Letters to the Editor

Letters: Free medical clinics should be everywhere

How-to: Letters to the Editor

Read a story from The Sacramento Bee and have a reaction worth sharing with our readers? Here is how to submit a letter to the editor.
Up Next
Read a story from The Sacramento Bee and have a reaction worth sharing with our readers? Here is how to submit a letter to the editor.

Free medical clinics should be everywhere

“When your school is a health center: How clinics offer lifeline for uninsured kids” (sacbee.com, July 1): The U.S. medical system should have free medical clinics everywhere. Totally free for Medicaid patients, with a small payment for others. These medical clinics should provide medical care up to a certain level. Also, the Medicare age should drop to 60. With the federal government’s help, the price of drugs should drop. The above changes would drop our medical insurance costs for everyone.

Frederick Hinds,

Lincoln

CalSavers is the solution for small businesses

“There’s a new way to save for retirement in California. Here’s how it works” (sacbee.com, July 1): Many California small businesses struggled for years to help their employees access retirement programs. That struggle is finally over, however, thanks to CalSavers — a new state-run program for small businesses that don’t have the resources to help their employees access retirement options. CalSavers will help small business employees access a retirement savings program at no added cost to their employers, leveling the playing field for small firms trying to compete with larger corporations that provide robust employee compensation. California’s small business owners strongly support programs like CalSavers. In fact, polling released by Small Business Majority and the American Association of Retired Persons found 73 percent of California small business owners said being able to facilitate a voluntary, portable retirement program would help them attract and retain top employees. CalSavers didn’t just level the playing field, it changed the game. And that is great news for small firms.

Mark Herbert,

Sacramento

I can’t trust PG&E

“Newsom’s wildfire plan for PG&E, other utilities, needs two-thirds vote in Legislature” (sacbee.com, June 28): I just received a large glossy tri-fold brochure from PG&E asking me if I have a plan for staying safe during wildfire season. Right away, my question is: What will be different in the operations of PG&E going forward, in terms of investing in maintenance and monitoring of their equipment so as to prevent another fatal catastrophe? I am sad to say that I do not in any way trust that PG&E will do anything differently, and applying lipstick (name/brand change) will not help at all. Please. It seems that ratepayers will continue to pay additional fees even though those fees were associated with the past “energy crisis,” not a poorly managed utility company responsible for multiple deaths. The for-profit model puts profits before people and habitat. Lastly, do not spend money on hard copy mailers. This is 2019. In fact, the paper mailers will add to the growing landfill.

Dana Clare Smith,

Auburn

Put the homeless first

“Major homeless nonprofit plans to close 90-bed shelter after loss of state funding” (sacbee.com, June 19): When I read this article, it made me sick. The homeless population is exploding! Ninety fewer beds and less access to services is not acceptable, especially after reading an article in last Sunday’s paper, regarding a last minute addition to the state budget of $9.25 million to “study atmospheric rivers.” In our long time progressive Democrat-led state, once again, residents in the most need are not put first! California currently has the highest poverty rate, the most billionaires, and yet 40 percent of Californians need some sort of public assistance, and we have the worst income inequality in the country.

Joan Bach,

Sacramento

Marching to a different drummer

Is something wrong with me? I’m out of step with my peers. You see, I’m an old lady, living in a retirement community. I am still mobile and active. I consider myself to have my wits about me and I manage my own affairs. Yes, I have a hearing deficit but state of the art aids allow me to manage quite well. So, when I received a jury summons a few days ago, I pondered aloud how to handle it, knowing I have a legitimate excuse due to age. Without exception, my peers told me I should get out of serving because of age. I also heard, “What a pain, be glad you don’t have to go.” And from my son: “What if it’s a long trial and the seats are really uncomfortable?” What, I wondered, if I or they were on trial, who would they want on the jury? I would want someone like me! I’m not in a hurry to reach a verdict and would be thoughtful and deliberative. My previous experience on two juries told me too many people think and behave otherwise. My serving would not create a hardship, the timing is good for existing travel plans, and no one depends on me for care. I believe serving on a jury to be my civic responsibility. Now I realize this is considered old fashioned and silly. I’m going to report for jury duty as summoned.

Marion Becker,

Davis

Give the candidates a break

“Espanol es bueno o no? Californians divided on presidential candidates speaking Spanish” (sacbee.com, June 27): I am a retired high school Spanish teacher, and although I looked for good grammar and pronunciation, the ultimate goal for my students was that they were able to communicate well enough to get their point across to whomever they wished. Beto O’Rourke and Cory Booker had noticeable grammatical errors. However, I did understand what they were trying to say, and for that and their effort they deserve some credit.

Martha Gonzalez,

Fair Oaks

  Comments