These following Letters to the Editor were submitted to The Palm Beach Post Opinion Page. The Palm Beach Post wants to hear your opinion − conservative, liberal and all points between. Letters must include
the writer's name, address and daytime phone number. Letters are subject to editing for clarity and length, and become property of The Palm Beach Post. We ask that you limit your letters to 200 words. To send a letter, email to letters@pbpost.com, or fax it to (561) 820-4728. You can also send it via snail mail to: The Palm Beach Post, 2751 S. Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33405. Whether the topic's growth and development, traffic, the environment, or government spending, we want to hear from you.
Amendment 3 coverage ignores spending
The Palm Beach Post’s article, “Could Property Tax Plan Mean Less Access to Hospital Care for County?” is another example of its consistently skewed coverage of property-tax relief. Every dollar taxpayers might save is portrayed as a government “loss,” while years of uncontrolled growth in government spending are ignored.
The Palm Beach County Sheriff’s budget, for example, has grown from approximately $425 million to $1.2 billion—nearly tripling—while the homestead exemption has not been increased since 2008. Inflation has steadily eroded its value as taxing agencies have reaped windfalls from rising property assessments.
Homeowners receive no cash from higher property values unless they sell. Government, however, taxes that unrealized appreciation annually and spends the proceeds like drunken sailors. Every business and household sometimes must actually spend less—not merely reduce the size of a requested increase. Government should be no different. Any honest reporting on proposed tax relief would disclose how much each affected agency’s spending has increased, express the proposed reduction as a percentage of its current budget, and explain whether it merely returns spending to the level of a year or two ago. Instead, the Post treats endless government growth as an entitlement and taxpayer relief as a crisis. That is advocacy, not objective reporting.
Douglas Sabra, Ocean Ridge
Diplomacy key in post-Trump era
The United States and Canada has always had a cordial, respectful relationship, until now. Let's hope that the next president has serious diplomatic skills, so he or she can repair and reinstate our nation's relationships with all foreign countries that President Trump has alienated.
Virginia Deighan, Jupiter
Show me the 'Trump' money
My wife and I are very excited about our coming Trump Checks, amounting to at least $18,000 ― $5,000 each for the Republican Party win in November, the $2,000 DOGE rebate and that $2,000 tariff refund. All in all, hopefully enough for an auto trip out west when prices “ drop like a rock “ after midterms.
John B. Kern, Juno Beach
Capital punishment piece flawed
Re: the Bradford Thomas piece of September 12, 2026: Mr. Thomas’ comments “The erroneous logic of opponents to capital punishment supports the idea that no one is personally responsible for their actions” is just wrong. Life in prison for a capital crime is more than adequate punishment and acknowledges that people are in fact responsible for their actions. Mr. Thomas neglects to acknowledge that there are many instances of innocent people having been put to death. He does not point out that it costs taxpayers more money to execute someone than it does to incarcerate them for life without parole. He insults the Catholic Bishops “that somehow justify allowing criminal to avoid their just punishment” and then he tries to use religion to justify his opinion. Pardon me Mr. Thomas, I believe that Catholic Bishops understand the scripture better than you. It is disturbing that Mr. Thomas believes that those who disagree with him are flawed thinkers. Death by capital punishment is final and irreversible, life in prison allows for mistakes to be corrected and murderers to be permanently removed from society.
Frank J. Sparks III, Palm Beach Gardens
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Post reader insists Amendment 3 coverage ignores spending | Letters
