Remember, asbestos firms made killing with product

John E. Calfee, in his zeal to promote the Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act of 1998, ignores the crucial history of both the asbestos companies' wrongs as well as asbestos litigation itself ("Asbestos deals have neglected needy victims," Aug 9).

Mr. Calfee's crocodile tears for the victims of asbestos are as false and misleading as his call for tort reform. In his clamor to decry trial attorneys, Mr. Calfee neglects to mention the reprehensible behavior of a multitude of corporate executives whose dollar-based decisions directly led to the death and suffering of thousands of American workers.

Asbestos manufacturers, like the tobacco companies, willfully and knowingly killed for profit. As early as the 1930s, asbestos manufacturers knew that their product would kill those exposed to its deadly fibers, yet did nothing to warn victims.

Asbestos fibers, invisible to the naked eye, invade the lung tissue of their victims. After a latency period of many years, they enter the cellular level of lung and pleural tissue, causing chromosomal damage. This often results in asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma. Mesothelioma cancer victims die a horrible death -- essentially they suffocate by having their lungs slowly squeezed shut by accumulated pleural fluid.

These deaths and injuries could have been avoided if workers were properly warned. Instead, the companies deliberately and willfully played hide the ball with this information.

The internal memoranda of these companies is as damning as those of the tobacco manufacturers. Some documents show that companies essentially said the workers will be dead before they figure out what killed them. This conduct continued throughout the next four decades.

If it were not for the dogged persistence of trial attorneys, these loathsome actions would have gone unreported, and victims would have received not a cent in compensation. Now, Mr. Calfee asks us to trust these very companies to organize and fund a compensation scheme. I think not.

Punitive damage awards are the only method in civil court for punishing this criminal behavior. Society can't jail a corporation, so we have to hit them where it hurts. It is called justice.

The pioneering attorneys in asbestos litigation took these companies head-on, often taking out personal loans to make their payrolls. They had to fight the corporate defendants inch by inch for any compensation.

The companies fell into a pattern of denying liability, torturing victims with multiple-day depositions and discovery, filing of frivolous motions and nearly endless appeals. Only after the companies were exposed in court were they willing to talk settlement.

In light of this history, it is absurd to say victims should trust defendant companies. Do not forget that it is these same companies who handed these folks a delayed death sentence for the sake of profit.

David G. Bolgiano

Baltimore

The writer is a trial attorney who handles asbestos cases with the Peter G. Angelos law firm.

Who's the scoundrel, and who's the victim in scandal?

How wondrously absurd that sexual activities are magnified and elaborated. A major felony, hardly; more likely, expressions of paranoia and pathological hypocrisy.

Washington and state capitals are well known as places of fun and lies.

The presidency, a sacred symbol? Nonsense, if not idolatry. Making less important matters into major issues is the daily work of politicians and media.

Sherman Roddy

Granite

Students must have better role model

I feel like giving up. I teach health to 11th and 12th graders at Hereford High School in Baltimore County, and right now it feels as if I am paddling upstream. In my classroom, we work very hard at discerning right from wrong while discussing issues dealing with sexuality as well as other crucial life subjects.

At times, I have to address some pretty tough questions from some pretty confused adolescents. How can I expect my students to accept responsibility and consequences relating to their sexuality when the president of our country does not honor truth and evades it whenever he chooses?

I won't give up because I have faith in the strength and spirit of my students, and I believe they are far too valuable not to continue my efforts. However, it would be most helpful if the leadership of the most powerful country in the world would begin to show maturity, integrity, forthrightness and personal commitment, not to mention monogamy.

Susan C. Euker

Phoenix

Clinton is responsible for making affair public

The Monica Lewinsky matter is not about President Clinton being forced to lie because he was asked an improper personal question about his private life. Mr. Clinton made it a public matter by choosing to have sexual relations with a subordinate in his office.

He works for the American people. Therefore, he has made it a public matter and should take the responsibility. Next time he chooses to have an affair and wants to keep it a private matter, he should do it outside of the White House on his own time.

Lauren Kingsmore

Annapolis

Baffled by reaction to Clinton's behavior

As I understand it, a sitting U.S. president had sex with a lady half his age, not his wife, in the Oval Office, denied it flatly to the American people, forestalled the investigation with false claims of privilege, admitted it seven months later in an address less than contrite that included an attack on the investigator for breaching his privacy, and the majority of Americans say, "Sounds fine to me."

Paul Kinnear

Abingdon

We talk too openly about sex these days

When I was young, if a man talked about his sexual encounter with a woman he was a cad. If a woman talked about sex with a man, she was a bum. If an inquisitor pried into the private life of a person, he was a scoundrel.

