SAVE Act is an act looking for a problem

Editor:

Over the past two weeks there have been two letters that I would like to comment on. One was a long letter embellishing the SAVE Act. How it will improve voter accountability, etc. What the writer fails to point out is that the act is not only an act looking for a problem, but a not so subtle attempt to disenfranchise millions of voters. 

It is estimated that as many as 21 million American Citizens do not have a passport, birth certificate or other necessary form of required ID. This would make it extremely difficult for a person who changes their name for any reason, such as the 60 million women who change it due to marriage every year, or change their address, or simply want to register to vote. Another thing to consider is this: What adult has time in their life to stand in line during working hours for long periods of time?

Two other things to consider are, why are we not making it easier to vote rather than more difficult? And, secondly, based on the lies and dysfunction coming out of Washington, why should anyone believe anything that this administration claims?

The second letter is by Cori Balch and Neil Watko, chair and vice chair of the Gunnison County Republican Party. In that letter, they walk us through how parents of young children can navigate the convoluted process of qualifying for the Trump Account, which will qualify young children for a $1,000 government-paid investment that they can cash in at age 18. Unfortunately, they seem to have again made some specious claims. A number of months ago they implied that based on the past history of the S&P 500, it would grow to as much as $40,000 in 18 years. The outlandish statement was quickly dispelled by a number of people. In this round, they are estimating a growth of $18,000 over 18 years. Unfortunately, this estimate seems to be overly rosy as well. Based on the incredible growth of the S&P over the past 20 years, the worth of the initial investment would be more in the range of $5,000 to $6,000 if the S&P continues to grow at the same rate. 

Given 18 years of inflation and having to pay tax at the regular income rate when withdrawn, the Trump Account Act doesn’t seem so rosy. Young parents would probably be far better off if the money were used to bring back some of the programs that would actually help parents with things such as child care or medical expenses. 

Charles Welch

Gunnison