Eileen Carpenter
Weblog7/8/06
Rick Mariano will be going to prison for selling political favors. It was a tremendous abuse of his office and surely cost taxpayers dearly by directing city money to firms that may not have been the most cost effective vendors.
He needs to be punished severely enough to set an example for other public officials. Yet what a waste of a life! Someone with a lifetime of public service and all the knowledge gained from that experience will be sent to prison at taxpayer expense to sit and do nothing for several years.
Meanwhile, we hear of daily murders of children caught in crossfire from drug dealers. Putting police officers on problem corners helped, but there aren't enough officers and the overtime expense was untenable. What if non-violent offenders like Mr. Mariano served their sentences at home while working 40 hours a week as uniformed community watch officers at $7.15/hour . Put them in groups on problem corners with walkie-talkies to contact the police if any drug activity occurs. It would be a voluntary alternative to prison, of course, and would have to require some training, but it could allow them to continue to contribute to the community while still deterring political graft.(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer; published 7/13/06)
6/30/06
I am ashamed to see so many Americans who feel that the risk of terrorist attack justifies the executive branch of government acting without any checks or balances from the other branches. It is that kind of fear that has allowed brutal dictatorships to replace democratically elected governments in so many other countries. America has remained a democracy despite many serious threats to our security. That is not because we're smarter or nicer people than the rest of the world, but because our Constitution insists that the president's use of the military and police functions of the federal government must answer to the legislature and judiciary.
Do Americans think the Soviet people, having finally overthrown the Czars, decided they would rather have a police state instead of a democracy? Stalin could not have carried out his purges if the Soviets had a constitution limiting his power over citizens and other state leaders willing to defend those limits.
I would remind Republicans that in a democracy, no party will remain in power indefinitely. Any powers they claim for the current president will be granted to all subsequent presidents as well. If they would not have wanted Bill Clinton listening to their phone conversations without court authorization, don't let George Bush listen to mine.(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
4/24/06
The time to have been worrying about Exxon's excess profits was after hurricane Katrina. Numerous Gulf area refineries were shut down, but no one wanted to consume less gasoline. Demand was equal, supply was less, and the price rose. The cost of producing gasoline had not risen at the remaining refineries. The difference was profit for companies like Exxon which had undamaged refineries.
But the current run-up in prices is due to the increase in the cost of crude oil, raising the refiner's cost of producing gasoline. Most of the damaged refineries are functioning now and competing with each other. Any oil company willing to sell gasoline for less than its competitors would get everyone's business, making profits through increased sales volume instead of higher prices.
The excess profits are now being made by those with crude oil to sell. If the chaos in Iran disrupt its exports, supply goes down. If Americans threaten to nuke Iraq or assassinate the president of Venezuela, speculators get nervous and bid the price up. Meanwhile, China's modernization is creating a much larger demand, and the unrest in Sudan and the oil-producing former Soviet republics may create future supply interruptions.
But the cost of getting the oil out of the ground isn't that much higher. The owners of oil fields even in stable areas of the world can increase their prices although their costs have not risen. That's where to look for your windfall profits today. And by a remarkable coincidence, most of those oil fields are in states that supported the Bush administration and the very policies that drove those crude oil prices up. Will the Republican congress tax / those / windfall profits? I doubt it.
If Senator Spector is sincere about addressing rising fuel prices, he should concentrate on making public transportation more affordable and widely available to reduce demand, and he should work on creating incentives that will help the U.S. produce clean alternative-source energy more cheaply and efficiently.(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
3/30/06
Regarding the proposed guest worker program: While immigrants may be taking jobs Americans don't want, that doesn't mean American workers have better choices. We have an educational system that funds schools based on the income level of the adults in each district, basically ensuring a steady supply of poorly educated adults for future low-skills, low-wage jobs. Those adults won't be able to compete with immigrants who are only going to be in the U.S. a few years and can afford to work for extremely low wages before returning home to countries where that money has much more purchasing power. The American worker has to plan for a future in / this / country, buying a home, providing for children, and funding a retirement at U.S. prices.
A guest worker program is beneficial only if U.S. workers are prepared to accept jobs that require higher skills and pay more money. I would propose that each state only be permitted to participate if the quality of its schools in low income areas is adequate to move those students into better jobs. School quality should be measured primarily based on the percentage of students who graduate from high school and should require that the graduation rate in the wealthiest and poorest districts vary by no more than a set percentage. Students vote with their feet; if their time is being wasted and their schools are dangerous, they are less likely to see the point of continuing to attend. Test scores can be manipulated, and anyway; parents in wealthier school districts measure student performance by percentile rank. As soon as low-income students start to perform better, wealthy districts will provide whatever resources are necessary to make sure their students remain "all above average" and can continue to keep low income students from competing with their children for college and jobs. Improving graduation rates will mean not only better test scores and safer schools, but also providing an economy where good jobs are available to graduates with a high school diploma.
For states that can pull this off, the economic benefits could be dramatic They would have a large sector of their citizens creating new jobs instead of merely trying to fill them -- and the guest workers would now be essential to fill those jobs. Everyone wins.(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
12/20/05
To those who advocate immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and also to those who wish to "stay the course:"
We entered Iraq because we claimed we knew what was best for the Iraqi people. It was an extraordinary violation of national sovereignty made on the basis of our belief that the Ba'thist government was illegitimate and that the people of Iraq were willing to accept a foreign invasion to liberate them from that government.
If we claim to support democracy in Iraq, we now must be willing to allow its newly elected representatives to decide when and how U.S. troops will be withdrawn. We must be willing to respect their right to self-determination. In a decision for which Iraqis will bear potentially devastating consequences, there is no longer any justification for that decision to be made unilaterally in Washington, no matter how well-intentioned the decision makers. For the various American political factions to argue about timetables for withdrawal without even raising the possibility of asking the Iraqi National Assembly to vote on a plan is embarrassingly patronizing.
(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
12/5/05
Tom Ferrick, Jr.'s columns about the Philadelphia Parking Authority's attempts to collect on decade-old parking tickets have done the public a great service. How on earth can people defend themselves against these tickets when they no longer have retained records of where they were or what they did on a particular date?
It is an interesting contrast to the clamor raised to extend the statute of limitations of sexual abuse of minors by clergy. Such crimes are nauseating, and it is horrible to think that the perpetrators continue to roam the streets looking for victims. But what of any innocent person who is accused of pedophilia?
Sexual abuse of children is so disgusting that simply to be accused could result in loss of one's job or family. Americans like to think that those accused of crimes enjoy the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. But when the crime causes such a visceral response in the jurors, there is a high risk of conviction, even if it is only the victim's word against the defendant's, and even if the accuser is a very unreliable witness. After all, it is the nature of pedophilia to leave its victims psychologically damaged.
The fact is that anyone accused of pedophilia will have to prove his own innocence. It is hard to prove a negative; it is even harder years after the supposed event. Even assuming no accuser would ever lie for financial gain, and that no victim is ever coached by adults to serve their own vindictive purposes, sexual abuse survivors sometimes have distorted memories. Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago was accused of sexual abuse by a former seminarian who only retracted his accusations when he saw evidence that showed Bernardin could not have been present at the time of the incident he remembered. What if there were no such evidence available to exonerate Bernardin?
It makes sense to extend the statute of limitation for concealing sexual abuse. That is a crime that has multiple witnesses, and often a paper trail. But to extend the statute of limitation on the sexual abuse itself will inevitably lead to false conviction of innocent parties. As distasteful as it is to let a pedophile go free, the criminal justice system cannot call someone up decades later and ask him to prove he didn't do something.
(Submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and accepted for publication)
10/2/05
Several thoughts about the clergy sexual abuse scandal and the recent grand jury report criticizing the Archdiocese of Philadelphia for a coverup:
While I appreciate the victims' desire for justice, I can't support eliminating the statute of limitation on sexual abuse. The longer after a crime is committed the accusation is made, the more difficult it is for an innocent person to mount a defense. Who among us could come up with any details of our lives 30 years ago to refute such an accusation? And since we know that sexual abuse can lead to serious mental health problems -- and that children with mental health problems are probably targeted by abusers since they are more vulnerable -- the fact that the accuser is an unreliable witness does not make their testimony less believable. For such horrific crimes, the principle of the accused being innocent until proven guilty doesn't really hold up in front of a jury. We have seen that even in the absence of malice, abuse accusations can be made against innocent clergy. A famous example is the late Cardinal Bernadin of Chicago, who was exonerated only when he was able to prove that he was not assigned in the place the accuser described at the time of the abuse. The accuser withdrew his accusation. He wasn't lying; he just had a false memory. He may have been abused by someone else whose real identity he can't remember.
But the coverup of sexual abuse is another thing. That requires conspiracy among a number of people and often a paper trail. It would make sense to extend the statute of limitations on that crime.
Another thought that occurs to me is that we are very quick to take the side of the victims and demonize the abusers. But it often occurs that sexual abusers were themselves sexually abused as children. Among the many dysfunctional defense mechanisms a victim can have, one is to delude him/herself into believing there was nothing wrong with what happened, and that the abuser may even have been doing the victim a favor. So we need to be offering support to both victim and abuser, while keeping abusers away from situations where they would be in unsupervised contact with children. The ideal situation would be a society that is supportive enough of former victims that they can come forward and reveal their sexual paraphilias before ever acting on them, knowing that people will be understanding and not put them in positions where they will put children at risk.
10/1/05
From the September 28 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America:
CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade , the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.
BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?
CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.
BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.
CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.
BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --
CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.
Poor William Bennett! He doesn't understand why those crazy liberals and touchy Black folk are so offended. After all, he did qualify his remarks by saying that it would be "an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do."
Earth to Bill Bennett: People aren't objecting to your just mentioning aborting Black babies. They are objecting to the underlying assumption that this country would be better off if there were no African Americans living here ... to the implication that African American children are genetically predisposed to crime right from the womb ... to the idea that it is only ethical restraints that prevent the U.S. from carrying out the extermination of the entire Black race, not any appreciation of their value as fellow citizens.
9/30/05
(Reply to editorial comment on NPR's Marketplace which stated that no one in the U.S. had a vested interest in the continued existence of poverty)I disagree that no one has a vested interest in the continued existence of poverty. The people who do society's most unpleasant jobs often make the lowest salaries because their lack of education and disfavored dialects keep them from getting easier, better paid, more interesting and more highly respected jobs. If everyone had a chance to prepare for any career they wanted, we would have to pay people more to get them to do the less pleasant jobs. We would have to pay the people who clean the bathrooms in hotels much more money than lawyers -- after all, which job would a lawyer prefer to take? And how many people could afford to buy fast food or shop at a discount store if all the employees made enough to lift their families from poverty?
Our entire economy depends on the existence of an impoverished class of people who will accept low wage jobs because no others are open to them. And as soon as any intervention starts to improve the prospects of the children of the Have-Not's, the Haves will invest even more into making sure their children remain more competitive. The school districts in wealthy areas will always spend more than those in poor areas to remain "above average," no matter how much the poor areas spend.
On the bright side, the standard of living of the poor in the U.S. is far higher than it was in the past, and it likely will continue to improve in the future. 200 years ago, a solidly middle class family would be living in a home with no heat, electricity, telephone service or indoor plumbing, would own maybe two sets of clothing per person, would have children who dropped out of school after 3rd grade to help in the family business, would be chronically infested with head lice and intestinal parasites, and would not be able to obtain any of the prescription drugs or medical technology currently available. Now those conditions mark the poorest of the poor in the U.S.
There is no easy solution. European nations use guest worker programs, but these have their own problems. At the very least we can recognize our dependence on inequality and stop blaming the underclass for their own poverty.
9/12/05
Conservatives are blaming local governments for the lack of Katrina evacuation. They point to a parking lot full of school buses, underwater now.
That's a good point, if putting people on buses were all you need to do. But prior to hurricane landfall, the possible track of hurricane-force winds covered a large area. You would have to bus them hundreds of miles to get them out of that zone. That would take many hours and multiple trips. And then what? The mayor of New Orleans can't set up shelters in Texas, and motel rooms were filled up throughout a large area. And are there enough unused nursing home and hospital beds to accommodate evacuees? And how would the mayor find those beds and learn who to contact to arrange transfer? And how would he arrange payment for the buses and other expenses? You're evacuating because the city of New Orleans was facing possible total destruction; that means whoever they call won't be paid for a long time. And why should the federal government need to wait for a phone call from the governor of Louisiana, if disasters mean communication may be out, and local government officials may be injured or dead?
The point of having a federal emergency management agency is precisely because these types of events can't be handled by local officials. It isn't just money; you need an interstate network of preparedness. It's a problem that even a faster federal response wouldn't have completely overcome. But we better figure it out before spring flooding-- the terrorists now know that ramming a barge into a levee (even without loading it with explosives) can destroy a major city, and there are plenty of other cities along the Mississippi that are below water level at that time of year.
9/9/05
We heard of anarchy in New Orleans as tens of thousands of people waited for rescue. Looting, shootings, rapes, carjacking -- we felt we were watching the human race revert to our animal instincts in the fight for survival.
But now we hear from multiple reliable sources that survivors who tried to walk across the Crescent City Connection bridge on I-90 were met with shotgun-toting sheriffs from suburban Gretna who refused to let them cross.
It's one thing for people to die due to incompetent government leadership. It's another for government representative to actively prevent people from trying to save themselves, knowing that they will die of starvation, dehydration, and disease if they cannot get out. They could at least have delivered food, potable water, and baby formula to the foot of the bridge, but chose to let people die instead.
Now which town's citizens were the ones acting like animals?
(Links to survivors' eyewitness accounts:
http://eurweb.com/story.cfm?id=22235
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/93EB4BF112FE926C862570710012D2D2?OpenDocument http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/6/211436/8987 )
When you read these accounts and see how survivors felt that they were being herded and intentionally kept from aid by authorities, you can imagine what they must think when they are told they must leave the Astrodome now and move to a cruise ship or a faraway city. If it were me, I'd want to stay somewhere the news cameras could see.
I would hope Mayor Street of Philadelphia, as well as mayors of other cities who wish to help shelter New Orleans evacuees, would extend a personal invitation so they can feel more confident that they are not being shuttled off to someone else who doesn't want them. A trip to Houston to speak to people in person would be a wonderful gesture. I'm still voting for the round trip Philadelphia to New Orleans plane ticket to make sure people don't feel they won't be able to return home to salvage some belongings, too.
9/8/05
The City of Philadelphia, channeling anger into action, prepared for 5000 New Orleans evacuees. It assembled a team of doctors and nurses to wait at the airport to triage the sick. Churches adopted shelters and made up welcome gift bags. But so far only 34 hurricane evacuees have shown up, and some of them weren't even told where the plane was headed when they were put on it.
If being put on a plane to a city over a thousand miles from home without forewarning is an example of the respect being shown the evacuees, no wonder they are hesitant to leave once they have halfway humane living conditions. I would be suspicious too, if I were one of them, especially after hearing Barbara Bush describe the possibility of my wanting to become a citizen of Texas as "scary."
If Katrina victims were treated like adults and given a chance to make their own choices, I suspect there would be many more coming to Philadelphia, at least for the rest of this hurricane season. Why not give people a round trip ticket from Philadelphia back to New Orleans, so they can either move back home or choose to collect their salvageable belongings and then return here? If people didn't feel herded like cattle, if they didn't feel they were going to be stuck in a faraway city without the money to return, they would be more willing to try someplace new.
To the Katrina survivors: Yes, Philadelphia does have winters, but not until after the hurricane season will be over. We have beautiful fall colors in the meantime. What we call "hurricanes" are the heavy rainstorms that remain after the real storms burn out over land, and most tornadoes are so tiny it's hard to tell them from microbursts. We have no significant earthquakes. We have many buildings older than the French Quarter, because there is nothing to knock them down except neglect. We have crime, but not as much as New Orleans did before the disaster. You can try to feel safe again here. We are looking forward to welcoming you.
9/5/05
Americans are surprised to hear that so many foreign governments have offered cash, military personnel, rescue teams and physicians in response to Hurricane Katrina's devastation. Some may feel a little offended at the implication that the U.S. can't deal with the problem without help, or that other countries are criticizing the U.S. relief effort's missteps.
Doesn't anyone remember how much better U.S.-Soviet relations were after Gorbachev accepted U.S. aid for the Armenian earthquake and Chernobyl disaster? Benjamin Franklin, in his autobiography, pointed out that it is easier to make a friend by asking a favor than by doing a favor. To give foreign aid but not accept it makes citizens of other countries feel perpetually indebted to the U.S. Accepting it allows them to feel like valued friends and allies. We can certainly find a way for each country to help and indeed feel a sense of pride in doing so, for instance, by asking individual countries to help rebuild individual small towns in the hurricane zone.
I would urge President Bush to swallow his pride and to accept aid. The long term benefits in world peace are worth it.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published 9/7)
9/3/05
This is the first entry for this Blog. Later on, I may upload some earlier stuff I submitted to letters to the editor of various publications.
Like everyone I know, I am angry about what is happening in New Orleans. The failure of the levees was completely expected. National Geographic even did a computer simulation of the results in their special on tornadoes and hurricanes. FEMA identified it as one of the three biggest vulnerabilities in homeland security. Money was already allocated to reinforce the levees, and the Bush administration cut it out of the budget every year. But there is money to fund an invasion of Iraq (of course, that's "off budget" -- wish I could budget that way!). And there is money to cut the estate tax. Maybe we should have told Bush the terrorists were going to blow up the levees -- he understands explosions.
The rescue effort began the evening of the hurricane, but grossly underestimated the number of people left in the city. Still, they knew there were 10,000 people in the Superdome alone; how long does it take to charter some buses from outside the affected area? Why are we sending large naval vessels from the Mid-atlantic instead of airboats from Florida? Are there no other helicopters in the U.S.? No tank trucks that could send some fuel for them? No amphibious vehicles?
It's a disgrace that not only are more National Guard troops in Iraq than in the hurricane damage zone, the prospect of being sent to Iraq will probably discourage a lot of recruits for years to come.
And global warming? This storm went from Category 1 to Category 5 as it crossed the Gulf of Mexico. The water is not only unusually warm, the warmth extends to further depths than in the past. The Bush administration wants to be 100% sure the documented increase in average global temperatures isn't due to normal climactic fluctuations before acting. So what if it is? We should be doing everything in our power to prevent any further increase, and if reducing greenhouse gases will help, it should be done. If there were a meteor heading toward Earth capable of causing a similar change in the climate, we'd be spending billions on sending a nuclear missile to deflect it. Again, things that explode get more interest.
One thing that may not have been anticipated is the high number of people who didn't evacuate and the lawlessness that is going on now. It's going to have to be taken into account for planning for future disasters, though.
As far as people not evacuating, someone should ask poor people what they think. They may not have had transportation -- all planes and trains were fully booked, and people without funds at the end of the month may not have been able to afford any transportation. They may have been anxious about not knowing where they may be taken for shelter or how they would get back. They are used to having to worry about how they are going to get income when they are not home by their mailboxes, especially when government checks were soon due to arrive, so they may have delayed leaving for that reason. They may have felt the prospect of their homes being looted in their absence was greater than the prospect of their belongings being destroyed by flood. (And some of them were in jail and yet left there without regard to whether they might be drowned.) The psychology that affects how different populations react to disasters has to be part of the equation in planning for disasters. It's also interesting to see that despite days of advance warning, people were still in dangerous areas -- makes you wonder how effective warning systems for tsunamis are.
And as far as the shooting, there was plenty of it when the police were around; no surprise it would only get wilder when there were no phones to call 911. The majority of people are not involved, and their safety is just as important as that of civilians in Iraq (and more properly our responsibility).
Some past letters to the editor of various publications. "Accepted for publication" means I have an email asking me to confirm authorship because a letter was under consideration for publication depending on space, but it wasn't actually published (or I don't remember if it was actually published). I recall also getting phone calls instead of emails asking me to confirm authorship of a letter they were considering, but I don't recall which letters). Most letters were not published in full.
7/14/05
Re: Karl Rove admits revealing name of Valerie Plame; Bush takes no action despite previous vow to fire whoever was the source of the leak.It's beyond belief that President Bush's supporters are so blind in their loyalty that they are now excusing Karl Rove's outing of a CIA agent by saying there is no proof that he knew she was a "covert" agent.
Okay, perhaps that won't be proved. But anyone so dimwitted as to assume a CIA agent is NOT covert unless specifically told otherwise is too stupid to have a security clearance. What other information has he revealed because no one told him not to? And if the information about who leaked the information was so vital that a reporter is now sitting in prison for failing to reveal her source, why is it not vital now?
He should resign and save the president from more embarrassment than he has already caused.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
6/24/05
Re: African Studies Curriculum now a graduation requirement in Phila. Public Schools.A few years back, Dr. S.B. Woo, a Chinese American, was Lieutenant Governor of Delaware. He traveled throughout Asia, successfully attracting investment to the state of Delaware. "How brilliant!" everyone thought. "And how obvious! Why hasn't anyone thought of that before?"
Africa is another region where greater economic ties are important. It is an important source of natural resources like petroleum, natural gas, uranium, chromium, cobalt, platinum, copper, gold, aluminum, zinc, lead, tin, manganese, titanium, lithium, fluorite, germanium, tantalum, vanadium, radium, thorium, quartz crystals, diamonds and other gemstones. Executives in manufacturing and technology firms cannot afford to ignore the nations of Africa, and the U.S. would be at a significant strategic disadvantage if its sources of some of these minerals were cut off.
But the average American knows very little about Africa. It's been my experience that most graduates of Philadelphia public schools can't even find Africa on a map. (Try it sometime: They usually look for something small.) Rep. John Perzel has demonstrated exactly how badly needed a course on Africa is by his statement that such a course is unnecessary because "most of these kids will never go to Africa. They have no affinity toward Africa."
No one can predict what knowledge will be essential 20 or 30 years from now, but it's a good bet that better knowledge of African geography, culture and languages will be advantageous. Why shouldn't the students of Philadelphia be positioned to accept leadership roles in government and corporate relations with African nations in the 21st century?
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
5/26/05
Re: Accusations of desecration of Qu'ran at Gitmo Detention CenterCan someone explain to me how a copy of the Qu'ran would fit down a flush toilet? Doesn't all this outrage hinge on whether this alleged event would even be possible?
