Alaska communities at risk too
Hearing about the impact of the hurricane season opener in Houston, I'm concerned about so many Alaska communities I've come to know as being vulnerable to increasingly severe winter storms.
The climate impacts of global warming are affecting Alaska more significantly than the rest of the country, and we've got massive expanses of land and inland waters buffering most of our populations and infrastructure. However, this is not the case for some coastal communities. I'm worried that this might be the year that a winter storm, intensified due to the unprecedented rapid increase in atmospheric moisture and temperature in recent years, will devastate one or more of our remote communities. I'm not convinced that adequate means of evacuation are in place for some of these communities. Please keep these communities in your thoughts and prayers.
— Raymond O'Neill
Anchorage
Bring back state income tax
Many thanks to Elise Patkotak for her commentary in ADN on Aug. 30. I generally (but not always) agree with her views, but she hit the ball out of the park on this one. For the last year, I have been advocating the reinstatement of our state income tax to drastically reduce our fiscal problem, with much resistance from legislators who are facing re-election.
The bottom line is that we are the residents/citizens of this state; we are the owners; and as such we need to step up to the plate, stand on our own feet and contribute to provide the government services we all rely on.
The dividend payment is a separate issue; that is a benefit created, yes, by our oil revenue, and the foresight of Jay Hammond, among others. That benefit rightfully goes to all of us equally, which especially benefits the low-wage earners, according to the latest tax plan.
Do not rely on politicians' promises that there is a nebulous solution coming with increased revenues (we should not have to rely on the oil industry) and further government cuts, without any specifics.
Let us take on the problem and work to solve it ourselves, so we can be proud of our state.
— Orin Seybert
Anchorage
Republicans were caught short
Now we have Sullivan, Young and Murkowski on record as how they would love to give Alaskans affordable health care. Nothing about the seven years they spent trying to kill the Affordable Care Act. The Republicans were caught short when they had to admit they didn't have a plan. Hell, they didn't have a clue. Now we are expected to believe this crew will take care of Alaskans. Of course, there is no mention of the 22 million people who will lose their health care under the various Republican health care proposals.
The only plan that makes sense is Medicare for all. Don't hold your breath; too much money would be lost to corporations.
— Jay Cross
Big Lake
Here are a few realities about health care in Alaska
I appreciated the recent Alaska Dispatch News commentary by Rep. Young and Sen. Sullivan explaining their contributions to the recent congressional failure to pass health care legislation. A few points raised in their commentary brought up some further questions.
The commentary suggested the Affordable Care Act was the cause of increased medical costs in Alaska. In fact, health care costs in Alaska have been increasing since long before the ACA (increasing 50 percent from 2005 to 2010 and now the highest in the nation). Premiums are high because medical costs in Alaska have increased, not the other way around.
It's true some Alaskans in the ACA individual insurance market have seen significant premium increases. There are 19,000 Alaskans (3 percent of the population) in the individual market; 17,000 of them receive federal subsidies for their premiums. While over half of Alaskans receive group health insurance through their employers (who split the cost of health care premiums with their employees) there are 2,000 Alaskans in the individual market who make too much money to qualify for subsidies. These 2,000 Alaskans do not have the benefit of cost sharing and are naturally upset about the price of fully funding their own insurance. The commentary highlighted several of their stories. Repealing the ACA would not reduce their costs but would increase Alaska's uninsured rate from 12 percent to 25 percent by 2022.
You want to eliminate the "onerous" individual mandate and taxes. Health insurance equalizes costs across groups by spreading financial risks between healthy and sick people. Unfortunately in the individual market if there is no incentive for healthy people to buy insurance, the majority of insurance will be purchased by sick people, dramatically increasing costs. Individuals earning more than $250,000 or couples more than $500,000 per year pay most of the taxes subsidizing ACA health care premiums.
