To the Editor:

Jim Cameron’s commentary to Hearst Newspapers is a truly welcome addition.

As a former commuter for over 17 years, I have always listened to his honest and truthful perspective and his foresight has always been spot-on.

Never subjective, but always clear and an excellent advocate for any traveler, whether by train or other vehicle, Jim’s candor and knowledge is most appreciated in these often difficult commuting times.

Thanks for all you share, Jim.

Michael Lennhoff


Phony rhetoric

To the Editor:

Trump phony rhetoric (aka lie) exposed: Exhibit “A.” “We will build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it,” is now “We will build a wall, U.S. taxpayers will pay for it, and we will ask Mexico to reimburse us.”

Buyers’ remorse to follow soon. Sad.

Richard Ross


A good resolution

To the Editor:

A new year is usually the time when we make personal resolutions to improve ourselves: eating right, exercising, having more patience.

As I think about the state of our environment, this may be the year to also make resolutions to improve the world around us.

Climate change affects everyone, including our parents, our children and our grandchildren.

We can no longer sit back as the impact of global warming intensifies and threatens our beaches, our drinking water and the air we breathe — the quality of our lives. We need to take action.

One good first step is to work together for bipartisan Congressional solutions to environmental problems, including a revenue-neutral carbon tax. This tax would put a steadily rising fee on the amount of carbon dioxide that fossil fuel emits when burned, with the revenue returned directly to our households. This approach would reduce emissions and add jobs.

Please make a resolution to work on climate change solutions and save our world.

Barbara Edinberg


Address the threat

To the Editor:

Global warming is one of the most serious threats to the quality of life on our planet.

Ninety-seven percent of all scientists studying global warming agree it is primarily caused by man-made activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels. What can we do about it? At times like these we need to be creative.

I’m a member of Citizens Climate Lobby. Our organization suggests a carbon tax and dividend approach.

This would mean carbon would be taxed and thereby increase the cost of gasoline, etc. The increased cost would discourage use like cigarette taxes discourage use.

The revenue received would be given back to each individual or family in the form of a monthly rebate. So the total tax received would be given back to taxpayers.

The administrative cost of the rebate is estimated at less than 1 percent.

Larry Ludwig


Congress must step up

To the Editor:

Until now, the U.S. policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has been driven by executive action through the Clean Power Plan to limit greenhouse gas emissions at electrical generation facilities.

This is our commitment as the world’s second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide when we signed the Paris Climate Agreement.

With the new administration likely to rescind climate initiatives, we must turn to Congress to provide a solution.

The policy that has the best chance of attracting support from both Republicans and Democrats is a revenue-neutral fee on carbon. The carbon fee and dividend approach levies a steadily-rising fee on carbon dioxide emitted by fuel from oil or gas wells or coal mines and border adjustment tariffs on goods imported from nations lacking an equivalent price on carbon.

The revenue from the fee would be returned to all households.

The election exposed the risk of depending on executive actions to reduce climate threats. Congress must provide effective bipartisan action through a revenue-neutral fee to offer the promise of a livable world for future generations.

Monica Roche