To the editor:

A private citizen is defined as one who does not have an official or professional position in a given situation. With this narrow definition, we say an ex-president is a private citizen because they no longer need to act on matters of importance to our country. They receive less publicity and there is less reference to what they think or say of current issues.

However, should not all private citizens and taxpayers be concerned with the conduct and actions of one who will continue to receive an income of $219,000 a year for life, Secret Service protection for a spouse, minor child and self for life, $96,000 for a staff, with additional funds for office supplies, phones, technology, etc. for life? Those of us who have always been private citizens do not receive these perks, yet we pay for them with our federal taxes. Are our Exes really private citizens in the true sense?

A private citizen with lifetime support of millions of dollars from public funds. Should there not be continued accountability during this lifetime support? Should our recent president really be excused for his part in the Jan. 6 insurrection on the basis that he is now a private citizen? Should evidence on each side of this issue be ignored because he is now a private citizen? Would evidence on the same alleged act of incitement not be required on you, private citizen? As long as he is on the public dole for a lifetime, his impeachment should be tried.

Senators Grassley and Ernst, do not take the easy way out yet again. The taxpayers of Iowa and this country deserve to have you do your job. Or even lead.

Diane Pratt

Fort Dodge