Broccoli and Bad Faith

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/30/opinion/krugman-broccoli-and-bad-faith.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine 
Date: Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 9:17 AM
Subject: re: Broccoli and Bad Faith
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

     Whether "to tax everyone — healthy and sick alike — and use the money raised to provide health coverage" is constitutionally different from "requir[ing] that everyone buy insurance, while aiding those for whom this is a financial hardship" is a matter that the SCOTUS may have to decide in the coming months. Out in the larger world, of course the two are different. One uses the power of the Federal government to guarantee the profits  of private insurance companies, and the other does not. From the vantage of an Insurer, or an Insurance lobbyist, or a lawmaker in the pay of the Insurers, the two are as different as night from day.

Barry Haskell Levine

Language Deemed Offensive Is Removed From F.B.I. Training Materials

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/29/us/politics/language-deemed-offensive-is-removed-from-fbi-training-materials.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine 
Date: Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:53 AM
Subject: re: Language Deemed Offensive Is Removed From F.B.I. Training Materials
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

     FBI spokesman Michael Kortan is in an impossible position. In order to assure the public that FBI agents would never "bend or suspend the law" as laid out in their own training materials, he must acknowledge that FBI agents are broadly willing to violate the letter of their own law--including that training material. Spokesman Kortan is paid to tie himself into such knots.  Readers look to this paper to expose such nonsense.

Barry Haskell Levine

For New Generation of Power Plants, a New Emission Rule From the E.P.A.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/28/science/earth/epa-sets-greenhouse-emission-limits-on-new-power-plants.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine 
Date: Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:27 AM
Subject: re: For New Generation of Power Plants, a New Emission Rule From the E.P.A.
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   It is no longer acceptable for any journalist to print the Coal Industry's spokesman's assertion that coal is "affordable" without comment. The Coal Industry continues to operate in the black only by foisting huge costs onto the public. These externalities--including CO2 in the atmosphere, acidification of streams, lakes and oceans, and mercury poisoning in our children--amount to many times the profits the Coal Industry reports. In short, American Coal destroys American wealth, kilowatt-hour by kilowatt-hour.  If we are to discuss the costs of carbon capture and sequestration honestly, we must also discuss the costs of  burning coal.

Barry Haskell Levine

When other voices are drowned out

http://www.google.com/#q=when+other+voices+are+drowned+out&hl=en&prmd=imvnsu&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=PO9xT9mdLqfg2QXH56HhDg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=5&sqi=2&ved=0CBgQ_AUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=6776a50ccb573219&biw=892&bih=653
re: When other voices are drowned out


In 2012, the equation of political donations with protected free speech is the law of the land. But that fails to define what is "free speech" by a long shot. If I am free to speak, but only where loud background noise drowns out my voice, has my right been denied? If I can use my voice but not a megaphone? If I can use my voice but not the airwaves? In 2012, the average voter doesn't read a daily newspaper; "Freedom of the Press" as our Forefathers knew it doesn't reach the electorate. In 2012 the average voter doesn't walk in the public square; "Freedom of Speech" as our forefathers knew it doesn't reach the electorate. In a world in which only the electronic media can reach 300million Americans, only the corporate media have meaningful freedom to speak to us. That freedom--only for the few--shouldn't be acceptable to the many.
Barry Haskell Levine

The Severability Doctrine

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/opinion/the-severability-doctrine.html


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine
Date: Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:45 PM
Subject: re: The Severability Doctrine
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:
   Professors Gluck and Graetz are wrong in a narrow sense. The
individual mandate to purchase health insurance is inseverable from
the mandate that insurers must cover people with pre-existing medical
conditions. If these two were severed, insurers would rapidly be
bankrupt as the young and healthy demurred to buy insurance until they
had an expense.  In a larger sense, the individual mandate is
unnecessary. If president Obama had had enough political capital to
buck the Insurers and the politicians they had bought to give us a
SinglePayer system, we could dispense with the individual mandate--and
with the insurance companies.
Barry Haskell Levine

Santorum Writings Voice Strikingly Consistent Views

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/us/politics/in-santorums-writings-a-consistently-conservative-voice.html?_r=1

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine 
Date: Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:58 AM
Subject: re: Santorum Writings Voice Strikingly Consistent Views
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

        Senator Santorum has spent years of his life and pages of ink expounding what he believes. He has not however explained why we should care.  Since--as he has said--"being a senator means voting for bills you don't believe in"--his beliefs are a private matter and don't determine his actions in the public sphere.  There are real political issues facing Americans today.  One man's personal convictions don't make the list.

Barry Haskell Levine

At Home, Asking How ‘Our Bobby’ Became War Crime Suspect

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/sgt-robert-bales-from-small-town-ohio-to-afghanistan.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: barry levine 
Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:49 AM
Subject: re: At Home, Asking How ‘Our Bobby’ Became War Crime Suspect
To: letters@nytimes.com


To the Editor:

   There is much we don't know about the killing of civilians in Afghanistan and much that we will never know. But questions about sergeant Bales come down to a binary; could we have predicted this from sgt. Bales, or not? If we could--i.e. if he was what we used to call "an ox that is known to gore"--then his commanding officers are guilty of putting all around him in peril.  If this was nothing we could have seen from Bales--if this was just what the war experience does to some people--then none of our servicemen and servicewomen should be trusted with weapons. For their own safety, for the safety of our Afghan and NATO allies, for the safety of our sons and daughters who serve along side them, all should stand down until we understand this.

Barry Haskell Levine