Letter: Is laissez-faire the right choice?

Dear Editor:
Like everyone, our children and grandchildren mean pretty much everything to us. Though, maybe not so much like everyone, I don’t know, but my wife and I also feel especially passionate about a bright future for all children.
Just so you know, my son makes a good living working as a coal miner. We worry about his future occupation while we witness the inevitable proliferation of wind turbines, solar arrays and natural gas. How will he support himself with a decent standard of living in the future?
It could seem pretty obvious, even to the most die-hard among wishful thinkers, that our atmosphere may not long tolerate the quick release of a billion years of carbon sequestration, during a short span of only several hundred years. Given a worse case scenario, should some new plans and actions be ready in order to address fast approaching, perhaps immediate changes?
When our daughter has shared her personal challenges and worries with us, we have often repeated and reminded her that success comes from adapting to constant and inevitable changes. To my son and to my daughter, I say: “always expect change and learn to deal proactively with your challenges.”
Fighting to maintain the status quo may not be a longterm, winning strategy. Fresh ideas and independent thought may be required to solve the problems ahead. (Please take note, there are few, if any persons, who abhor more than myself being told what I can or cannot do.) However, I can appreciate and abide that government can and should protect our population from polluted air and water, from counterfeit medicines, tainted food and toxic chemicals in our environment, etc. And, what about sufficient taxation to pay for our children’s future and to meet the general welfare of society? I do not recoil from that too much.
Referring to the county land use plan, that plan might be okay, as long as it does not result in profiteering by some locals at the expense of all the nation’s public land users. With eight billion people bulging at the planet’s seams, are regulations crucial? For example, consider hunting game laws. Are they really necessary?
Laissez-faire attitude toward government is antiquated. Change is upon us. That brings me to selecting Reed Kelley for county commissioner. Reed believes government regulations are intended to protect public health and safety and he believes those regulations are, within the limits of reason, good ideas that usually may require some enforcement.
Public office to Reed literally means public service. For 30 years, I have known Reed to consistently put enormous amounts of his time and energy into his commitment toward meeting the challenges of tomorrow. Reed is proactive. Please consider Reed Kelley for county commissioner and prepare for the future. Please vote!
Mike and Debbie Frazier
Meeker