Loutish Behavior
The debate over the place of religion in the public schools goes on.
Sanford Teplitzky, a member of the Baltimore County school board (and a former president of the Baltimore Jewish Council) was booed, jeered at and called godless at the Nov. 22 school board meeting when he said he was opposed to placing !B religious symbols such as Christmas trees in the schools.
Many in that audience are no doubt among those wishing to bring back organized prayer to our schools. However, their intolerant behavior serves as a reminder of precisely why organized prayers should not be allowed in the schools. If the adults behaved in such a loutish way, just imagine how their children would treat classmates of other faiths if they refused to participate in the officially sanctioned prayer.
One of the basic principles on which America was founded is freedom from any sort of religious tyranny. We must make sure that this protection continues to extend to the schools.
Sylvia Egeth
Owings Mills
Will Wrong
I almost never find myself in agreement with George F. Will on any position taken by him. However, I have come to respect his ability to make his case. His recent offering (Nov. 27) headlined "A Case For Term Limits" did nothing to change my disposition to agree with him, but it did lessen my respect for his ability to make his case.
I hate to be picky, but it seems to me that Mr. Will should get his terms correct. I don't think what he is advocating is "Term Limits" but rather "Term Limit." Every term of every elected official in the United States is already limited.
Mr. Will should know by now that we have congresspeople because we can't submit every issue involved in the management of government to a referendum of the people. It seems to me that the people who are to be represented should have the most options available in making their decision.
I'm not impressed with his statement that Americans by a three-to-one margin want term limits. Maybe that's because the persons making the survey didn't ask the right question. If the American people were asked if they feel that they are too stupid to cast an intelligent vote for Congress every two years, the result would probably be 1,000 to 1 in the negative. I'm convinced that 99 percent of the people who profess to want terms limit, want them so as to be rid of someone else's congressperson, not their own.
Should we wind up with terms limit then congresspersons will probably, with the exception of president and several governors, be the only job holders in the history of the world where "on the job" training is a disqualifier.
Archie D. Williams
Macon, N.C.
Substitute Teacher
State Sen. Julian L. Lapides should be teaching a course on legislative ethics at the University of Maryland School of Law, rather than Bruce Bereano's teaching one on lobbying.
Randolph Tolj
Baltimore
Limbaugh
Adine Panitch, in a letter Nov. 27, joined Bill and Hilary Clinton in vilifying Rush Limbaugh because of his ideas and the way he expresses them.
Rush Limbaugh could do a lot to improve the latter, but as Nov. 8 proved, he's right on the button on the former.
Not to worry. If Rush Limbaugh is a bigot and racist and a clever purveyor of lies and distortions, he'll go away.
Right always conquers wrong, otherwise we'd still have slavery, apartheid, the Soviet Union and Dan Rostenkowski.
Some things take a little longer, like Ted Kennedy, Marion Barry and abortion -- but if they're wrong they will definitely go away.
Jim Althoff
Phoenix
Insurance Change
I am writing on behalf of Maryland Universal Health Care Action Network to express concerns over the recent announcement that Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Maryland is requesting permission to convert to a for-profit insurance company.
The first issue with which we are concerned is the complete lack of concrete information made public about the plan.
To hold public hearings on such a change without any idea how the average consumer is to be affected is irresponsible.
There are 1.4 million customers in the state who would need to know how they are to be affected. As a customer myself, I am mystified about how turning a profit is going to save me money. It seems to me that profits for shareholders would only add to my premium and be subtracted from my benefits.
The second issue which concerns us is the short notice on the hearing.
To hold a hearing on Dec. 19 may be politically expedient for the Blues, but the 1.4 million customers will be in no position to respond on such short notice (particularly in the holiday season).
The last (but not least) issue is our concern over the persons insured by the Blues who are turned down by all other companies.
We understand that the Blues are the insurer of last resort for those who can afford health insurance. We are concerned that once relieved of the not-for-profit status, the Blues will no longer be required to serve those who cannot get insurance because of illness. We are concerned that this is the means by which the Blues intend to reduce the costs indicated in the snatches of information that they have let escape.
anet C. Harris
Baltimore
The writer is vice president, Universal Health Care Action Network.
