Regarding the Oct. 5 Metro article “Boots on the school-ground”:
I am the parent of two young children at Bruce-Monroe Elementary School, and I am outraged by the deployment of large numbers of heavily armed National Guard troops and FBI agents during school drop-off hours.
Whoever ordered these operations kicked off a wave of nightmares for hundreds of pre-K and elementary school children, as well as parents and teachers. The public deserves to know more about this new initiative and whether it intentionally targets schools.
The military should have zero role in domestic policing. Period. On average each National Guard soldier costs $607 per day compared with $384 for a D.C. police officer, according to analysis from the Niskanen Center, and taxpayers like me are footing that bill.
Worst of all, we’ve seen too little action from the D.C. Council to bring transparency and accountability. Fortunately, November is coming. Elected officials who fail to demand real oversight that protects our kids and neighbors might be sent to the sidelines.
Myles Duffy, Washington
As a parent of a 9-year-old, I would like to echo the concerns voiced by neighbors, parents and local officials in the Oct. 5 Metro article about the National Guard appearing outside D.C. schools. It is indeed deeply disturbing to experience this. Soldiers have no place in our communities, including at kids’ schools, recreation centers and playgrounds.
Helen Hubbard-Davis, Washington
What I saw in D.C. in 1968
I recently came across the yellowed clipping of a story I wrote for the Evening Star in 1968, after the riots in D.C. following the assassination of the Rev Martin Luther King Jr. Large numbers of stores were looted and burned here and across the country. Federal troops and the National Guard, including my unit here in D.C., were called up to enforce a curfew and restore order.
My impression then was that residents were happy to see us and overwhelmingly friendly, greeting us on the street and offering coffee and food.
It’s a different situation now. People are shocked and appalled to see troops from outside D.C. showing up unexpectedly at schools and elsewhere where there has been no trouble. The city is peaceful. I and many others want the National Guard to go home.
But please be kind to those who are here. They would rather be home with their families.
And this, too, shall pass.
Tom Oliver, Washington
Charity ratings can’t replace judgment
Dustin DeVito’s Sept. 29 op-ed, “Your company’s charity list may have a political screen built in,” could leave readers with the impression that organizations considered ineligible for other employee gift-matching services are somehow barred from receiving donations from employees of companies that use those services. That is not true. Employees who wish to support organizations that do not appear on the eligible list remain completely free to do so but will just not have those gifts matched by their employer.
It is important to remember that gift-matching services exist to help their clients ensure that these gifts are both lawful and consistent with the corporation’s values. In that regard, gift-matching services traditionally have never — and never should — limit themselves to “using IRS 501(c)(3) status as the sole eligibility standard,” as DeVito suggested.
Michael Montgomery, Dearborn, Michigan
Dustin DeVito’s Sept. 29 op-ed is right that no advocacy group’s list should decide which lawful charities employees may fund. 1792 Exchange, where DeVito is a research director, is itself an advocacy group that publishes its own ratings of companies and boards in service of a stated mission to promote particular values.
That matters because the problem he describes is bigger than one list. Inclusion is decided by a measure built by a party with a stake in the outcome. The Southern Poverty Law Center built the Hate Map; the 1792 Exchange builds bias ratings. In both cases, an organization must live with a denominator it did not choose.
DeVito’s remedy is sound: use IRS 501(c)(3) status as the floor and tell employees whenever a portal filters. But the better remedy is older. Donors who visit a charity, read its Form 990 and ask how it spends their money have vetted it in the only way that cannot be outsourced. Any rating, from any side, is a substitute for that work. Neutrality does not come from choosing a better list-maker. It comes from gift-givers who know what they are funding.
James A. Lomastro, Conway, Massachusetts
The writer is a retired nonprofit health care administrator and a national accreditation surveyor.
Letter submissions
Send letters to [email protected].
Submissions must be exclusive to The Post and should include the writer’s address and day and evening telephone numbers. Letters are subject to editing and abridgment. Please do not send letters as attachments. Because of the volume of material we receive, we are unable to acknowledge submissions; writers whose letters are under consideration for publication will be contacted.
The post I’m a D.C. parent. Why is the National Guard outside our kids’ schools? appeared first on Washington Post.
