Jumping the Gun
The Sun's Nov. 7 pre-election front-page story, "GOP seems poised to take control of House, Senate," is a textbook example of how the media mishandle politics. Two cardinal sins were committed.
First, the headline's large type and prominent placement created the impression that the election results were already known before the polls had opened.
If every paper in the country ran a headline as speculative as this one, then many voters already indifferent to their civic privilege would probably feel justified in not voting. Why bother if it's a done deal?
The second sin was The Sun's over-reliance on pollsters -- an all-too-common phenomenon in contemporary political reporting.
When will it dawn on editors and reporters that survey data is not hard news? That speculative statistics are not the same as facts?
The inherent contradiction in this approach is evident in the meek subhead that accompanies this article: "Outcome is in doubt, though national polls show strong support."
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Report on the candidates, the issues, the mudslinging, if you like. But don't second-guess the voters.
Amy L. Bernstein
Baltimore
Disarming Nukes
In your Oct. 21 editorial, "The North Korean Nuclear Accord," you express understandable concern about the good deal that the Pyongyang regime was able to get -- particularly with respect to the kind of message this would be giving to "other would-be nuclear powers."
In the framework of your recognition of the critical importance of the renewal and strengthening of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1995, we suggest the need for much greater concern about the message being sent to the rest of the world by the Clinton administration's decision for continued reliance on nuclear weapons.
Not too long ago, Colin Powell advised the Third World that nuclear weapons " . . . were a wasted investment in military capability that is limited in political or military utility."
Meanwhile, the Pentagon has stayed enthralled by a weapon that can best be described as both suicidal and genocidal in its production, presence and potential.
We can not expect the rest of the world to take seriously our advocacy of nuclear non-proliferation when these weapons remain at the center of our own defense planning.
At the inception of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the existing nuclear powers committed themselves to work for nuclear disarmament.
Precious little progress has been made in this regard when our arsenals still contain thousands of weapons. We agree with you: "But it is now more important than ever that the Non-Proliferation Treaty be renewed next year . . . " But the focus of this commitment needs to be inward if we hope to end this madness.
One year ago, you wrote, "Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is the most troubling problem in the world today . . . "
May the public be blessed with perceiving the truth of your analysis, so that one day we may more earnestly follow the Psalmist's injunction: "Seek peace, and pursue it."
Rev. Edward Heim
Baltimore
The writer is the chairman of the Central Maryland Ecumenical Council's Interfaith Coalition for Peace.
Nasty Column
The column by former Reagan-Bush crony Jeane Kirkpatrick (Opinion * Commentary, Nov. 1) has to be one for the most mean-spirited to appear in a very long time. Her summary dismissal of each of President Clinton's foreign policy achievements can be nothing more than another politically-motivated Republican attempt to discredit everything that this president has accomplished.
I firmly believe that Clinton did the right thing in Haiti and that it was done with great skill. I do not feel any need to demonstrate that establishing democracy in Haiti is directly tied to vital U.S. national interests. There are hemispherical and global interests that are just as vital. The fact that Haiti is the most environmentally degraded country in the hemisphere is reason enough for us to have become involved in their affairs. Of course one doesn't expect Republicans to show concern for the environment; their record on that score speaks volumes.
When such blatantly political material is printed on the editorial pages, just before a very important election, rebuttal space should be provided on the same page and the strong party affiliation of the writer ought to be detailed.
John S. White
Stewartstown, Pa.
Excellent Words
As readers daily sift through the op-ed and editorial pages of The Sun, it is rare that one sees more than commentary on the moment. Most columns fail to offer anything but a brief slant on the nonsense of the day.
Oct. 30 was an exception. Peter Jay's excellent few words condensed the last 40 years in a nutshell. I can't imagine a better way of portraying the decline of America in both the arts and industry.
Certainly Mr. Jay is one of the more talented members of society -- a man who can sort out the meaningful from a paucity of real ideas and display the true story of America, both in relating personal anecdotes and eternal truths for the benefit of the common man.
R. D. Bush
Columbia
Slackers, Unite
With reference to the article on "The Official Slacker Handbook" (Oct. 21), I disagree that writing, thinking and reading constitute laziness or unwillingness to exert oneself. Work, by dictionary definition, is exertion or effort to produce or accomplish something. Writing a poem takes some effort and the result is something.
Thinking can be hard, depending on the subject and if a decision has to be made. Reading is helpful from the inspiration and knowledge it gives.
Hemingway wrote one of his short stories sitting in a Paris cafe in the 1920s.
I think the problem is our pragmatic society's narrow definition of what constitutes meaningful occupation.
Activity that produces money, especially a lot of money or fame or high social status, is work. Anything else is sloth. That 'N includes non-commercial art, minor league sports, philosophical and spiritual activity.
