Letter to the editor Susan Denton

Re: Gag Cheerleading Awards in Tremper Wisconsin,( New York TImes, February 19,2019 pg B10.)

Basing cheerleading awards on appearance is in no way a light-hearted exercise. It is pure harassment. The coach who thought this up should be stood up in the middle of a crowded room, her loved ones in attendance, and be heckled in the same invidious style. Then she should be fired. What she did is not teaching, not coaching in any way, but could stay with the girls throughout their lives.  It is work enough to live through adolescence without being branded as having the biggest breasts or the best butt or being a string-bean and can carry difficult scars. Lead-hearted is a better descriptive of this sorry situation. Time to take out the trash.

Publishing history:

Daily Freeman 2/23/19

  

Letter to the editor Hal Chorny

Donald Trump and his Republican supporters portray Democratic efforts to help the average person as creeping socialism. Socialism is the governmental takeover of the means of production and distribution. Cuba was an example of a socialist country where the government owned everything and directed the dissemination of goods and services. Bernie Sanders calls himself a socialist which is a misnomer. He is not advocating extreme governmental control but seeks to modify capitalism with social welfare reforms.

Capitalism in the strictest form provides protection for no one. Every person is on their own and the winners can trod upon those who do not make the grade. Some extreme Conservatives appear to want strict capitalism, with no protection for anyone and the smallest possible range of government services. We once approached a stricter form of capitalism but after a horrendous depression Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced social welfare reforms. Those reforms did not turn us into a socialist country and many have argued that he saved capitalism . One controversial byproduct was the rich paid more taxes.

Why do the Republicans now want to destroy Medicare and Social Security when those programs have been largely successful? Why did Republicans pass a tax bill which gave the super rich even more money creating a huge debt for our children while giving a pittance to most of us. Republicans, particularly under the direction of Trump are working to undo social welfare reforms. Republican fear the lazy will take advantage, or that complacency will replace innovation. Social reforming can be done in moderation and is not a perfect solution. On the other hand, life in the jungle is brutal leaving little energy but to survive. Universal health care and affordable education will allow a broader group of people to reach their potential to make this a better United States. The perfect balance between social welfare and capitalism will always prove elusive, but it is a better ideal to strive for than a return to stricter capitalism.

Publishing history

Daily Freeman 2/23/19

"Letter to the Editor" Kathy Adorney

In 1970 New York passed a ground-breaking law:  “Article 125-NY Penal Law: Homicide, Abortion and Related Offenses”. At the time this law was passed, abortion was a crime The new law only amended the parameters of the crime. It determined that an “abortional act is justifiable when...it is being committed by a duly licensed physician, acting under a reasonable belief that such act is necessary to preserve (the female’s) life, or, within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of her pregnancy.”  It did not make an exception for a woman’s health or for the viability of the fetus.

1. The Reproductive Health Act (RHA) which was signed into law January 22, 2019:
2. Removed the regulation of abortion from the Penal Code and placed it in the Public Health Law.
3. Allows Advanced Care Clinicians, (licensed, certified, or authorized practitioners, such as nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and physician assistants) duly trained in abortion care, to perform abortions.

Ensures that a woman can access the care she needs when pregnancy places her health at risk or when the fetus is not viable.

Limiting the performance of abortions to medical doctors is a burden for women who live in rural areas of New York where access to a physician is limited.  They typically have to miss days of work, often unpaid, to travel to a doctor.  They may also have to arrange for childcare.  These difficulties can result in a delay in getting the care they need and thus, a latter abortion.  Allowing Advanced Care Clinicians to provide abortions will reduce that burden.

Allowing later term abortions when a fetus is not viable or when the pregnancy places a woman’s health at risk, is a humane provision. To put a human face to this issue here are some real examples (Stories abridged from “Critical Conditions:  How New York’s Unconstitutional Abortion Law Jeopardizes Women’s Health”, K, Bodde & S. Krueger, NYCLU, 2017)

She was told by her doctors that her cancer treatments would make it impossible for her to get pregnant.  Late in her second trimester she found out that they were wrong.  Further tests revealed that her cancer treatments had damaged the fetus and it would not survive.  But because she was more than 24 weeks into her pregnancy, she was prohibited from receiving an abortion in New York State.  She travelled thousands of miles to receive care in another state.

In her 24th week of pregnancy she began having seizures.  Years earlier she had been treated for melanoma.  It was now in her brain and had spread elsewhere in her body.  If she was not treated for the melanoma she would likely live for only a few weeks after giving birth.  Treatment now could give her more time, but would be toxic to the fetus.  She and her husband had to consider the needs of their young child at home.  It was a wrenching decision, but they were certain the best course for their family was treatment for her cancer and a focus on quality of life.  Despite her condition and the needs of her family, an abortion in New York was no longer possible.  The couple had to travel to Kansas.

A routine ultrasound in the third trimester revealed that the baby had had a massive brain hemorrhage.  It destroyed his cerebral cortex. If he even survived delivery, he would be kept alive by machines.  Termination was the only way to prevent his suffering.  But “because I was in the third trimester, there was no one who could provide this kind of care for me in New York. We were shocked.  With the help of our hospital, we found a doctor across the country who would treat us.“           

The RHA takes abortion out of the penal code, provides for better access to legal and safe abortions, and allows families a humane choice when things go terribly wrong late in a pregnancy.   That is why loving, humane women and men have fought for the RHA for many years.  We welcome its passage.   

