LETTERS: Nurse practitioners, 14th Amendment and more

Two-tiered care will hurt average patient

Regarding "Medical melee" : The rewriting of state health care laws to lessen the quality of care is an obvious ploy by the government and the health insurance industry to provide two tiers of care. This will result in the average patient being seen by a lesser-trained person.

I am cynical enough to believe that few members of Congress or their families will be seen by nurse practitioners. Your health insurance company will require you to see a nurse practitioner, whom they will pay less than a physician, but your premiums will reflect the costs that a physician would be paid. The difference will go to the company.

So much for the promise by President Barack Obama that you will be able to see the physician you choose. You will see the nurse practitioner they want you to. The president and your Congress member will be able to see the physician he or she chooses.

Dr. Robert F. LaPorta

Dix Hills

Arizona has right idea on 14th Amendment

I find it ironic that "legal scholars laugh at . . . state Sen. Russell Pearce's proposal" to deny citizenship to children born in this country to undocumented parents .

My first question to these "legal scholars" is, why was the 14th Amendment fashioned in the first place? The answer is readily found by examining when and why it was written. It was adopted after the Civil War as one of the Reconstruction amendments in 1868, to overrule the Dred Scott v Sandford decision of 1857, which held that slaves could not be citizens of the United States. By adopting the 14th Amendment, former slaves were rightfully franchised as citizens.

Given that, it was never the intention of the 14th Amendment to provide citizenship to anyone, regardless of the citizenship of their parents, who was born in the United States either by accident or design. Thus, rather than these "legal scholars" laughing at the Arizona proposal, perhaps they should be using their legal scholarship to have the 14th Amendment applied as it was intended.

Barbara Tubertini

Northport

Don't just sell plants; modernize them

In "Finding a new balance of power" , experts agree that clean energy sources such as wind, solar and geothermal power will be inadequate to accommodate Long Island's energy needs for the next several decades, if ever. They are expensive and inconsistent, and they require backup conventional power generation. Off-Island power sources like cables have the potential to fail from a breakdown in the grid hundreds of miles away.

Closing some elderly power plants would help, but the 800-pound gorilla is the 50-year-old Northport plant. Rebuilding it to current technology would reduce pollution more than 90 percent, while at minimum doubling its power output. This will take care of our energy needs for decades. Furthermore, a rebuild would create jobs, reduce foreign oil use, reduce blackouts, reduce health care costs, increase tax revenues for host communities, make more money for the power company and make Long Island less dependent on off-Island energy sources.

LIPA and National Grid are mulling the sale of several power plants. A condition of sale should be a thorough updating or rebuild. They should not be "flipped" status quo.

Mark Seratoff

East Northport

Editor's note: The writer is coordinator of the Sustainable Energy Alliance of Long Island.

Turtle torture signals lack of respect for life

What are parents teaching their kids these days ? What are our schools teaching children these days? Where do kids learn to do this stuff? Certainly not in Sunday school. Our children today are not learning any respect for life, whether it be people or animals. All we hear about is kids out there killing "Mexicans," or burning crosses or painting swastikas on Jewish houses of worship or other hateful acts. Who is out there teaching children to hate? What ever happened to teaching children to love and respect?

I realize that some kids just seem to have some bad circuits in their craniums, but when that happens we can't just sit back and say, "Oh, but he's a good kid." This is a kid who needs help.

M.E. Cole

Bay Shore

. . . and should bring stricter punishment

How many more acts of horrific cruelty to animals will it take before the New York State Legislature passes a law to make intentional cruelty to wildlife a felony? Bills introduced by Assemb. Linda Rosenthal and Sen. Carl Kruger would extend New York's animal cruelty felony law to include wildlife. Currently, only aggravated cruelty to companion animals is a felony in New York, although felony animal cruelty laws in more than 30 states are not limited to pets.

There are many studies that document the nexus between cruelty to animals and violence against humans. Serial killers David Berkowitz, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and many other violent offenders tortured animals before killing humans. The legislature should also pass legislation to expand New York's humane education law, to require humane education be taught through high school. Teaching compassion and kindness is an important lesson that will benefit animals, humans and society as a whole.

Elinor Molbegott

East Williston

Editor's note: The writer is an animal rights attorney.

Ban on lobstering a misguided choice

The proposal to ban lobstering south of Cape Cod is based on general assumptions that do not apply to the Long Island Sound . Because of regional differences, a ban here would actually do more harm than good.

Before 1975, the annual catch was stable at 600,000 pounds. The catch then rose exponentially until it peaked in 1998 at about 10 million pounds. While some speculated that the increase was the result of greater fishing effort, sampling showed that the total lobster population was also increasing. After years of stability, what caused the rise?

After 1975, lobstermen conformed to strict regulations governing lobster pot construction. The designs allow smaller lobsters to escape. In 1999, researchers from the University of New Hampshire videotaped lobster pots in use. What they saw surprised them. Lobsters gathered around the pots, fighting to get in and keep smaller lobsters away. Because lobsters could easily enter and escape the pots, their behavior suggested they were using the traps as a source of food.

During the period of peak harvests, lobstermen were adding at least 600,000 pounds of bait to their traps per day. By providing food, lobstermen had essentially become farmers.

The current harvest is almost double the pre-1975 average. Although that's only 10 percent of the peak harvests, those peaks were directly related to the farming activities of the lobstermen. Eliminating the lobstermen will not only needlessly destroy an industry, it will cause the farm to become fallow.

Roger C. Tollefsen

Hampton Bays

Editor's note: The writer is president of the New York Seafood Council.