Letter to the editor: Bravo to DePasquale, Shapiro | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Bravo to DePasquale, Shapiro

Who can we trust in Harrisburg these days? As our gas prices go up, it’s nice to find out that the taxes on that gas I put into my tank to go to work have been diverted from repairing our aging infrastructure to supporting the budget of the Pennsylvania State Police (“Gas tax covers police for areas that won’t,” April 26, TribLIVE).

A shout-out to Auditor General Eugene DePasquale for performing an audit to find out that over $2 billion was improperly diverted from one fund to the other. How does one improperly divert that much money from road funding to the state police budget?

I also want to give credit to Attorney General Josh Shapiro for trying to come to some reasonable conclusion with the Highmark-UPMC debacle. He has the conviction to stand up and say that what UPMC is trying to do is not right and that it needs to provide access to all Western Pennsylvania residents, not just those with the right insurance.

Bravo to DePasquale and Shapiro for being two of the few in Harrisburg who appear to be looking out for all Pennsylvanians, not just those that contributed to their campaigns.

Matt Rusiewicz


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.