Letters: Strong air service a necessity in Centre County; You can’t repeal reality
Strong air service a necessity in Centre County
Strong air service is not a luxury for our region — it is a necessity. It is one of the most direct ways we stay connected to national markets, attract investment, retain talent and remain competitive in an increasingly connected economy.
Air service growth supports the industries that drive our regional economy. It strengthens our colleges’ and university’s ability to attract research partners, conferences and visitors. It supports health care systems that depend on visiting specialists and time-sensitive travel. It fuels tourism, outdoor recreation and hospitality by making our region easier to reach for visitors who want to experience our communities, trails and events.
That is why regional support is so important.
The Fly State College Fund, administered through the Chamber of Business and Industry of Centre County, exists for one purpose: to support air service growth and sustainability at State College Regional Airport. Contributions to the Fly State College Fund help demonstrate regional commitment, support air service development efforts, and strengthen our case with airline partners.
I encourage you to visit the Fly State College Fund website at https://flystatecollege.com/. Many small contributions add up and demonstrate community support better than a few large ones.
Together, we can strengthen regional access, support local businesses and invest in long-term economic vitality.
Ralph W. Stewart, State College. The author is the interim executive director of the Centre County Airport Authority.
You can’t repeal reality
Under pressure from the president, the Environmental Protection Agency has repealed its 2009 finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases “endanger public health and welfare.” That finding wasn’t symbolic. It was the legal backbone for regulating climate pollution under the Clean Air Act. Without it, the EPA now claims it has no authority to regulate greenhouse gases at all.
But that’s not how this works.
In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The Court said that if scientific review showed they harm public health and welfare, the EPA must regulate them. After extensive study, the agency concluded in 2009 that they do.
That science has not disappeared.
The Administrative Procedure Act requires agencies to confront and discredit the evidence behind any finding they repeal. The EPA has not meaningfully addressed the scientific record. Instead, it offers a legal workaround — despite the Supreme Court already making clear that the authority, and the obligation, exist.
This is not just a political or philosophical debate. Climate pollution drives asthma, heat-related illness, crop loss, rising insurance costs, infrastructure damage, and billions in disaster recovery. It affects our health, our wallets, and our children’s future.
You can change leadership. You can revise policy. But you cannot erase scientific reality — and pretending otherwise will cost us dearly.
Patty Satalia, State College
Governors must protect state control of elections
As a concerned citizen, I urge our nation’s governors to stand firm against calls to federalize control of American elections.
The Constitution deliberately assigns the administration of elections to the states. The Founders understood that decentralizing this power would prevent dangerous concentrations of authority and safeguard democratic self-government. For more than two centuries, governors and state officials of both parties have upheld that system.
Recent calls by President Donald Trump to “take over” or “nationalize” elections in states he claims cheats — without evidence — are deeply troubling. The assertion that states are merely “agents” of the federal government in administering elections contradicts constitutional text and longstanding practice.
In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court reaffirmed limits on executive authority in other contexts; similarly, election administration remains constitutionally grounded in state authority. While Congress may set certain federal standards, the Constitution clearly assigns the “times, places, and manner” of elections to the states. A president cannot override that structure by executive order.
This rhetoric is not harmless. Declaring state election systems fraudulent without evidence undermines public trust, pressures election officials, and risks improper federal interference.
This should not be a partisan issue. Protecting the integrity of state-run elections protects every voter, regardless of party.
Governors must publicly reaffirm their constitutional authority, defend the independence and safety of election officials, and resist any unlawful federal overreach. The question is not who wins the next election — but whether elections remain free, fair and administered as the Constitution requires.
Karen Stoehr, State College