Readers Write: Competing state flags, misinformation, citizenship, health care, transit

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

After college I worked in Albemarle, N.C., a long way from my (then) St. Cloud home. While living in that rural part of North Carolina, I became familiar with the culture around the Confederate flag.

I believe there are a couple issues that are creating a similar dynamic of two flags in Minnesota, as Karen Tolkkinen discussed in her recent piece (”Minnesota has become a state with two flags,” Aug. 23). The first is that the cultural issue around the farmer and Native America is about the state seal, not the flag. The old state flag design simply stuck the seal on the flag, which created the greater issue, and the one I think we should be focusing on:

The old state flag was a poor flag design. Period.

A flag is meant to be recognizable from far away, to stand out next to many other flags, and to be recognizable when hanging in a place without wind.

Our old flag did not meet any of those marks. Something the Confederate flag and our new state flag have in common is that they meet all those requirements. I firmly believe that if we move the conversation about the old flag away from the cultural issues surrounding it (not to belittle those important issues), and talk, instead, about the purpose of flag design, we can change minds.

I recently sat on the porch of some older conservative people in my community, and, by talking about flag design, I’m sure I made some new fans of our new, well-designed state flag.

Alexander Ohman, Vergas, Minn.

I’m not one to go public about politics. In fact, this is a first. But in light of recent letters to the editor questioning our presidential candidates, I felt compelled to do so. This is a historic time in our elections; one in which we can choose one of two very different, distinct paths in which to take our nation.

Let me be clear, I do not care who you vote for. That’s your choice, and at least you’re exercising your right to vote. I will not judge you based on your choices.

In writing this, my real wish and hope is that everyone who votes does their due diligence in advance to determine fact from fiction in all the political comments, articles, broadcasts and social media posts inundating us today.

We are constantly barraged with a lot of lies, innuendo, distortion, fake news and now artificial intelligence, including from other countries trying to affect our election. It’s easy to do your due diligence and separate fact from fiction. It doesn’t take too much of your time to do it. Simply Google the items to determine what is true and what is a lie. I assure you, you may be very surprised and discover what news sources are truly the ones you should trust and follow.

Not doing your due diligence is, in my opinion, a travesty and a detriment to our local and national governments. Simply relying on the same old news outlets, etc., to support your beliefs is naive, lazy and says a lot about how seriously you take your right to vote. So, please take your voting rights seriously and double-check your sources!

Unfortunately, I suspect this advice will more often than not fall on deaf ears and not be taken seriously. How sad is that?

John Magnus, Champlin

Regarding “There’s hope yet” (Readers Write, Aug. 17): Congratulations to those who have just earned their citizenship. They should be gratified that they know more about American civics than the majority of native-born citizens. According to a 2018 study released by Institute for Citizens & Scholars (formerly the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation), “only one in three Americans (36 percent) can actually pass a multiple-choice test consisting of items taken from the U.S. citizenship test, which has a passing score of 60.” Birthright citizenship does not automatically confer knowledge; citizenship is a learned value. Rudimentary knowledge of the composition of government and how it works is fundamental to the perpetuation idea that is America. Every high schooler should be required to pass the civics (history and government) questions for the naturalization test before getting a diploma. Democracy dies in ignorance.

Gordon Abel, Minneapolis

This has not been UnitedHealth’s year. First, its billing was inadvertently disabled across the country due to lax cybersecurity. Then its subsidiary OptumRx comes under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission as part of a broader antitrust investigation of pharmacy benefit managers. Now, a respected Twin Cities care provider, HealthPartners, has announced it will no longer be part of UnitedHealth’s Medicare Advantage network, specifically because the insurer denies too many patient claims and has consistently delayed payments.

My question is, when will our policymakers seriously address what Sen. Elizabeth Warren called the “monopoly on steroids” that is UnitedHealth? CEO Andrew Witty had to answer questions before Congress following the disastrous cyberattack, but what actions have policymakers actually taken? While Sen. Amy Klobuchar talks about battling online monopolies and negotiating Medicare drug prices, she has been silent on the laundry list of issues UnitedHealth has caused or been a part of this year. Attorney General Keith Ellison has made no announcement regarding the frankly alarming claims HealthPartners made in its statement.

The Aug. 18 editorial “A Minnesota health care battle royale” was spot on when it said, “HealthPartners merits commendation for stepping forward. Its concerns should be taken seriously and require deeper scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers.” I know I will be watching to see exactly what kind of scrutiny our regulators bring to bear.

Rachel Adolphson, Apple Valley

•••

It is a puzzle that rural America thinks conservatives are better for rural America than Democrats. Looking at the Project 2025 proposals for farmers, such as decreasing government support for crop insurance, should make it clear that conservatives are not supportive of economic success for rural America. As the Minnesota Star Tribune works to expand its footprint in greater Minnesota, it would be sensible to continue to make clear all the support the state and federal governments provide to make rural Minnesota economically successful.

One of the areas that needs more support is health care. Rural Minnesota should not be dependent on the decisionmaking of the big hospital and clinic systems and the health insurance industry. Rural Minnesota needs short- and long-term planning combined with adequate financial resources to provide adequate obstetric care, ambulance transport, emergency care and primary care.

Mark Brakke, Coon Rapids

The writer is a physician.

As the Minnesota State Fair continues, I have been seeing advertisements for the free park-and-ride services offered by Metro Transit to get to and from the fair. In past years, according to the State Fair webpage, approximately a million people used this form of free transportation in lieu of driving to the fair. I’ve observed the positive impact of this service firsthand and it has prompted me to consider how similar accommodations could be extended to residents summoned for jury duty.

Every year, Hennepin County calls approximately 37,000 residents to serve as jurors. Given that the State Fair can successfully offer free transportation options to a million attendees, I wonder why a similar provision couldn’t be established for jurors.

I believe that such an initiative could demonstrate a commitment to supporting community members who are fulfilling their civic responsibilities, allowing them to participate without the added burden of transportation costs. This would be a meaningful step toward making the process more accessible and equitable for all residents.

Greg Kjos, St. Louis Park

Opinion editor’s note: Metro Transit offers free rides to jurors in Hennepin and Ramsey counties, but not a park-and-ride service.