Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Support bill to mitigate coal pollution

Re: “State must protect East Bay from Trump’s toxic coal threat” (Page A6, Aug. 18).

As new residents of Oakland, my wife and I see, hear and smell the Port of Oakland from our home. We moved to a historic manufacturing building on the Jack London waterfront this spring and do not want coal dust filling our lungs or home.

I recently read The Mercury News commentary supporting Assembly Bill 40 by Veronica Eady, executive director of West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project, and I agree that this $75 million Defense Production Act does nothing to make my community safer.

I believe that selling “cheap” American coal to Chinese and other Asian markets does not further our national priority toward energy independence.

What selling American coal means is selling out on America’s health and exacerbating poor human and environmental indicators. I encourage readers and leaders to review the community-led research and organizing from No Coal In Oakland and support The Community First Coal Review Act

.Ryan Gaul
Oakland

Column misinforms on billionaire wealth tax

Re: “Search beyond state budgets to discover real spending data” (Page A6, Aug. 21).

In his column, Dan Walters presents excellent data that reveal California financial profligacy and opacity, for example: our general fund spending rose from 7.9% of personal income in 2019-20 to 9.4% today.

However, Walters misinforms us about the Proposition 40 wealth tax, conflating billionaires with those with high taxable incomes. Our “top” three billionaires (Sergey Brin, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg) each earn $1 in annual salary. But Brin’s wealth has increased by $170 billion from 2020 to today. How much income tax has he paid? Probably very little, possibly none. He’s not propping up state finances. That’s why we need a wealth tax, and why any departure of our oligarchs won’t be a calamity.

Doug McKenzie
Berkeley

Transit tax opponents are not advocates

Re: “Lawsuit calls tax measure wording ‘biased’” (Page A1, Aug. 21).

The article refers to the complainants as “tax advocates.” They are not tax “advocates.”

They are tax haters — even though taxes paid by our parents and grandparents built and maintain our highways, schools, libraries, parks, public hospitals, fire departments and myriad other public services. These avaricious folks hate all taxes and would refuse to contribute to the maintenance of these services. They do not merit the platform you afford them.

Please do not refer to these people as tax “advocates.” They advocate no taxes — they advocate the collapse of our society. Your article should have called them what they are — opponents of all taxes and opponents of all government services and public infrastructure.

Douglas Hammer
Oakland

To be strong, third party needs platform

Re: “Our politics require a strong third party” (Page A10, Aug. 23).

I agree with Jim Kenna’s letter in which he asserts that we need a third party to challenge the two corrupt and out-of-touch establishment parties, both Republicans and Democrats. Unfortunately, he avoids the major issues such a party must address.

First, we must advocate for detente between the major nuclear-armed powers, especially the U.S.and Russia. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists warns us that the danger of nuclear war is the highest since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1963. A nuclear war would destroy civilization as we know it.

Second, we must address the worsening global climate crisis before large areas of the planet become uninhabitable. This requires major carbon reductions by limiting our reliance on fossil fuels.

Lastly, we must combat the burgeoning wealth gap that corrupts our democracy, enriching a tiny irresponsible elite who buy our politicians and make serious political reform difficult to nearly impossible.

Michael Dunlap
Oakland

Trump truthful in saying he wouldn’t save lives

Re: “President Trump honors teen lifeguard, boy he rescued” (Page A1, Aug. 18).

The only true words I have heard from Donald J. Trump are in this article referring to lifeguard Ryder Williams. “He’s a real hero.” “I don’t know if I’d do it. I wouldn’t probably. You’re lucky I wasn’t on the service that day.”

Unfortunately, he is on the service of the United States of America, which he would probably like to name The United States of Trump. How can anyone support him? He is dangerous.

Virginia Kamp
Berkeley

Renaming carrier for Trump dishonors hero

It is with sadness and disgust that I read about the Navy considering renaming the aircraft carrier under construction from the “Doris Miller” to the “Donald J. Trump.”

Doris Miller was a genuine hero who risked his life at Pearl Harbor to both carry wounded sailors on the battleship West Virginia and then, despite having no training, manning a machine gun to defend the ship which was under attack.

Donald Trump avoided military service with a finding of “bone spurs,” reportedly issued by a doctor at the request of Donald’s father. I urge people to write the Navy and urge them not to change the name.

Roger Wood
Fremont