Copyright 2002 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Inc.  
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
February 7, 2002 Thursday Five Star Lift Edition
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. B6

LENGTH: 1280 words

HEADLINE: LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

BODY:
Meeting the costs of prescription drugs

I disagree with the proposal by Mark Fraley (Feb. 3 letter) that any government prescription drug program should cover all seniors for all drugs. As a senior who has good prescription drug coverage, I do not want the government taking over my program.

If anything would drive up an individual's cost for drugs, it would be taking on all individuals -- including those who are very capable of paying for their own drugs. I for one do not want to pay for prescriptions for Bill Gates, Rush Limbaugh and other millionaires when they turn 65.

Medical costs began their exorbitant rise when the government got into the medical field by starting the Medicare and Medicaid programs. I am not against helping those who need help with their drugs. But instead of making programs that are universal in nature, they should be made available on an as-needed basis.

I am in favor of the prescription drug program that George W. Bush proposed during his campaign -- that is, give people the option of whether or not they want to take drug coverage, just as we have the option of whether or not to take Part B of Medicare.

J.A. Heitert

St. Charles

The Feb. 4 editorial, "A floor but no ceiling," encourages Congress to pass a Medicare prescription drug plan because of the vast difference between the need and the ability of most elderly to pay the ever-rising cost of pharmaceuticals.

This editorial ignores the true issue -- that of the obscene profits made by drug manufacturers over and above their cost of research, advertising and lobbying (to retain their exclusive brand name licenses beyond the normal seven-year limit).

For the past decade, drug manufacturers have managed an average of 17 percent profit a year, after all their expenses. If they cut out their expensive TV and newspaper advertising and their lobbying efforts, they could easily cut the prices of most drugs and allow low-cost generics to be available much sooner.

This is an industry that is crying out for government regulation. It would be so much better -- and cheaper -- if the drug makers voluntarily worked to keep their prices down.

Larry Lieberman

Member, Governor's Advisory Council on Aging

University City

The Bush doctrine

Regarding the Feb. 3 editorial, "Carrying a big stick," I probably speak for thousands of your readers in offering some needed clarifications to the following points in your editorial:

1. The Bush doctrine "aimed at specific nations, rather than terrorists." In his speech, President George W. Bush clearly enumerated both as targets tied to terrorism.

2. "No longer is the United States reacting in self-defense." Wrong. The rules of self-defense against criminality are well established and include an effective offense.

3. "The axis of evil metaphor supports a huge defense spending increase." Sure. Just as Ronald Reagan, with great success, revealed that the emperor (the Soviet Union) wore no clothes, so does Bush declare realit y: We are under attack.

4. Regarding North Korea, Bush "walked away from the negotiations." Of course. Continuation of the Clinton/Albright initiative would have resulted, once again, in a piece of paper to which only we adhere.

5. Iran: " ... throngs in the street ... shouting 'Death to America.'" Probably staged. It is naive to imply spontaneity.

6. The Bush doctrine may "propel us heedlessly into a dangerous new era." The new era began at least as far back as the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center towers, followed by terrorist actions against Somalia, on our African embassies and to the Cole off Yemen. The previous administration slept. The present one carries a big stick and speaks loudly and clearly.

David Taylor

Kirkwood

Poverty and terror

It's Professor Kenneth Ryan's thinking (Jan. 21 letter), not Sen. Jean Carnahan's, that has missed the mark. Osama bin Laden's group found fertile ground precisely because of the poverty -- just as the blanket of poverty in Egypt and Saudia Arabia has produced the terrorists.

As Thomas Friedman has pointed out, the lack of opportunities in these countries has produced massive discontent that touches young males in all facets of society.

Ann Newton

Effingham, Ill.

Spare the birds

The recent mass poisoning of starlings in Breese, Ill., was an inhumane and ineffective approach to managing human/wildlife conflicts.

The slow-acting poison used means that starlings might take hours, even days to die. The need to thin the flock for public health concerns is the same unsubstantiated excuse used when Canada geese are targeted for destruction. The real issue is the inconvenience and nuisance these birds present, a fault for which a death sentence is inappropriate and unnecessary.

Lethal control simply allows birds from other locations to move in to the vacated area.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture already uses nontoxic bird repellents on crops. This method would be more effective, especially when combined with scare devices and applied as soon as birds enter an area rather than after they have become established.

Shooting first and asking questions later is not a humane, environmentally responsible, or sound approach to resolving conflicts between people and wildlife.

Elizabeth Stallman

Wildlife Scientist

Wildlife and Habitat Protection Humane Society of the United States

Washington, D.C.

Rights of the unborn

As Clarence Page explained the current legal status of the unborn in Tuesday's column, "Playing politics with prenatal care," he reverently cited the immutable authority of the Supreme Court as "the arbiter of fundamental rights." What about its wisdom in the Dred Scott case?

Page claims that granting personhood to the unborn treats a pregnant woman like a "biological chauffeur." Yes, but only in keeping with the pro-choice lexicon, where unborn children are "defined" as parasites, or just so much baggage.

Page accuses the administration of "playing politics," or surreptitiously promoting a conservative agenda with its proposal to expand S-CHIP in providing women and their prenatal children equal protection before the law. Page contends that other, more pressing social needs are neglected as a result. But this is just a smokescreen for his own ideological motivation.

Bush's proposal offers a practical, win-win situation for both mothers and their unborn babies.

Cynthia Hitschler

Wildwood

Swimming upstream

And a big round of applause goes to the city of Richmond Heights for stepping up to the plate with plans in place for a world-class aquarium.

Once again, the city of St. Louis loses out with too much talking, too little money and endless squabbling over who gets what.

Go, Richmond Heights!

Bea Coplin

Bridgeton

Children are dying

As a grandfather of a 4-year girl, I was moved to tears when I saw the Jan. 15 photo of a little girl who was an Afghan refugee near the Pakistan border. The little girl was walking through mud and snow in mud and ice soaked shoes. Her home consisted of a little pup tent that was covered with snow and ice.

We in the United States have been told that people such as this little girl will die in the brutal winter.

Then on Feb. 3 we read that little children are indeed starving and freezing to death in the Mirqasimjan Camp in Afghanistan. The parents of these little children are saying that God has abandoned them.

We can help them by contacting our senators and representatives and by sending a contribution to the American Red Cross. We can stipulate that our contribution is for the Afghan refugees. We can all be on the same team together against suffering and dying.

Dick Reeves

Kirkwood

GRAPHIC: PHOTO; Photo from THE ASSOCIATED PRESS - An Afghan refugee child walks between plastic tents in a camp just outside Mazar-e-Sharif, Monday, Jan 14.

LOAD-DATE: February 7, 2002