Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

For many years I've said that when I die, just call Waste Management to come pick me up in one of those green and yellow compactor trucks. Instead of organ music, I'll go to the "beep-beep-beep" of the truck as it backs up to the house. Now I read in the Star Tribune about composting our bodies after death ("A new back-to-the-land movement for the end of life," Opinion Exchange, April 21). Looks like we're getting there.

Michael O'Donnell, Northfield

A proposal before the Minnesota Legislature would legalize cannabis, otherwise known as marijuana, to the general population. It would impose a tax of 8%, one of the lowest rates among states that have legalized this product, widely acknowledged to be a recreational drug with medicinal benefits in other applications.

A comparison with states that have a similar political history in recent years, blue states, reveals the flaw in this Minnesota proposal. According to the Tax Foundation, California imposes a 15% excise tax with additional taxes for cultivation and homegrown product. Colorado has a 15% tax at both the retail and wholesale levels. Washington has a whopping 37% tax at retail.

Let's face facts: Most ardent supporters of legalization are recreational users, similar to folks who consume alcohol. Alcohol taxes in Minnesota have a tax impact of 9.375%, when combining sales tax and the gross receipts tax. If the state chooses to separate cannabis taxes used for medicines by prescription, that can be justified. However, 8% for recreational use is too low.

Supporters say that they want to incentivize the local industry. At the same time, they minimize the terrible impact that abuse has on people. Historically, taxes of this type are known as "sin taxes" for good reason. I'm a boomer, and I am not a novice when it comes to pot, but how can a state known for taxing everything but the air we breathe look the other way?

Dan Gunderson, Minneapolis

•••

How have we come to this when we have deemed cigarette smoking so harmful to health? According to the Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units at the University of Illinois, Chicago, marijuana smoke contains the same carcinogenic chemicals found in tobacco smoke and other dangerous chemicals, such as cyanide and ammonia, and is "significantly higher in marijuana smoke compared to cigarette smoke," posing serious dangers to small children.

This is only one of the myriad scientific reasons to oppose the legalization of marijuana.

Emanuel Gaziano, Minneapolis

The writer is a physician.

"At fertility clinics, no COVID lull" (April 18) may have led readers to believe that since the number of IVF cycles in our state has increased that all Minnesotans have insurance coverage for medical treatments for infertility. That is not the case. One in six people globally have infertility, according to the World Health Organization. Minnesotans do not have equitable access to fertility medical treatments because insurers are not required to cover this disease. The American Medical Association and World Health Organization recognize infertility as a disease, and it should be covered by health insurance like other diseases. Lack of insurance coverage also discriminates against the LGBTQ+ community and others who require medical assistance to have children, including cancer patients.

As state Sen. Erin Maye Quade stated in the article, "fertility treatment is limited to those who are fortunate enough to afford it, or go into debt, or raise money, cash in their 401(k)s, or take out second mortgages. … This is not how we want people to be building their families in Minnesota."

I agree and applaud the Minnesota Senate for including a fertility insurance provision in its Health and Human Services omnibus bill, and I urge the House and Senate to keep this pro-family provision in the final HHS bill. This insurance requirement will go a long way in helping all Minnesotans build their families.

Julie Berman, Minnetonka

The writer is former board chair of RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association.

I am a longtime supporter of Gov. Tim Walz, finding him a tremendous leader. However, this is to add my voice to many others who see his current budget proposal as overreaching and setting Minnesota up for significant budget problems in the future.

There is still time to get the budget mostly right. I ask the governor and our state leaders to accomplish three foundational things with this budget:

1) Before funding a new program, assign the probability that funding for that program would survive funding in a recession. Do not fund programs that have low probability of surviving a recession. Do not permanently raise taxes and fees. Make tough priority choices now.

2) Include in the budget the best ideas of the Republicans. I am no fan of the extreme Republicans, but you need to put dollars behind the image of collaboration you seek.

3) Return more of the surplus to those who paid in to create it. As a high-wage earner, I supported higher tax rates when our state needed it. If now those funds are not needed, return more of those dollars to those who paid them and/or create more of a reserve. Don't lose the trust of those of us who are willing to step up by redistributing income due to a surplus.

The budget as proposed may be bold. But I question its sustainability and see a negative impact on the DFL if it is passed in its current form.

Dan Kinsella, Bloomington

•••

In reading the April 20 coverage of Walz's State of the State address, I was taken aback by the response by Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks: "It was like being in a Democratic pep rally … that didn't talk about the needs of Minnesotans."

Are he and those he represents actually saying they don't see such things as a chance to be 'America's North Star,' focusing on families, a firewall against hatred and bigotry and a plea for gun control as needs of Minnesotans? Then what are the needs of Minnesotans?

Voula Heffernan, Hermantown, Minn.

As the facts of the gifts to Chief Justice Clarence Thomas slowly come out, I am shocked by his behavior. I spent 12 years as a City Council member. We did not even accept a cup of coffee if we were meeting with a resident or someone interested in our community. Certainly no gifts, trips or purchases of homes were accepted. My husband spent 20 years as a Hennepin County judge. No one could buy him lunch. When a previous law client invited him to use his condo, of course he declined. Being an ethical person and abiding by a code of ethics should be the same. Not only should you report anything that might be viewed as a potential gift, but refuse anything that might cross the line. I expect the justices on the Supreme Court to be transparent and ethical.

Ann Swenson, Edina

I would like to invite Star Tribune readers to visit any of the improvisational theater groups in the Twin Cities — Brave New Workshop, ComedySportz, Jesters Comedy Improv, Stevie Ray's Comedy Cabaret, Strike Theater and HUGE Theater are all putting on incredible weekly shows. In addition, the Bryant Lake Bowl and Phoenix Theater have improv delights in their lineup.

This city has an enviable improvisational comedy scene, the strongest in the region. If you haven't been out to see it lately, it's time to get out and get some spontaneous laughs!

Jill Bernard, Minneapolis