Why debate when you can throw mud?
As a former staffer for Gov. Ted Strickland and a practicing therapist, I suppose I could begin every political argument by reminding readers of those credentials.
Unlike Rep. Jeff LaRe, however, I don't make my former job or my current profession my entire personality, or pretend either one makes my political opinions inherently more credible.
LaRe's response to Strickland is a good example of what is wrong with our politics. Rather than engage seriously with Strickland's central point, that attacks insinuating Amy Acton has a drug or alcohol problem are beneath the dignity of a campaign for governor, LaRe changes the subject to a collection of familiar partisan grievances.
Ohioans can debate Acton's COVID-era decisions. They can debate her comments
about immigration enforcement. They can debate Strickland's record as governor. That is what elections are for. But none of those debates makes an unsupported personal attack about substance abuse more legitimate.
And constantly invoking a law enforcement résumé does not settle those debates, either. Public service is worthy of respect, whether someone served as a police officer, a therapist, a teacher, a social worker or in any number of other professions. It is not a substitute for an argument.
Ohio deserves a governor's race about housing costs, health care, wages, schools, public safety and whether working people can afford to build a decent life here. If candidates and their supporters have a substantive case against Amy Acton, they should make it.
But "I used to be a police officer" is not an argument, and neither is dragging someone through the mud.
Zachary Branstool, Columbus
Columbus should use Flock but...
Columbus shouldn’t fear Flock license plate cameras. It should fear Flock without accountability.
I support Columbus using Flock, but I understand concerns about government surveillance. I don’t want a surveillance state or a police state. But I do want effective law enforcement.
I own a Columbus business, Esie, where I train law enforcement officers and intelligence analysts from agencies across the country. I’ve seen how powerful technology can make law enforcement more effective and how important safeguards are when powerful tools can be misused.
The question isn’t simply whether Flock is powerful. It is. The question is how that power is governed.
If Columbus uses Flock, city leaders should clearly explain: Who can access it? Who monitors searches? How are inappropriate searches detected? How often is access audited? And what happens when someone abuses the system?
Those aren’t anti-police questions. They’re accountability questions.
We trust officers with firearms because we expect training, rules, supervision and consequences for misuse. We should expect the same with powerful digital tools.
Columbus can protect public safety while protecting civil liberties. But that requires meaningful oversight and real consequences for abuse.
Public safety and civil liberties should not be opposing goals. We can, and should, have both.
Steve Bennett, Columbus
Trump's cruelest deed
During his presidency, Donald Trump's actions have often been motivated by vanity and occasionally by stupidity. But perhaps his cruelest deed is attempting to deport the Haitians who had Temporary Protected Status.
I assert that a great country takes good care of its refugees.
Steve St. Martin, Columbus
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Amy Acton doesn't abuse alcohol or hate police. Republicans have nothing but lies | Letters
