I was disappointed in the Forum Communications endorsement on Sept. 30 of Jason Lewis for U.S. Senate. The reasons given deserve closer inspection.
The editorial supported Lewis’ description of the “lockdown” as “overreaching.” Although the majority of COVID-19 deaths have occurred in senior living facilities, all occur as a result of human-to-human transmission. As cases increase in St. Louis county, opening based on expert public health guidance is required to avoid a surge in COVID-19 mortality, including within senior living facilities.
The editorial supported Lewis’ contention that Sen. Tina Smith’s votes against coronavirus relief bills indicate a lack of support for any relief. House Democrats have, however, introduced a more comprehensive and expensive bill. The better question is what kind of coronavirus relief would each candidate support. How much, to whom, and for how long?
The editorial supported Lewis’ unwavering support for copper-nickel mining, without acknowledging the inherent environmental risks. Sen. Smith quite logically asks whether the short-term economic gain is worth the long-term environmental risk. The better question is whether Lewis believes mining companies need to have their feet held to the fire with regard to the risks.
Finally, the editorial indicated that Minnesota “needs a Republican to better reflect Minnesota’s values.” Taking this argument to its logical conclusion, the editorial would have me vote for my granddaughter’s hamster, as long as it was Republican. The voters of Minnesota should consider individual characteristics more than party affiliation in deciding for whom to vote. This is especially true in the case of Jason Lewis, who has a well-documented history of questioning the role of the federal government in outlawing slavery, of claiming that laws preventing sexual harassment in the workplace interfere with First Amendment rights, and of making misogynistic statements.