Letters to the Editor | April 20, 2025

Donald Trump has paid Salvadoran dictator Nayib Bukele $6 million to imprison about 300 immigrants who were kidnapped and internationally trafficked to the Central American country. Many of the kidnapped men have no criminal record. None of them received due process. One of the victims, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the government agrees was sent in error, was ordered to be returned by the U.S. Supreme Court. So far, the administration has done nothing to comply with the court’s order. President Trump has said he is going to start kidnapping and trafficking U.S. citizens, or as he calls us, “homegrowns.” I am terrified for the immigrant men who have been kidnapped. Who will be the “homegrowns” who are next? Rep. Chrissy Houlahan and Sens. John Fetterman and Dave McCormick are part of the federal government. What are they doing to protect their constituents?

Lynn Strauss, West Chester

A major investment in public transportation in 2025 would be a win-win for all of Pennsylvania. Yes, all Pennsylvania. A visionary and responsible policy would recognize that the Delaware Valley’s economic strength benefits the entire state, that our mobility and access rely on all our transportation modes performing well, that our vast system of state and local roads and bridges throughout the commonwealth relies in no small measure on our transit systems operating fully to the greatest extent possible, and that Pennsylvania isn’t getting any younger, and more people will be relying on public transit.

This is not in any way a zero-sum game, nor should it be seen as urban vs. rural. A cost-benefit analysis would clearly demonstrate that a major investment in public transportation would yield benefits far in excess of the expenditure. Let’s not make the mistake of thinking about public transportation as a cost. Of course, this investment need not preclude smart strategies to improve all facets of public transportation. Pennsylvania’s policymakers can leave a great legacy by investing in public transportation substantially now.

Keith Chase, Drexel Hill

While columnist Jenice Armstrong may not have known Elon Musk when she bought her Tesla in 2018, her “hubby,” a “big-time techie” who still owns Tesla stock, surely did. And Musk’s repugnant character was obvious even then. That year, he was sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission for securities fraud, and he slandered someone as a “pedo guy.” Nevertheless, buying a Tesla was defensible. What’s inexplicable is her choice to keep that Tesla despite Musk inflicting, as she acknowledges, an “unconscionable amount of damage on the federal government,” not to mention his support and encouragement of virulent Nazism, racism, and bigotry.

Equally baffling is her choice to publish self-serving Tesla apologia (only $326 for maintenance!) disguised as critique. While I do not support vandalism, Tesla owners like Armstrong are not owed public deference for their choices. Next time she has to “think twice” about where she parks her Tesla, she should consider how federal employees feel going into work every day, not knowing if they even have a job. Perhaps then she’ll realize her conscience matters more than her “convenience.”

Jared Mikulski, Washington

Join the conversation: Send letters to [email protected]. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.