Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard
Link copied to clipboard

Letters to the Editor | May 21, 2025

Inquirer readers on Qatar's gift jet, removing healthcare barriers, and U.S. defense spending.

President Donald Trump holds up a pen given by Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani as they exchange documents during a signing ceremony at the Amiri Diwan in Doha, Qatar, last week.
President Donald Trump holds up a pen given by Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani as they exchange documents during a signing ceremony at the Amiri Diwan in Doha, Qatar, last week.Read moreAlex Brandon / AP

Trojan jet

Donald Trump said turning down a free jet plane from Qatar is “stupid.” Almost as stupid as the story of the Greeks snookering the Trojans with a big, beautiful wooden horse. Trump wants to graciously accept the plane and forget about thinking the gift plane could have a bunch of hidden surveillance devices at no extra charge. And surely, Trump’s benefactors would not consider including a feature that could override the pilots’ control of the plane to hijack it from a remote location. Of course, Trump would not accept the plane without the “strong words of assurance” that the plane was not rigged — even if he could not trust the assurance that voting machines were not rigged. Maybe Trump could get Elon Musk and his DOGE boys to do a thorough teardown of the plane to guarantee its absolute security. What could possibly go wrong?

Wayne Williams, Malvern

Selective outrage

Gov. Josh Shapiro is drawing criticism from Republicans for using the private helicopter of billionaire Michael Rubin for official travel. The $68,000 cost is reimbursed by his campaign. Rubin, CEO of Fanatics, a sports apparel company, is, among other things, an American philanthropist. Republicans, on the other hand, haven’t said a word about President Donald Trump’s acceptance of a luxury jet worth $400 million from the Qataris, a foreign government that supports terrorism. Shapiro’s use of Rubin’s helicopter is legal under Pennsylvania campaign law. Trump’s acceptance of Qatar’s 747 violates the emoluments clause of the Constitution. Republicans bristle at the former and are silent on the latter. See how this works?

Steven Barrer, Huntingdon Valley, [email protected]

Remove barriers

As threats to Medicare funding loom, the need for accessible primary care for all is more urgent than ever — especially in underserved urban and rural communities. One clear, evidence-based solution, already embraced by 27 states, is to allow full practice authority for advanced registered nurse practitioners (ARNPs). These nurses graduate from primary care programs at triple the rate of physicians, are more likely to serve in rural and underserved communities, and are more likely to provide care for Medicare, charitable, and uninsured patients.

A recent study showed that states with full practice authority ranked higher on overall state health, clinical care, quality of care, and access to care than states with restricted or reduced practice authority. Currently, ARNPs in Pennsylvania have restricted practice authority, which places unnecessary barriers to access to care. Three years ago, Penn Nursing received a transformative gift to establish the Leonard A. Lauder Community Care Nurse Practitioner Program. This historic investment provides full tuition for ARNP students and supports collaborations with community-based centers.

Penn Nursing can educate and deploy ARNPs to the communities that need them most. To date, more than 20 graduates have gone on to care for communities throughout the U.S. — yet only six remain in Pennsylvania. We need full practice authority for ARNPs. Gov. Josh Shapiro, in his budget proposal, supports this policy. The General Assembly has the power to make this change. It is past time to grant ARNPs full practice authority if we truly are committed to the health of individuals, families, and communities in the commonwealth.

Antonia Villarruel, dean, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing

Indefensible spending

Can anyone explain why the defense budget needs to be increased? Are we not essentially at peace? Does it not stand to reason that after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ended, our military spending should decrease? And while we are supposedly attempting to root out waste, fraud, and abuse in government spending, should the U.S. Department of Defense not be subject to the same scrutiny as any other department? I mean, no one at the U.S. Department of Education ever accidentally dropped two $60 million fighter jets into the ocean. While we’re at it, $60 million for a fighter jet, really? Where’s all that money going? Lots of legislators complain about “throwing money at problems,” but no one objects to throwing money at defense contractors and their investors and CEOs like there’s no tomorrow.

Patrick J. Ream, Millville

Negotiate, not surrender

Vladimir Putin is playing Donald Trump like a fiddle. The so-called peace deal does not reflect any concessions on the part of Russia. Trump’s response to this was that Russia would not take any more land. Oh, the evil dictator bully will only take one quarter of your marbles and then leave the playground. The hubris of Russia to launch an attack on Kyiv, followed by more attacks on civilians in the lead up to a peace deal, only underlines the fact that Russia is not a good-faith partner.

Ukrainians were once again killed. The people of Ukraine have put up a valiant battle defending their sovereignty against a monster dictator hell-bent on acquiring territory with the goal of reconstituting the Soviet empire. Ukraine deserves a deal that returns land taken by force, without provocation, along with an agreement securing it from further aggression by Russia. That would be accomplished by allowing Ukraine to become a member of NATO. But that would require a skillful negotiator and a president willing to hold Putin accountable.

Maria Duca, Philadelphia

Fairness, please

The recent Inquirer article on the Wildwood tram cars was truly fascinating, as it involves something we all grew up with. I’m very fortunate to own a second home in Wildwood Crest, and I know how important this icon is to locals and visitors alike. That said, while the piece covers an interesting development on the boardwalk, I was surprised and disappointed by the tone used when referencing the Wildwood Video Archive website.

Rather than sticking to the news itself — that hybrid trucks may one day replace the tram’s towing cars — the article seemed to take an unnecessary jab at a platform that’s widely respected for its local coverage, especially in South Jersey. What I found most fascinating is that, while the article implies that the Archive’s reporting was exaggerated or incorrect, CBS News aired a segment that essentially confirmed the Archive’s reporting and, in some ways, contradicted The Inquirer.

While The Inquirer takes issue with the Archive for writing about the truck and calling it “a ‘major transformation’ for the tram cars, suggesting an overhaul of the system,” the CBS report quotes Mayor Patrick Rosenello saying the tram engines will need to be replaced within the next decade and “the Ford Maverick is a more cost-effective alternative.” To me, that does represent a “major transformation” — especially for a system that has remained visually and mechanically consistent for decades. And for a community that’s deeply attached to its traditions, any change like this is worth highlighting.

As a longtime Inquirer reader, I’m writing to encourage the kind of respectful collaboration and accuracy I know the newspaper strives for. The Wildwood Video Archive may be a smaller outlet, but it plays an essential role in keeping South Jersey informed — just as Inquirer reporting does for the Greater Philadelphia region.

Giselle Marzo, Gloucester Township

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.