Dec. 8 Letters: Oyster rules, W&M, election phone calls, Medicare

December 07, 2012

One step too many

My Dad is 81 years old and he works an oyster dredge with his 75-year-old friend. They have been self-employed watermen all of their lives.

Working in the Chesapeake Bay in the winter months is no picnic. Dad's actual day begins at sunrise, but he has been up since 4. Each time the dredge is pulled aboard the boat, they have to step up on a board, then dump the oysters on this same board and step back down in the bottom of the boat. This is where they cull (check to the size of) the oysters, putting them in plastic tubs and then dumping them loose on the boat floor.

When they get to the Buy Boat, a Virginia legal-sized tub is lowered and they begin shoveling their oysters in this tub. Using a snow-like shovel with a three foot handle, keeps my Dad in a bent position after already being tired from a hard day's work. I am asking the members of the Commission to allow the oysters to remain in the plastic tubs and not be dumped loose on the floor.

It will be easier {I believe] for the VMRC officer to cull the oysters for legal size.

I know that you don't have to, but you have an opportunity to get rid of a law that has no good or clear purpose and indeed causes unnecessary hardship.

Carlene M. Shores


Could be better

I read with great interest your Nov. 30 article, "Faculty to hear curriculum pitch," regarding developments at William & Mary.

As an alumnus, and as father of a current student and two recent W&M graduates, I am keenly aware of the deficiencies of the existing curriculum. It is practically impossible to assemble a coherent set of courses under W&M's "General Education Requirements."

The College also has weak requirements for core knowledge such as English composition and American history. Students are certainly exposed to a broad range of intellectually disjointed material – but they are not assured of a solid grounding in essential knowledge.

Unfortunately, the proposed changes will make matters worse. The administration seems intent on implementing the latest educational fad, by replacing the scattershot GER requirements with a new set of ill-defined interdisciplinary courses. The trouble is that undergraduates aren't ready for interdisciplinary work, simply because they have yet to master even one discipline. Professor John Delos, who was quoted in your article, wrote an excellent letter to the faculty making that point. There are also many other problems with the new proposal, which perhaps a future article could explore.

W&M is a great place, and my sons have all had wonderful experiences there. But it could be even better, and I fear the College is missing a great opportunity to implement real, effective reform.

Matthew C. Ames

W&M Class of 1980


We used to be somebgody!

During weeks past, we received phonecalls almost daily from folks like: Pat Boones, Ann Romney, Clint Eastwood, George Allen and Tim Kaine.

Now, they never call.

What a relief.

Don and Carol Schultz


Wider access

Let's remind ourselves why Medicare exists and how insurance works.

Medicare is an "insurer of last resort". If you don't think so, please let me know of a health insurer that will cover my 84-year-old mother with congestive heart failure at a rate less than her total net worth.

The conservative think tank in Congress wants to raise the age of eligibility. This is like an auto insurance company dropping its best drivers in an attempt to improve profits. Hint to the think tank: the youngest Medicare participants are the healthiest and contribute more than they consume.

Medicare already provides healthcare at a rate lower than commercial insurance. It's just that the older folks get, the more they need health services.

So what can we do? How about adding more healthy people to the pool instead of cutting them out? How about letting pre-retirees buy in to Medicare at commercial rates? It could work like this; at 60, and at your option, you could contract for 5 years worth of Medicare coverage to carry you through to retirement and regular eligibility. This could remove the costliest participants from commercial plans and add healthier individuals to the Medicare pool at market rates. As a side benefit, you might encourage employers to retain older workers by reducing the cost of keeping them on their group plans.

If your goal is to reduce the cost of healthcare in general and stabilize Medicare you might think this a good idea. If on the other hand your goal is to bankrupt Medicare for ideological reasons and leave the elderly to fend for themselves, just keep doing what you are doing, you are going down the correct path.

Don French


Daily Press Articles