The Daily of the University of Washington

Free Speech Friday: Oct. 2, 2009


Share

In response to “How to avoid petitioners,” by Celina Kareiva, Sept. 25, 2009

Dear Daily editor,

I feel as though your article underscores the importance of petitioning as a part of our democratic process. I am the chapter chair of WashPIRG, which is part of a national network of public-interest research groups. On our campus, we work on campaigns including health care, hunger and homelessness, public transit, textbook affordability, and global-warming solutions. We registered hundreds of students to vote for the 2008 election, helped pass Proposition 1 last year, which increased funding for public transit in the Puget Sound region, and have helped to pass some of the strongest state climate-change legislation in the country.

Petitioning is a vital part of our democratic process because it demonstrates wide support to our representatives for a specific movement or campaign, helps to educate the student body about current issues and teaches students how to be community leaders. Without petitioning, the public’s voice on legislation would not be heard. For example, without the hundreds of petitions from University of Washington students, the Sound Transit Link Light Rail would not be extending to the University District.

Petitioning is a vital part of our democratic process, so the next time somebody asks you, “Do you have a minute to hear about an important issue?” take a minute and make your voice heard.

David Corrado

Green Coalition associate director

WashPIRG UW chapter chair

UW Young Democrats vice president of events

In response to “Talking Heads,” Sept. 25, 2009

ASUW President Tim Mensing says in the Talking Heads section that he is excited for “Huskies Football hosting a bowl game here.” Any college football fan should know that universities and athletic departments don’t host bowl games. Mensing’s comments worry me: How can students expect him to lead us if he doesn’t even know how college football works?

Nick Hassell

Senior, economics

In response to, “Public option critical to reducing health costs,” by Chris Jordan, Oct. 1, 2009

Jordan says, “The President has said that it must be self-sustaining and funded by those who pay to use it.” The Congressional Budget Office said the House bill would add $220 billion to the deficit. Obama’s whole reform excuse was that health care costs too much.

Jordan also says, “Another [CBS] poll published in September found that 73 percent of doctors support the public option.” A CBS News poll is unreliable. Would you trust a Fox News poll? It is only legitimate if conducted by a company such as TIPP, who conducted a poll: “65 percent of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan.”

Under the proposed medical overhaul, there would be a 15 percent increase (47 million people) in patient loads, while 45 percent of doctors said they “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement” if Congress passes the plan they have in mind (TIPP). Supply and demand will increase costs.

Jordan says, “They have constantly claimed that Americans will be forced from their private insurance.” The “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the House bill states: “The individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of the year the legislation becomes law.” Those with current coverage won’t be able to change, nor will those who leave a company be free to buy a plan from private carriers.

Lastly, Jordan says, “… similar to the way everyone is required to have auto insurance.” There is no government option. I want a new system. Auto insurance is the example we should follow. You don’t get auto insurance to pay for oil changes, new windshield wipers or tires. If you did, the costs would be outrageous. Just like how the government requires health insurance to cover massage therapy and acupuncture that most don’t want, or twice-a-year dental cleanings that would be cheaper out-of-pocket. Let us citizens, who are the consumers, decide what we want, and price will go down and become more available.

Rob Pollard

Senior, Spanish


2 Comments

#1 Chris J.
(UW Campus | UW Community)

on October 2, 2009 at 8:59 a.m.
Report this comment

Rob,

Thanks for your response to my column.

Just wanted to clear one thing up from my column...

The poll I used to cite doctors supporting the public option was not a CBS poll. It was conducted by the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine and several professors there.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...

#2 Steve
(UW Campus | Unverified Name | UW Community)

on October 9, 2009 at 1:12 p.m.
Report this comment

David,

Read your last paragraph again. When someone asks me if I have a minute to hear about an important issue, what comes next is not the part where my voice is heard. What comes next is where the petitioner tries to get me to agree with them.

I'm busy most of the week, because I take hard classes and I work in between. Frankly, I don't have much time or energy to save the world right now. If that's your thing, you're welcome to it, but I agree with the original article: if you try to intrude on my life to gather support for your cause, don't be surprised if I am unresponsive, or (if you press the issue) rude.


Post a comment

Name:


(None, None | Unverified Name)
Login to verify your name

Email:


Required, but not shown.

Comment: