Slap on the wrist not enough for undermining democracy

Re: “Former Trump lawyer censured for falsehoods about election,” March 10 news story

So, it is great that lawyer, Jenna Ellis has been censured, but how can the fine be less than $300?! I realize that it is hard to put a price tag on the damage done for lying excessively and undermining our government recklessly; how it erodes trust and respect for our voting systems and all those who are dedicated to serving the public good responsibly.

But she should be punished more harshly so that there is really a deterrent. Instead, there is no real impact on those who self-servingly barter in lies and conspiracies. It is embarrassing what has come of those who tarnish Colorado’s reputation.

You choose to abuse; you should lose out on the benefits and opportunities provided to those who appreciate their democracy respectfully. Fortunately, there are many more who outweigh these un-American ways, but without more meaningful penalties, the balance that is needed will continue to be tested.

Dirk Angevine, Denver

I am dismayed as I watch the reporting that Colorado attorney, Jenna Ellis, has only received a slap on the wrist for her part in spreading falsehoods about the outcome of the 2020 election. Ellis sought out a position with the Trump administration and provided Trump with legal counsel before and after the 2020 election.

She lied several times to news outlets, FOX, and a variety of journalists, insisting that Trump won the presidential election by a “landslide.” She said she had proof, but none was ever presented. In her interviews on TV she was dishonest, rude, manipulative, and condescending: not exactly attributes I would expect from a professional lawyer.

In today’s news we see a text from her mocking Rep. Mitch McConnel for falling down a set of stairs. Really?

For the Colorado Supreme Court to censure her and fine her, a mere $224 is absurd. This person, and others like her, took advantage of citizens’ rights to truthful and honest information. If you can lie this blatantly on a worldwide stage and endanger our democratic process, you cannot be trusted to keep a lawful oath. This person should be barred from ever practicing law again. Courts across the nation need to take a harder stance against deception and assaults on our democracy. The Colorado Supreme Court needs to follow suit and protect us from such miscreants.

Carol Kiernan, Westminster

Reduce barriers to Colorado drivers licenses

It sounds (and is) counterintuitive, but the Colorado DMV no longer provides driving tests themselves, instead offering these legally required services through third-party companies. This practice increases the cost and time to obtain a license, making it more difficult for Coloradans to drive legally.

For those in rural communities like Lamar, where I live, this means that someone may need to drive an hour or more to go to driving school, potentially pay more than $100 dollars to do so, and, if you have to retake the exam, pay the DMV penalty fees, even though the DMV is not the one offering the service.

Language barriers are also holding more potential Colorado drivers back. And although it’s been two decades since I received my Colorado driver’s license for the first time, I still remember the anxiety I felt since I did not yet speak English fluently. For many, the language barrier remains a significant challenge.

While my organization and I work to support community members with this, there is legislation moving in Denver that can help address these time, language, and cost barriers. If enacted, House Bill 1147 would help ensure equitable access to a driving test for all Coloradans and provide the language support many individuals need. This would benefit all Coloradans when we need it most, as the cost of living and difficulty to make ends meet soar. I encourage our representatives in Denver to get this done.

Nancy Margarita Díaz Escápite, Lamar

Housing crisis hits seniors too

I am a senior on a fixed income and I have found out as I have navigated the public housing network that there is a sizeable difference between “affordable” housing and “subsidized” housing.

Affordable housing is not affordable for many people! Affordable simply means it is under the current market value for comparable units in the area. Usually within 70% to 80% of the current value of rental places in the surrounding area. If a one-bedroom apartment is $1,300 market price, for affordable, it could still be about $900 to $1,000. For many people who are making $15 dollars an hour working or those on a fixed income, that is not affordable.

Subsidized can be vouchers, or with HUD it is usually 30% of the individual’s income. Subsidized helps extremely low-income individuals, but unfortunately, there is usually a 3 to 4-year waitlist. I currently know three seniors who are losing their housing where they have lived for more than 20 years, but the property has been sold. They do not have the income to pay for current “affordable” housing, or there is no units even listed as “affordable” housing. This is not just a city issue; this is happening all over the nation. We need real answers with real solutions starting in our nation’s capital!

Mary K. August, Lakewood