Letters From Our Readers

Annlinn Kruger, Jayne Ashworth

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR POLICY

We welcome letter submissions to The Bar Harbor Story; for details on our policy, please visit our about page and scroll down or just visit here.

The beliefs, opinions, and viewpoints expressed by the writers of letters to the editor and included here do not necessarily reflect the beliefs, opinions, and viewpoints or official policies of The Bar Harbor Story.

All the past letters to the editor can be found on the Substack site here.

---

Budget Scheme

This past week Republicans again voted for a budget scheme which attempts to balance perpetuating cuts to revenue with unprecedented cuts to essential and emergency services.

On the revenue side, we've seen DOGE obstructing the IRS's ability to collect taxes owed; the DOGE cuts have made it harder for those who want to pay their taxes to get help and easier for those who don't want to pay their taxes to get away with it. Under the Biden administration, IRS funding was allocated to improving routine customer services, including access by phone and on-line. Notably, funding was also allocated to hiring the forensic accountants needed to audit the thousands of pages tax returns of the ultra wealthy who use loop holes, tax shelters, and quasi legal tactics for avoiding taxes—available only to the ultra wealthy. (For instance, Trump's numerous bankruptcies gave contractors pennies on the dollars they were owed by Trump, while giving Trump years of tax exemptions.) Under the Republican regime, workers providing crucial IRS services have been terminated. This year, amid the chaos, the IRS is predicting that it will collect $500 billion less in revenue.

On the services side, under cover of the battle cry of cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, the uninformed, undisciplined, and unaccountable DOGE is actually a prime example of waste, fraud and abuse. DOGE is costing taxpayers in: wasteful government payments to DOGE staff and the teams of government lawyers having to clean up after them; fraudulent unsubstantiated DOGE claims of savings; and in abusive DOGE practices, which thankfully are to some degree being reversed in court but are still leaving thousands of government workers, and we who rely on their services, in limbo. There is no way Republicans can achieve their stated goal without slashing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—directly by cutting benefits, indirectly by making it impossible to claim earned benefits, and through privatization which would effectively end the programs as we know them. (For instance, Medicare Advantage's for profit tactics - denying services and payments—have compromised healthcare and are closing hospitals.)

Now comes President Trump's tariffs. On one hand Trump's defenders are saying the tariffs are a bargaining tool to bring other nations to the negotiating table. On the other, they are saying they will bring business back to the United States. While intelligently negotiated trade policy might accomplish some of both, Trump's scheme makes these goals mutually exclusive—in this context, negotiating lower tariffs disincentivizes bringing manufacturing to the U. S. (Perhaps, Republicans—who are antagonistic towards unions, collective bargaining, and the minimum wage—want to commit Americans to working for lower wages, with no safety standards, no benefits, and no pensions.) Another self-contradictory aspect of the Trump tariff scheme, is the regime's assertion that we must hit our trade partners and allies with a tariff sledge hammer to bring them to the table, but we cannot apply the tariffs to Russia because that might keep Putin from coming to the table. This seems backwards, at best.

But worst of all, the Republican motto is now Fake It As You Break It. It is one thing for Republicans to lie in Congress, at rallies, and to the news. It is another much more serious thing to be faking the official numbers—the data on which economic analyses and policy decisions are based. This is what Republicans are now doing throughout government: in how they calculated the tariffs (magic math and magical thinking—leading to imposing tariffs on an island inhabited by penguins); in scoring the effects of their tax cuts (i.e., using the novel 'current policy baseline' to zero out the impact of their tax cuts); and omitting government spending from the GDP (to hide the impact of their taxes, spending, deficits, and deregulation on overall growth.) This is not Trump lying about his crowd numbers, golf scores, and property values. This is Republicans destroying the full faith and credit of the United States. Are you comfortable with this crew taking their proposed trip to Fort Knox? Neither are millions of people across the nation and the world, who joined in April 5 Hands Off Protests. From a sense of duty to our neighbors, our nation, and the world we share.

Annlinn Kruger

Bar Harbor

---

Letter to Rep. Faulkingham About His Deer Hunting Bill

Dear Representative Faulkingham,

I read with interest the story in the Bar Harbor Story about the bill you have introduced into the Maine legislature to allow deer hunting on Mount Desert Island, Maine. (see: the Bar Harbor Story article) The bill is listed in the 132nd Maine Legislature as LD 1438, Resolve, Regarding Deer Hunting on Mount Desert Island.

I am wondering:

• What prompted you to introduce this bill, which seems to have nothing to do with the locality you represent? For example, did residents from Mount Desert Island approach you to ask you to introduce this bill? If yes, what were their reasons for approaching you and not working locally to make this action happen?

• Why are there no local Maine legislature representatives who are listed as sponsoring the bill? Did you invite Rep. Eaton, Rep. Friedmann, and Sen. Grohoski to co-sponsor the bill? If yes, what was their response?

• Did you have conversations with the local elected leaders here on Mount Desert Island (the town council in Bar Harbor, the select boards of the towns of Mount Desert, Southwest Harbor, and Tremont), and/or any contact with the town managers of any of those towns before introducing the bill?

I am confident that there are reasons why hunting on Mount Desert Island, Maine, should be allowed, as well as reasons why it should be prohibited, but I think the decision likely should involve input from the people who live here, as well as from their hired and elected government representatives, both local and state.

Please help me understand what you and the other sponsors of the bill are attempting to accomplish.

Thank you.

Jayne Ashworth

Resident, Town of Tremont

---