Today's Edition Local Missouri National World Opinion Obits Sports GoMidMo Events Classifieds Newsletters Contests Special Sections Jobs
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Thomas Minihan

Jefferson City

Dear Editor:

On May 22, U.S. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer might as well have declared the world was flat. He claimed in the News Tribune that last week he, "introduced four bills with commonsense solutions" to alleviate flooding or flood insurance, or privatizing flood insurance or mismanagement, or new maps drawn by the people that will benefit from having new maps. I personally saw very little "common sense;" what I saw was someone building sandcastles in the sky. He can introduce all the bills he wants, but if he continues to dispute the science of climate change, and stop voting along with his troop leader, Kevin McCarthy, all the new maps and flood insurance in the world won't help him, his farm or the 3rd Congressional District.

His approach to flooding doesn't seem as if he's fully aware of what flooding is, where it happens or how it's been increasing. He claims he wants to "protect our communities from the devastating effects of flooding that we know all too well." Flood insurance, new maps, claims of mismanagement or the needs for reauthorizing legislation will provide zero protection for the constituents of the 3rd Congressional District. What might make a difference is his ability to put his constituents ahead of his political agenda. He's correct in his claim we well know about flooding along our rivers, but the "thousands of miles of shoreline along the Lake of the Ozarks" makes me wonder if he was serious about proposing any of this legislation.

I would like all of the U.S. representatives to understand flash flooding can occur wherever it rains, especially ours. The assertion some have the "luxury of representing districts that don't face a major flood risk" is absurd. Luetkemeyer went on to claim, "for me this is personal." That claim was very telling. His goal in proposing four pieces of legislation is not in the interest of his constituents, it was done for some unknown personal reason(s). I think the reason has more to do with what he doesn't want to talk about than what he is talking about. Why not write about the false claims of voter fraud in the 2020 General Election, or how we can benefit from an infrastructure bill with teeth, or an investigation into the Jan. 6 invasion of your workplace? Maybe that's too personal.

COMMENTS - It looks like you're using Internet Explorer, which isn't compatible with our commenting system. You can join the discussion by using another browser, like Firefox or Google Chrome.
It looks like you're using Microsoft Edge. Our commenting system is more compatible with Firefox and Google Chrome.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT