To the editor:

I read with interest Representative Finstad’s letters to the EPA regarding actions to address nitrate contamination in public water systems and underground sources of drinking water in the First District. The petitioners included Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Environmental Working Group, Minnesota Well Owners Organization, Center for Food Safety, Clean Up the River Environment, Food and Water Watch, Friends of the Mississippi River, Izaak Walton League Minnesota Division, Land Stewardship Project, Minnesota Trout Unlimited, and Mitchell Hamline Public Health Law Center. Representative Finstad labeled their petition “politically motivated and non-science-based”. While I am not able to assess either of these conditions, I can tell you I am aware of and have admired the work done by a number of these organizations. While his support for farmers and livestock producers is admirable, his use of the label “radical” to describe these petitioners is, at best, misleading.

I have asked Representative Finstad to recognize the “politically motivated and non-science-based” action of US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s defunding of 22 grants on messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine research. This technology is credited with saving millions of lives during the COVID-19 pandemic and has shown potential for treating cancers, autoimmune diseases and inherited conditions such as sickle cell disease. His action is needed by the entirety of his constituent base to strongly oppose continued dismantling of the US health system.

It’s easy to throw around inflammatory labels. It’s much harder to talk authentically about hard decisions. Secretary Kennedy has been labeled “radical”. When did radical become a political label for wrong? Perhaps “non-science-based” is a more accurate label? Is $550 million too much to focus on one method of disease prevention? Where will this money go instead? Do farmers, private well owners and environmentalists have incompatible goals for clean drinking water? I know this isn’t true. What is true? We do have the ability and can expect others to engage in respectful dialog and decision making. We can do better.

Beth Zabel

New Ulm