Bottle bill a burden on small business

I read that state legislators are considering implementing a bottle deposit system in Rhode Island (“Could this be the year of a bottle bill in RI?” News, March 7) and I have real concerns about what the increased costs of this idea would do to working families and small businesses like mine.

I care about reducing litter and protecting our environment. But a bottle bill would force small businesses like mine to spend more up front and take on the administrative burdens of running this program. Small businesses are having a tough time dealing with high prices. We cannot afford to take on more costs. 

I hope that lawmakers stand with small businesses, our employees and customers who need relief from higher prices and costs and will reconsider moving forward with a bottle bill. It would be better if lawmakers focus on ways to protect our environment that do not add financial burdens on business owners. 

One of these ways that’s been proposed by state leaders is an Extended Producer Responsibility program that boosts recycling for all recyclables, not just bottles and cans. This modern system has been used successfully elsewhere to increase recycling rates. And the cost is covered by the producers of packaging materials, not by consumers or small businesses. I hope that leaders will consider this more cost-effective and less burdensome approach instead of adding more costs to Rhode Island’s working families and small businesses.

Reyes Galindo, Providence

Missing points in AG’s gun-crime report

A couple of things were glaringly missing from the article about the attorney general’s report on gun crime in Rhode Island (“AG releases report on gun crime in RI,” News, April 5).

First, not a single word about any arrests involving so-called ”assault weapons.” Arrests for possession of large-capacity magazines were mentioned, but nothing about arrests for possession or use of “assault weapons.”  Yet, our legislators want to ban possession of these rifles by law-abiding citizens?  Apparently, they want to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.

Second, the AG says the report is meant to show how successful his office has been in enforcing current gun laws.  If he has been so successful, why does he need additional gun laws?

Most bothersome is the AG’s statement that “hundreds if not thousands” of older gun cases are still pending, one dating back to 1978.  Doesn’t this statement prove that he’s not enforcing current gun laws?  Yet, he wants to add more gun laws to the books. 

Unbelievable!

Lonnie Barham, Warwick

Cannabis harmful to pregnant women

In response to the column by John J. Tassoni Jr. (“State’s cannabis profits should fund drug treatment, prevention,” Commentary, April 8), I say ditto. The chemicals in marijuana, particularly THC, can pass from the mother to the baby through the placenta during pregnancy and through breast milk after birth.

Repeated research has shown that cannibis use while pregnant or breastfeeding will lead to several complications that include lower birth weight, premature birth, and brain developmental problems for the baby. 

It is crucial for all people to understand these risks and make informed decisions. It is critically important that pregnant or breastfeeding women avoid using cannabis in any form ‒ whether by smoking, vaping, edibles, or oils. 

Might I suggest requiring an escrow of cannabis profits to fund the extra resources and special education services required by these newborns.

Dr. John Concannon, Cranston

RI enriched by Endowment for the Humanities

Rhode Islanders should be deeply concerned about the latest efforts by DOGE to dismantle the very institutions that enrich our communities and preserve our shared history. By targeting the National Endowment for the Humanities, DOGE is threatening to substantially reduce staff, cut grant programs, and even rescind funding that has already been awarded.

The consequences of these cuts would be devastating. NEH funding supports vital programs in education, public history, libraries, and cultural institutions across Rhode Island. It helps teachers bring history to life in classrooms, sustains museums that showcase our local heritage, and funds research that deepens our understanding of the world. Without NEH support, many of these programs will disappear, leaving a void that will be difficult ‒ if not impossible ‒ to fill.

Rhode Islanders have long understood the value of the humanities in shaping our communities, fostering civic engagement, and driving economic development through arts and cultural tourism. The attack on the NEH is an attack on the very fabric of our state’s cultural and educational institutions.

We must not allow this to happen. Congress must take action to prevent these reckless cuts and protect the NEH’s critical role in supporting education and the humanities. The people of Rhode Island ‒ and the nation ‒ deserve better.

William Stark, Newport

Let Trump balance the budget

Looking at the front page of The Journal I see the headline “Trump’s cuts have cost RI $91.6M” (News, April 2).

Well, maybe our political leaders, who are constantly voting themselves more raises, should have waited instead of tripping over themselves grabbing for more pay and more benefits! How about cutting back on the number of politicians in this state.

Yes, President Trump has a responsibility to balance the budget, not give away the house like Joe Biden. Yes, we must pull up our bootstraps and be efficient as well as cost effective in government, to clean up the Biden Hole in our nation’s bank account.

Donald Trump will be the first POTUS to balance the budget. Get some tough skin for the sake of others!

Arthur Russo, Cranston

Questions for the protesters

I am a retired Air Force veteran and a lifelong Rhode Island resident. I consider myself an independent voter who believes our political leaders past and present have not always done what was best for Rhode Islanders. 

If the people of Rhode Island want to spend their time protesting like in the recent “Hands Off!” rally, here are some valid and true concerns that should reflect in the chants and signs.  Why do we have a higher cost for taxes, utilities, medical care, and automobile insurance in Rhode Island?  Why does a small state like ours spend more dollars per resident than states that are larger in population?

No matter what political preference, we need to begin electing local and congressional politicians that are going to support policies that are best for Rhode Islanders no matter who the president happens to be.

David Zinno, Wakefield