I was born too late to be with Hemingway and the other members of the Lost Generation in Paris. Too young to be part of the Beat Generation of the 50s. I was stuck in a conservative Baltimore high school in the 1960s and unable to be part of the San Francisco scene.
Now in my early forties, I am too old to be part of the current slacker scene, although I am with them in spirit.
I recently read an essay that said Bohemia is dead in America. Hopefully, the slackers will crush that statement.
Frederick E. Whittle
Baltimore
Hospital Charges in Maryland Are Reasonable
The prominent Oct. 9 Sun article, entitled "Maryland's hospital costs go awry," suggests that rate setting in Maryland has led to wide discrepancies between hospital charges to consumers. That's not the case.
Furthermore, consumers -- or their insurance companies -- don't pay for hospital services on the basis of the prices that appeared in the Sun article.
Consumers are charged for the specific services they use when hospitalized, such as operating room time, medications, physical therapy, etc.
The Health Services Cost Review Commission -- established in the mid 1970s -- has a long, successful track record in controlling hospital costs in Maryland.
Since its establishment, the commission has saved Marylanders over $9 billion, and the state's average cost-per-case has dropped from 25 percent above the national average to 11 percent below.
Also, contrary to the article, in recent months Maryland hospitals' expense growth has been tracking the same steady decline as the U.S. average. Maryland's overall expense increases in 1994 were 5.35 percent, as compared to the U.S. average of 5.51 percent.
The rate setting commission also closely watches overall per case charges among hospitals using a sophisticated methodology designed to assess their appropriateness.
It is true that prices on individual procedures vary between hospitals. Hospital charges can differ for a number of reasons, including such things as the intensity of care, the number of patients without insurance being treated by the hospital and whether or not the hospital has a teaching program to train health professionals.
Cost variations also can result from differences in levels of efficiency and in overhead from capital procedures.
But these variations are not unique to Maryland. In fact, they vary even more in other states.
They also are not as dramatic as they appeared in the article.
For instance, the article aggregated several different types of procedures together (including several procedures with charges substantially lower than heart angioplasty) under the heading of "heart angioplasty" and created an average price.
In another illustration, the article grouped together psychoses with lengths of stays ranging from three to 22 days of care, suggesting vast differences in the types of care provided. The article also fails to illustrate how well Maryland hospital prices stack up against those in the rest of the United States.
One recent study, commissioned by Northwestern National Life Insurance, showed Baltimore to be the cheapest place among 16 cities nationwide to undergo surgery to repair a hernia ($3,830), have a gall bladder removed ($7,245) or to have a coronary bypass ($23,390).
Another study, which focused on Maryland's hospital charges for transplant services, showed that having a heart transplant in Maryland costs $99,168 as compared to the national average of $266,000, and a bone marrow transplant cost $130,143, as compared to $245,000 nationally.
The association is a strong supporter of public disclosure of cost TC data to consumers. Unfortunately, the misuse of data in this article serves more to confuse people than to enlighten them.
Cal Pierson
Lutherville
The writer is president, Maryland Hospital Association.
Free Trade and the Multinationals
Our government is inappropriately leaning toward supply side economics. Our president said -- and I agree -- "We shouldn't favor any side." The correct stance on trade is to allow fair competition to work its wonders, to protect the country, not to protect local industry.
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade is a liberal move for exploitation that neglects the populace. The idea of eliminating duties might sound like a good idea, but look at the real side, the dynamics of it, to see the appropriate action:
1. Multinationals and wannabe multinationals move to build facilities in markets where the currency value is lower. They start with test facilities and expand with market share. When foreign capacity matches foreign sales, the relative home capacity and the export are eliminated. Those are the dynamics of displacing American workers, due to a strong dollar.
2. Our nation's central bank oppresses our economy, encouraging multinationals to take advantage of cheap labor markets to produce profits that could have been made here.
3. The introduction of cheaper goods by displacing American labor, by definition, erodes the purchasing power of the very market that multinationals intend to exploit.
4. Small businesses account for the majority of employers and are unable to compete with low-wage labor from developing nations. The pressures of cheap goods and the oppression of our central bank combined are obstacles that imperil small businesses and worsen unemployment.
5. Our nation has a trade deficit problem that will worsen with GATT. Our trade surplus with Mexico is falling due to the North American Free Trade Association agreement: The first quarter and second quarter surplus of 1994 is 6 percent below the first and second quarter surpluses of 1993, which was lower than the 1992 surplus.
The second half of 1993 was flat, indicating that 1994 will continue the trend toward a trade deficit with Mexico. We are misinformed.
American businesses need no government help, they do very well on their own, while people are oppressed by our government sectors are not doing very well.
Constitutionally, the Federal Reserve avoids its obligation to promote the general prosperity and employment when it maintains 6 percent, or any other level of unemployment. The populace are in dire need of protection from the oppression of their own government.
The best thing that can happen is to allow competition to work on a level playing field. Competition is being represented as having to do with quality; not so, it really has more to do with price.
