Summer Savings! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Would Ben Carson approve cutting research at Hopkins to balance the federal budget?

Having watched Dr. Ben Carson's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast on YouTube, I can accept his foray into politics because he has worked with people of all religions, and his scholarship fund has supported talented students regardless of race or religion ("Remarks vault Carson into the political arena," Feb. 18).

Dr. Carson is a good man. Yet I am flummoxed by his railings against political correctness. Now that he is retiring, he is free to sound off, but I am sure that at Hopkins he practiced political correctness as assiduously as anyone, else he could not have survived there. Hopkins has an international clientele, and because of that it must promote cultural sensitivity, which is just another name for political correctness so far as how people from different backgrounds ought to be treated.

But Dr. Carson went further in touching on the nation's financial state and health care system. He bemoaned the deficit and preached fiscal discipline to the feds, admonishing them for not balancing the budget and spending within their means.

Of course conservatives took him to their bosom, because he wants the nation to avoid deficit spending. But without deficit spending we are not going to have growth in this country and the end result will be even more massive layoffs and stagflation.

It is perverse to compare a nation as large and diverse as America to a family and impose on it the same fiscal principles a family needs to stay in the black. Yes, we should cut government bureaucracies and we should address the problems of waste and fraud. But to make deficit reduction a sole obsession, as many Republicans would, is bound to hurt the nation at a time when government spending is needed to bolster our infrastructure and research and development programs.

Dr. Carson works in a marvelous research institution. Would he be happy if the government took back the millions it has given Hopkins for basic science and clinical research in order to reduce the national debt and balance the budget?

Recently I read an alarming e-mail from the chancellor of a premier hospital system in this country to its employees, asking them to gird themselves for massive cuts, to the tune of $30 million, to cope with cuts in federal aid to hospitals. The letter advised that employees would have to do more for less, yet the hospital still expected the quality of care would not suffer.

Would Dr. Carson be happy if the national debt was reduced on the backs of the infirm and at the expense of health-care workers who are already stretched thin?

Dr. Carson wants to solve our health care woes with Health Savings Accounts. He thinks universal health care will be possible with such accounts, and that sounds great on paper. But we have a system whereby the healthy participate and help defray the costs for those who are ill. With Health Savings Accounts we can't have that. It will be everyone for himself, with no one to defray the costs of caring for the most severely ill or disabled patients unless the government stepped in to play the rescuer.

I don't think Dr. Carson has thought through such issues carefully enough. That said, all his comments about how we should value education and pay homage to our scholars are right on. His work funding the Carson Scholars is admirable. Perhaps Dr. Carson should stay out of politics and soar above the fray, like the bald eagle he so admired at the end of his speech.

Usha Nellore, Bel Air

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Ben Carson's conservative approach to health care reform [Letter]

    Ben Carson's conservative approach to health care reform [Letter]

    I wonder why letter writer S. R. Cohen is so quick to attack neurosurgeon Ben Carson when he seems so unaware of Mr. Carson's beliefs ("Ben Carson commits 'values malpractice,'" March 16).

  • Carson is no 'simpleton'

    Carson is no 'simpleton'

    I am a 50-something, Jesuit-educated, Libertarian-leaning registered Democrat who has been reading Thomas F. Schaller's column for years. He has the luxury of at least being accepted around liberals and only being castigated by conservatives. Libertarian thinkers eventually are attacked by both...

  • Ben Carson's own words show he's ill-suited to office

    Ben Carson's own words show he's ill-suited to office

    Thomas Schaller makes a strong case that Dr. Ben Carson should stick to medicine ("Carson should stick to medicine," Feb. 3). Mr. Schaller did not need to stray far for evidence: He cites Dr. Carson's own public pronouncements for curing the nation's ills, namely, his call for a flat tax which...

  • Carson v. Obama

    Carson v. Obama

    How can columnist Thomas F. Schaller compare Michael Jordan trying to hit a 95-mph fastball to Ben Carson being president of the United States? Is he saying a community organizer was more prepared to be president than Dr. Carson ("Ben Carson should stick to medicine," Feb. 3)?

  • Is Carson's race the problem?

    Is Carson's race the problem?

    I find it interesting that columnist Thomas F. Schaller can champion our "community organizer" president as all-knowing, intelligent and, of all things, competent, yet Ben Carson, a world-renowned brain surgeon and Herman Cain, a very successful business owner, don't have the ability to be president,...

  • Carson speaks truth

    Carson speaks truth

    Thomas F. Schaller's analogy comparing Michael Jordan's attempt to play baseball to Ben Carson's qualifications to be president is asinine ("Carson, stick to medicine," Feb. 4). Why don't we just expand that assertion to dissuade political science teachers from becoming newspaper columnists?

  • Carson should run for president

    Carson should run for president

    Columnist Thomas F. Schaller makes reference to some prominent individuals who failed to succeed in business, but he may be too young to remember that a shopkeeper named Harry S. Truman defeated a favored Republican, Thomas E. Dewey, in 1946 ("Ben Carson should stick to medicine," Feb. 3).

  • Columnist, heal thyself

    Columnist, heal thyself

    Thomas F. Schaller's piece on Ben Carson is nothing more than an ad hominem attack, an attack more appropriate to a blog from the fever swamps of the ideological left than a nationally-recognized newspaper ("Carson, stick to medicine," Feb. 4). Frank Kent has to be spinning in his grave.

Comments
Loading
79°