Another look at Delphi
Another look at Delphi
EDITOR:
The bankruptcy court should reconsider the offer of the “new General Motors” to infuse $1 billion into the Delphi Automotive Systems’ pension fund. The U.S. Treasury Department opposed this offer and the bankruptcy court sided with the Treasury.
An infusion of this magnitude would, I believe, have several advantages, a few of which follow:
1. It would allow current Delphi retirees who retired in 2000 and later to keep their full pensions.
2. Those retirees would then be in a better position to pay a significantly increased premium for health care. Note that health care benefits are being canceled for hourly retirees, although an alternative with a high premium will probably be offered. With a substantially reduced pension, many retirees will be unable to afford the health care, placing a burden on our already-overworked public health care system.
3. Those retirees with secure pensions would also be able to continue to spend their money at local businesses, helping the nation return to a prosperous economy.
4. Instead of boycotting GM and urging others not to buy GM vehicles, Delphi retirees would heartily support the “new GM” and its products.
5. Surely the federal government would save money by not having to administer an additional 70,000 pensions through the PBGC.
6. The State of Ohio would also benefit by having this segment of our society still able to support themselves, seek health care at their own expense, and spend in local economies.
We appreciate and support the efforts of Attorney General Richard Cordray to rectify the decision of the bankruptcy in this matter.
Please understand that the other Delphi retirees and I are not asking for a handout, loan, or bail-out. We are only requesting that pension dollars that we earned and that we were guaranteed by contract for work we performed, be delivered to us.
JAMES VICZAY
Poland
Now could be forever
EDITOR:
There is an old romantic song, “There’s No Tomorrow.” Unfortunately that song takes on a different meaning for the city of Girard. There will be no tomorrow if Mayor James Melfi and city council let the land deal for V&M Star Steel fall apart. Mayor Melfi is only looking at what he can get now (money) to help bail out the financial mess the city has been in these past nine years.
Apparently the big picture of 400 new jobs for the unemployed in this area and steady income from taxes if the V&M expansion goes through means less to him. Melfi would do well to ignore the dollar signs he sees in front of him and do what is best for the area. It wasn’t all that long ago that Liberty Township was not happy about losing land off Shannon Road to the Girard School District. Liberty officials changed their minds when it was pointed out that they would be responsible for police, fire, ambulance, snow plowing, etc. if they refused to give up the property.
If the mayor insists on keeping this 80 acres, where would the city get the funds to clean up this property before construction could be done?
TONY ROSACE
Girard
No problems? Look again
EDITOR:
In a letter last Sunday, the writer suggests that readers check the National Coalition on Health Care to learn the truth about U.S. Health Care. Contrary to what the author wrote (“there’s nothing wrong with our health care”), the very Web site he cites states: “The United States spends the most money on medical care of all advanced industrialized countries, but it performs more poorly than most on many measures of health care quality.” (http://www.nchc.org/facts/quality.shtml)
As to the contention that the hospital costs are increasing due to “paying for the illegals,” only 2 percent of the hospital bill is covering costs for those “illegals” who have no health coverage. Furthermore the rate of uncompensated cost to hospitals (which is passed along to other payers) has remained fairly constant for the past 30 years.
Basing our opinions on facts will help elevate the discussion taking place on the health care reform measures.
BOB ELSTON
New Middletown
Liberal minority are tyrants
EDITOR:
When does tolerance become tyranny? When do the demands of the minority enslave the majority? America is about to answer those questions.
Democracies can harbor intolerant even oppressive majorities, but it is the minority that institutes tyranny. Our Founding Fathers understood this, which is why they created a constitutional democracy. The U.S. Constitution limits the ability of the majority to oppress a minority, but it also limits the power of the minority to terrorize the majority.
Individualism is the key to freedom. In a country of individuals, there are no permanent minorities or majority. There are only personal interests, beliefs and behaviors. When those interests coalesce into a voting block, the Constitution limits that block’s ability to impose its will upon the nation. Yet, if the coalition is far-reaching, the country can be moved to adopt its ideas by amending the Constitution. Thus, by amendment, the character of the nation is changed at the behest of an overwhelming (not a simple, fluid or fleeting) majority. There is no wiser government system on the face of the earth, but it is not invincible.
How does one destroy such wisdom and replace it with tyranny? First, diminish the individual and elevate the group. People love their groups and will blindly support them, which creates a form of tribalism, as lines are drawn, loyalties cemented and demands made.
Next, replace blind justice with empathy. Abandon the rule of law and the amendment process and replace it with a “living” Constitution. This will destroy the constancy of the Constitution and replace it with the politics of the day, which whipsaws the character of the nation with each election.
This is where liberalism has taken us. Liberals have transformed America into a nation of tribes governed by a “living” Constitution. It is a prescription for disaster. Those of you who can’t, or refuse, to see it, look to Bosnia, the Middle East and Africa and gaze upon your future. If that is your “hope,” then Obama and the liberals will deliver the “change.” For the rest of us, it is time to stop tolerating liberalism and embrace liberty and justice before we have neither.
THOMAS MASKELL
Poland
Majority voted for change
EDITOR:
We didn’t elect President Obama to maintain the status quo. We elected a man who had big ideas and a broad scope. The fervor that swept him into office was a repudiation of eight years of lies, war and corporate greed. We wanted something different. We wanted an administration that was empowered by the people, one that would look at the problems and say, “I can do something about that”. We wanted that kind of leadership because we were ready make a change but needed the political will do so.
And we won.
There are those who say this president is doing too much, too fast. That it would be better to wait “for the right time” to make changes. They say that spending money on health care reform so soon after a giant stimulus bill would be an enormous error.
In my experience the time is never right for change. Health care reform needs to be dealt with so we can move on to growing the economy, deal with immigration and a hundred other items on the national to do list.
It is spectacularly shameful that so many people want this legislation to fail. There are people who are in real need, who want health insurance but who can’t get it because of high premiums, pre-existing conditions or those who have exhausted their lifetime benefits due to catastrophic illness. There are people who started the year with a job and health coverage who no longer have it. They are our friends, our neighbors and our family members. If this legislation is not passed how can we proclaim that we are our brother’s keeper?
Rumor, fear mongering and misinformation have played an enormous role in watering down this powerful legislation. Free floating anxiety over the government’s involvement in health care will kill the public option and guarantee that all of us will be forced to buy insurance without a government run program to compete for lower prices.
These people who react from fear need to move aside so that those with bold ideas can forge ahead. It’s what we voted for, and it is what we expect.
MIKE PRELEE
Hubbard