Publishing history:

New Paltz Times 2/14/19     

Letter to the editor Sherrill Silver

There are many misconceptions and much misinformation around the proposed New York Health Act, which I’d like to clear up. I have had experience as a health care professional, as an employee of companies that helped with my health insurance cost, and as being unemployed and trying to find my own insurance.  What I have learned from reading the proposed bill and listening to discussion makes me very excited that this could come to pass and the residents of NY would all have comprehensive health insurance at a modest cost.  

The proposed bill will eliminate the two tier system which affords great care for some and little-to-no care for others. Many young people I know have jobs which do not offer health insurance, and they go without it because the cost is prohibitive. Some indigent people have Medicaid, so they have insurance, but the quality is poor. There are some who are happy with their current plans, but in my experience they are in the minority.  I, for one, am currently on Medicare, and have monthly premiums, deductibles, and copays, and no coverage for vision or dental, not a great deal from where I sit, and I’m currently healthy. The new proposal will provide comprehensive care (Including long-term care) for people of all ages; it is a great improvement on the current Medicare. 

When insurance companies are taken out of the picture, there will be a single-payer system, which will streamline the processing of care and reimbursement to providers.  

Costs will be lower for most individuals, the range of services available will be improved, and the balance will actually be savings for the state, as there are not profiteering companies involved, drug prices will be negotiated, and doctors can be providing care rather than dealing with insurance companies. Prof. Gerald Friedman’s calculations with the UMass Economics Department’s assistance show that New York would SAVE $71 billion a year. 

There is a job re-training plan already in place for those displaced from their jobs with the insurance companies. 

This is a Win-Win plan. The updated bill (including coverage for long-term care) will be released Monday Feb. 11 so watch your newspaper for details.  

Please go to NYHcampaign.org for more information. 

Publishing history:

New Paltz Times: 2/14/19

Letter to the editor Misha Harnick

I think we have a curious paradox in New Paltz. On the one hand, our laws in regard to structures and their nature is restrictive and prescriptive, mostly for good reasons, even if some of them do create hardships for owners. On the other hand, whatever is legally possible, no matter how unwelcome and “harmful” it may be, is allowed to take place. As a case in point I can name Medusa Antiques on Main Street, or the towering house on 56/58 Elting Avenue: both are eyesore defacement of the neighborhood, but not really detrimental to the community.

CVS, on the other hand, by its intrinsic nature, would be a great hurt for our community. It is not only traffic, and municipal infrastructure, and destruction of natural habitats that would be very negatively affected. It would be economically hurtful to us: after all, we have Rite Aid Pharmacy which is wonderful; there is a good pharmacy at Stop and Shop; Dedrick is a local treasure. Most of any “drugstore” items we can get at Rite Aid, ShopRite, Tops, Dedrick, Convenient Deli, even the One dollar stores.

WHY to bring another giant retailer here? Neither the existing venues nor the newcomer would financially benefit, in fact, I believe that ALL would feel a hurt.

Remember the opposition to WalMart, led by the recently deceased Dave Porter – we won once, we should be able to do it again.

And Five guys? Does our community need ANOTHER purveyor of transfat fare and sweet soft drinks????


Misha Harnick

Publishing history:

New Paltz Times 2/14/19

"Sustainability" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Sustainability

The term “sustainability” most often references our relationship with Mother Earth: the ways in which we can and must use our scientific knowledge to preserve our natural resources, to address the challenges of climate change, and to develop an economy that nurtures healthy and productive growth. Sustainability helps us order our present lives with a vision of a hopeful future for the planet and its creatures.  

But “sustainability” also informs our understanding of economics.  What should have been apparent for decades is that the decline of the American middle class—broadly defined as the segment including all but those with high income and wealth and those suffering from poverty—cannot be sustained.  The rhetorical and political successes of trickle-down economic theory, dominant in the Reagan years and resurgent with Trump, have conned enough of the voting public to mask the relentless erosion of financial health for most Americans and the shocking growth of economic inequality.  But no more.  In 2019 proposals to change the course of unsustainable inequality abound:  redirect taxation to recover the disguised bonuses paid to the wealthy through current laws on estates, tax rates, unearned income, and stock market activity; regulate large corporate buybacks of stock and dividend distributions, which mostly profit the wealthiest families and executives while neglecting research, investments for growth, and shared benefits with workers; revitalize anti-trust oversight to break up and limit the dominance of monolithic companies in their industries.  These proposals come from elected Democrats and commentators and thinkers on “the left” with very few Republicans willing to listen.

But the boundaries of left/right are shifting.  What is radical or extreme about demanding that the wealth of a prosperous country be shared fairly with all its citizens?  We should applaud the overdue conversations that the volcanic disruptions of the Trump presidency have generated.  The Democratic Party in 2019 and 2020 must focus with laser intensity on ideas that offer hope to the mass of the American people.  The right is already accusing its opposition of stirring “class envy.”  It is a hollow and cynical accusation grounded in the fear of lost privilege.  If Democrats stand for anything, they must take the lead in offering plans for a truly sustainable path to the future.  If they do not, our democratic society will not endure.

Publishing history:

Daily Freeman,  2/13

NP Times, 2/14