Santos' fiasco: It's not funny

For those of us represented by Rep. George Santos, there is nothing funny about what is happening — it is potentially dangerous “Stepping away from two panels,” News, Feb. 1].

No town officials have been contacted by Santos, which means we have no way of telling the government about dangerous roads that need repair, health care needs, veterans and senior needs, our schools and their priorities, and, most important, our town’s need for federal dollars for critical infrastructure.

Our congressman is unable to coordinate these important efforts while he dodges probable criminal charges, lawsuits and, critically, constituent needs. We are the definition of taxation without representation.

The two members of congressional delegations in adjoining districts have kindly taken on some of the 3rd Congressional District’s constituents’ needs and priorities, though they have no obligation to do so.

Santos’ district office is usually unmanned, and phone calls are not returned.

So while the jokes are funny and the mockery well-founded, his constituents have no representative in Congress protecting their rights. There is nothing comical about that.

— Howard Metzger, Westbury

I’m sure I’m not alone in this question: What exactly is Rep. George Santos getting paid to do? He is being paid with taxpayer money, and that is quite upsetting.

— Camille Morselli, Islip Terrace

The unfolding story of Rep. George Santos’ chicanery is akin to peeling layers from an onion.

Now, his campaign treasurer’s practices need to be scrutinized [“Santos campaign treasurer resigns,” News, Feb. 1]. This election was Santos’ second campaign, and documents filed only two years earlier differ dramatically from those most recently submitted.

Santos’ disavowing knowledge of these filings reveals he was not alone in this fraud.

As we have learned, just “follow the money.”

— Michael J. Vicchiarelli, Eastport

A federal attorney should investigate the citizenship status of Rep. George Santos [“Santos should prove he is a citizen,” Opinion, Jan. 13]. It appears that he was born in Brazil, so he may not have been a U.S. citizen at birth but could be a naturalized citizen.

There are two issues that need to be examined. First, how did Santos gain his permanent residence status? He has identified as gay but was married to a woman. Was that marriage a sham entered into only to gain permanent residence? Did he apply for naturalization after being married to a citizen for three years but failed to meet the requirement of living with his spouse for that entire time?

When he applied for naturalization, did he disclose his criminal charges in Brazil? If Santos obtained his permanent residence through fraud, an action can be initiated to denaturalize him and deport him to Brazil. His failure to disclose his criminal history could also lead to the loss of his citizenship status. If Santos is not a U.S citizen, he is, of course, not eligible to be a congressman.

— Robert Gottfried, Plainview

The writer was an immigration attorney for 40 years.

The most disturbing insight of the Newsday/Siena College poll is that 31% of voters would still have voted for him if they knew about his lies and shady campaign finances [“Newsday poll: Santos should resign seat,” News, Jan 31].

Is blind devotion to a political party more important than ethics and morality?

— Lew Cohen, Jericho

Has anyone considered that Rep. George Santos may be a mole [“How to avoid another Santos disaster,” Opinion, Jan. 23]. Barry McManus rightly points out that Santos will have the ability to access sensitive and secret information that he may use to his or others’ benefit, and not in a good way. This man has been down so many rabbit holes, and yet every day, he can continue to delve into information he should not have access to in view of his persistent and unabashed lying.

This debacle is an open invitation to those who would seek to harm the United States, and they don’t even have to plan a physical attack. They can follow the path created by Rep. George Santos.

— Nadine Moir, Westbury

I do not know anyone who voted for Rep. George Santos because he claimed to have a degree from Baruch College.

I supported Santos because his predecessor, former Rep. Tom Suozzi, and his recent opponent, Robert Zimmerman, both supported federal funding of abortion. I believe that people who are against abortion should not have their tax money used to pay for it.

— Dan Martin, Babylon

Rep. George Santos says he will not resign. Why would he? He is making a salary of $174,000 as a congressman. Would any businesses be clamoring at his door with job offers, especially at that salary?

— Dorothy Horsham, Ridge

Rep. George Santos should immediately be forced to resign and prohibited from running again for elected office. Those who lie on their resumes should not be allowed to reapply for the same job.

The stakes are too high for tabloid fodder, as fun as it may be. For all he isn’t, every day that we still don’t know who we are dealing with is a day our democracy is less safe.

— Jaime Franchi, Melville