Remember when cars from Japan were cheap? They sold like hot cakes. Now that they cost more than comparable domestic autos, quality isn't an issue, and domestic automakers are regaining market share.
Duties on imports to either adjust for disparity of currency value or subsidized goods-dumping are appropriate and fair and do not constitute trade barriers.
Clearly, eliminating duties will be more problematic and unfair than the current structure, making it necessary at a later date to reinstitute them.
The people have more confidence in what Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., says about "free trade" than they have about what our president says.
No one can deny that the free trade concept, reappearing time and again over the decades, is full of moot points. Let this debate play out; that's what the Constitution wants of Congress.
Global trade isn't the state of international commerce, as some say. Rather it is the speculation of international commerce in financial markets.
We have been trading on a global basis ever since Jamestown, that's nothing new. The financial markets, on the other hand, are a real threat to economic stability.
As you know, violent commodity trading has erupted and caused extraordinary inflation a number of times. To reform the markets to correlate with the proposed information superhighway would be more appropriate than promotion of a futile system of free trade.
If our Congress performs its sworn obligation to promote fair competition and regard for the general welfare and prosperity, versus the now sectional prosperity, then inflation, interest rates, employment, the budget deficit and national debt and most of the socio-economic problems would be minimized.
That is the correct vision that inspired our nation's Constitution. History shows that with or without GATT, exports will increase. The true purpose of GATT is to give exclusive support to the profits of multinationals.
Vincent A. Henderson
Towson
Columbia as a 'Real City'
The comments attributed to James Rouse (The Sun, Oct. 19) regarding the efforts currently under way to make Columbia a real city call for some response.
. . . There are 156 cities and towns in Maryland, and while there are none in Howard County, Ellicott City was in fact a city until it gave up its charter during the Depression because of financial problems.
As of the 1990 census, 715,000 Marylanders live in cities and towns. And if you include Baltimore, this figure doubles to about 1.5 million people. More people reside in the state's six most-populated cities than reside in one-third of the state's counties.
All cities and towns in Maryland are governed by a charter and have been given "home rule" authority by the state of Maryland.
Because of this, cities and towns have a good deal of governmental power and more legislative authority, for example, than the non-charter counties in Maryland.
A proposed charter is a new city's governing document. It outlines exactly what the people want to do within their city.
Providing services determines a property tax level. The tax level depends on the type and extent of those services, which may include: drinking water, sewage disposal, road maintenance, planning and zoning, police protection, street lighting, parks and recreation, garbage collection and recycling, building inspections, snow removal, public bus transportation, youth service bureaus, airports and fire protection.
The needs and wants of the people of the local community will determine which services will ultimately be provided.
The only public services that a municipality does not provide are education, jails and health and welfare.
In Maryland typically, 70 per cent of a municipal budget will come from self-generated revenues like property taxes and services charges and fees.
The other 30 per cent will come from state and federal revenues and grants such as income taxes, highway user revenues and police aid.
Mr. Rouse points out in the article that incorporating Columbia would create an unneeded layer of government, divide the planned "town" from Howard County and likely increase taxes.
People choose to have a local home rule at a level that is closer to them for many reasons, including:
* Creation of a greater sense of community with more accountability from locally elected officials.
* Dissatisfaction with the present form of local government. The county may be unresponsive to the specific needs of a community and may be less accessible.
* Provision of more local control. The city raises the revenues and spends them on locally determined projects and problems.
* Local definition of the types and levels of services.
* Exercise of police powers and code enforcement authority.
* Control of growth.
* Efficiency. A smaller entity can choose to have more (or less) services, get them faster and do them better.
There are also reasons that weigh against the idea of creating a real city. These include:
* The cost -- time and money -- to get the process going and getting services started.
* Responsibility and the liability exposure for municipal officials.
* Economies of scale opportunities depending on the size of the entity.
Mr. Rouse's arguments don't hold water when applied to Columbia. The people of Columbia already have an unneeded layer of "government" that is apparently not satisfying to a
growing number of Columbians who want to govern themselves.
In counties where there are cities, the counties and cities often work together to solve problems. Often counties have viewed their cities as opportunities to refer problems that are more appropriately handled by a city government.
On the issue of taxation, it has been shown in a recent study by the University of Maryland on the proposed city of Kent Island that the cost of governance would actually be next to nothing and the proposed property tax rate would be less than one penny.
Furthermore, property taxes are deductible on state and federal income tax returns, while current Columbia Association fees are not.
City and town governments are the governments that are closest to the people. National surveys report that citizens respect municipal governments more than any other level or unit government because of their ability to effectively and efficiently respond to the needs of people.
It's hard to understand why Mr. Rouse's vision of future cities never accommodated the basics of real self-governance for the people who live in those cities.
Jon C. Burrell
Annapolis
The writer is executive director of the Maryland Municipal League.