I appreciate Naseem Rakha taking the time to write her perspective on the Oregon kicker (“Kicker offers chance to address pressing problems,” Wednesday, March 15). I have a few thoughts of my own on this subject.

Several times in her column, Naseem refers to the return of incorrectly forecasted revenue as a “giveaway.” While it is a giveback, I would have preferred not to have paid it in the first place. It is first and foremost my money and not the state’s money, whether the state has it or not.

She then goes on to say the return of kicker funds is not critical to those at the top. While this may (or may not) be the case, I reject her politics of envy. In fact, every time I see this used as a defense of an assertion, it causes me to pause. How other people spend (or don’t spend) their money is no concern of mine, and should be no concern of the state’s.

Lastly, in response to Naseem’s request to use this “revenue windfall” to help the homeless, I respectfully refer her to the Eugene Mission. They have been moving people from addiction and homelessness to recovery quite successfully one beautiful soul at a time, with the help of prayer, private donations, a dedicated volunteer base and no public funding.

Spending billions of dollars on a problem that can be solved for much less seems to be the more irresponsible option.

Trina Rice

Enterprise

Do you have a point you’d like to make or an issue you feel strongly about? Submit a letter to the editor.