the sick than they had to in the past. This is a good thing.

Obamacare is also forcing Americans to think about the funding of health care for their entire lives, not just the next few months. It is expensive, and the average American cannot afford it. Those individuals fighting against Obamacare are flippantly suggesting that those who can’t afford full-life health coverage are not deserving of this coverage, because they were somehow too lazy to earn enough money. This attitude puts us back in a society of the royals and the peasants.

If you believe that every citizen has an equal right to health care, then you should be working with the government to find ways to help peasants get their health care paid for by the economy they create. If you believe that only the royals deserve health care, then please leave my country. We can’t ignore that one’s view of the basic value of a person forms the crux of the health care debate.

Steven A. Enkemann


Weather Center