New Auto Emission Tests Avoid Big Polluters
I appreciate your printing the article on Maryland's new strict auto emissions tests (Nov. 27). I suspect that the previous absence of coverage and current perceived public indifference toward the Jan. 1 event are directly related.
The shortcomings of the original auto emissions testing program have been tolerated in the expectation that the fundamentally commendable program would eventually be broadened in scope.
It was not expected that the same narrow category of participants would face increasingly greater costs and inconvenience while large numbers of fossil-fueled vehicles and equipment . . . often committed to far heavier service demands than the family car . . . would be under no scrutiny at all!
In the District of Columbia metropolitan area, it is my understanding that the current program does not affect some of the most notorious types of polluters:
* Diesel-fueled vehicles, such as buses, trucks, locomotives and construction, industrial, agricultural vehicles and equipment;
* Aircraft;
* Government fleets;
* Old, unserviced vehicles;
* Lawn mowers, leaf blowers, chain saws, weed whackers and other equipment with small gasoline engines;
* Any vehicle registered outside of Maryland or the seven counties covered under the regulation.
The new program, which is more time consuming and costly, extends testing to six additional Maryland counties.
I can see me going for my first inspection under the new program as described by the article.
As I drive around trying to locate one of the 19 new testing sites I'll be adding additional fumes to the environment and pondering what the state is doing with all of the former facilities that 'N taxpayers and program participants paid for.
I will pay twice as much more for a longer series of tests. The attendant will temporarily disconnect part of the engine's evaporative system and sit in my vehicle with a dynamometer for several minutes while accelerating the engine to the equivalent of highway speeds. (A portable fan is supposed to keep the stationary engine from overheating).
Subsequently, he will pump a small amount of compressed air into the fuel system for a leakage test. If it does not leak out, don't I potentially end up with what my father used to call vapor lock?.
We are expected to have complete faith in the attendant's skill. I hope he is not the same individual who has had difficulty inserting the sampling tube in my vehicle's exhaust pipe the last few years.
I am expected to have complete faith in the accuracy and maintenance of the contractor's equipment even though a test result might indicate the need for very expensive repairs.
I have always been ready to do more than my "fair share," particularly where there are environmental concerns.
However, I do mind being expected to shoulder the full burden so that responsibility does not have to be legislated for common carriers and other specialized commercial interests and their lobbyists -- the same folks that have contributed so heavily to the existence of bio-hazards in the first place.
Walker C. Trussell
Laurel
Movement Therapy Reduces Worker Injuries
Your writer, Michael Burns, (Opinion * Commentary, Nov. 22) documents the extent of repetitive stress injuries and their cost, and suggests increased employer action to "fix" the workplace to accommodate the employee.
So far so good. Adjustable chairs, headsets, repositioning of computer terminals, resilient flooring will all help.
So will improvement in air quality (the air inside modern buildings is usually far more polluted than outside air), appropriate lighting (placement, full-spectrum bulbs) and planning for frequent breaks from repetitive tasks.
However, the risk factor usually overlooked, and perhaps the most difficult to control and potentially most significant, is the individual worker and how the worker uses his or her body in response to the environment.
Question: Why do some workers, even using well-designed and individually adjusted equipment, develop problems, while others remain free of pain?
A partial answer is that asymptomatic people move differently; one worker uses more tension for a given movement than another.
Unfortunately, most of us are so out of touch with our bodies that we seldom notice how we abuse them in daily activities, much less know what to do about it.
Help is available, hiding within complementary medicine.
Movement therapy (Alexander technique and others) assists people to increase their awareness so that they are gentler with their bodies in all movement, not just at work.
Partly because it's not accepted by the medical establishment (not having been discovered by a physician) and not reimbursed by insurance companies, and in large part because it requires willingness to change and acceptance of responsibility by the client, the potential of movement therapy has gone too long unrecognized.
As an Alexander teacher, I have worked with people who got immediate relief of their pain but chose not to pursue further study and thus fell back into their dysfunctional, painful movement patterns.
Less dramatic than a shot of cortisone, less rewarded with secondary gains than invasive surgery, change takes time and is often a struggle.
However, by addressing the person's overall movement patterns, healing can take place, and not at the expense of another part of the body.