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
5/16/05
Re: Article describing free e-prescribing software being made available to NJ docsRegarding "N.J. Blues offers e-prescribing freebies" (AMNews, May 16): It's lovely that payers like Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey are making such generous offers to promote electronic prescribing (in this case, not only the software license, but also the PDA to run it!)
But as someone who already uses e-prescribing, accepting such an offer is not a risk-free decision. The software is proprietary -- any changes, including adding any new medications or dosage forms as they come on the market, must be made by the vendor(in this case, Caremark). Even if the software is free now, there could be a considerable charge for updates in the future.
Should a physician wish to institute a comprehensive electronic medical record system in the future, he/she would have to buy the one Caremark will be selling or else start all over with a new e-prescribing system. Recovering the patient records from a proprietary program would require paying a consultant or the new software vendor to transfer it. I've been through that too -- and heard all the excuses why they they "don't recommend" doing it (i.e., can't figure out how).
If electronic medical records are going to be widely accepted -- and Lord knows, they need to be -- the physician must have open access to his/her own data. There has to be an industry standard for all the database files and encryption, so that any new program can be installed and know exactly where to go to find the needed information.
While vendors might prefer the comfort of keeping their clients captive, it would be to their advantage to establish standards. It would increase the market for all EMR products. It would also allow innovative companies to develop and profit from add-on modules to serve niche markets.
(submitted to American Medical News)
3/23/05
Re: Medicaid budget cut, but spare no expense to save Terri SchaivoLegislators in Washington are falling all over themselves to "save Terri Schaivo's life." But these same hypocrites just cut the Medicaid budget. That's the funding that pays for nursing home care for patients like her whose personal resources are exhausted after a few years. Other funding for the disabled, like Paratransit, is also being cut back.
And they want to be the heroes to doctors looking for medical liability reform. But one of the biggest pressures on families to sue after a catastrophic injury is when they find out how few nursing homes will accept young people who will need years of care with nothing but Medicaid to pay for it -- and how underfunded those nursing homes are.
If you want to know what people's real priorities are, look at where they put their money. Grandstanding about Terri Schaivo is free. Quality care for the disabled is not.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
1/4/05
Re: Motivation for suicide bombersWhen some men feel emasculated, they behave irrationally and violently. They may even commit suicide to assert control over their own destiny, as in the case of an abusive spouse who kills his ex-wife and then himself.
We are seeing that phenomenon with suicide bombers in Iraq. Leaders like Zarqawi and bin Laden can recruit young men to carry out suicide missions because those young men resent the power -- not the freedom -- of the U.S. Their once-great nation, the former superpower of the ancient world, a repository of culture during Europe's dark ages, and a recent economic, military and technical power, is in shambles. The impressive U.S. military presence in Iraq and the largesse of the American taxpayers will never overcome that resentment. The shame Iraqis feel in their current circumstance provides recruits for the cult leaders who gain social status from their ability to induce others to commit suicide for them.
We can only overcome the attraction of terrorism by giving the Iraqis pride, not by beating them further down. As illogical as it may seem, we should be asking Iraqis to assist other nations, even when their own nation is so much in need. The U.S. should be hiring some of those unemployed engineers, building tradesmen, business leaders, college professors, etc., to assist in the rebuilding of Indonesia. There is a strong tradition of charitable giving in Islam. And since Muslims the world over learn Arabic, Iraqis have the ability to communicate with many people in Indonesia. Iraqis at home would receive regular reports of the heroic and beneficent actions of their humanitarian mission to Indonesia, so they could all share in the pride of being able to help. The unemployment situation in Iraq would be a bit better, and some of the most skilled workers would be out of the danger of suicide bombs until things settled down at home.
Benjamin Franklin noted, "He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another, than he whom you yourself have obliged." The U.S. needs to accept that we are a fabulously wealthy and powerful nation and have no need to prove it. The entire world stands ready to join in tsunami relief. By providing the financial support to allow others to provide help -- even if our own role is less prominent -- we will ultimately gain more status than if we rush in to "direct the operations" ourselves.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer; accepted for publication)
12/7/04
Re: Religious ad rejected by major networksJust when I thought the major television networks were willing to run an advertisement for absolutely anything, I find that it is too controversial for the United Church of Christ to invite Log Cabin Republicans to attend church ("Networks Are Accused of Rejecting Ad on Religious Bias," Dec. 2).
It seems to be okay with television networks for a naked woman in a towel to invite a man she's never met to have sex with her, especially if she leaves the towel on until the camera cuts away. It's okay to encourage someone to use a drug that may cause painful erections that last more than four hours (gee, thanks for sharing!). It's okay to watch as human beings with messed up lives go through emotional turmoil while waiting to find out who fathered a child, and to televise that child's name and photo. And it's okay to encourage people to consider other people's suffering on "reality" shows as a form of entertainment. Maybe the UCC should have disguised its spot as an advertisement for a plastic surgery clinic.
How interesting that television executives find it okay for programs to fairly explicitly imply that sexual intercourse is occurring between homosexual or unmarried heterosexual couples, yet find it really disgusting if they put their clothes on and go to church.
(submitted to New York Times)
12/6/04
Re: public transit fundingNumerous readers have sent letters insisting that SEPTA cover its costs through higher fares, not tax revenue. After all, those who don't use a service shouldn't have to pay for it.
But if SEPTA must trim unprofitable routes, the long trips to suburban shopping and business centers will have to be cut. Those businesses rely on hiring low-wage city residents to fill service jobs, like cleaning offices or stocking retail stores. If those workers are unable to consider taking jobs in the distant suburbs, businesses will have to pay much higher salaries to attract employees who live closer or who own cars. That will make it hard to compete with businesses is other states.
Therefore, those businesses might find it to their advantage to send shuttle vans to pick up their employees from the city. Since paying the driver of such a van would be its major fixed cost, I imagine businesses within the same mall or office park would join together to run vans. And it only makes sense to have a larger van or bus pick up and drop off at several nearby clusters of businesses. Local governments might want to contribute to the cost of the vans to reduce traffic congestion or to avoid having those businesses and their tax revenues relocate elsewhere.
Of course, since you have to pay a driver during a return trip whether the van is full or empty, it would be a great idea to allow members of the general public to ride those empty vans back into the city for a modest fee. You could even call it, "public transportation." What an innovative concept!
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and accepted for publication)
11/24/04
Re: Septa bus stop signs are uselessI rarely take Septa because it doesn't go where and when I need to travel, but I don't mind paying for it when I buy gasoline. Every person who does take public transportation improves my life by staying off crowded roads, reducing the demand (and therefore the price) of fuel, and contributing less pollution to the atmosphere.
What I do mind is how poorly marketed Septa is. No wonder their ridership isn't paying more of the costs! Every bus stop in the region has a sign that could be used as a marketing tool. Instead, they say something useless like "44." At least there's a picture of a bus so you know it's a bus stop. How is someone new to the region supposed to start using Septa?
When I lived in Chicago, every bus stop in the city included a route map of each bus that stopped there (showing which roads it rode on and which corners it turned at), and a statement like "runs every ten minutes from 5:00 am to 12:00 midnite; NiteOwl service every 30 minutes." It may even have listed what the fare was, so people could have ready the infamous "exact change only." If not, it was at least posted on the sides of the buses.
Instead, Septa publishes little fliers for each route that you must go and find for yourself somewhere. And even these only show that one bus's route and the times the bus arrives at selected intersections. (If a bus runs at least every 15 minutes, who cares what times it is scheduled to arrive?) There is no master route map (not even on their website) that lets you see all the buses and trains in your area and where you could transfer. How do you know which route schedules to get without wandering the neighborhood to see what numbers are on the various bus stop signs? The trip planning function on their website doesn't give you the information to make any decisions yourself, and every trip it plans seems to end up requiring two transfers and four hours of travel time.
