OPINION:
Rep. Randy Feenstra’s recent op-ed in The Washington Times speaks to why Republicans continue to lose (“Law enforcement officers and police dogs deserve our support,” web, March 22). Rather than cut frivolous government spending, they look for ways to spend it less frivolously.
Wiser? Yes, but only in comparison to the ways Democrats spend money, and hardly inspiring. I should caveat my comments in that it is not clear how Mr. Feenstra’s bill would be funded. If it diverts money away from officer diversity, equity and inclusion training, great. If it’s from taxpayer dollars (which it apparently is), it appears to be yet another example of Washington’s addiction to spending.
Mr. Feenstra would have us believe that police dogs need $5,000 or more in veterinary care after retirement. Certainly these dogs deserve a comfortable retirement. But who spends $5,000 on veterinary care? I don’t spend that for my pet, nor do most Americans. But just like Democrats would have broke senior citizens paying pensions for Ukrainians, Mr. Feenstra would have Americans who cannot afford pets pay for retired police dogs to live in the Ritz. No, thanks.
JAMES RYAN
Silver Spring, Maryland
Please read our comment policy before commenting.