Making Medicaid "sustainable" by cutting 34,000 current recipients and capping future funding takes benefits away from the 185,000 lowest-income Alaskans currently on Medicaid (25 percent of Alaska's population, 50 percent of those, children). It is a tax-reduction strategy for the wealthy. We won't solve our Medicaid costs by reducing access to care. Alaska has introduced a Medicaid reform strategy. We must give it a chance to lower costs by changing how Medicaid services are delivered.
Sen. Sullivan and Rep. Young, it's time to turn from the past efforts to "repeal and replace" and look to the future to solve our health care issues. Please embrace the facts about the Alaskans who depend on health care and work with Sen. Murkowski and your other colleagues to stabilize the insurance markets and repair, not destroy, the ACA. Alaska needs to reduce costs by restructuring payment mechanisms to providers and hospitals, reducing drug costs and redesigning our health care delivery system by encouraging innovation.
— John Riley, PA-C, M.S.
retired UAA Health Sciences faculty
Anchorage
Love thy neighbor
The columns in Wednesday's paper give a good snapshot of where we are as a nation, and a path to our way forward. Thanks to Christian Caryl, Toney Wade, Texans, Cajuns and others who are helping their neighbors trapped by Hurricane Harvey and its aftermath. And I appreciate Elise Patkotak and Michael Gerson reminding us of our obligations to make our communities and government work for everyone.
The bottom line: Love thy neighbor. Let's all take this opportunity to do that in our private and public lives. Dear reader, ask yourself: What can I do today to help my fellow man? Then follow up with your actions.
— Cheryl Lovegreen
Anchorage
Airline employee expresses
negotiation frustration
As a 10-year employee of Alaska Airlines I have seen many changes to the industry. Being that it is our second round of negotiations since my hire date in 2007, I have recently become passionate about collective bargaining. What does this mean for me as an employee and my future with Alaska Airlines?
As a new hire in 2007, I was unaware of the effect that negotiations might have on me, not just my financial future but also my well-being. This passion, as I call it, is not selfish. It is brought on by a will to voice what I feel is my duty to get a fair wage apart from a pension that has been lost and gone the way of the 401(k), as well as job security. All of which should be a given, yet they are not. How to place value on an employee's job is more than just monetary; it also involves the intangibles: pride, appreciation, integrity, etc.
In economic globalization there has been a shift in the specialization of labor. It has gone from know-how to cost-driven economics. Lowering costs short-term has not necessarily produced long-term savings. How to better this? It's called strategy. However, this strategy is internal. Educate your employees, give them the tools they need to grow and be competitive in every growing industry. This means job security, good pensions and fair pay as starters and a basis, so they can lead healthy productive lives.
Sir Richard Branson said it best: "Train people well enough so they can leave, treat them well enough so they don't want to."
I believe that our jobs are meaningful and give dignity to the employed. However, when it comes to the bargaining table, how do you reach the other side and help them understand that it's people's lives that are being negotiated? Each dollar up in pay means much more to someone struggling to make ends meet, while one dollar less means how much more of a bonus to those on the other side of the negotiation table. It's not complaining; it's seeing what's fair to those who are left wondering why that unattainable glass ceiling had chosen not to increase their pay, or offer them a pension, or have job security. How can you ask the very best of us and still not see how important these are?
— Loren Garcia
Anchorage
Word choice can twist meaning
I saw in Wednesday's (Aug. 30) paper the headline "New York Times wins dismissal of Palin's defamation lawsuit." It was pretty straightforward at first glance, but on closer examination, as stated, it was misleading in meaning. Sarah Palin had brought the lawsuit against the Times, which was innocent until proven otherwise, so the burden of proof was on Palin. Thus, the win or loss was hers. In reality the headline should have read, "Palin loses defamation lawsuit against NY Times." You could say that either way it was expressed, the outcome was the same, so why bother about the actual contextual meaning? That is the exact purpose of the printed word. Words carry meaning in definition and tone. How they are used in phrases shades the point the writer wishes the reader to interpret. "NY Times wins" versus "Palin loses" conveys two different views.
