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

•••

The author of "Yes, Virginia, you can trim a tree and still fight climate change" (Opinion Exchange, Dec. 12), tries to argue that while humans are responsible global warming, somehow individuals are not. The author states:

"As I've noted before, the idea of a personal 'carbon footprint' was invented by BP PLC, the oil behemoth formerly known as British Petroleum. It's a clever marketing ploy that makes you, dear reader, feel guilty about your own emissions, which in turn makes you less likely to complain about those of, say, BP (340 million tons last year)."

Does it really matter who made up the expression? Perhaps it is simplistic, but it captures the fact that the global carbon footprint, including that of corporations, is ultimately the product of the billions of daily decisions that make up household consumption. Household consumption and government consumption (government consuming on behalf of households) are in fact the only contributors. Corporations, with all their carbon output, are only the middleman. No company exists without serving the demand of some entity that serves the demands of households. So, BP's carbon footprint belongs to each of us.

What makes global warming so hard to combat is that the cause is decentralized and diffused in our personal decisions, rooted in our instinctual drive to improve our lives. The concept of a personal carbon footprint provides an easy way to make that connection.

Regina Anctil, Minneapolis

A recent selection of commentaries noted the crisis in our country related to social isolation, as well as the importance of connections with others and "small talk" ("Home alone: America's crisis of isolation," "What a big difference small talk can make" and "Where has community gone?" Dec. 11). I appreciate the attention being paid to this topic, which affects so many.

In truth, loneliness affects more than one-third of American adults and can have profound impacts on both mental and physical health. A lack of social connections is associated with a 30% increased risk of early death, and research has shown loneliness to have the same impact on life expectancy as smoking 15 cigarettes a day. Having connections with others is not a luxury … it is necessary, life changing and even life saving.

However, it can be challenging for many who are feeling isolated to reach out and make those connections, but there options out there to help. Warmlines, like the one provided by Mental Health Minnesota, can help provide connections with others who have also struggled with their mental health, isolation and loneliness. The peer support provided by this service is anonymous, confidential and free of charge, and can be reached via phone, text or chat, so it's available to anyone who could use a social connection or support seven days a week, including on weekends and holidays.

The holidays can be a particular difficult time for those who are already struggling with loneliness and isolation, but no one needs to face it alone, because organizations like Mental Health Minnesota are here to help. Visit mentalhealthmn.org or call 833-HERE4MN to connect.

Shannah Mulvihill, St. Paul

Special Counsel Jack Smith, Donald Trump's Grand Inquisitor, just pulled the trigger on a legal master stroke, in my opinion. He wants a clean, straight-up interpretation of the U.S. Constitution on the issue of whether a president can be brought to court on charges of committing grave crimes that threaten our democracy. And Smith wants fast action by the court because the country needs and deserves it.

Lawyers and judges are fond of invoking — when it suits their purposes — the adage "Justice delayed is justice denied." As a former Star Tribune court reporter for years who later worked for two Ramsey County attorneys, I can tell you that swift justice is not the norm. Never has been. It should be, however, especially in cases like the Trump indictments, where the fate of the nation is at stake. And it was in 1973 when the high court moved quickly in the Watergate scandal.

When investigation revealed Richard Nixon's secret White House audio taping system records that documented high crimes, the Supreme Court moved to order the tapes be turned over to law enforcement. Like Smith's filing in the Trump issues, the Nixon tapes case was a straightforward legal issue. No messy fact issues for lawyers (or judges) to spin. Can a president use executive privilege to coverup a potential crime against the country? The court then said no, and Nixon was soon done and gone. He should have gone to prison, like his attorney general, chief of staff and other sycophants, but the political aristocracy takes care of its own.

Our founding myth is that we threw off the arrogance of kings and queens, but our history says we still fall for con men and false idols. If that happens again in 2024, and justice is not served, it's on us as much as Donald Trump.

Paul Gustafson, Minneapolis

The writer is a former Star Tribune reporter.

I agree on a proposal to provide help to middle-class families struggling to pay for child care. Small businesses like mine desperately need more parents freed up to participate in the workforce. We also want to see children in quality early learning programs, so that they are ready to succeed in school and all that follows.

Have legislators evaluated the already-existing Early Learning Scholarship program? It has been primarily for low-income families until now, and could be expanded to include the middle class. Scholarships are working well, connecting children with quality programs where kids are making significant progress on things like phonics and social skills. Scholarships ensure that children are benefiting from school-readiness best practices. They're flexible, allowing families to choose from a variety of programs in homes or centers that match their needs for schedule, location and culture. And scholarships have support from both DFL and GOP legislators, so they are unifying.

New government programs take time to generate support, architect rollout plans, hire resources and execute on the objective. I'd love to see Minnesota build on an existing approach for delivering this kind of help that has a track record of working well and that has broad support.

Lori Most, Bloomington

•••

I am a 28-year-old registered nurse with an almost 3-year-old son. My husband and I both work full time to provide for our family. It is extremely disheartening to work hard at good-paying jobs yet be stretched so thin financially due to the outrageous cost of child care. We currently pay $350 per week for our one child to attend full-time preschool. This cost is preventing us from being able to save for a home, grow our family and put any money back into the local economy.

Furthermore, the stress this financial burden places on us is insurmountable. We need elected officials to address this issue immediately, as it is a huge problem for thousands of families just like mine. Good hardworking families, that are unable to plan for the future due to the amount paid for child care.

Affordable child care, like that described by two state legislators in "Child-care cost crisis requires urgent action" (Dec. 9), would change my life entirely. It would open up opportunities for my family that I dream of and would help ease stress so that my husband and I can focus on what's important. Family, giving back and raising a good human who will grow up to positively impact our community.

Emma Harrington, Savage