Entertainment critics should be as diverse as the arts they cover

As an artist working in the city of Chicago, I understand the necessity of reviews and critics and how they play an essential role in the circulation of artists and audiences. Critics present a well-reasoned critique and/or analysis of the play/movie/book they’re indulging in, and present this analysis to the public in the hopes of further discussion, and piquing the interest of the general public to further consume the art in question as well.

With this in mind, I write this email to request that as a paper of note in Chicago, the Sun-Times would greatly benefit from a more diverse panel of critics writing for your entertainment section. As the art we are consuming these days becomes more diverse and more representative of our city’s population, so too should the critics who are reviewing this work. I believe the Sun-Times would greatly benefit from hiring critics of color to their team, and I’m sure readers in the city would appreciate this action as well.

Ben Kaye, Lakeview

Imbalance in Illinois means problems for residents

Illinois has been budget-less for about two years because the governor and our legislators are at an impasse. Illinois bond rating is sinking. Bills go unpaid, businesses close and people move out. Gov. Bruce Rauner recalls the legislators from their summer break for a special session to attempt to resolve the impasse. The leader of the Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan dismisses the legislative body after twenty minutes.

Anybody else see a problem here?

Larry Casey, Forest Glen

Health care inequality hits everyday citizens hard

Big health insurance companies are exiting the Affordable Care Act en masse, leaving behind the twisted wreckage of policyholders left with no choices. These health insurance providers claim their costs are too high and they can’t make any money, so off they go.

How convenient to be able to proclaim that your costs are too high and you’re therefore simply unable to sustain such exorbitant costs and so little income that you must, in order to survive, exit the deal.

But what about the individual, the citizen who is forced by law and penalty to buy health insurance regardless of whether they can afford it or not? Left to decide whether they pay their mortgage or their health insurance.

The ACA is no deal. If you get on it and then take on a second job to get ahead, the Obamacare subsidy money becomes income and you’ll owe taxes on it, regardless of your costs. Caveat Emptor.

So big companies have costs that force them to exit the Obamacare marketplace, but when our costs from Obamacare get too high we’re forced by statute to pay — or else.

Sounds fair to me.

Mike Simon, Glen Ellyn