Illinois lawmakers have a last chance to pass Karina's Bill in 2024

When Illinois lawmakers convene this week for their last days of session in 2024, they must act on Karina’s Bill and Safe at Home legislation to prevent tragedies that result when guns fall into the wrong hands.

We’ve seen the headlines when children and teens or at-risk people access deadly weapons in their homes and use them to inflict tragedy on themselves and others. Or in the case of Karina Gonzalez and her daughter, when a known domestic violence abuser used a gun to end their lives.

Legislators must act on Karina’s Bill to remove guns from known domestic abusers when an order of protection is filed against them. They must pass the Safe At Home package to enhance what it means to safely store weapons and strengthen reporting requirements when firearms are lost and stolen to prevent them from being trafficked to commit crime and violence. The Safe At Home package has two proposals: the Safe Gun Storage Act and the Lost & Stolen Firearms Reporting Bill.

At a time when there are more guns in our country than people, and when one in three children lives in a home with a gun, we need our laws to better prevent minors, at-risk people, domestic abusers and criminals from accessing these deadly weapons.

Our laws must reflect the serious responsibility gun ownership carries and work to keep firearms out of the hands of people prohibited from using them.

Together, Karina’s Bill and Safe at Home will continue to act against the public health crisis of gun violence in the face of a lack of leadership from the new White House. When it comes to gun violence, there is no time to waste.

Kathleen Sances, president and CEO of Gun Violence Prevention PAC

GOP must say ‘no’ to ‘awful’ Cabinet picks

I am glad that Donald Trump's Cabinet picks are so universally awful. Maybe now Republicans will wake up and realize that they now have the responsibility of controlling Trump and saving our nation.

The election is over. They have the power they want. They have to realize if Congress is to have any reason to continue existing, they have to start saying no to Trump.

All it takes is a few Republicans with a heart and a spine to swing the votes.

Joyce Porter, Oak Park

Looking forward to Trump

Letter writer Kevin Kann’s bleak predictions for the upcoming Trump administration are a perfect example of why the vice president lost the election. She tried to scare the voters with half-baked, fear-based predictions of what she thought four more years of Trump would look like.

Thankfully, she failed miserably and lost the election. We've lived through four years of President Trump in the past, and America did well, with low inflation, low unemployment before the pandemic, lower gas prices and a more secure border.

This is what scared me about the possibility of four more years of Biden-Harris policies: high inflation, high costs for consumer goods and the appearance of an open border. I am looking forward to four more years of President Trump with optimism.

Mike Kirchberg, Little Italy

Trump’s past nuclear threats should scare us

I am a retired psychiatrist. Fifty years ago I was assigned temporary duty at Kimbrough Army Hospital in Fort Meade, Maryland. While there, I attended a lecture concerning the consequences of an atomic detonation at or near Washington, D.C., or alternatively, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

The immediate destruction and loss of life, coupled with the loss of life secondary to nuclear fallout was and still is horrifying. The predictions were subject to capacity and wind direction.

Our president-elect has previously discussed the use of tactical nuclear weaponry in modern military operations. This remains a sobering and haunting vision for me and I’m sure the majority of my fellow veterans.

I trust that our Joint Chiefs of Staff and military experts will remain steadfast in their opposition to such an endeavor.

To those currently serving, to those who have served, to their families who sacrificed for their service, stand tall. This old dogface salutes you and remains grateful for you and your love of country.

I never thought I would be proud to be known as a sucker and/or loser.

Sam Garloff, New Eastside

Dems accept ‘will of the people’

Yes, Democrats lost the presidential election. But unlike many Trump voters in 2020, we accept the will of the people. So enough already with Democrats’ tortured self-flagellation and the smug postmortems of pundits.

Contrary to the shaming rituals coursing through mass media, Kamala Harris didn’t “fail to see or hear” working-class Americans. Every domestic plan she offered was focused on addressing working-class economic woes and expanding our shrinking middle class.

Though we were in the minority Nov. 5, millions saw in Harris and Tim Walz two inspiring and exciting candidates, two warm and caring human beings. They worked hard, campaigned with joy and vigor, and respected the healthy traditions of civilized debate. Their speeches were coherent, often eloquent and free of violent overtones. Blessedly devoid of vulgarity, racism and cruelty.

So if the vote reflects any failure, it is the decision of the majority to reject the idea that, in public service, character is the ultimate and definitive qualification. The success of everything substantive — policy, politics, foreign relations — flows from the honor, dignity and wisdom of the occupant of the Oval Office.

