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

•••

The most recent news on the food for children fraud involving Feeding Our Future is truly disgusting ("DOJ charges accuse 48 in $250M meals fraud," Sept. 21).

If life sentences in prison did not cost the taxpayer, I would recommend that for every one of them. In lieu of that, I suggest once the perpetrators get out of prison they be on lifelong parole. People who would do this are scum and likely to return to other unacceptable activity once not supervised. Imagine $250 million intended to help hungry children siphoned off for personal gain. It makes me boiling mad.

These 48 alleged crooks need to be severely punished, and others who have committed similar fraud should be pursued, prosecuted, convicted and punished.

Mark Brakke, Coon Rapids

•••

Time should update the story with a picture of Gov. Tim Walz holding the skeleton of a fish with the headline: "Scandals in Minnesota: the state that used to work."

George Woytanowitz, Minneapolis

I shouldn't have been surprised to read Jeff Campbell's statement to the Professional Educators Licensing and Standards Board as reported in the Sept. 8 Star Tribune article, "Proposed teacher licensing update draws pushback." He spoke against the revised requirements and argued that students are best served when they're all treated the same.

I should not have been surprised, because this position reflects a common mind-set in our society: colorblindness. There are degrees of colorblindness, ranging from a complete denial of difference ("my culture is the only reality") to a minimization of difference (believing that deep down, we are all the same).

People who espouse colorblindness do not necessarily intend harm. If they are well-intentioned, they speak from their own life experience. The problem is that there may be a substantial gap between one's own life experience and social conditions in which many or most of our fellow citizens live. And the effect of colorblindness as a policy position, even if naive, is harmful.

In this context, to argue that it's best to treat all children in Minnesota classrooms the same is to advocate for reinforcing disparities. I suggest something like this instead: Students (and their families, communities and nation) are best served when their individual learning needs inform teaching practices in each of their classrooms. This is what the licensing board proposed standards aim for.

As a teacher myself, now an aging citizen looking to our young folks for inspiration, I want us to work for equity in educational outcomes. That will require not treating everyone the same.

Colleen Bell, St. Paul

•••

In his counterpoint "There's talk about education, and then there's action," Gary Marvin Davison takes issue with the needs and solutions put forward by several education advocates and experts in this publication over the past few weeks. After a long diatribe about other contributors' flawed thinking, he declares, "a quiet revolution appears to be in progress at the Minneapolis Public Schools." Davison goes on to praise a litany of "highly promising initiatives" underway, presumably focused on closing the learning gap and increasing college readiness.

The harsh reality is this district is in crisis. MPS is hemorrhaging students, teachers and staff and facing a budget deficit in the millions this year. And trust and confidence are broken, because in the midst of this dumpster fire, district leadership has continued to operate behind closed doors with virtually no transparency or accountability to the community.

So before interim Superintendent Rochelle Cox and her team quietly go down yet another long road of best-practice reinvention that misses the mark, why not bring this "truly revolutionary" and "highly promising" plan to the community for dialogue and input? Tell families, students, teachers and administrators what you're doing and why this is different. Explain how this will bring thousands of students and teachers back through our doors. Explain how this will help derail the school-to-prison pipeline and foster joy in learning for all students. Explain how this will reignite passion and purpose in all our staff. And then ask them, "Does this make sense to you? Is this what you need? What are we missing? What else?"

Include. Listen. Respond. Deliver.

Good ideas get better and bad ideas give way when we actively and consistently partner with those closest to the source.

Cheryl Persigehl, Minneapolis

Anikka Knick, Shakopee

•••

I was disappointed that the Star Tribune led with such a misleading headline on the Roe v. Wade poll.

The headline "Slim majority backs legal abortion" ignored the fact that women overwhelmingly (61% to 35%) want abortion to be legal in all or most cases. They want control of their own bodies. And frankly, why should men have a say in this at all? The state has no business being involved in medical decisions of this nature. They should be between a woman and her doctor. Those who want to discourage abortion can invest in incentives for women to carry the child to term and raise it in a healthy environment. You will note that the states with the strictest anti-abortion laws also do the least for women's health and welfare.

Robert Veitch, Richfield

Kudos to a Sept. 15 letter writer for pointing out that Sen. Lindsey Graham's proposed bill to allow abortions up to 15 weeks would be a great bipartisan compromise to this thorny abortion issue. Democrats have reacted by saying that a 15-week limit on having abortions is radical, yet survey after survey cites that most Americans do not approve of abortion up to the moment of birth, which is the Democrats' current position on abortion. Other countries find a 14-15 week allowance to be acceptable. Fifteen weeks seems like a very reasonable compromise.

I fear, however, that Democrats would never agree to this because this would be a winning compromise suggested by a Republican — horrors!