Letters To The Editor

Tue., Feb. 3, 1998

BUSINESS AND LABOR

Hospital’s position most un-Catholic

Sacred Heart Medical Center is letting down Spokane and tarnishing its and the church’s image by refusing Washington State Nurses Association’s contract proposals.

At issue is not raises we feel we deserve but issues of autonomy, safe staffing levels and the right to control our lives without mandatory overtime and being on call.

We have no doubts that if approved, nurses will be laid off and remaining nurses, especially part timers, will be worked to death.

Teachers can mandate teacher-student ratios. Why can’t nurses mandate nurse-patient ratios? We know better what is safe. Administrators making proposals are so removed from the bedside, they’d be hard pressed to figure out at which end of your anatomy to stick that bedpan.

We resent CEO Skip Davis. His goal is to break the nurses’ union. He stated he’ll fire any nurse who goes on strike, WSNA member or not. He can’t and he knows that.

Catholic teachings include doctrine on economic justice, supporting collective bargaining, including the right to strike. It opposes the use of replacement workers as stealing, a violation of the 7th Commandment.

If abortion violates Catholic doctrine and is not permitted at Sacred Heart, why is it OK for Sacred Heart to blatantly ignore the doctrine on economic justice? Are administrators allowed to be cafeteria Catholics, picking and choosing the most convenient doctrines to uphold?

We will hold Bishop William Skylstad, the Catholic Church and the Sisters of Providence accountable for the deplorable behavior of Sacred Heart’s administration.

Nurses, vote strike! Linda M. Gusch, R.N., B.S.N., C.C.R.N. Spokane

Nurses, welcome to ‘90s reality

I read with interest your front page article about the nursing controversy at Sacred Heart Medical Center and the current health care environment. While I share their concern for the problem, I believe we must look at the bigger picture.

For far too long, many of those in the health care profession have felt themselves to be in a sacred position, insulated from market forces. They have demanded more compensation and more staff, all under the guise of patients’ needs. It kind of reminds me of the current lament that “it’s for the children.”

The trouble is that this attitude has driven hospital costs to such a level that hospital care has become financially unavailable to everyday working people without top-notch insurance or government subsidy (i.e. welfare, Medicaid).

It looks to me as if those in the medical care industry are now facing the same economic realities those of us in the real world have been facing for years. The market, rather than those with the vested interest, is dictating the economic realities .

While I share your concern, nurses, it is a welcome relief that the market is changing the fantasyland of medical economics. We are all in this together and we must adapt to doing more with less, as many of your fellow citizens already have done. The administration at Sacred Heart apparently already has. Jim Prokop Moses Lake

CLARK COLUMN

We need luxury hotel, not static

Re: Doug Clark’s column concerning the new downtown hotel, Hotel Lusso (“Spokane clod just adores penthouse view,” Jan. 22).

It is mentalities such as Clark’s that keep a society in the Dark Ages. This is a city, not some rural town with a population of 10. Spokane needs a hotel of this caliber.

To imply that this will scare away common folk is a slap in the face to everyone in this community. Do you honestly believe middle- or lower-class individuals don’t know how to appreciate or desire luxury, or how to act in its presence?

Hotel Lusso has been advertising locally as well as in other states. A friend saw advertisements in a southern California airport. Spokane is being mentioned as far away as southern California. Spokane now has a five-star hotel. I don’t see this scaring people away, but rather attracting them, regardless of status in this community or others. Hotel Lusso is putting Spokane on the map. Isn’t this what we want?

Since moving to Spokane three years ago, I’ve heard nothing but talk regarding downtown revitalization. It is political, argumentative, very tiresome and a great waste of time and energy. Hats off to Hotel Lusso for bypassing this trifling process and just doing something that was remarkably efficient and tasteful. They even did so without having to bulldoze an entire city block.

Let’s not be left in the cement dust; let’s follow their lead. Earl E. Price Spokane

Look who’s calling who riffraff

In his Jan. 22 column about the Hotel Lusso, Doug Clark writes, “… just 50 yards away from the riffraff outside the bus station.”

Calling people riffraff is certainly objectionable. If we apply those words, there’s a lot of riffraff driving around in cars, too. You just can’t see them, they go by so fast. You might even find some at The Spokesman-Review. At least you might find Clark.

I ride the bus and I do not consider myself riffraff. Many of the young people who hang out there are not riffraff, either. They could be your children, in fact. Dorothy Carter Spokane

Clark, try plainer accommodations

Re: Doug Clark’s column about the Hotel Lusso.

It really bothered me when he said, “The hotel is so well insulated and so captivatingly different that guests will forget they are still stuck in Spokane, just 50 yards away from all the riffraff outside the bus station.”

Did he really intend to demean the people at the bus station?

If Clark considers these people riffraff, he is in dire need of Jesus. They are all Jesus’ people and we are to love everyone. Maybe if he’d go sleep on the street one night, instead of the newspaper paying for him to sleep in a fancy hotel, he would learn a lot more and his column would touch a lot more people. Susan Mihalchean Spokane

HEALTH CARE

Reducing Medicare age a mistake

The suggested change in Medicare to younger age coverage for some does not make sense. First, we do not have the surplus yet; it is only an overexuberant expectation.

With this change in Medicare, more employers will reduce their employee health care coverage, to make more profits. Nonprofit or other health insurance plans would increase premiums and/or deductibles to compete and to stay in business.

We must all remember our Economics 101, that says all companies must make a profit to stay in business. The government does not. Profits are necessary to protect the value of investments by paying dividends. Without profits, retirement and insurance plans of all kinds would collapse and become worthless. All of this points to a total collapse of our economy.