Could this be the kind of worker training Mr. Burns had in mind?
Such useful strategies are largely ignored, as employers and their employees don't find effective help because they and their doctors don't know about, or won't explore, other options.
The possibility exists now for effective, low-cost, non-invasive intervention with no negative side effects. No dangerous drugs, no impressive machines, no pain, no "learn to live with it."
Just low-tech, gentle movement facilitating gradual change with a holistic approach.
Could this be the reason for the lack of popularity of this method?
Karen Guertler, R.N.
Baltimore
Schools Also Need Report Cards, Just as Students Do
In Maryland and across the nation, parents, students and citizens all want and expect the same things from the public schools.
We want schools that will inspire students to do their best and to take responsibility for their own learning; schools that would rather aim too high than too low. We want our children to be well-read, to be able to express themselves, to have a grounding in math and science and reasoning. We want our children to be safe, and to be able to go to schools that are free of violence and drugs.
L But how do we make our expectations of schools into reality?
Maryland is one of a growing number of states that are finding the answer: spell out exactly what students should know and be able to do, and help schools to reach this level when they fall
short.
Just as we grade our students to let them know how they are doing, it is necessary and appropriate for us to grade our schools.
Ask yourself: Is my fifth-grader now on a path in school that will enable him to assure his choice of jobs when he graduates from high school or college? Is my third-grader on a course that will enable her to work effortlessly with computers in her chosen career, whether as a doctor or a writer or an engineer, by the time she is 21? Will my eighth-grader be thanking his high school teachers 10 years from now?
Grading our schools requires acknowledging changes under way in our world -- advancing technologies, greater competition for jobs, bigger challenges facing families and communities -- and then requiring our schools to make sure that children are well-prepared for the world they will enter when they graduate.
Maryland has taken the first step. Under the leadership of the State Board of Education and Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick, the state has undertaken a program crucial for the future of Maryland's children that is watched with great interest by others across the country -- to evaluate all of Maryland's 1,254 public schools.
The program begins with a report card, graded once each year for every school, that looks at student scores in a carefully-chosen variety of academic and reasoning skills. Each school's report card shows where that school is strong and where it needs to improve in preparing students to succeed. With the benefit of this crucial information, parents, teachers, principals and civic leaders in each community work together to make changes their particular school needs to succeed.
The effort is working. Even at this early date, schools are &L; beginning to see improvements in how students perform.
In its third year, Maryland's report card for schools already is being praised by school systems nationwide as the example of positive action needed to rebuild public education. While communities across America struggle to begin to address the problems of public schools, Maryland is already on its way to solving those problems.
The Maryland Business Roundtable for Education is comprised of 60 Maryland companies that are committed to improving student achievement and believe strongly that Maryland's report card for schools is the right idea.
If we want children to grow up having choices and opportunities, we must prepare then for tomorrow's world -- a big challenge. The economies of our country and the world are changing.
By 2010 -- only 16 years from now -- many careers may require skills now unheard of. Whether our children are ready or not will depend upon our schools. With change already in motion, the opportunity for genuine improvement of public schools in Maryland has never been better.
As a group of the state's largest employers, the roundtable has an obvious business interest in wanting better schools.
Graduates of public schools who are hard-working, skilled and literate are an asset to business and a benefit to everyone else in the state. Businesses are as good as the people we hire, and we want to hire the best.
Part of the reason we care so much about education is that the stakes are so high -- for the future of our companies, for Maryland, and for our children.
Finally, there is another reason we are committed to public schools. It comes down to what kind of society we want to live in. We are unwilling to allow such fundamentals as literacy and proficiency in basic math skills to become luxuries in our home state.
We believe, as did Thomas Jefferson, that America will thrive with "a system of general education which shall reach every description of our citizens from the richest to the poorest." In this light, our obligation to public schools is clear.
Quality schools are the very life blood of Maryland. They are the hope for our children's future and for our state's competitiveness in a rapidly advancing world -- an investment worth protecting.
With its report card for schools, Maryland has the momentum for change. Let's keep it moving forward.
Edward F. Mitchell
Washington
The writer is chairman of the Maryland Business Roundtable for Education.