WaterFix will help regardless
Re “A path to bring health back to the San Joaquin River system” (Forum, Oct. 30): In the article, Matt Weiser argued that the State Water Resources Control Board should wait on considering whether to permit California WaterFix until the water board had set new flow requirements for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. That argument shows a lack of understanding of how the process works.
If WaterFix is permitted, the permit conditions must be updated to reflect whatever flow requirements ultimately are imposed by the water board. Furthermore, no matter what flow levels and patterns are eventually established by the water board to protect all beneficial users of Delta water, the modern infrastructure of WaterFix would minimize the reverse flows in the Delta that harm fish while stabilizing the delivery of water to two-thirds of California’s population.
John Laird, Sacramento
California secretary for Natural Resources
Never miss a local story.
What about Dems who are losers?
Re “The real winners and losers so far in ’16” (Editorials, Oct. 30): I would expect nothing less than The Bee editorial board’s inclusion of Republican National Committee. I won’t hold my breath for the trashing of the Democratic National Committee.
I dare the board to praise the disgraced former chairperson, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the current chairperson, Donna Brazile, as she also flames out. Can you smell a Hillary Clinton’s connection to both?
Little wonder the electorate is fed up.
Gary Schmitt, El Dorado
Megyn Kelly is no winner
The Bee’s editorial board names Megyn Kelly a real winner. Demanding pay equity with that of Bill O’Reilly, are you kidding? Both my son and I think she should be fired. She works for Fox News, the only “conservative voice” in the media, and she is using Donald Trump’s unauthorized private locker room tape to try to sink him from the presidential race.
She holds up Hillary Clinton as a champion of women’s rights. Kelly’s holier-than-thou attitude would be more believable if today’s fashion for women did more to encourage men’s respect and high esteem only for the beauty of their brains.
Come on, Kelly, get real.
Nancy Shanahan, Auburn
Help for high school newspapers
Re “More than tradition at stake with defunding of high school newspaper” (Forum, Oct. 30): Kainoa Lowman already has the making of an investigative journalist, and it would be so nice to encourage his talent. High school newspapers may be the last hope for the preservation of newspapers as we know them today. Sound bites and celebrity journalism seem to be the coming trend.
When my husband and I travel, The Bee gives us the option of having our newspapers delivered all at once when we return or donating to the newspapers in the classroom program. We usually take the latter. How about a third option – donating to a program that will help fund high school newspapers? What a great cause and one that I would certainly choose.
Lorraine Doig, Sacramento
Mammograms early save lives
Re “Guidelines suggest cancer screening at age 45” (Forum, Another View, Oct. 30): I hope women ignore biostatistician Diana Miglioretti’s misguided questioning of the value of early mammogram screening.
Breast cancer is curable if found early. Three decades of research prove yearly mammograms starting at age 40 save lives. In California, breast cancer is the No. 1 cause of death for women ages 35-54. Women in their 40s account for 1 in 6 breast cancers. Screening women in their 40s will lower their chance of dying from the disease by 30 to 40 percent and women over 50 years by 50 percent.
She emphasizes the small risks of screening and ignores the serious risks of not screening: more aggressive surgery, chemotherapy, radiation and ultimately less chance of survival. If the current U.S. population of women ages 30 to 39 delays screening until age 50, 65,000 to 100,000 may die unnecessarily from breast cancer, enough to more than fill the 49ers’ football stadium.
Dr. Daniel Herron,
Agrees on illegal immigration
Re “What about illegal immigration?” (Letters, Oct. 30): Hooray for John Hightower. As the daughter of an Italian immigrant who came through Ellis Island, I totally agree with his observations.
Ida Defield, Carmichael
Teacher success requires partners
Re “Why not assess our teachers?” (Letters, Oct. 30) Dennis Clear’s letter betrays a layman’s ignorance of a public school teacher’s duties. Snidely asserting that “teacher unions would like us to believe their work performance is too complex to measure with exams,” he completely misses the point that these exams would not be completed by teachers.
I have a problem being evaluated via the effort of others. Clear’s doctor may have passed his exams, but have all his patients’ health issues improved? If not, does that make him a bad doctor? Perhaps some of his patients didn’t follow instructions. Likewise, teachers are not the only variable.
Before making glib assertions that just serve to make our job even more difficult, consider this: There is no magic formula for educational success. It’s just a lot of hard work from multiple partners: staff, students and families.
Mirna Jope, Carmichael
A better way to evaluate schools
Re “Multiple measures better identify schools in need of improvement” (Viewpoints, Oct. 23): The new “multiple measures” way of evaluating schools has been falsely criticized as failing to provide a direct reading of a school’s health.
Any evaluation of factors of health, or anything really, should include detail of all that is evaluated and not just a single word. This will help with solving faults and continuing success. The new multiple measures way of scoring a school’s health does exactly that. By scoring multiple factors, the scorers are giving the schools a better reading in what they are doing wrong, allowing them to correct themselves; instead of combining everything into a single score that can cover up vital info for improvement.
By evaluating Patrick O’Donnell’s reasoning and presented evidence, I can conclude that the new way of evaluating a school’s health is more effective than the old way.
Trevor Owen, Sacramento
Consider biomass for power, jobs
Re “An incendiary idea for clean energy and rural job growth” (Viewpoints, Oct. 23): Catherine Brinkley stated that “energy industries have pulled up operations, leaving behind unemployment and environment disasters.” But she has an idea that can change the situation by containing biomass for clean energy.
In California last year, nearly 9,000 wildfires burned more than 900,000 acres. In my opinion, her idea could give new jobs and prevent environmental disasters, so we should put her ideas into consideration.
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.