Letters to the Editor 9/20/18

Posted 9/19/18

Just how “strict” are some of these interpretations? Many Republican jurists claim a “strict” or “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution. The implication …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Letters to the Editor 9/20/18

Posted

Just how “strict” are some of these interpretations?

Many Republican jurists claim a “strict” or “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution. The implication of the claim, as it is used, suggests that their interpretations are objective: not mere-clarifications and certainly not justifications for a belief—Oxford definitions of “interpretation.” The way their interpretations are promulgated is reminiscent of Bible commentary: they claim to be showing the foundation upon which a correct view must be based. This requires that the original intent of the framers is clearly discernible in each specific detail.

Other views of the Constitution, e.g., as a living document meant for the guidance of generations to come, are deemed to amount almost to irreverence. Judges who disagree are deemed activists—read “sacrilegious.”

If these jurists were consistent in their strict interpretations it would add weight to their argument. But they are not: if they were, the Supreme Court would not have interfered in the 2000 election, guns would be restricted to “well-regulated militias,” corporations would not be people and money would not be speech. “Strict” interpretations are almost always conservative. Is that what the framers intended?

Roy Tedoff

Fremont, NY

The frog and bright shiny objects

According to a roster of people convicted of felonies while holding state office, for nearly two decades no other state except Pennsylvania rivals New York. Apparently green is the second language of Albany.

Which brings me to the frog.

As the parable goes, the frog boils to death without notice when placed in the pot of cool water below which sits the flame. Is it any wonder then why Albany corruption doesn’t register among voters as a kitchen table issue, when, in fact, it is? Whether God, guns, voting rights, or healthcare, no issue is immune to potential influence from unscrupulous lawmakers—can we say tendencies leading to the convictions of Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos don’t have undue influence on policy-making decisions?

Which brings me to bright shiny objects.

The season’s campaign rhetoric would have us believe that Donald Trump is the largest threat to New York. Is he? Or is Albany? I’m not sure I know the answer, or that it matters. And for all the talk from candidates running to be our state’s attorney general, let’s see whether the winner has the stones to take on Albany. A good first step would be to pick up where the Moreland Commission left off.

Dave Colavito

Rock Hill, NY

Mail-order prescriptions not the best

I am writing in response to the recent letter to the editor from Phil Blando of Express Scripts, Inc. I totally agree with his statement “that patients and plan sponsors need access to affordable prescription medications, especially those managing chronic conditions.” However, we totally disagree that mail-order prescriptions are the only way to accomplish this. I question his claim that ordering by mail assures greater accuracy and wonder how he arrived at his statement that this eliminates two million drug errors annually and leads to patients taking their medications more faithfully.

Our neighborhood pharmacists and their families are part of the fabric of our communities. They are members of our fire departments and ambulance corps, serve on various community boards and contribute to our local economies. They pay real estate and school taxes. Our pharmacists are knowledgeable about possible interactions between medications that are prescribed to us and we need their services for unexpected illnesses.

The insistence on mail-order drug delivery is a part of the larger inequity that exists in our national health system that desperately needs attention. We need to make sure that our elected officials are reminded of this.

Beth Peck

Narrowsburg, NY

SNAP provision unacceptable

I read your editorial “Please sir, may I have some more?” with disbelief. This is about provisions in the pending Farm Bill that would deny food assistance to those in need. In case you missed it, here is what is proposed.  I quote: “Say you’re a nursing aide making low wages working 20 hours a week, and you get laid off. If you don’t find a new job working at least 20 hours a week within three days, you lose your SNAP (food stamps) for a year. If it happens again you lose them for three years.”

Who are low-wage workers? The person who cares for your mother in her nursing home; the part-time preschool teacher, trying to complete her education; the driver who picks up disabled people and gets them to the doctor; the person who works for Amazon, for the wealthiest man in the world; and the person who assists you in Walmart. These folks are parents. Please, sir, may I have some dinner? No, you may not.

Not if the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives including our current representative, John Faso, has its way. I refuse to believe that we as a people want to punish people for being unable to find work that pays a living wage. We must stand up, and say it loud and clear: “This is not me, this is not us,” and vote anyone who supports this devastating provision of the Farm Bill out of office.

Susan Sullivan

Narrowsburg, NY

PA Milk Marketing Board should raise its premium

Readington Farms of Whitehouse, NJ has raised its premium again to $1.50 per cwt. (hundred pounds of milk) to all of its dairy farmers in Pennsylvania. The Progressive Agriculture Organization urges the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board (PMMB) to consider raising their premium from 75 cents up to a level that equals the Readington premium.

During 2017, Pennsylvania dairy farmers were underpaid $500 million, and this underpayment will be surpassed in 2018.  The loss to Pennsylvania dairy farmers in 2017 caused a $2.5 billion loss to the Pennsylvania rural infrastructure.

This kind of underpayment to our dairy farmers is not the fault of the PMMB, but the blame should be placed squarely on Washington, DC, as neither the U.S. Congress nor the USDA is willing to tackle the real problem facing dairy farmers. We strongly feel the inadequate pricing formula used by the USDA to price milk to all U.S. dairy farmers is totally inadequate. PMMB has always tried to treat dairy farmers fairly; however, the PMMB is limited as to what it can do to help Pennsylvania dairy farmers.

People who have been criticizing the PMMB could use their energy to help correct real problems for dairy farmers that still exist in Washington, DC. In addition, we urge the PMMB to consider raising the Pennsylvania premium to a higher level.

Pro-Ag can be reached at 570/833-5776.

Arlen Tewksbury, manager

Progressive Agriculture Organization

Meshoppen, PA

The Hankins Pond Dam is who we are

It is hard to imagine a more beneficial Public-Private Partnership (P3) than the one presented to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf by the Wayne County Board of Commissioners for the preservation of Hankins Pond Dam.

Over these past months, working as a team, our bi-partisan county commissioners have covered every aspect of the issue, presenting the Wolf administration with a plan for its preservation and potentially creating a mechanism in which other historic structures could be saved across our commonwealth.

Instead of cooperation, Gov. Wolf, through the PA Fish and Boat Commission (PAFBC) and the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), ignored these efforts with little or no regard for the historical significance of the dam, only clinging to hypothetical scenarios of how this small dam could affect the population within proximity if it were it to fail.

Ironic, when you think of this hand-built structure from the days of the D&H Canal, which has withstood the test of time over a century since the last canal boats utilized the waters from Hankins Pond. This breach continues a disputable program that has seen over a dozen dams across Pennsylvania eliminated by the PAFBC in predominately rural areas with no regard for their historic and recreational aspects—frankly in areas with little or no political clout to stop it from happening.

Even as our commissioners were seeking a resolution, the PAFBC was positioning equipment to take down the dam without notice to the county.

I support the injunction filed by Wayne County to save this structure and commend the ruling by Wayne County Senior Judge Ray Hamill, which halts any demolition until a formal hearing takes place, now scheduled for September 19.

The author David McCullough wrote, “History is who we are and why we are the way we are,” and for many of us, the D&H Canal was the catalyst that brought our families to this county; we owe it to future generations to preserve such history.

Ned Sader

Oregon Township, PA

NYSEG response still sluggish

No one has more understanding of the pressures NYSEG must be under recovering from the two horrendous Sullivan County storms last spring, and just the sheer amount of construction happening in the county. But when one of the county’s largest investors has to wait five months for a simple utility pole to be installed so we can get electric to a new home, the situation has reached an alarming new stage.

Chuck Petersheim, owner, Catskill Farms

Eldred, NY

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here