Educated people don't like feeling stupid. But they do realize the value of a public transit system. Respect their intelligence and tell them where the "44" goes!
(submitted to the Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
11/3/04
Re: ideas for promoting unity among Americans after the election
I see significant parallels between Bush supporters and his opponents in this country mistrusting each other, and the hostility between Sunnis, Shi'a and Kurds in Iraq. I am concerned that so many people don't recognize the similarities because they are unable to see things from any point of view except their own.
I would suggest an essay contest for high school or college students on how the various factions in Iraq could be encouraged to trust each other and work together in a democratic government (other than uniting in hatred of an occupying army), since it might prime the population's collective consciousness for thinking about American politics in a new way. It might also encourage non-Quakers to understand the pros and cons of making decisions by consensus (as was done in writing the Afghan constitution) instead of rule by a slim majority.
The contest ought to have prizes sufficiently attractive to get applicants to do some serious research to make their entries competitive. (I'm thinking college scholarship grants.) There might be a teaching kit to be distributed to schools on how to go about doing quality research on controversial current events topics, and how to evaluate the quality of such research. (That might also eliminate the problem of parents doing the work for their children, since most parents aren't really competent researchers, either.)
It would be important to "market" such a contest in areas of the country where students are not normally exposed to ideas from outside their own communities. For instance, many newspapers do not have staff reporters in any city except their own and are completely dependent on wire service stories. Their lack of direct experience is reflected in their editorial policies, and the citizens they serve continue to have provincial attitudes inappropriate to the 21st century.
(submitted to Friends Committee on National Legislation in response to "A Time for Unity – Post-Election Message from FCNL’s Executive Secretary")
11/3/04
Re: Bill restricting parties from being heard on zoning issues if they do not live in the immediate vicinityThe more I think about HB1954, the angrier I get. I've already written to you once, but it has occurred to me:
If appeals to the ZBA are to be limited to those living within 500 feet of the property for which a zoning variance is sought, then there should also be a law that no party should be able to SEEK a zoning variance on a property -- nor receive remuneration from ANY activities permitted by the zoning variance -- unless they also live within 500 feet of the property (and have no other residences!). And that includes not only owning the billboard and selling the advertising, but also printing the wrap or owning any interest in the business being advertised. It's only fair.
After all, as Councilman Dicicco said in his letter SUPPORTING this same measure when it came before Philadelphia City Council, "Outside developers, billboard companies, vendors, and others, who don't live here, don't raise their children here, and don't have a direct stake in our neighborhoods should not decide how our neighborhoods and communities grow." Great. I agree. So don't let them advertise any farther than from 500 feet from the homes where they live and raise their children, either.
Submitted to Hallwatch.org
10/19/04
Re: Flu vaccine shortageWho is responsible for the flu vaccine shortage? As much as I'd like to pin the blame on George Bush, that really is unfair. The blame falls on every one of us who wants the most medical services for the lowest personal expense.
The whole complicated mess comes down to money. Medicare, which insures a large percentage of patients who need the vaccine, pays just $10 a dose. Other insurers reimburse at similar levels. Compare that to over $50 per dose for chickenpox vaccine, which is not available as a generic (so the manufacturer can charge whatever the market will bear).
Influenza vaccine must be designed differently each year to protect against the strains of the virus considered most likely to occur the next winter. Production must begin months before the vaccine is shipped, and any doses unsold by the end of the winter are useless. Although serious side effects are rare, with so many people receiving the vaccine, there is a significant liability risk. As we have seen, recalls may be necessary, making the entire year's production a loss. When the likelihood of profit is slim, the likelihood of loss is significant, and the performance of an excellent job is merely taken for granted, it's no surprise that most manufacturers no longer bother. I wouldn't be surprised if Chiron drops out of the market, too, rather than invest in whatever upgrades are needed to keep its manufacturing facility open.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and accepted for publication)
10/6/04
Re: Bush's performance in televised presidential debateAfter watching the President in the presidential debate September 30, and seeing Vice President Cheney's more competent performance in his debate, I guess I'm more interested in knowing who would be a heartbeat away from the vice presidency if Bush were reelected.
(submitted to the Philadelphia Inquirer)
9/3/04
Re: Publication of unproven rape accusationsAs sick as I am of hearing about the Kobe Bryant case, I feel it illustrates the need for change in the way these cases are publicized. Responsible media outlets do not name rape victims, so as not to add to their trauma. But men accused of rape, who are supposed to be presumed innocent, have their names and pictures publicized as soon as the accusations are made.
Our society has fortunately evolved to the point where a man who is falsely accused of rape suffers the same type of anguish the rape victim does. In the types of cases where the victim's name is not disclosed, should we not also keep the defendant's name confidential until he has actually been convicted? After all, DNA evidence is being used to free men who have been incarcerated for years based on sincere eyewitness testimony, so false accusations are a real issue.
This policy would benefit victims as well -- in the Bryant case, the victim suffered harassment after her identity was leaked. No reporters would have been interested in her name in the first place if they didn't know the accused was famous. It would also eliminate the suspicion that the accusation was only being made in order to extort a payoff from the accused.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
6/11/04
Re: Skateboarding outlawed in Love ParkLet's suppose the city did accept the $1 million from DC Shoes and allow skateboarding in Love Park. Will they have skaters or their parents sign releases of liability? Will they check ID's and exclude skaters under 18 who do not have a parent present? Will they insist on helmets and other protective equipment? Will they have city employees working as guards to supervise activity to make sure none of the skaters is a danger to himself or others? Will skaters have to prove adequate health, disability and long term care insurance?
Part of the attraction of skateboarding is that there is a bit of risk taking, of pushing the limits of one's ability, of risking falls on a granite or concrete surface. One 16 year old with a serious head or neck injury presents far more than $1 million in liability. If her injury occurs on city property with city permission, there will be a lawsuit. And given that juries are willing to hold anyone fully responsible for the victim's actions other than the victim and her parents, there will probably be a large award to cover the very considerable lifetime expense of a disabling injury. It would require many millions of dollars to cover just the economic losses, even if there were a cap on non-economic losses like pain and suffering.
Legal skateboarding in Love Park isn't going to happen.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
4/30/04
Re: Reading names of soldiers killed in first year of Iraq warCurrently there is controversy over Nightline's plan to read the names of every soldier killed in the current Iraq war during a television broadcast. Opponents say it is a political move. Of course it is. And trying to keep all recognition of the war dead out of the press is a political move, too.
The only people who ought to be making these decisions are the families of the deceased. If a family wishes their grief kept private, the press should respect that. And if the family wishes public recognition of the sacrifice of their loved one, they should get that, too. If a family prefers a fallen soldier's body be returned during the daylight hours with a military honor guard instead of being shipped in at night like so much cargo, to deny their request is hardly helping the morale of soldiers whose lives are still at risk. After all, those troops may suspect that should they return permanently disabled, the government will attempt to keep their needs out of the public eye in order to prevent a negative perception of the war.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
3/30/04
Re: Trial lawyers feel limiting non-economic damages in malpractice suits is unfairWith all the talk about caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice awards, did you realize that if a lawyer willfully steals from a client, the Pennsylvania Lawyers Fund for Client Security has a payment cap of $75,000, even if the lawyer stole much more than that? -- and that is for the economic losses, which no one is talking about capping for medical malpractice.
