Giving top priority to finding ways to stop new cases of cancer
Stewart J. Greenebaum's heartfelt plea ("Fighting cancer with tobacco money," Opinion Commentary, Jan. 29) to invest significant funds from the state's tobacco settlement into the search for cures and more sophisticated equipment to treat cancer, misses an important point. As National Institutes of Health researchers have repeatedly demonstrated, we have our greatest impact on cancer by preventing new cases rather than treating those afflicted.
Certainly all Maryland citizens should have access to the very best of cancer care when they need it. But Maryland does not have the "6th-highest rate of cancer incidence and mortality in the nation" for wont of medical facilities; we have one of the highest rates of lung cancer because too many Marylanders smoke.
While we certainly can and should spend more money on biomedical research, this will not yield a ready solution either. Even if we were so fortunate as to discover a "magic pill that, when taken with your cigarette, would prevent lung cancer," it would still do nothing for emphysema, chronic bronchitis, heart disease and stroke -- tobacco-related illnesses that kill far more people.
What we need to do is to help people who are presently smoking stop and prevent children from starting to smoke. What we really need to do is to discover why people smoke in the first place, how we can reduce that tendency and how we can change the behavior of those who presently smoke.
What we learn should then be turned into effective education, regulation and taxation policies that reduce the prevalence of smoking amongst Marylanders, and reduce the likelihood that young children will start to smoke. These are achievable goals.
As Mr. Greenebaum notes, cancer, particularly tobacco-related cancer, is a public health problem; it deserves a public health response.
Alfred Sommer, M.D., Baltimore
The writer is the dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health.
Shame on Postal Service for Malcolm X stamp
Shame on the U.S. Postal Service for issuing a postage stamp honoring that anti-American black radical Malcolm X.
The next thing we know they might well be issuing stamps honoring Judas, Hitler, Clinton and even Mike Olesker. Too bad!
Norman J. Lange, Baltimore
Stopping the steamroller of suburban sprawl
I was both puzzled and delighted to read in Andrew Ratner's Opinion Commentary column ("Light touch keeps Smart Growth viable," Jan. 28) about a Dutch group touring Maryland to learn of Gov. Parris N. Glendening's Smart Growth initiative. Puzzled because no people know more than the Dutch about how to live civilly within an extremely limited land area. Delighted because perhaps now Maryland officials will be invited for a reciprocal tour of the Netherlands.
As Mr. Ratner reminds us, Smart Growth in Europe has been around for a millennium. Well, for most of that millennium Europe need not have been too smart about coping with growth, beset as they were with high doses of plagues, wars and emigration. But if they are coping now, then how? Is it public policy, a culture of patriotism and discipline, accommodating demographics? Is any of this applicable to Maryland?
Mr. Ratner views Smart Growth in proper perspective, describing its cornerstone as limiting public spending so as not to encourage rampant suburban development. But he also warns that Smart Growth must confront unrelenting consumer preference for bigger houses. So how can the growth steamroller ever be stopped, even as Smart Growth puts a few bumps in the road? That European junket by state and county officials for a specific learning purpose (well, they can have a little fun, too) could be a very wise and timely investment.
Nelson L. Hyman, Randallstown
Two writers who take very different approaches
I found much amusement in the contrasting styles of two articles appearing on the same page of The Sun's Opinion Commentary page on Jan. 28. One, "Clinton's survival proof of country's move to the right" was written by syndicated columnist George Will; the other, "The crime of walking while white," by Sun reporter Scott Shane. The most glaring difference was the lucidity and eloquent simplicity of Mr. Shane's article in contrast to the tortured syntactic convolutions of Mr. Will's editorial treatise.
It might be argued that Mr. Will's style fits his subject matter -- weighty abstractions that trace trends in political climate; whereas, Mr. Shane's article is a narrative taken straight from the streets of Baltimore. "Baloney," I say.
I suggest George Will pick up (or dust off) a copy of Strunk and White's "Elements of Style," a dated but immensely helpful book that clearly outlines precepts of effective style. Reporters such as Scott Shane help keep the language of news reporting alive and well and keep readers such as myself coming back for more. J. Douglas Miller, Columbia
The writer is a professor of English at Gallaudet University, Washington.
Could this be beginning of 'Shadow government'?
It did not take William "Do It Now" Schaefer long to try to get his hands on off-budget money. On the day he was sworn into office, he suggested using a small portion of state's pension money for venture capital.
Don't get me wrong, venture capital does have a very small place in some pensions, but I cannot feel that Mr. Schaefer's goal is to do things with the money rather than earning returns for the pension.
If he gets his way, in two years The Sun should dust off its "Shadow government" series because the same extra-government wheeling and dealing will be taking place.
Larry Johnston, Hereford
Citizen lawmakers have a right to earn a living
Maryland is truly blessed by having a citizen assembly rather than one of career politicians. That its members are at home nine months of the year earning a living gives them the opportunity to know their constituents and their community's needs.
I believe it is normal for people to gravitate to an elected official to do work for them, be it legal, accounting, construction or real estate. People feel they know them and can trust them. The elected official does enjoy that advantage.
Recognizing this, as in the case of Del. Tony Fulton, we should be careful not to turn making a living for a citizen delegate into a political hazard.
I hope we haven't become so jaded that we hold those people we elect to represent us to be less than honest in the conduct of their legislative business in Annapolis. I have to believe not. But The Sun and its cohort Ms. Susan Skullney of Common Cause certainly raise that specter. Mr. Fulton had the right to earn a fair commission for practicing his profession.
To my knowledge, neither Ms. Skullney nor The Sun was given the mantle of Guardian of the Public Trust. The presumption of innocence is still a linchpin of this democracy.
Albert Bedell, Pikesville
Setting new priorities in criminal-justice system
As a taxpayer, I agree with Professor Doug Colbert's sensible proposal ("Attorneys at bail hearings would unclog the court system," Perspective, Jan. 17) that we concentrate on spending more money on serious crimes and less on incarcerating low-level offenders who cannot afford the bail.
Maybe if defendants had lawyers from the beginning of their cases, we wouldn't read about homicide charges postponed indefinitely and eventually dropped. Isn't part of the delay caused by defendants not having a lawyer until much time has passed?
With lawyers, we would save a good-sized chunk of the $71 million we spend keeping nonviolent offenders in jail on charges that often are dropped. These savings could be used far more productively, especially for people who are seeking drug treatment.
David Linden, Baltimore
To our readers
The Sun welcomes letters from readers.
They should be no longer than 200 words and should include the name and address of the writer, along with day and evening telephone numbers.
Send letters to Letters to the Editor, The Sun, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore 21278-0001. Our fax number for letters is 410-332-6977. The e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.org.
All letters are subject to editing.
Pub Date: 2/06/99