The victim was to be pitied.

Now I am old and things have changed. I liked them better the old way.

W. K. Lester

Severna Park

Don't shed any tears for Monica Lewinsky

Poor Monica Lewinsky. She wants to be viewed as a victim. She feels hurt that the president offered no sympathy for her travails and suffering.

After all, she did nothing more than prey on another woman's husband, spill her guts to her nosey pal, calling President Clinton a "creep" and saving a dress (for what purpose -- a memento?).

The tapings almost seem like a setup between Ms. Lewinsky and Linda Tripp, and to what end? Personal gain, perhaps? And since when is a modern, sophisticated 21-year-old woman considered a taken-advantage-of kid in sexual matters when it appears she was such a willing participant?

No, Ms. Lewinsky deserves no apology. Rather, she should be the apologist to Hillary Rodham Clinton for helping her husband commit adultery.

Florence Smelkinson

Baltimore

We need to have president who is trustworthy

After watching Bill Clinton's "mea culpa" speech on TV, I have concluded that we should change his nickname from "Slick Willie" to a more respectful "Slippery William." He may slip through the net again.

After his lie in January 1998, he at least admitted a "relationship" with Monica Lewinsky that was not appropriate. He cannot bring himself to admit that he had sexual relations with her. He attempted to convince the American people that he gave "legally accurate" answers in his January deposition, and that is another lie.

If a cabinet secretary, other government official, corporate executive or others had admitted the acts attributed to Mr. Clinton, he or she would have been fired or forced to resign. A military officer would be court-martialed. How can we condone this behavior in the commander-in-chief?

During his four-minute speech, he did not use the words "apologize" or "forgiveness."

I do not want a president whom I cannot trust. If the Starr investigation does not lead to impeachment, Mr. Clinton should resign for the good of the country. We should not be subjected to more than two years of a lame-duck president who cannot be trusted.

John H. Hesterly

Aberdeen

Infraction of moral code is a concern to Americans

Having just read the editorial "Tragedy meets farce in appalling precedent" (Aug. 19), I offer these objections:

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr's interest in President Clinton's private life is limited to those acts about which the president is suspected of having lied under oath and or encouraged Monica Lewinsky to lie about under oath. Mr. Clinton apparently chose to perjure himself.

"Spied on by a massive FBI and Secret Service presence"? Absurd. Secret Service agents reluctantly testified before the grand jury only after it was ruled that they must do so. Mr. Clinton's "infraction of a moral code" is a matter of concern to Americans who live by a moral code that recognizes his admitted actions as immoral.

Citizens are free to abhor, condemn, forgive, accept, approve of, applaud, defend or ignore these actions as they see fit.

But the law demands that Mr. Starr and his grand jury investigate any credible evidence that the president may have committed the felonies of perjury and suborning perjury, and the Constitution requires Congress to act if it believes Mr. Clinton to be guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors."

Jeffry D. Mueller

Eldersburg

We have to pay the price for storm water systems

Tom Horton's excellent and timely column "Improving on storm water ponds" (Aug. 14) begins by painting an eloquent word picture of what happens to our streams, rivers and Chesapeake Bay during rainfalls.

Then Mr. Horton tells what happens when we disrupt the natural storm water cycle through urban and suburban development.

As Mr. Horton points out, for nearly two decades, the state of Maryland has required storm water ponds and other "best management practices" in an effort to offset the damaging effects of development on our streams.

As a result, he notes, "thousands upon thousands" of storm water ponds have been built that are now the responsibility of government or private homeowner associations to maintain. And he rightly applauds Maryland's proposed new approach to storm water management that builds on lessons learned over the last two decades to better mimic natural systems.

I would like to take Mr. Horton's ideas one step further, however. The growing number of facilities for storm water management have become for Maryland and its subdivisions a silent infrastructure and a significant funding liability.

To give Mr. Horton's descriptions some actual numbers, today in Baltimore City and the five surrounding counties there are 3,500 storm water management ponds and another 4,600 best management factilities for storm water management.

In addition is a vast system for storm water conveyance with 2,500 miles of underground storm sewers, 105,200 catch basins, 22,000 outlets and several thousand miles of free-flowing streams.

Facilities need systematic maintenance, repair and replacement. Degraded streams need restoration. With a long list of state and federal requirements for watershed management, these activities have become major unfunded mandates for our local governments, who bear the primary responsibility for these programs.

But unlike the water and sewer systems, which are supported by user revenues, storm water facilities and watershed management lack the dedicated source of revenue that is needed to assure consistent and responsive performance.

While we have heard much about the costs and sources of revenue for controlling Pfiesteria, nutrient runoff from farms and sewage treatment plant effluent in our effort to improve and protect the Chesapeake Bay, we have heard little about the costs and sources of revenue for local storm water management.