The info is at http://www.palawfund.com/Downloads/Instructions%20for%20Statement%20of%20Claim.pdf
This fund comes from premiums that lawyers must pay to the state, just as doctors must pay into the MCARE fund. But as I understand it, their yearly premiums are less than $100. Doctors pay thousands of dollars a year for $500,000 coverage from the MCARE fund (on top of their malpractice premiums which cover the first $500,000 per occurrence). And that's even after the cigarette tax provided a 50% reduction for most doctors. (It did eliminate the MCARE premium this year for high risk specialties like OB-Gyn.)
(letter to Philadelphia Inquirer columnist in response to a column)
11/6/03
Re: Children adopted by foster parents found starvingChildren coming into foster care from abusive homes are often a real handful. They can't be expected to show up in their new homes grateful and cooperative. The diagnosis of reactive attachment disorder is given to children who are much more than "withdrawn and mistrustful," as mentioned in the Inquirer article Nov. 6. These kids seem to actively rebel against any kind of attachment -- they lie and steal, they may smear feces, set fires, run away, destroy furniture, and abuse pets and foster siblings. When they reach adolescence and develop adult strength and sexual desires, they may no longer be manageable in a family situation at all. Yet they may be so charming with strangers that outsiders think the parents must be the monsters.
Adoptive parents of these children who have the means will spend a lot of time and money on long-term therapy, with variable success. Foster parents get only what medical assistance will pay for, and that is pretty limited. Parents with little training may resort to inappropriate methods of discipline, and they may avoid outsiders, like physicians and teachers, who don't seem to understand their situation.
The family in Collingswood had seven foster and adopted children, several of whom had fetal alcohol syndrome. You can't just put all those kids in the care of one couple and leave it up to them to beg for help when they find themselves in over their heads. I recommend that people expressing outrage about this case should contact their state representatives to say they want funding for more caseworkers and better psychotherapy for abused children -- and that they are personally willing to pay higher taxes to get it. And consider becoming a foster parents themselves, so there is less pressure to put so many difficult children in one home.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
10/18/03
Re: Bugging of Philadelphia City Hall to investigate graftWhen the justice department decides to investigate the Halliburton Corporation's $2 billion of no-bid federal contracts in Iraq, then I'll take them seriously when they investigate a lawyer who received $534,000 of business from the PHA.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
7/16/03
Re: Post war IraqDoes it matter that there was no real evidence of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons when we invaded Iraq? Supporters of the administration point out the human rights abuses Saddam committed as sufficient justification.
No one disagrees that Saddam was a monster and the world would be better without him. Most of those opposed to this war had already come to that conclusion when the Reagan and first Bush administrations were arming Saddam despite his use of mustard gas against the Kurds.
But if human rights abuses were the reason for the invasion, we should have had a plan for what to do after removing Saddam. It seems our plan was for the US to take care of the oil fields and Chalabi to take care of everything else. As we learned in Bosnia, even tyranny is better than anarchy. And as we learned in Afghanistan, the lack of a strong central government provides an opportunity for well-financed organizations like al-Qaeda to find a home. Before we go into any more foreign countries, we need to be sure we have a plan and financial commitment to actually improve the situation after removing the evil dictator.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and accepted for publication)
5/20/03
Re: Insultingly low pay for jurorsOur state is struggling to control a tort system that seems to award massive sums of money in unpredictable, illogical ways. This affects not only health care, but everyone who lives, drives, works, or owns a business in Pennsylvania. One reform that I have not heard suggested should not be controversial: raising jury duty pay.
Nine dollars a day is not only inadequate; it is an insult. No one who relies on working for their income can survive on that if they end up on a jury that lasts more than a day or two. People currently go to any length -- even failing to register to vote -- to avoid jury duty. Part of the problem with out-of-control jury awards is that defendants settle cases in which they are not at fault because they can't count on being judged by a jury of twelve people who know how many zeroes come after the "1" in one million.
Even more frightening is that we treat our jurors for criminal cases no better. Is it any wonder we are hearing of so many cases of people erroneously convicted of crimes when the jury should have seen there was a reasonable doubt of guilt?
Jurors bear tremendous responsibility for other people's lives, but they don't even receive minimum wage, let alone pay that reflects the effort and skill involved. While we should not pay so much that people lie to get on a jury, neither should we pay so little that otherwise honest people lie to get off, either.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
4/20/03
Re: Article on effectively complaining to businessesI enjoyed your article on complaints. I would like to add that although complaints are a good way to get people to stop doing what you don't want them to do, compliments are a good way to get them to consistently do want you do want them to do. Sometimes it takes patience to catch them finally doing their job right, but if you write a letter commending the employee that did so, you tend to get that behavior more often from all the employees.
Our medical office is next to a property whose "air rights" are the property of a billboard company. There was Joe Camel glowering over our office when it opened. Next month it was alcohol, and it literally alternated cigarettes or alcohol each month. (At the time, tobacco ads were legal.) Finally, there was a billboard for canned tomatoes -- as it happens, from a company that markets some low-sodium varieties. So I wrote a letter to them, noting that it was a welcome change from tobacco and alcohol advertising, and thanking them for "investing in our neighborhood." They sent me a bunch of coupons for their products, but even better, there hasn't been a an ad for alcohol or tobacco since. I guess they made a comment to the billboard people, who were probably pleased to look good in front of a customer.
(letter to Philadelphia Inquirer columnist in response to a column)
4/10/03
Re: Photo of bloody Iraqi child on front pageIn 1890, the frozen corpses of Lakota slaughtered at Wounded Knee were dug out of the snow, rolled over, and photographed, sometimes after being stripped of valuables (like clothing). We are horrified today to see that these photographs were even sold as picture postcards to tourists
( http://www.personal.umich.edu/~jamarcus/wkneebdy.gif ).How will people living one hundred years from now view publishing photos of dead or suffering Iraqis for commercial purposes? Were the parents of the child in photo on page A10 approached for consent to photograph their minor child? Were they even aware of his condition before the photo showed up on the AP wire service? Would you have published a photo of an American child under these circumstances, or do different rules apply to people of different ethnicity and religion, just as they did in 1890?
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
3/31/03
Re: Article on protests that preceded Iraq warIf even the half-witted crackpots ("The Fringe Factor," March 30 Inquirer Magazine) knew that this war would be longer and bloodier than the Bush administration advertised, what kind of people are advising the President?
I don't believe those advisors are really stupid; I believe they expect personal gain from the war and from the rebuilding of the oil industry infrastructure in Iraq. They have put their personal profit ahead of the lives of the soldiers who have been and will be sent to Iraq. They have put personal profit before the future of our children, who will be living with deficits, inflation, anti-American terrorism and the precedent we have set by making a pre-emptive attack. They aren't even trying to pretend it's not about oil anymore. The first contract has already been awarded to Halliburton, after all.
Maybe only professional protesters have the time and inclination to get arrested on a weekday morning. But the opposition to this invasion also runs deep among those with job and family commitments.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer Magazine)
3/18/03
Re: Protesting invasion of Iraq viewed as lack of support for the troops themselvesIt is unfortunate that many people feel they must be in favor of the Iraq invasion in order to be supportive of our military personnel. Remember that members of the military are prohibited from publicly criticizing the president's policy on Iraq. Only the ones in support may speak out. The others depend on the rest of us to speak for them. I have spoken to several members of the military and all confide that they are against the invasion and that the other people they serve with feel the same. And it is well known that even General Colin Powell is the most reluctant administration member in this venture.
It seems to me that we could best support our military personnel by not using these highly trained defense professionals as cannon fodder.
(submitted to Philadelphia Daily News)
3/18/03
Re: Goals of invasion of Iraq"Americans...hope that success will be swift???"
