Letters to the Editor | May 22, 2023

With the latest revelations about her health, it is clear that U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s marvelous career in public service is being marred by a selfish insistence that she retain her seat. Few individuals would be capable at the age of 89 to perform the duties required of one of the 100 most powerful people in the country, and the problem is compounded when serious health issues require the individual to be away from their responsibilities for a prolonged period. The people of California owe a great deal to Feinstein, and she in return owes them for the privilege of serving in elective office for decades. If she wishes to be firmly ensconced in history as a great leader, she should do what great leaders do in circumstances such as these: know when to leave.

Oren Spiegler, Peters Township

As a heart transplant patient and former hospital CEO, I am concerned that dismantling America’s transplant system will lead to disastrous consequences. Many are alive today, me included, thanks to an intricate system developed and refined over decades to match the generous gifts of organ donors with people in need. Our nation’s transplant system is couched in the organ procurement and transplant network (OPTN), which unites thousands of professionals to recover organs and perform transplants nationwide. It, in turn, is managed under federal contract by the nonprofit United Network for Organ Sharing. Today, it oversees more than 42,000 transplants per year. Despite these clear successes, critics have declared the system inefficient and in need of replacement.

As a past and current volunteer with the OPTN and UNOS boards, I know that most in this field want all who need a transplant to get one and to find the most fair and equitable solutions to accomplish that. However, some endorse an upcoming plan to break up the OPTN contract and issue separate components to different contractors. Setting aside the alarming fact that this would include for-profit bidders, I am stuck wondering how those separate contracts will come together to form a working, nationwide system. Splitting it between multiple, competing contractors is a huge challenge that, if mishandled, can greatly hurt the system, our momentum, and most importantly, our nation’s patients.

Robert Goodman, Westampton, N.J.

The recent picketing of the Marriott for hosting Moms for Liberty highlights a serious mistake we on the left have been making for far too long. The knee-jerk response of labeling parents who choose to raise their children according to traditional values as “haters” and “bigots” does nothing to change minds or win hearts. These parents seek sympathy and understanding of their concerns. They find little of it from the left but are welcomed by the right, where they find many who will listen. Ultimately, this strengthens the ultraconservative camp, almost guaranteeing the election of the Trumps and DeSantises of the nation. Do we really want this?

Roland Williams, Philadelphia, rwcrookedwood@comcast.net

Republicans are taking brinkmanship to a dangerous level. Their insistence that any support for addressing our national debt must be tied to spending cuts is both hypocritical and disastrous. Back in 2016, Donald Trump promised he would rid the United States of its $19 trillion debt in eight years. By the end of his first term — spurred by tax cuts to the wealthy — Trump and the Republicans added a staggering $7.8 trillion to our debt. House Republicans now say they will raise the debt ceiling if President Joe Biden agrees to policy concessions and spending cuts to social programs that address the needs of everyday Americans. The U.S. must pay its bills. A default would crash markets and eliminate jobs. Our retirement savings would take big hits. It would also downgrade the nation’s credit rating and add increased costs when the government needs to borrow money. Paying bills and controlling future spending are two entirely separate matters. Get on with it.

Michael Frank, Doylestown

Some politicians and judges insist that mifepristone (one of two medications used to provide abortions and treat miscarriages) must be banned because its sole purpose, in their view, is to end human life. How can many of the same people object to banning assault weapons for the same reason?

Jay Lynch, Pittsburgh

The gun violence crisis has reached a new peak and shows no signs of abating. While the cause is complex, action can be taken without impinging on Second Amendment rights. First, our children are growing up in a world much different now than it was two decades ago in part from social media hyperconnectivity. Mental health needs to be destigmatized, and the brain needs to be treated just as any other organ system. Students nationwide should be seen by hired school psychologists, at least twice each year. Call it preventive medicine for the brain.

The country also needs commonsense gun legislation. It is curious that lawmakers don’t have to see the carnage inflicted by assault weapons. Legislators should be required to view crime scene photographs of all mass shootings, so they have a better appreciation of the damage these weapons inflict. Their continued silence or sending “thoughts and prayers” speaks to a disregard for human life. I suspect directly viewing the carnage would enable any empathy they possess to prevail over politics. Gun violence can be controlled. It will take courage and sustained commitment from Washington, D.C., on down. It is time for thoughts and action.

Mark R. Goldstein, Paoli

For the first time in decades, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives has advanced a comprehensive gun safety package. Known as the Common Agenda to End Gun Violence, it includes bills that address reporting stolen guns, safely storing weapons, and extreme risk protection orders that temporarily remove an individual’s firearms if they pose a risk to themselves or others. Pennsylvanians from all walks of life, ideologies, races, and religions support the measure because these bills will help save lives. A final vote is expected to take place this week. Act by asking your legislators to support the Common Agenda to End Gun Violence.

Susan Frankel, Ardmore, swfrankel@gmail.com

Philadelphia is America’s poorest big city, with a poverty rate of more than 20%. Senseless acts of violence take our youth and destroy communities, allowing a generational cycle of poverty to continue unabated. Today, approximately 15% of students who enter ninth grade in the School District of Philadelphia graduate from college within 10 years. Philadelphia’s 100th mayor can rewrite this narrative, making this a better and more equitable city for all by putting our city’s next generation of leaders — our students — first.

Consider a city that increases funding to the School District to expand support access beyond the current 1-600-plus counselor-to-student ratio. Consider a city that establishes a school selection process based on equity and focused on opportunity for all, not just for some. Consider a city that creates career paths for students by building partnerships, developing coursework and enrichment programs, and hiring students from Philadelphia public schools. Consider a city that offers a citywide scholarship program to lower the cost of postsecondary degree attainment. The Community College of Philadelphia has done this well through its Octavius Catto Scholarship. Replicating and scaling this program citywide would provide students with internal support from postsecondary partners and external advising focused on degree attainment. To the next mayor of Philadelphia: put our students first.

Sara L. Woods and Sean E. Vereen, copresidents and CEOs, Heights Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.