Based on a recent self-assessment by the Baltimore Metropolitan Council's Environmental Finance Alternatives Committee, we estimate that added revenue averaging $43 per household per year, dedicated to storm water and watershed management, is necessary to meet the needs of this silent infrastructure in protecting and improving our streams, rivers and Chesapeake.

That is more than twice the amount we are spending through a patchwork of undedicated funds.

Only when we meet these costs can storm water management contribute fully to our vision of clean streams, rivers and Chesapeake Bay as expressed so well by Mr. Horton.

Paul Farragut

Baltimore

The writer is executive director of the Baltimore Metropolitan Council.

Maris' record no fluke

Your article on Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa chasing the Roger Maris home run record was well conceived, hitting on most of the hype in the media today ("Larger than life," Aug. 22).

I took exception -- almost offense -- to the statement about erasing "Maris and his fluke season from the record books." A close examination of Maris' career shows him hitting 20-plus home runs six times in a career that spanned 11 seasons.

I would recommend that you never refer to one great season as a fluke. Maris lost half a head of hair in pursuit of a record no one wanted him to break.

Having a great year in baseball like Mr. Maris did is akin to receiving the Pulitzer Prize: It may only happen once, but when it does a hitter (or a writer) deserves all the credit he or she can get.

A lifetime of working hard deserves more credence than "fluke" when everything falls into place. Please be more careful in your use of words when describing an individual's achievements, especially one that no one else had ever reached.

Rob Hirschmann

Baltimore

Baltimore back in the NFL where it belongs, and has stadium others will envy

Anyone doubting how fortunate we are to be opening the new Ravens stadium need only recall the dark days when Baltimore was twice rejected by the NFL in its flawed expansion process.

Despite having what we now know was the strongest stadium and financial package of any of the entrants, Baltimore was passed over for -- of all places -- Jacksonville. Former Gov. William Donald Schaefer was insulted by the NFL, and the commissioner told the city to build museums instead.

What sweet revenge to be home to the best stadium in the NFL, with an improving team that should go far. With the Camden Yards sports complex completed, Baltimore and Maryland command national attention and envy.

Of course, the twin stadium complex will generate jobs and excitement downtown. Most importantly, all of us who call Baltimore home have another common link and bond that we can rally around.

Caring about the Ravens will bring people together in a positive endeavor and project our city and region around the country.

More that anything, that's what the new stadium makes possible. Isn't that what public projects and facilities are supposed to accomplish?

Kudos to the Maryland Stadium Authority and other public and private leaders who built this beautiful stadium and brought Baltimore back to the NFL, where it always has belonged.

Paul A. Tiburzi

Phoenix

Freud's concepts live in unconscious minds

If Paul R. McHugh still labors under the antique notion that he or anyone else is a rational creature, he must have missed (or rejected) the 20th century, as he suggests in citing Isaiah Berlin's notation of a "crucial shift from the 19th century views about human nature." ("How could Sigmund Freud have been so dead wrong," Aug. 8).

The fact that we have progressed in understanding since Freud postulated the Oedipus complex, castration fear and penis envy has not undermined Freud's essential notions of the dynamic, irrational and largely unconscious basis of behavior. Just look at any modern advertisement, where rationality has yieled to reaching the unconscious.

Or if Dr. McHugh -- as he apparently does -- prefers books, he might try anything by Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Proust, Kierkegaard, Joyce, Mallerme, Beckett, Camus, Faulkner or many thousands of others.

Or he could just read the newspapers.

He will find Sigmund Freud's signal discoveries changed a bit, but alive, well and flourishing in a world and species driven by unconscious and irrational motives.

Franklin T. Evans, M.D.

Baltimore

Getting a bit crabby over missing display

Recently I returned on a flight to Baltimore-Washington International Airport and was disappointed that the stained glass crab was not on prominent display in the lobby. I was told by airport workers that thousands of visitors also miss the crab.

We understand that it is sitting in a storage bin awaiting some repairs from damage caused when state employees attempted to move the artwork.

We all cherish the Chesapeake Bay, and the crab is a symbol which makes us proud.

The blue channel crab is an icon of the bay recognized throughout the world. I ask that Anne Arundel County Executive John G. Gary and Gov. Parris N. Glendening direct their staffs to look into this matter.

The citizens of Maryland, and particularly those of Anne Arundel County, love the Chesapeake Bay. We should support local artist Jackie Leatherbury Douglass of Shady Side, the designer of the Blue Crab.

Vincent O. Leggett

Arundel-on-the-Bay

Pub Date: 8/29/98