Professors 'never wanted' furloughs

Re "Ticked-off profs punish students" (Editorial, Sept. 5): What days would The Bee have California State University, Sacramento, professors take off for furloughs?

Sure, there are committee meetings and conducting research, but our routine week is preparing for class, teaching class, and grading papers and assignments for class. If we don't take a teaching day off, do we not prepare for class, or not grade those papers?

Sure, students and their parents are angry – they should be angry. But how about that anger being directed at those who imposed these furloughs, not the professors who never wanted them in the first place?

Sure, we'll do our fair share along with other state workers, but if you want to reduce what we do by 10 percent, you get 10 percent less of what we do. What we do, for the most part, is teach. You do the math.

– Larry Boles, professor, CSUS Speech Pathology Department

Medicare-like plan for everyone

The only way that health care can be affordable for all Americans is to make a Medicare-like plan available to compete on a level playing field in a national exchange with private insurers. As has been well-documented, the private insurance companies ration health coverage to only those who can afford it and on whom they can make a profit (i.e., those without serious conditions).

The rest of us – for example, those who are self-employed or without large-employer coverage – need a Medicare-like plan that is portable everywhere in the United States, covers preventive care, charges fair rates for needed treatments and does not deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. Medicare is extremely popular (my mom loves it) and has been highly successful in keeping our senior citizens healthy without making them destitute.

The so-called "co-op" option cannot substitute for a Medicare-like plan because the co-ops will have to be built from scratch in markets dominated by big insurers, won't be able to provide a broad choice of doctors and will not have the leverage to control costs and improve quality of care.

Finally, delaying a Medicare-like plan (the "trigger") makes no sense with all of the health disasters occurring already.

– Jordan Lang, Sacramento

Health care should not be for profit

Every day, American lives are saved by the U.S. military, local law enforcement and fire department services. We don't expect any of these to turn a profit. Why do we expect the vital lifesaving services of the medical profession to turn a profit? Is this not the very definition of wasteful spending?

– Stephen Quinn, Antelope

Science isn't always clear on medicine

Re "Health debate short on evidence-based science" (Viewpoints, Sept. 9): The authors take a bit of a simplistic approach in their article on evidence-based medicine, but science is not simple.

Although the idea of using the best evidence available in treating patients is sound, in many cases, knowing what is the best evidence is difficult to ascertain. It is all too common for multiple studies on the same subject to come up with opposite findings. What, then, is the physician to do?

In addition, due to lack of time, most doctors outside of academia may not read peer-reviewed journals, and this only compounds the problem. In an ideal world, all doctors would be required to be involved in some aspect of research, and this would help to keep their skills and knowledge honed.

– Mark Collen, Sacramento

Bureaucracy ruins good intentions

Re "Puppies aren't commodities" (Letters, Sept. 8): Animal rescue can be harder than it appears. After the death of my 16-year-old rescue dog, I tried for five months to find another rescue dog to fit into my family through numerous rescue organizations. I filled out multiple six-page questionnaires that asked me personal questions that had nothing to do with dog adoption.

Each time, the screening process assumed that I was unfit until I proved otherwise. My last rejection was because I would allow an adult dog into my securely fenced backyard unattended.

Weary and frustrated, my Visa card got me a really nice puppy at an area pet store that I had previously avoided as a rescuer. He came with food, a free veterinarian checkup, shots and was already neutered. Nothing bad happened. At the same time, a friend got a rescue dog from the pound that required multiple vet visits, emotional stress and was quite costly.

Neither situation is perfect, and I wholeheartedly support animal rescue efforts. However, these agencies should realize that along with criticizing purchased puppies, they need to remove the barriers that prevent worthy people from giving needy dogs loving homes.

– Karen Kurkis, Sacramento

Let's consider desalination plants

Re "Don't rush water package into law" (Editorial, Sept. 11): Scientists indicate that future weather changes will result in less snow in winter for summer water needs; increased sea water levels from global warming could overwhelm Delta levees; and increased spring rain is problematic.

Perhaps instead of trying to figure out how to send more water south, Northern Californians should consider sending dollars south instead to build more desalination plants. The technology of desalting has been done. Such plants are used in Israel, France and Dubai.

Bond proceeds or tax dollars could also be used to develop technology to generate power for these plants, such as using tide changes, as is done in the North Sea. The question: "How can we help Southern California out of its impending water problem?" might better be, "How do we improve current water availability?" The answer can help both sectors of the state and provide greener methodologies.

– Joe Sullivan, Sacramento, former executive director, Regional Water Authority