Cut spending, Sen. Casey |
Letters to the Editor

Cut spending, Sen. Casey

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., spoke Aug. 17 to a group of Westmoreland County business and government leaders ( “Sen. Casey holds roundtable talk in Jeannette” ).

Sen. Casey, do you understand anything? Grants? Isn’t that why people elected Trump — to cut the budget? We have a $20 trillion national debt (and still growing), and we can’t cut spending? You can’t keep borrowing money to give away.

What about the people who have to take pay cuts just to keep their jobs because their employers sent jobs overseas, or who lost their jobs because employers were overtaxed and left the country or closed?

Why can’t every elected official and government worker take pay cuts and help reduce the national, state or county debt? Or is Casey just wanting to buy votes?

I had to take a 25-percent pay cut and learned to live with it. Why can’t these officeholders do the same? Maybe Casey, along with Westmoreland County Commissioners Ted Kopas and Gina Cerilli, should take a 25-percent pay cut to show they can help reduce the debt.

As for the presidents of St. Vincent College and Pitt-Greensburg stressing “the importance of full funding for the Pell grants that students rely on for tuition expenses”: Doesn’t everyone have expenses? Plan for it. Or maybe St. Vincent and Pitt should cut tuition to help them.

I’m tired of paying for everyone else.

Cliff Long


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.