FW Symphony; Immigration law; Democratic Party
FW Symphony
What’s the problem with the Fort Worth Symphony?
It doesn’t seem to be the musicians since they get regularly get very good reviews when they play.
It doesn’t seem to be that Fort Worth doesn’t support the arts since we support Bass Hall, several world-class museums and other fine arts.
Could it be the way the symphony is managed? If management says the musicians should take a pay cut to balance the budget, shouldn’t management take a pay cut?
If not enough money is coming in, isn’t it management’s responsibility to develop an income stream, as do other cities that have their own symphonies?
If the current management team can’t do the job, shouldn’t Fort Worth have a team that will support a first-class symphony orchestra as we deserve?
Dan Moore, Fort Worth
Fort Worth has an excellent orchestra that performs in a wonderful hall. The city is known for it.
The region has thousands of graduates from schools with excellent music programs and boasts great cultural institutions.
Fort Worth itself has entered a golden age. Things have never been better.
Why on earth is the Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra in trouble? It’s not the music. It’s obvious that it’s because of poor leadership.
It must be replaced immediately. It’s that simple.
There are many talented arts administrators out there who know how to raise money, sell tickets and to brilliantly lead such an organization as the Fort Worth Symphony.
The symphony board needs to step up.
Dean Corey,
Guizerix, France
Immigration law
While I’m certainly not a lawyer, I’ve seen them on TV.
I think this puts me in the same boat as Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Irvine, based on his opinion piece you published on Wednesday.
He must have studied law at the same place as the “constitutional scholar” currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D.C. They view the Constitution as just a set of guidelines that are to be followed when you feel like it and ignored when they don’t suit your agenda.
Chemerinsky says it’s settled law that there is leeway in enforcing immigration law. On that we can agree.
What we cannot agree on is when President Obama starts making enforcement decisions that also grant some 5 million people the right to obtain driver’s licenses, work legally or otherwise enjoy the benefits of citizenship.
Chemerinsky didn’t mention any of this in his piece, choosing to address just the prosecutorial discretion aspect. What about the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government?
Do we ignore that because it’s inconvenient to his argument? I think not.
Troy Worthy, Hurst
Democratic Party
Jack Vaughan wrote in a Jan. 21 letter: “I’ll vote for Democrats because of their record of passing laws that benefit the poor and middle class: Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, the 40-hour work week and overtime pay.”
Unfortunately, the Democratic Party was taken over by corporate interests years ago. Bill Clinton, the first Democratic Leadership Council president, moved the party to the right, giving us NAFTA, the repeal of Glass-Steagall and media deregulation. Hillary Clinton had a DLC leadership position.
Money equals access and access equals influence. The Democratic primary is a battle for the soul of the party.
Will Democrats vote for someone who wants to get the money out of politics and return the party to its roots, or will they vote for someone who took outlandish speaking fees and is beholden to corporate CEOs and Wall Street?
Mary Vogel,
Bedford
This story was originally published January 29, 2016 at 5:43 PM with the headline "FW Symphony; Immigration law; Democratic Party."