ShareThis Page

Tuesday takes

| Monday, June 19, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

Vegas East?: The latest game of chance introduced in a state House bill would allow the sale of 50/50 raffle tickets at Pittsburgh International Airport, with half the proceeds going to the Allegheny County Airport Authority Charitable Foundation. The foundation's services, including a designated comfort room for U.S. soldiers, are all well and good. But with all the gambling proposals percolating in Harrisburg these days, is the erstwhile Steel City going to become known as Vegas East?

Lock it down: The problem with big-spending federal infrastructure programs, as suggested by President Trump, is that the money usually is politically directed — not necessarily spent where it's most needed. The case for continuing repairs on the lock-and-dam facilities along the lower Monongahela River couldn't be more clear. As it is, the project is more than a decade behind schedule. We urge Mr. Trump to get off the dime and push for the nearly $50 million needed to continue repairs.

Aiding delinquency: In a “pretty please” to delinquent property owners to clean up their mess, Jeannette is considering a pilot program that would provide grants of $2,000 toward the cost of demolition. So, the tendency to tap taxpayers to clean up others' messes — the Monsour Medical Center, the Jeannette Glass plant — should be institutionalized, albeit on a smaller scale? How about putting lawmakers to work to enact legislation that toughens the wet-noodle penalties for delinquent property owners? And stop enabling them.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.