I’m a liberal Democrat and a retired high school teacher. Mitch McConnell is a conservative Republican and a decadeslong leader in the U.S. Senate. But we indeed have something very important in common — we are both “polios.” (An unfortunate label given back in the day to those who suffered from infantile paralysis caused by polio.) We polios represent the thousands of people still alive who remember the fear and dread we and our parents experienced in the 1940s and early ’50s when there was nothing to stop the scourge of polio, a disease that could put you in leg braces, a wheelchair or an iron lung for the rest of your life. McConnell and I got polio before the Salk vaccine became available. But we were lucky — we both benefited from our mother’s love and medical advances, and we went on to lead relatively normal lives. At age 2, I found myself in Evanston Hospital, where my mother was instructed in the “Sister Kenny Method,” a therapy that involved lots of warm baths and manipulation, not unlike what McConnell experienced in Warm Springs, Georgia. A while back, post-polio syndrome was identified. It puts some old polios back into braces and wheelchairs with muscles in affected areas losing mass and strength. McConnell has taken a few spills lately, and so have I. He’s got a sprained wrist, and I’ve broken my right wrist twice as I ill-advisedly tried to break my fall when I tripped. McConnell and I live with polio every day. So do thousands of other older Americans. I think they would join me in stating my 100% support for McConnell’s position that any “efforts to undermine public confidence in proven cures are not just uninformed — they’re dangerous.” McConnell and I agree that our nation and the world should not relive society’s dread and families’ fear and anguish caused by polio. We polios want to be the last polios. We’re with McConnell. He just needs to let us know if he wants us to come to Washington to demonstrate. We’re there — as long as we can get our wheelchairs around and avoid tripping on the Capitol steps. — Sandy Deines, Park Ridge Assailing vaccines’ good I was 6 years old when Jonas Salk announced the approval of his polio vaccine. It was huge news. We kids were vaccinated in our schools shortly thereafter. But, sadly, two kids on my block had already contracted polio. One walked with braces but showed improvement as we grew older. The other was on a ventilator and passed away soon after. I still remember the trauma of visiting him, as young as we were. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s lawyer, Aaron Siri, is involved in lawsuits challenging federal approvals for an array of vaccines, the polio vaccine being one of them. Donald Trump says he will follow RFK Jr.’s advice on vaccines. Hundreds of thousands of people needlessly died because of Trump’s deceptive response to COVID-19. Did anyone actually vote for exposing children to polio? I hope not. — Richard Keslinke, Algonquin Participant in polio trial I am a polio pioneer. I still have the card issued to me on June 2, 1954, by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis for “taking part in the first national tests of a polio vaccine” at Lincoln School in West Chicago. I fortunately received the vaccine because of my last name and the use of the alphabet; those whose names fell at the bottom of the alphabet received the placebo and subsequently received three more shots after the trials proved the Salk vaccine effective. The Salk vaccine changed everything regarding polio and has been responsible for almost eradicating this terrible disease worldwide. I am beyond disbelief that anyone would suggest that the Food and Drug Administration revoke the approval of this critical, proven and highly effective vaccine. — Alan Bergeson, Winfield RFK Jr. holds promise While Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination to lead the Department of Health and Human Services has drawn mixed reactions, it represents a rare opportunity for bipartisan leadership and transformative health policy. As a longtime Democrat, Kennedy’s willingness to serve in a Republican administration underscores his commitment to country over party. At a time of deep political division, his nomination demonstrates the value of bipartisan representation in the Cabinet, a quality that could restore trust in our government and public health institutions. Kennedy’s focus on the role of processed foods in America’s obesity epidemic is resonating with voters across party lines. Because of Kennedy’s campaign, Americans may question what’s in their food and how it affects their health. Kennedy’s pledge to challenge powerful food companies and demand transparency is a game-changer for those struggling with obesity and related health issues. Critics have mischaracterized Kennedy’s stance on vaccines, branding him as an anti-vaxxer. In truth, he supports vaccines as an essential public health tool but demands greater accountability and transparency from pharmaceutical companies. His healthy skepticism reflects real concerns about the revolving door between federal agencies and the pharmaceutical industry. Kennedy seeks independent studies to ensure vaccine safety and effectiveness — not to ban vaccines, as some claim. His advocacy for more research and recourse for those harmed by rare side effects is a call for fairness, not fear. Kennedy’s nomination is a chance to shift HHS policy away from corporate influence and toward the well-being of everyday Americans. His leadership promises to prioritize public health over profits, addressing systemic issues that have plagued our nation for decades. Let’s hope our senators embrace this opportunity to confirm a leader who is unafraid to challenge entrenched interests and advocate for healthier lives for all Americans. Kennedy’s vision is exactly what our country needs. — Philippe Melin, Lake Forest Party of preservation? The 18th century British politician Edmund Burke described a conservative as one who prefers to keep things as they are, while cautioning that change should be limited and gradual. These principles have, at least nominally, been the guiding policy of the Republican Party. Yet Donald Trump, the present leader of that party, can be described only as a radical, determined to upset many of the institutions that are in place. At the same time, the Democratic Party is trying its best to keep intact many of the long-standing policies and practices that are being threatened. So, which party is conservative and which is radical? I’m confused. — Don