Though the Harris-Walz ticket failed to deliver victory, they succeeded brilliantly, in only 100 days, in voicing a noble and aspirational dream for all of us. They carried themselves with heart, humanity and the positive energy of our true American ethos. These candidates, and their clearly articulated vision, are what I proudly voted for.

Character matters, as do morals and the rule of law. These values never really “lose.” They endure in the conscience and consciousness of individuals and nations. My vote? What I believe? No regrets. I have only gratitude and respect for the Harris/Walz candidacy.

Jane Artabasy, Glencoe

Biden, Dem allies failed party, country

In the wake of their latest defeat at the hands of Donald Trump, Democrats nationwide face hard questions. Chief among them: why the party leadership allowed President Joe Biden to stay on the Democratic ticket until it was far too late.

It is no secret that senior White House officials and congressional leaders opted to ignore — or even outright dismiss — the increasingly visible signs of Biden’s cognitive decline over the course of his presidency. It took a disastrous debate on national television for senior Democrats to finally admit what most people already knew, and to push Biden out in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. But, as we now know, this was too little too late.

These events raise unsettling questions about the Democratic Party’s priorities. Was it truly about protecting democracy, as they asserted again and again on the campaign trail, or was it about holding onto power? Many Democrats were content to leave this question unanswered following Biden’s defenestration, instead choosing to focus on getting Harris elected.

Had Harris managed to pull off a win, the afterglow of victory might well have been enough to let the Democrats sidestep a serious reckoning, as electoral success has a way of absolving political sins. But in the wake of defeat, the problem cannot so easily be brushed aside. Now, the Democratic Party must confront the hard questions.

While some may wish to lay the blame solely at Biden’s feet, the reality is that he was not acting alone. His closest advisers, senior Cabinet officials, and influential figures in Congress repeatedly assured the American public that the president was as sharp and capable as ever, claiming over and over again that he and only he could keep their party united and defeat Donald Trump. This deliberate misrepresentation, along with their strategic choice to avoid a primary and push forward with a struggling candidate, was a dangerous gamble — a gamble they lost.

There is a certain tragic irony in seeing a party that campaigned so passionately on democratic integrity and accountability allow its leaders to place political self-preservation above all else. America can and should expect more from its leaders, regardless of party affiliation.

John C. Engle, Logan Square

Fascism is almost here

On Jan. 20, 2025, Americans will be living under a fascist regime. Don’t believe it? Donald Trump’s former chief of staff, General John Kelly, has provided us with a succinct definition of fascism. Project 2025 and Agenda47 fill in the details.

Four years from now, if we have a free and fair election or any election and if the American people reject the regime, it will take a generation to restore our democratic institutions and clean up the mess.

Eleanor Shunas, West Ridge

Dems should stick with progressive ideals

First, it was the reversal of 50 years of precedent on abortion. It could expand to a federal restriction on personal freedoms.

The president-elect threatens to enact the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. Deploying the U.S. military domestically to round up and deport the “enemy within.” At that point, there wouldn’t be much further in American history for the wannabe-authoritarians to take us back to.

So, where do those who oppose authoritarianism go from here? Do we allow Democrats to continue to run on legislative compromises rather than our ideals? Will compromises ever feed our country’s decade-long hunger for change? I don’t think it will.

Incrementalism as a guiding political philosophy has failed. It may be responsible for President Joe Biden’s legislative successes, but it almost certainly played a role in Kamala Harris’ defeat. Assistance for first-time homeowners sounds nice and so does expanding the child tax credit. However, they also sound like line-item amendments in a 200-page bill — not an exciting vision for this country that speaks to our ideals.

In 2020, the face of incrementalism, Biden ran on a public health care option, canceling student debt, and creating a million auto-industry jobs, and he barely won. Who would’ve thought that running on even less than that was a bad idea? Were we doomed when we let them convince us that populist proposals like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal are electoral suicide?

While it may not feel like it at the moment, there is still a progressive future ahead of us. That’s not to say that the next four years won’t be dark, especially if Democrats can’t prevent a national abortion ban or if the courts allow the president-elect to deploy the U.S. military domestically. The best case scenario is that we’ll be an international embarrassment. There will, however, be more elections in two short years to strengthen those checks and balances. Two years after that, we’ll be electing a new president. Hopefully, a progressive president because if our country returns to 1798, incrementalism will never bring us back to the present, let alone the future.

Camden G. Buck, West Town

Felon reaches highest office; most cannot vote

Earlier this month a convicted felon was elected president, yet in most states convicted felons can’t vote. Irony or hypocrisy?

Richard Barber, Mount Greenwood