May 18, 2007

Letters

Iraqi experiment

Dear Editor: CNN's May 11 broadcast in Europe showed some children in Baghdad gathered around a big pool of water created by holes punched in one of the makeshift water lines leading into the Green Zone. They weren't frolicking in the water as one might expect; they were washing themselves and collecting water in squalid plastic containers. These kids know the discomfort of being dirty and not having water to clean themselves; they live with the fear of thirst. For them, this pipeline carrying water to the powerful of Baghdad was not a temptation for vandalism; it was a necessity.

This image illustrates the failure of the Bush administration's great social experiment. Under the guise of "making the Middle East safe for Democracy," the neocon Republicans' social theory actually intended to provide unfettered privilege to the wealthy, with the afterthought that their improved economy would drip down to the poor people. Drip down economics, indeed. The idea of collective public works for the good of the community is anathema to these Republicans, whose anti-taxation spokesman, George W. Bush, proclaims, "it's your money, don't let the government take it away."

It's a seductive sentiment if you have money, money enough to buy your own clean water system and prevent those who don't from taking "your" water. But, as we now see on CNN, this is a formula for incredible personal misery where, ultimately, even the wealthy live in danger. "Mission accomplished," experiment failed.

Bruce Joffe,

Piedmont





Shopping center unfair to merchants

Dear Editor: I finally got the message that Ellis Partners does not want me to shop at Town & Country Village [in Palo Alto] anymore. First it puts the very popular Cook Book restaurant out of business. Then the parking lot was reconfigured with so little room for error that my car is more likely to be a fender-bender victim than I am to be a victim of the speeding traffic they eliminated. State Farm tells me my insurance agent of 20 years is leaving and the Hairshapers Club, where I have had my hair cut for more than 17 years, has been evicted.

Given that Ellis knows its intention not to renew leases far in advance of the 30 days' notice it is giving, one must conclude that either it intends to put merchants out of business so they cannot make contingency plans and compete with remaining merchants or it is just callously indifferent to the fate of those merchants. Either way, its integrity and ethics must be called into question. Am I the only one outraged by this behavior?

Ellis was originally quoted as intending to retain the character of the village while providing much-needed maintenance. It is not being transparent in its intentions because the Cook Book was the essence of that character and was the first to go. I hope merchants contemplating leasing there are taking careful note of how they will be treated when Ellis no longer wants them there.

Ivor Durham,

Los Altos



Sutter Health

Dear Editor: The Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) is seeking to build a hospital and medical office building facility in San Carlos. Sutter Health, PAMF's parent corporation, has a troubling track record of only providing care that is profitable, no matter its contractual obligations.

Sutter is in the process of backing out of a 20-year lease to run the county hospital in Santa Rosa after claiming financial losses and it abandoned another 20-year lease to run the county hospital in Merced, also after citing unprofitability. In addition, Sutter has signaled that it may cut all acute services at St. Luke's hospital in San Francisco as early as 2008. This would put an unbearable strain on the full-capacity emergency room at San Francisco General Hospital, according to the San Francisco Department of Public Health. Caring for the uninsured is apparently just too costly for a nonprofit corporation like Sutter, which posted a 33 percent increase in "profits" in 2006.

Will PAMF/Sutter bring this same pattern of practices to San Carlos? If so, which seems likely, we ought to fully expect that this new facility will only provide profitable services and that the whole facility could be closed in the future if it does not meet profitability standards.

It is all fine and good to praise PAMF, like many of PAMF's employees, former employees and patients did at the recent San Carlos City Council hearing, but why aren't we talking about what really counts, namely the business practices of the parent corporation, Sutter Health?

Dick Rozakis,

San Carlos



Bush in the bubble

Dear Editor: President Bush continues to seek refuge in his tight bubble, refusing to acknowledge the indefensible behavior of his appointees. No sooner had Alberto Gonzales completed his lamentable "I don't recall" testimony about the growing scandal of the firing of federal prosecutors, than the nation was confronted with the inexcusable behavior of "big, bad Paul Wolfowitz."

As former deputy secretary of defense, Wolfowitz testified before the U.S. Congress that the occupation of Iraq wouldn't cost the American taxpayer a single penny. He assured Congress, "There's a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be U.S. taxpayer money. ... Revenues of that country could bring between $50 [billion] and $100 billion over the next two or three years." After guiding the ship of state toward the quicksands of an Iraqi quagmire, Bush appointed Wolfowitz to become head of the World Bank, where his autocratic style caused an exodus of many senior professional staff. It is ironic that Wolfowitz should be caught with his hands in the World Bank cookie jar, attempting to grant his longtime girlfriend, Ms. Riza, a huge raise at about the same time he launched an aggressive campaign to rid Third World countries of corruption.

Balbir Singh,

Palo Alto