Draganski, Evanston No evidence of rigging If Democrats can and have been rigging elections, as President-elect Donald Trump and some other Republicans have been claiming, how is it that Trump has apparently won two of the last three presidential elections? And if a Democrat wins in a statewide or local election, how is it that Republicans often win other down-ballot races? — Mary F. Warren, Wheaton Donald Trump supporter Alan Spitz talks during Republican Day at the Illinois State Fair in Springfield on Aug. 15, 2024. (Tess Crowley/Chicago Tribune) Illinois is a red state In his article regarding November election numbers (“GOP, Dems see signs of weakness in vote data,” Dec. 16), Rick Pearson attempts to apply whip cream on a pile of you-know-what. No matter how Pearson slices it, dices it or explains it away, Illinois is a red state. Look at the map. It’s fact. Donald Trump carried 88 of the 102 Illinois counties in the presidential election. Illinois is a red state with a big blue ink blot in the northeast part of the state. Without that stain, Trump (and John McCain and Mitt Romney preceding him) would have carried the state. We are conservative and proud of it! — Sam Karambelas, Lincolnshire Donald Trump’s appeal In the list of “accomplishments” that Donald Trump enthusiast JoAnn Lee Frank offers (“Trump is a legend,” Dec. 16), I have noticed something interesting. Her list includes several items that would benefit Trump, but I saw nothing that I think or that she even suggests would be beneficial for the United States. She clearly can find no fault with Trump. I have wondered if the difference between me and Trump enthusiasts is that I never saw his largely fictional portrayal of a successful businessman on “The Apprentice” reality television program. As Frank touts Trump’s second Time magazine “Person of the Year” honor, she may be unaware of it not being a stamp of approval for recipients. It is awarded for newsworthiness, which is why Adolf Hitler, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Vladimir Putin and Josef Stalin (twice, like Trump) have been chosen for it. Like them, Trump makes bad news, and he makes a lot of it. I wonder, as she touts Trump as a strong leader, if she shares his enthusiasm for leaders whom he regards as strong because they are not subject to the will of their people, a situation that I suspect that he aspires to. While I have no more insight into what led 1930s Germans to support Hitler than I ever had, I think that in recent years and, especially, on Nov. 5, I have acquired a sense of how rational Germans in those days must have felt as their nation went mad around them and followed Hitler down the path to ruin. I have to hope that things go well under the Trump regime. Like somebody who has, with a gun to his head, been ordered to bet his money on a horse that he is pretty sure is a loser, I am invested now. If the ship sinks, everybody sinks, including me, so I have to hope that it does not sink. However, without that gun to my head, I would bet, as I have all along, that Trump has been a lucky bluffer and that his second term will not be, as he hopes, about retribution but about an overdue reckoning for him as his luck runs out. — Curt Fredrikson, Mokena, Illinois Confirming nominations The unfolding of the choices being made by the president-elect to run the government gives one pause. I am struck by the arrogant incompetence of the unqualified who believe they have the expertise to oversee Cabinet positions and government agencies. Loyalists, sycophants, convicted felons, a daughter-in-law, the girlfriend of a son, the father-in-law of a daughter and Fox News employees? It’s like asking a plumber to perform a surgical procedure about which he knows nothing and has no expertise but happens to be a good friend and confidant of the surgeon. Pray the confirmation process weeds out the least competent and holds those who are confirmed accountable to the American people. Our democracy depends on it. — Teri Pehta, Glen Ellyn Buyer’s remorse absent I respectfully disagree with Storer H. Rowley’s assessment that the GOP has buyer’s remorse about Donald Trump or his Cabinet picks (“Trump’s Cabinet picks are giving Republicans buyer’s remorse,” Dec. 15). These “Weimer” Republicans wanted to win at all costs and, like the old fable, knew all along that Trump was a scorpion. But what of the rest of us? Even though Trump did everything within his means to subvert the democratic process and stay in power following the 2020 election, including putting a target on his vice president’s back during an insurrection, we’re still going to docilly hand the reins of government over to him? Even though Trump is a convicted felon and was also found liable for battery when a civil court jury believed the sexual assault claims against him, we’re still going to gladly install as president a man of such low character? Even though Trump just appointed a billionaire businessman to co-chair a specially created Department of Government Efficiency operating outside the government — after having accepted more than $250 million in campaign contributions from this same businessman — we’re to seriously believe Trump has the interests of American citizens, and not his cronies and big business, at heart? Even though Trump has shown no regard or respect for America’s government, its laws, its processes and its people, we’re just supposed to dumbly follow the usual steps to a transition of power — and expect him to ever hand it back? We’re all right with this? — Stephen Sonneveld, Manteno, Illinois Politicking as usual U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren are in sync. Each deplores the killing of the UnitedHealthcare CEO, yet they also decry the billions of dollars in profit or the endangerment or loss of lives due to claim denials by health insurance companies. So, do they really care that this individual has been shot and killed? Not once do I recall any discussion of the health care industry during the presidential campaign, so why now? In fact, these lawmakers’ words are irresponsible and offer a dangerous excuse for the killer’s actions. These politicians are elected by us, and we expect a level-headed response, some responsibility, the setting of a positive tone. Yet, we’ve come to know that’s asking too much. It’s all about trying to appeal to a certain demographic or sentiment — all for the vote. Politicking as usual, no matter the cost. — Anthony Blasco Sr., Lemont Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].