Mask confusion, recycling bill and diversity

A simple solution to our mask mishmash

The rules for wearing masks are a mess ["Mask rule back at airport, Suffolk transit," News, April 21]. Federal? State? City? Business? School? Public transit? Indoors? Outdoors? Yikes!

Here is the answer: Democrats must wear masks. Republicans must not wear masks. Independents should wear masks, but let them hang below the nose.

Have a nice pandemic, everybody!

Lewis M. Lebetkin, Roslyn Harbor

I am triple-vaccinated and have had a mild case of the omicron variant of COVID-19. I am employed by the Longwood School District. The issue I am faced with is: Should I continue wearing a mask at school and other public places? I have decided to continue to wear a mask. While protecting myself from COVID, though, despite the small chance of contracting the virus again, there is another reason why I continue to wear a mask. On average, I would contract a common cold about twice a year. In the two years I have been wearing a mask, I have had of zero colds.

Richard Jacobson, Plainview

The mandates for wearing masks have been revoked in many situations. However, there are individuals who continue to wear them in all situations where they may come in contact with the public. Some continue to wear a mask out of concern for their own safety as well as for the safety of others who may be vulnerable due to age and/or medical conditions. Therefore, it is particularly disturbing when an "anti-masker" questions or makes derogatory comments when encountering a masked person.

Suzanne Yankwitt Susswein, Wantagh

Say no to Hochul's recycling bill

Not all “extended producer responsibility” plans are alike [“A better way to recycle,” Editorial, March 29]. The stakes are too high to accept legislation that will not do what is necessary — reduce the amount of plastic drowning our communities in waste.

The garbage of millions of Long Islanders is dumped at the Brookhaven landfill, less than two miles away from my home. During recent community waste audits, I saw that much of Brookhaven residents’ garbage is plastic. This is not because Long Islanders are averse to recycling, but because too much plastic flooding our communities is not recyclable.

We see the toxic impacts of incinerated plastics in our air quality, waterways and bodies. The landfill is meant to close in 2024. For Long Islanders, our need to reduce waste is not an abstract problem.

We must say no to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s EPR bill, which will not significantly reduce waste, because it leaves corporations in charge of regulating how and when they address this issue. Instead, all our good neighbors should insist that the EPR program must have teeth, or we don’t want it.

Assemb. Steve Englebright (D-Setauket) is championing a bill that mandates, not wishes for, waste reduction. This is the EPR we need.

Abena Asare, Brookhaven

The writer is member of the Brookhaven Landfill Action and Remediation Group.

The timely editorial asks, "How do you design the best EPR program for NY?" If the goal is to reduce the amount of waste that taxpayers pay to use landfills,

 or incinerate, then the EPR law must aim to reduce the amount that ultimately enters the waste stream. Just look at all of the plastic-wrapped products in our grocery stores, pharmacies, etc. It is rare to find a product not in plastic, and little of it is recyclable or contains recycled content. An effective EPR program should require manufacturers to redesign packaging products to be reused or recycled, incorporate recycled materials into product design, forgo the use of toxic chemicals in manufacture, and pay fees based on the environmental damage caused by their products. The state Senate EPR bill fails to include any of these requirements. Furthermore, they place the packaging companies themselves in charge of creating standards. The editorial board states, "It's a complex issue," and indeed it is. But, simply, to start, shouldn't we at least have some minimum standards set in the law and have packaging made from products that are readily recyclable in New York?

Randall Sorscher, Rockville Centre

Op-ed promoted diversity, didn't attack it

A reader defends diversity ["Diverse youth offer a variety of ideas," Letters, April 21]. The letter is intended to dispute an op-ed by Timothy Rosen, who she thinks attacked diversity. In fact, Rosen was promoting diversity. His complaint was that liberals don't practice diversity enough, that they promote it without practicing it. Rosen made an accusation about liberals that I don't agree with. But he was not attacking diversity.

Ralph Daino, Wantagh