Hyrdrofracking poses many threats
I have been pondering a statement made by Marie Lusins of Oneonta and member of the Unatego Area Landowners Association (The Daily Star, Jan. 26).
Lusins was quoted as saying, "There never has been one instance in New York of fracking fluid contaminating someone's water."
This is indeed true because "fracking" is not yet permitted in New York state.
Lusins' statement is tantamount to saying, "Otsego County waters are not contaminated by Perdue poultry farming operations." True, because no such factory farm currently exists here.
To follow Lusins' logic, corporate poultry farming, like "fracking," must surely be environmentally friendly.
To frack or not to frack has been the heated subject of the state Department of Environmental Conservation's proposed Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement for a number of months.
There is good reason for a thorough deliberation on the SGEIS, which will regulate drilling here. (Many believe deliberation has not been thorough enough.)
Hydrofracking poses multiple threats, such as costs to local governments, public health risks and serious environmental damage.
There is ample empirical evidence to counter Lusins' confidence in the safety of fracking.
In 2008 in Dimock, Pa., approximately 100 miles southwest of Oneonta, a water well exploded from methane contamination from nearby hydrofracking, and many other wells in that area have been rendered undrinkable.
A spill amounting to 6,000 to 8,000 gallons of undiluted fracking fluids also occurred there in September 2009. But that is Pennsylvania and this is New York, where things are different, I suppose _ different, as well, from the 31 other states that have experienced problems with hydrofracking.
Lusins' vision appears to be clouded by the dollar signs in her eyes.
I earnestly hope that Gov. Paterson does not follow similar "logic" when making his decision about the SGEIS.
Teresa Winchester
Butternuts
Killing health care reform a mistake
It sounds to me like health care reform is almost a dead issue because some people in government are against it or can't agree how to go about it.
I'll sacrifice every friend I have if they don't like what I say, but this is the way I see it:
I think not having a public option is a big mistake. Imagine if we take away everybody's unemployment insurance benefits because it's a public option and it's too much government control.
It's no secret that everybody would be against that, so why is it such a problem to pass (life-saving) health care reform?
I'm tired of hearing the immature bickering in government between the Democrats and the Republicans. People's lives are at stake and they're fighting like two little babies in a sandbox to no end.
We are all Americans, and we are supposed to be the good guys!
As for me, I'm neither a Democrat nor a Republican. In fact, I'm impartial.
When somebody's dying in a hospital from a heart attack, it shouldn't matter if he or she is a Democrat or a Republican or black or white.
Now, the big question _ how to pay for health care reform.
Do not tax the working poor or the people on Social Security. Tax the rich people, because they have the monetary resources. All of the millionaires and billionaires should pay their fair share, with no loopholes or excuses.
And, to all of the millionaires out there who cry poverty, I say try to live on disability and an income of $40,000 a year for a few months and see what it's like.
If health care reform does not happen in this country, I predict an economic cataclysm in the next few years.
Robert Caffee
Bainbridge
Health care taxes will make situation worse
Gov. Paterson has released an executive budget piled high with health care taxes, including a doubling of taxes on inpatient and home care.
There are also proposed tax hikes for nursing homes, as well as an expanded surcharge on physicians' services.
These proposed increases in 2010-11 health care assessments would be added on top of the 2008-09 health care assessments and would hit New Yorkers at a crucial time, when national health care reform carries the promise of new health care and insurance taxes nationally.
Medical providers would have no choice but to build the taxes into the cost of their services and pass them on. Inevitably, increases in medical costs will result in increased insurance rates, meaning fewer individuals in our state will be able to afford the premiums.
As a member of the New York State Association of Health Underwriters, I am on the front lines of this health care crisis.
I bear witness every day to how increases in health insurance rates affect people and families.
I recognize that our state is in a financial quandary, but increasing taxes on the health care sector will just exacerbate the problem, further creating more uninsured New Yorkers.
If further taxes like these are added to the health care sector in 2010, New Yorkers will be looking at a perfect storm of rate increases, causing employers to drop insurance coverage for their employees or to lay off workers.
As more people are dropped from the rolls of the insured, this health care tax revenue would decrease, prompting a trend of higher taxes collected from fewer premium payers statewide. No one would win.
Ralph Morse
West Oneonta
Big businesses given too much power
The recent Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations to spend millions of dollars to help elect political candidates is so disturbing to me.
You see, I thought what I did as an American citizen mattered.
I gave a small amount of money to a candidate. I knocked on doors for a candidate. I even invited candidates into my home for a discussion of their views.
Now, when I see the Supreme Court, the highest court of our land, has voted 5-to-4 to allow unlimited amounts of corporate money to elect or dismiss a political candidate, I wonder what good can I as an individual do ?
The Supreme Court has given wealthy corporations more rights than "we, the people." What can you and I do about this dangerous decision?
Gretel Bachler
East Meredith
