ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Preserve printed newspapers |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Preserve printed newspapers

Recent hearings on C-Span with Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross exposed some truths. Previous administrations were willing to give power to an unconstitutional, unelected World Trade Organization, removing the constitutional decree that Congress regulate trade. U.S. senators engaged with Ross regarding the harm to hard-copy printing of newspapers due to tariffs placed on subsidized Canadian newsprint (uncoated groundwood, or UGW, paper), which is used to keep costs down for customers and accommodate employment and other company requirements.

U.S. paper-mill industries have been dismantled or reduced in capacity due to regulations and trade deals that too many in Congress agreed to. Congress’ involvement only required an up or down vote on trade deals, worked out at the international level without their input.

I urge you to contact U.S. Sen. Bob Casey and ask him to co-sponsor and push passage of the PRINT Act, S2835, co-sponsored, to his credit, by Sen. Pat Toomey. The act suspends tariffs on imported UGW paper until the Commerce Department completes an economic study of the newspaper and publishing industries. Once the study is complete, then the president would have to certify this tax on imported UGW paper is in the United States’ best interest.

Taxpayers and government-subsidized schools and entities get their online upgrades due to taxpayer dollars doled out to them. Preserving printed newspapers assures easily accessible information.

Regina Liermann

Kiski Township

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.