No one doubts that our forces can remove Saddam's government efficiently. But what then?
We will need to occupy the country until a stable government forms. And for much of the Mideast, stable has meant fundamentalist Muslims. Is that what we'll be satisfied with? And if not, how many of our soldiers will die of suicide bombs before we lose interest and pull out, as the Soviets finally did in Afghanistan?
As much as everyone would like to see Saddam out of power, a secular dictator like him is probably far less likely to tolerate a serious rival to power like Osama bin Laden than most of the possible alternative governments that Iraq could end up with.
If we think we can seriously create a democracy in Iraq, let's prove it by finishing what we have started in Afghanistan before we take on a second country.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
7/18/02
Re: Elimination of inheritance taxSen. Santorum, in his recent letter to the editors, states he opposes inheritance taxes on the principle that the income has already been taxed once. I like that principle. That means that since I live in Philadelphia and have paid city wage tax on all my income, I am exempt from city sales taxes, state income and sales taxes, federal income taxes and FICA, etc. Even better, since this principle seems to extend to third parties (after all, the inheritance tax can't be paid by the same taxpayer who paid the first time), I figure I'm exempt from the city wage tax, too, since my employer has already paid taxes on the income. Of course my employer would be exempt from any income it received from clients who have paid taxes on their income, and those clients are exempt from taxes unless they work for non-profit corporations ...
Maybe death is still inevitable, but it looks like we won't have to pay any more taxes! (Well, at least Sen. Santorum won't, since he won't be getting any more government paychecks to pay taxes on.)
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
4/5/02
Re: Display of Ten Commandments on public propertyPutting the Ten Commandments in the company of secular documents of the founding of the United States would not blunt its religious nature. It isn't a secular document and wasn't created by an American. That solution would merely increase the perception that the US government favors one religious tradition.
Instead of removing it or putting it in the company of documents like the Bill of Rights, I suggest accompanying it with copies of the ancient codes of conduct from other religious traditions which have been set down in similarly succinct form. It would remove the impression of favoring a single religion. Also seeing the same principles appear repeatedly in codes from very varied cultures would also increase the perception that they are integral to our humanity and worth respecting.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
11/30/01
Re: Holding suspected foreign terrorists -- most of whom are later cleared -- incommunicado:A violation of the constitution? Or a "bleeding heart liberal" cause? Whenever I hear about a controversial case, I apply the China Test: If the Chinese government used the same tactic to maintain order and suppress dissent, how would I feel about it?
If China arrested an individual they merely suspected of sympathizing with revolutionaries, held him without charges, did not permit him to contact a lawyer, family member or his consulate, put his children in foster care if there were no one else to care for them, and didn't even admit that they were holding him in custody, we would be screaming bloody murder. The fact that the individual was a foreign citizen would not excuse it; it would make it even worse.
The same constitutional protections that are so inconvenient during national emergencies prevent our government from behaving like a communist state. Thousands of American soldiers have died in the last 200-plus years to defend that principle; it's not a lot to ask for the rest of us to be willing to risk being victims of terrorist attacks in order to continue to defend our freedom.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
10/22/01
Re: Letters invited re: when is it important to vote?It's always important to vote. Even if you don't like anyone who's running. Especially if you don't like anyone who's running. Write in someone you do like. Make the party machine members stay up late biting their nails waiting for your precinct to come in.
Getting maximum voter turnout isn't the parties' goal. They can't be sure they'll be the right sort of voters. They engage in negative campaigning knowing it's better at lowering turnout of those who might vote against their candidate than at bringing out voters who will vote for their candidate. If you get disgusted and stay home, you have allow the special interests with big money who paid for those negative ads to buy your vote away from you.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
10/8/01
Re: Response to following email request for letters sent from Philadelphia Inquirer to previous letter writers:
"Community Voices will be talking about patriotism and related issues over
the next few weeks. Feel free to send in an essay to each of the following:
(1) What is patriotism?
(2) What does that now ever-present U.S. flag mean to you? If the meaning
has changed over time, tell us how. "I'm not ready to add my own voice on this one, but I thought I would point out an interesting quote from Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, published in 1889:
"You see, my kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or office-holders. The country is the real thing, the substantial thing, the eternal thing; it is the thing to watch over, and care for, and be loyal to; institutions are extraneous, they are its mere clothing, and clothing can wear out, become ragged, cease to be comfortable, cease to protect the body from winter, disease and death. To be loyal to rags, to shout for rags, to worship rags, to die for rags -- that is a loyalty of unreason, it is pure animal; it belongs to monarchy, was invented by monarchy; let monarchy keep it. I was from Connecticut, whose Constitution declares 'that all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their benefit; and that they have at all times an undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of government in such manner as they may think expedient.'
"Under that gospel, the citizen who thinks he sees that the commonwealth's political clothes are worn out, and yet holds his peace and does not agitate for a new suit, is disloyal; he is a traitor. That he may be the only one who thinks he sees this decay, does not excuse him: it is his duty to agitate anyway, and it is the duty of the others to vote him down if they do not see the matter as he does."
Mark Twain
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, chapter 13(correspondence with editorial page editor of Philadelphia Inquirer)
9/21/01
Re: Invasion of Afghanistan to find Osama bin LadenOkay, the United States is going to spend massive amounts of money to send ground troops into Afghanistan, risking torture, mutilation, and death to capture Osama bin Laden. Meanwhile, Afghan refugees are spending massive (to them) sums of money and facing similar risks among pirates and typhoons in hopes of finding asylum in countries like Australia.
Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper all around to offer asylum in the US to whatever group of Afghan soldiers or civilians arrives at the border with bin Laden or his corpse? You might even get the refugees encamped in Pakistan to go back to join the effort, relieving Pakistan of a major headache.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
9/12/01
Re: Response to 9/11/01 attacksOur civilized minds are in horror at the massive suffering and loss of life from [the 9/11] terrorist attack. But the little savages inside us are ticked off that we were dissed, that the most powerful nation in the world was injured by some rich brat who's even been thrown out of his own country, a mere fly buzzing around our heads. We want to swat him, bomb him, leave such a big crater that no one would ever dare try it again.
That might work against nations, who are governed by leaders that depend on the support of enough of their populace to suppress anarchy, and who must consider the preservation of their social order and future generations regardless of their personal feelings. It doesn't work against terrorists. Though if we pursue justice through rule of law we won't get the immediate rush of seeing the smoking crater, again and again we see that retaliation only draws sympathy for the terrorists and more adherents to their cause, more fanatics for a sick mind like Bin Laden to manipulate. We have to let our civilized minds make the decisions now. Likes chess grand masters, we must think many moves ahead before we make our next move. The perpetrators of this abomination have managed to give the U.S., "the great Satan," the moral upper hand. We should not squander it. The world can finally all can agree on something: This was pure evil.
Nations all over the world are offering their help. Yes, we can probably get along without it. But it is offered in the same spirit that has sent so many of our citizens lining up at blood banks: We as humans have been deeply wounded that this could have happened, and we feel a need to participate in the response, to find some source of reassurance that we are not impotent against the evil in the world. I would urge our leaders to accept help from these other countries, even those we do not enjoy good relations with, and even if it is mostly symbolic. After all, it was the terrible tragedies of Chernobyl and the Armenian earthquake, and the willingness of the Soviet government to accept our assistance, that really brought our countries into cooperation in so many other areas. The world will change forever in the wake of these events. Can we make it change for the better?
