Thank you for the two articles covering the attack on tenure by the University of Hawaii Board of Regents (“Proposal seeks to modify UH tenure system,” Star-Advertiser, Oct. 21; “UH regents defer controversial tenure proposal,” Oct. 22).

While the first article was excellent, the second did not paint the entire picture. The testimony opposing the regents’ plan to weaken tenure came from a wider group than just individual faculty members. Testimony from September and October included more than 700 pages from more than 300 faculty members from all 10 campuses, campuswide senates from 6 of the 10 campuses, the Graduate Student Organization and 24 administrators.

Tenure is not primarily about job security, which all unions have. Tenure allows faculty to do the creative work and teaching that make a university great. In addition to teaching, UH employs thousands of citizens through hundreds of millions of research dollars in competitive grants.

Ashley Maynard

Manoa

Address climate change via carbon tax in deal

The New York Times article, “Biden meets with key Democrats on budget deal” (Star-Advertiser, Oct. 25), highlights the urgency for President Joe Biden to land on a package that meets the $2 trillion price tag and addresses climate change.

If Biden were to successfully push for a carbon tax that returned much of the dividends to households, he would win on the U.S. and international stage. This policy would meet his goal of 50% reduction in emissions by 2030, benefit lower-income households, have minimal impact on the budget, and return the U.S. to being a world leader on climate in advance of international negotiations.

In addition, if this policy included a border carbon adjustment, it would boost and protect U.S. companies, eliminating the risk of having exports impacted by carbon levies from the European Union and Canada, and protect U.S. products against imports. This policy already has the support of Hawaii’s U.S. Rep. Kai Kahele and U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz.

Paul Bernstein

Aina Haina

Vaccine stirs musing on constitutional rights

Constitutional rights: What are they and how do they work? I have the right to smoke, but I don’t have the right to pass second-hand smoke to those around me. I have the right to choose religious beliefs, but does that right include not being vaccinated and passing the coronavirus to others?

I have the right to vote, but does that give legislators the right to restrict others from voting? I have the right of free speech, but that does not include the right to profess words to harm our president. I have the right to bear arms, but does that give me the right to purchase weapons of mass injury or death?

I have the right to breathe clean air, but does it give selected industries the right to pollute our air?

I have the right as an individual, but does that right include hurting or injuring others? Does individual right override the rights of others?

Gilbert Horita

Piikoi

Airborne COVID makes shared air dangerous

There is only one air that we all must share. We all breathe this air in and out about 15 times per minute in order to stay alive.

Being considerate of others includes not polluting the air we all share. We turn our heads when we sneeze or cough.

COVID-19 is airborne, deadly and can silently leave an infected person’s mouth (without them knowing it) as it enters our communal air.

If you do not want to get vaccinated, if you don’t care if you get COVID-19, if you don’t care if you exhale COVID-19 into our air, then stay home. Breathe your own air.

Too many people have already died from inhaling COVID-19.

There is no legal right that allows any person to pollute a shared resource, like our air, with a deadly disease.

John Brizdle

Hawaii Kai

COVID brings out rush to judgment on affiliations

Dave Shapiro’s commentary saying Nick Rolovich put his interests above those of his team had a point, but I alternatively point out that all of us are members of many teams (“Rolo’s attempted pass on vaccine mandate falls incomplete,” Volcanic Ash, Star- Advertiser, Oct. 24).

As people, we are also Americans, Christians, pro-vaxx, anti- vaxx, etc. Often our “team” affiliations come in conflict with the multiple teams we belong to, or others belong to.

For Rolovich, he actually may have put his religious or pro-individual- rights team ahead of himself to the tune of sacrificing $3 million. Now that is taking one for the team.

One of the ugly trends that this incident highlights, though, is the rush to judgment. I don’t know why he did what he did. Going against the pope’s position makes Rolo’s stance a mystery. Of course, though, there have always been differing beliefs within a same religion. Whether Rolo’s position is religiously valid is ultimately up to God.

Leighton Loo

Mililani

EXPRESS YOURSELF

The Honolulu Star-Advertiser welcomes all opinions. Want your voice to be heard? Submit a letter to the editor.

>> Write us: We welcome letters up to 150 words, and guest columns of 500-600 words. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and length. Include your name, address and daytime phone number.

>> Mail: Letters to the Editor, Honolulu Star-Advertiser 7 Waterfront Plaza, 500 Ala Moana, Suite 210 Honolulu, HI 96813

>> Contact: 529-4831 (phone), 529-4750 (fax), letters@staradvertiser.com, staradvertiser.com/editorial/submit-letter