With Medicare provided at an earlier age, rich people would retire early and take advantage of government health care, even though they don’t need it. Poor people would not benefit because they can’t afford to retire early, even if Medicare is available. If they do, massive increases in unemployment insurance and unearned welfare would be required.

The answer is to reduce government by privatizing all insurance and health care programs. Let the private charities help the needy instead of the government using our tax money to help the greedy, both rich and poor.

Most of the problem can better be handled by the private sector than by the government. In addition, our Constitution does not authorize the federal government to provide welfare, only to promote it - a totally different ball game. Floyd F. Damman Colbert

Clinton’s pointing us the wrong way

People aged 55 to 65, if the president keeps nattering about shoving you into Medicare, rise up and smite him. I can tell you what Medicare is like.

If your family doctor retires, it’s very difficult to find another doctor to take you on.

I asked my doctor why doctors boycott Medicare patients. He said they don’t boycott Medicare patients. Medicare doesn’t pay the cost of an office call, so they have to limit the ratio of Medicare to private patients or the cost to private patients would be prohibitive.

Now, the government penalizes a doctor for taking a Medicare recipient as a private patient. In fact, he cannot do it.

Every effort is made to put you into managed care: HMOs. Right, now we have competition between HMOs. If they ever consolidate, things will be a nightmare. It’s called socialized medicine. And Medicare is going broke.

The federal government has turned into a bloated, overbearing bureaucracy, foisting on us crushing tax burdens, horrible debts and overregulation.

Statism - the notion that society’s problems are best met by the political process, is turning people into public dependents. There should be talk of privatization, not expanding the present mess. We should study Margaret Thatcher’s method of privatization. She turned a sick nation back to health again. Winifred Edwards Greenacres

U.S. AND THE WORLD

Emargo a poor policy choice

When will we learn that an embargo is rarely an effective way of bringing about positive change in countries like Iraq? (“Bishops say sanctions on Iraq ‘killing people,” Jan. 21.)

When the Haitian military went against our democratic beliefs, we responded with sanctions that only seemed to devastate the poor and at best inconvenience those in power, whose thinking we were trying to change. In the end, they had to be convinced by force when the United States invaded the poorest country in the Western hemisphere. U.N. troops remain there to this day.

So, we need to think of some alternatives to sanctions. Maybe we could begin by setting a good example with a little bit of disarmament at home. Think of the money we could save. Think of the money the Iraqis could save. Austin DePaolo Spokane

Let’s not rush off to war

Saddam Hussein is a threat, but no greater than in the first military encounter. At least this time he is contained within his own borders.

It appears another confrontation is imminent. I praise our officials for using every diplomatic avenue prior to any massive bombing. I hope our officials and allies, as well as Iraq, would mutually agree to set aside a safe zone for the innocent civilians in Iraq, similar to what has been afforded the Kurds.

I think we need not act barbarically while there is still time. James E. Davis Spokane

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

Sagacity a presidential benefit

Among the handful of persons willing to take on the big jobs is our president, Bill Clinton - a job he knew would engage him, disparage him, even prematurely age him, but in the end, sage him.

In reference to your article on the possibility of a saging center, may I suggest for the rest of us, our promise of aging is saging.

I also want to add a note to editor Chris Peck: You are empeckable! Randee V. Milleville Spokane

We let wool be pulled over our eyes

After listening to President Clinton’s denial just prior to the State of the Union address, I can’t help but evaluate his prowess as an actor. Although he has come a long way from the days of biting his lower lip and pretending to cry, he still appears shallow and transparent in his portrayal of righteous indignation.

But does anyone question the veracity of the statement he makes? He says, “I have never asked anyone to lie. Never.” Perhaps in his lawyerly mind, to deny is not the same as to lie. There are audio tapes of Clinton telling Gennifer Flowers to “deny everything” concerning the illicit sexual affair he lied about having with her.

Americans are a generous, trusting people. Clinton has betrayed our trust and taken advantage of our generosity. Be that as it may, he may not be convincing enough to fool all of the people all of the time, but it appears that after years and years of denials and explanations, he’s capable of fooling most of the people most of the time. Shame on him, and shame on you and me. Ron Yorke Spokane

We’ve made pols what they are

It confuses me that so many people are castigating and condemning President Clinton’s extramarital indiscretions. Clinton is a modern politician, a product we in the United States have cultivated for the past 50 years.

Today’s politicians are not good family men. They can’t afford to be if they want to be successful in the world of politics. Positions in national government require more than the standard 40 hours a week. It’s a day-and-night job - sometimes 24 hours a day, as in election years.

Today’s political climate demands that its applicants put their job first and everything else, including their families, second. A good husband puts his wife first, his family a very close second and the rest of the world - including his job - a distant third.

If politicians were true family men, they wouldn’t be in politics. They wouldn’t have time. Today’s politicians are generally devoted to power, fame or other such egocentric, self-gratifying goals. They can’t afford to put their wife, children, constituents or even their nation first. Politicians have been conditioned to put themselves first.

This isn’t to say that these men cannot be effective leaders. We’ve had many strong presidents with weak morals. Lord knows, if we impeached every president who had an extramarital affair, we wouldn’t have enough of them left to field a chess team.

I’m not for or against Clinton. I just have a hard time condemning a man for following the rules of a system that we the people created. Mick R. Jackson Veradale

As a phony politician, Craig excels

According to radio network news, Idaho Sen. Larry Craig did not plan to attend President Clinton’s State of the Union address. They reported that he didn’t want to applaud Clinton.

However, when Craig was interviewed for The Spokesman-Review after the speech, he said he didn’t show up for other, unspecified reasons.

Do they give out Phony Politician of the Year awards? For his unabashed attempt at political pandering and then lying about it, all in the same day, I’d like to nominate Craig. He’s an inspiration to us all.

What a guy. Thomas Osowski Rathdrum, Idaho