In the heartland, a different take on Trump | Readers respond

Former CBS News anchor Dan Rather continues to be an observant reporter. He and his grandson are on a road trip from Texas to Mount Rushmore in South Dakota. Via social media, they are posting videos about their journey.

One emerging theme is quite telling: Local newspapers throughout the heartland give very little attention to the issue of President Trump and alleged collusion with Russia. According to Rather, items pertaining to this topic mostly are buried on back pages and lack the nuance that engages most readers who closely monitor politics and are titillated by daily revelations from Washington. However, front-page attention is given to stories about the Republican health-care proposal.

There is a lesson for Democrats to learn from Rather's observations: perhaps they should keep in mind how non-coastal newspapers cover political events as they choose what to talk about and prepare for the 2018 elections.

— Richard Cherwitz, communications professor, University of Texas, Austin, cherwitz@austin.utexas.edu

Liberal newspapers, including the New York Times and Philadelphia Inquirer, have been relentless in criticizing workers, blaming us for electing President Trump ("Roseanne to return to a changed nation," Tuesday). Your paper continues to imagine a "white working class," when there is only a diverse working class.

Many workers voted for Trump out of anger and disgust at the way the Democrats and Republicans have treated them over the last four decades. Many of them also voted for Barack Obama, belying the notion that workers have become right-wing racists, misogynists, and xenophobes.

As an oil worker who has supported neither the Democrats nor Republicans in any election, I can report that some coworkers voted for Trump, some for Hillary Clinton, some not at all, and a handful for the Socialist Workers Party candidate. All are critical of what is being done to workers by big business and the government on its behalf. Those who supported Trump did so to break the mold of so many Democratic and Republican administrations.

Workers understand these things; the rulers and their mouthpieces don't have a clue.

— Mitchel Rosenberg, member, United Steelworkers 10-1, Philadelphia

Thank you for the explanation of the proposed revision of Medicaid funding ("Medicaid battle: Slower growth or a cut," Sunday).

I am wondering why reining in Medicaid and Medicare costs does not include negotiating prescription drug prices first, before creating per capita limits in payments to states and then only increasing the per capita allowances based on the Consumer Price Index for urban consumers (overall inflation) rather than index for medical-cost inflation?

It will be devastating to the economy of Pennsylvania to put the rising costs of medical treatment on the backs of working people, sending us back to the years when 67 percent of personal bankruptcies arose from medical bills.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) should ask his colleagues to reconsider and find Medicaid funding from those who have, not those who have not.

— Carl Flaxman, Doylestown

Four young men were recently murdered in beautiful Central Bucks County, and it was on the front page for days, not to mention the national news ("Grieving together," Monday).

Four people were murdered and others injured in one evening in Philadelphia, and the story appeared on page B3 of the Local News section ("Four dead in overnight shootings across the city," Monday). I found that interesting.

— Barry Johnston, Souderton

I have been a Reform Jew for 91 years and refer to myself as a lox-and-bagel Jew. I am originally from Chicago, where my parents are buried and whose graves I have not visited since their second funeral, commonly referred to as a stone setting.
In the mid-1990s, my wife and I joined the Pennsylvania Cremation Society for $750 each ("Bury or cremate? Thinking in or out of the box," Sunday). When she passed away in 2005, my total cost was $1,800; the cheapest casket costs more than that.
I do not need a fancy urn to remind me of the 53 wonderful years we had together or to display to my new child bride, who is 88 and had a 56-year marriage.

I scattered her ashes over the Grand Canyon, and someday I will join her there. My second wife has given away her prepaid plot and will join us.

Visiting grave sites may provide solace for the living, but the guest of honor will never know.

— Ralph Bloch, Rydal, ralphdbloch@yahoo.com

The devastation in Mosul cannot be ignored by the United States; the most important thing we can do to ensure Iraq's security is start investing in its recovery ("Liberation from militants leaves devastation in Mosul," July 14, Philly.com). Our president might not like to admit it, but one of the primary causes of terrorism is the crushing weight of extreme poverty, especially in developing countries, that can make vulnerable young men feel that there's no other option. Thus, it is in our national security interest to fight to eradicate extreme poverty around the globe.

If we leave Mosul to fend for itself, with thousands of displaced citizens and an uncertain future, it won't be long before a new terror threat rises from the vacuum left behind, just as the Islamic State rose when the United States destroyed al-Qaeda with no plans to fix the damage.

— Garrick Schultz, Swarthmore, thegarrickschultz@gmail.com