TODAY'S PAPER
Good Afternoon
Good Afternoon
OpinionLetters

Letters: Admin. fees for traffic offenses

I would like to comment on "Fees unfair for 'innocent' in Suffolk" [Letters, Nov. 24].

Some tickets are for violations, like an expired inspection or registration, or broken brake or taillights. Some charges are dismissed because the judge finds a flaw in the writing of the ticket.

I remember having a violation corrected the day I received a ticket, and I went to court and had the ticket dismissed. That didn't mean that I was "innocent." I was guilty and corrected the violation.

If I had been charged an administration fee, I probably would have complained, but I would have accepted that I had cost the court some expense, and I would have paid the fee.

Another time, I received a ticket for a turning infraction that I didn't commit, and I was found not guilty. I would have fought any administration fee for that one.

The letter writer made no distinction, regarding the fee, between tickets that are dismissed and those where the accused is found not guilty.

Jerry Schreibersdorf, Douglaston

There is an administrative fee assessed in Nassau County Traffic Court as well. I was not guilty of a traffic infraction, but I still had to pay a $30 fee, not to mention the time I took to go to court to prove my innocence.

I think it is patently unfair to have innocent people pay to support a court system that needs money to operate. Wouldn't it be more fair just to charge guilty people more for their infractions, and not have the innocent punished with a fee when they have been mistakenly charged?

Maybe someone will see the folly in this ridiculous practice, and someday I will get a refund if someone decides to fight city hall.

Maureen Baglio, North Bellmore

Care act's mandates beyond insurance

Insurance is a business based upon a voluntary shared risk ["Presidents and leveling with people," Letters, Nov. 20]. Mandatory participation is neither a business nor insurance. It is socialism.

Richard Rocchio, Stony Brook

Psych center must remain open

Who among us, faced with the need for a new roof, would abandon the building simply to save money? That is essentially what New York State wants to do in proposing to close the Sagamore Children's Psychiatric Center ["Bill would delay Sagamore closure," News, Nov. 21].

If our lawmakers and governor want to save money, they should consider this: If Sagamore closes, decades of physical and personal investment to develop an excellent treatment program for children will be lost. The resulting future expenses for the criminal justice system and corrections department will be incalculable.

Joe Giovaniello, Port Jefferson Station

Will airlines charge for quiet?

So the Federal Communications Commission has determined that using cellphones on a plane is safe, but says it will let the airlines decide whether to allow their use on flights ["Feds weigh cell calls in flights," News, Nov. 22].

The airlines are going to love this. How long will it take before they decide to allow cellphone use -- just to charge us yet another fee if we want to travel in their new "quiet class"?

Want to travel to Los Angeles without an annoying seatmate blathering in your ear for six hours? That will be an extra $50, please.

Michael Melgar, Great Neck

Pill law results in wasted time

New York's new I-STOP prescription tracking law requires doctors to check a prescription database before dispensing pain pills such as OxyContin ["Group: Insurers can help in drug fight," News, Nov. 11]. The law was designed to stop people from doctor shopping.

I am a well-educated baby boomer and previously worked in human services, including with former substance abusers. I am now personally affected by this new regulation as a patient and as our population ages, many more people will be as well.

While I understand the need for strict government control and doctor oversight, I am concerned about the new need for monthly visits to doctors who I've seen for years and who know my medical history. Monthly visits are time-consuming and costly, and the purpose is simply to receive prescriptions that were previously written for a three-month supply.

While I applaud New York for trying to decrease the use or abuse of controlled substances, this system is not beneficial to me or others who are not abusing drugs. In fact, this is a recipe for a crisis. Seniors and other people who can't go to the doctor regularly -- they may lack the ability, money or transportation -- will be the most vulnerable without their medications.

I am asking Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and his administration to consider other viable solutions that can benefit all of us.

Barbara Cohen, Massapequa Park

Columns