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
6/28/01
Re: A recent letter to editor about the "Patients Bill of Rights"Cal Thomas reports that "his doctor" feels a patients' bill of rights is unnecessary, because HMO's can't prevent a doctor from doing what is right for a patient; they can only argue over payment afterwards. I wonder if "his doctor" is a primary care doctor for any HMO's.
Yes, it is galling to have a large corporation come along after you saying what you did was not "medically necessary" and refuse to pay you so they can deliver higher profits to their shareholders. And as a matter of public policy, it's a bad idea to systematically under-reimburse doctors and institutions that serve HMO members -- a hospital bankruptcy is very disruptive to a community, and the financial uncertainty makes it difficult for private physicians to obtain loans to open practices in low or moderate income areas. But it's true that doctors do have a commitment to do what is right for their patients, which is why most times the HMO's can get away with not paying for it without making the newspapers.
But the most dangerous part of the current situation is that no doctor or institution has a commitment to serve people who are not its patients yet. Suppose a patient is in a hospital that does not have the facilities or personnel to provide the service she needs. Her doctor must then get on the phone and find a specialist willing to accept that patient in transfer who is on staff at a hospital that can provide those services. Most doctors have a personal network of specialists to contact in such cases, so it's a quick phone call and the patient is on her way. But if there is an insurer involved that will not approve admission to that specialist's hospital, the transferring doctor has to start going through the phone book. No one at the HMO will lift a finger to help, of course, and it's even worth your life to get a list of the specialists and hospitals they do accept faxed over in an emergency. And what specialist wants to receive a patient in transfer who never wanted to go to his hospital and may end up suing everyone involved (except the HMO, which is the only entity protected by law)? This was the underlying issue in the case of the spinal cord injury patient who could not be transferred to Jefferson Hospital because his HMO did not have a contract with it, and had to spend hours waiting to be transferred elsewhere.
I hate the current malpractice laws as much as anyone and realize they punish more good doctors than bad. But there must be some incentive for an insurer to not get in the way of adequate care. Unless there is a law that does that, the risk of lawsuits is the only incentive available.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
11/10/00
Re: Republican party minimizing importance of large numbers of disqualified votesAre the Bush campaign spokespeople just sleep-deprived? 14,872 votes in Palm Beach County were double-punched in 1996 and discarded -- and they feel this should make us relax and accept 19,000 discarded in 2000? How many were discarded in areas with different ballot designs, or in areas with better public schools, or areas with a smaller Black population? Why was the problem not addressed immediately? Is this the new substitute for the literacy test that used to exclude former slaves from voting in southern states?
The first time I used a punch-card ballot, I had a college degree in science with a math minor, and had taken a computer course where I actually used punch-cards to input my homework assignments. Even so, I had to look at the ballot a bit to figure it out. My heart went out to a man in another voting carrel, obviously a first-time voter who didn't understand the difference between voting a straight ticket and voting for a candidate by name, who called out in confusion. The election judges prohibited anyone from clarifying his problem, as he was already in the voting "booth."
Everyone complains about low voter turnout and failing public schools. If it is to change, you have to be able to accommodate first-time voters and voters who are products of those failing schools. I feel there must be a re-vote in the wards in Palm Beach County with a high percentage of discarded votes, allowing anyone who voted the first time to vote again. (You can't tell who cast the disputed ballots, but you can confirm that they voted.) And those punch-card ballots have to go, butterfly-style or not. With a squeaker like this, the first-time voter turnout next time will likely be even higher.
(submitted to the Philadelphia Inquirer)
8/31/00
Re: Raising minimum wageCongress is currently arguing whether or not to raise the minimum wage by one dollar an hour. I suggest another possibility: Raise the minimum wage only for workers who do not receive a defined minimum health insurance benefit.
Currently, employers who hire large numbers of workers near the minimum wage, such a fast-food restaurants, have a strong disincentive to offer health benefits. Even a modest plan would raise their labor costs about 20%, putting them at a great disadvantage against their competitors. Americans may say they object to working people being unable to obtain health insurance, but they haven't shown a lot of enthusiasm for paying more money for goods and services from the companies that treat their workers most ethically. It is difficult in many markets to stay in business without using a lot of part-time workers, or even providing no insurance to any workers. The problem magnifies itself, because the fewer of these mostly young, healthy workers in the risk pool, the more expensive health coverage is for everyone else, providing further disincentive to employers.
If the minimum wage were $5.15 for insured workers and $6.15 for uninsured workers (whether full- or part-time), it would eliminate much of competitive disadvantage for companies that hire mostly full-time employees and provide health benefits to them. While its impact would be less for workers already making more than $6.15 an hour, it would help give companies that treat their employees fairly a level playing field on which to compete.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer and published)
5/22/00
Re: Restaurant Smoking BanWhile I personally can't stand eating while smelling cigarette smoke, I can't support a city law banning all smoking in restaurants. Who would enforce it -- the restaurant owners, who don't support the law, and maybe smoke themselves? If a restaurant no longer has a smoking section, but no one enforces a smoking ban, the entire restaurant becomes a smoking section.
I would suggest the city provide incentives for restaurants and bars to go non-smoking. Why not have a comprehensive list of non-smoking establishments on the city's web site, with links to the restaurants' own web sites (and maybe assistance in setting up sites for those who have none yet -- there are plenty of free web hosting services now). Rather than a law that would discourage anyone from eating in Philadelphia, let's have a program that encourages more non-smokers to come here.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
3/21/00
Re: Reducing medical errorsGovernment leaders are proposing new laws to require mandatory reporting of medical errors. Physicians' groups are speaking out in opposition. Another case of the profession trying to protect its bad apples?
Hardly. In fact, most doctors take pride in their own ethics and skill and are just as incensed by the quacks and the profiteers as anyone. The current system -- which insures doctors sued for malpractice but leaves those sued for slander, libel or anti-trust violations hanging in the breeze – can be blamed for any "conspiracy of silence."
No, to explain the opposition to the current movement to reduce medical errors, you have to understand that physicians are trying to articulate the gut feeling among those who work in this field that the proposed changes don't make sense.
Other industries have made great strides in improving safety. But they haven't done it by finding more effective ways of placing blame. Any safety program whose success relies on its human workers never making mistakes is doomed to failure.
People make mistakes, and doctors and other health care workers are people, not gods. The proposed system relies on fault finding: Which doctors, nurses, pharmacists, etc., made the most mistakes and which hospitals do they work for?
As a doctor, I would want to know something different: Which hospitals and physician's offices have systems that encourage employees who witness mistakes to propose changes to prevent the same mistakes in the future (or to minimize the potential harm from any mistakes)? Some medical procedures, like blood transfusions, already involve strict steps to eliminate human error at minimal additional cost.
Any new law should encourage hospitals and physician's offices to work with their employees to make more procedures safer, not just to examine their employees' performance to affix blame. If you want to eliminate everyone who makes mistakes from the medical field, you may have a very difficult time finding anyone to care for you when you are sick.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
11/28/99
Re: Measuring improvement in public school performanceI would like to know how the Philadelphia School District's performance index accounts for the change in each school's enrollment due to students leaving for charter schools? I doubt that it is a random cross section of parents who opt for a charter school, and I can't help but wonder if the drop in Gompers Elementary School's performance is related to the fact that there are two charter schools within walking distance.
Perhaps it would be more useful to release two indices: One calculated in the present way, and a second that only evaluates students who were included in the previous year's study. Instead of ignoring the charter school phenomenon, schools should focus attention on the needs of the remaining students, whose needs may be quite different than those whose parents choose to transfer them. The most successful result of the current system is charter schools giving the optimal education to their students, and the public schools giving the optimal education to theirs.
(submitted to Philadelphia Inquirer)
Eileen K. Carpenter
