Letters to the Editor

Nursing homes, political ambition, IRS

Protect nursing home patients

Re “Nursing homes unmasked” (Page A1, Nov. 9): This article was of great concern to me, having worked in the health care industry for the last five years. There are tens of thousands of people living in nursing facilities across the state. Many of these people, who are disabled and elderly, do not have any way to advocate for quality care, and they are completely dependent on those that take care of them.

Family members may try to get better care for a loved one, but this is a problem that cannot be fixed individually. The system is not working. Leadership needs to take a hard look at their corporate values and how it impacts patient care. Their business model, which is oftentimes more focused on profit, is hurting the vulnerable people that these companies are supposed to protect.

Julie Anderson, Roseville

Why point out religion

Re “Who owns California’s nursing homes” (Page A1, Nov. 10): Kudos to a very thorough series of articles on a very important topic given that many of us baby boomers are heading in the direction of requiring nursing-home care. I was, however, insulted that you elected to indicate the religion of only one of the owners being investigated. To point out that one is Jewish without indicating the religion of any other owners makes it appear that this explains the questionable business behavior. And, I really don’t care where his daughter was married. Just saying.

Hope Rabinovitz, Sacramento

First-rate reporting

The comprehensive and timely investigation was first-rate reporting. I can only imagine the hours and frustrations the reporters experienced. The regulators are failing their responsibilities, which I had no idea until The Sacramento Bee’s series. Reporters and articles like this keep me a subscriber.

Pat Fitzsimmons, Davis

Looking out for taxpayers?

Re “A politician looking out for taxpayers – what a concept” (Viewpoints, Foon Rhee, Nov. 11): It took a week for The Sacramento Bee to do its first hit piece on Kevin McCarty. He is blamed for running for the state Assembly from his position as a Sacramento city councilman. He should not have run for City Council two years ago? He should not have run for Assembly? Oh, having done both, he should pay for the election of his successor on the council. That is The Bee’s contention. Foon Rhee is not “thrilled” when he has to help pay for the election. Really? We pay for every candidate’s political ambition. We value the election process and are willing to pay for it. I am sorry that The Bee does not and is not.

James Speakman, Sacramento

Dismayed at IRS

Re “IRS allows big earners to pump up Roth IRAs” (Business, Page D5, Nov. 9): I was dismayed to see that the IRS has instituted another perquisite for those who already receive more than those who can only dream of the high six-figures or occasional tax break. Plus, the IRS allows this earlier than usual. What is the reason for the change?

Joanne North, Sacramento

Limits on California’s growth

To what avail is water conservation when our state’s growth is unchecked? About 500 houses are going into my neighborhood in the Curtis Park area. What do any of my water conservation measures mean then?

Efforts to control our population will certainly be met with fierce and hateful rhetoric, perhaps from those whose business is involved in population growth. However, can we deny that California’s water is not only finite, but in ever shrinking supply? What crisis will we face if we permit growth as our snowpacks decline?

Tom McElheney, Sacramento

Will miss campaign cartoons

Re Jack Ohman’s election cartoons: Can’t say I will miss the Ose/Bera campaign ads. I considered taping them and sending them to people I don’t like, but my better angels got to me. I will miss Jack Ohman’s campaign cartoons. The best of the lot was the kid peering into the pool and, with two words, Jack summed up the entire governor’s race: “Mr. Kashkari?”

Roger Peterson, Rocklin


Find them at:



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.