As a reader, my idea of what truly happened in a reported story is guided by the spin of each phrase. Words are important, and since the basic nature of a newspaper is to use words, the burden is on you to chose precisely. Its a serious responsibility influencing others' points of view, and mistakes or slips are bound to happen, but if you wish to be believed, then you must be exact in your reporting and use of words.
— Michael Harrison
Kotzebue
Governor and Legislature are throwing state into the sewer
Gov. Bill Walker and Lt. Gov. Byron Mallott want re-election so they can "complete the work they started" in Alaska. What work would that be? Do they want to finish gutting the economy and people of the greatest state in the country?
Under their reign, Alaska is facing a $3.7 billion budget deficit. Alaska's credit rating has been downgraded numerous times. A huge tax hike was pushed that would increase the burden to already overburdened Alaska families. Walker slashed the PFD, a move that did nothing other than hurt already hurting Alaska families. He's cut into senior programs. He keeps hinting at increasing the gas tax in Alaska. In light of the soon-to-be-felt impact of increased fuel and food prices because of the Hurricane Harvey devastation to Gulf oil refineries and ports, actions such as this would send hurricane-like devastation to Alaskans' already depleted wallets. Food prices are already so high in Alaska, I feel as though I need to get a grocery mortgage.
Additional burdens occurring daily to Alaskans include huge increases in electric and natural gas rates — rates approved by an Alaska Regulatory Commission that includes several attorney appointees by Walker and rubber-stamped by the Alaska Legislature. Alaskans need to scrutinize the commission and utilities; tell them what you think about endless increases. During his tenure, Walker also wasted countless dollars by throwing huge consultant fees down the tubes.
In 2014, Walker changed his party affiliation from Republican to undeclared in joining forces with Mallott to upset Gov. Sean Parnell, a Republican. Mallott, a Democrat, that year abandoned his own run for governor to be Walker's running mate, and the 2014 Walker-Mallott ticket won the support of state Democrat party leaders. Mallott plans to remain a registered Democrat. Walker plans to remain politically unaffiliated. The 2014 election was more like a bait-and-switch or used car deal. Walker pulled no punches in getting himself elected.
Alaskans need to get involved if we want our state to keep from drowning in Hurricane Walker and the Alaska State Legislature. Write letters to legislators and the ADN editor — that is, if there is a newspaper still standing after the 71-year-old paper was thrown into bankruptcy. Walker and this Legislature are throwing our state into the sewer. They can be stopped, but it takes action from everyone. Alaska is the biggest state in the union; don't allow it to be the biggest bankrupt government state.
— Jacqueline Fries
Anchorage
Do something about JBER noise
I have lived in the same house in the Elmendorf-Fort Richardson area for 40 years, and each decade the jet fighter noise has steadily increased. Much of the time, this was due to construction or repair work that required use of the North/South runway for takeoffs. And, unlike automobiles, succeeding generations of jets have not become quieter. It is impossible to describe the shattering roar that blots out every other sound in the spectrum until the aircraft is miles out from the runway. I worked for a decade in the occupational safety and health field, and can attest that any employer exposing its people to such intense sound would be cited and fined. I am surprised that there has not been legal action taken to abate the hazard.
If we in the Turpin neighborhood find the jet noise so painful, I can't imagine how it is for those living in Mountain View. While I can appreciate the goal of JBER in attempting to gain more training minutes and to save a bit of fuel, I don't believe full-time use of the North/South runway with the new jets will sufficiently endear the Air Force to anyone to be worth the change.
Spend the darn money now to change flight patterns or runway configuration, land 'em on the East/West runway instead of circling over my house just before Happy Hour, construct blast baffles — there must be a better solution other than continuing to batter our ears on a daily basis for the next 40 years.
— Don Neal
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.