Why a train is not a ‘wise use of public funds’

I support the recent Sentinel letter writer as he asks where we want our huge property and sales tax investments to go. I want my transportation Measure D sales tax funds to go to fix potholes, fund the bus system and make the roads safer for bicyclists, not multi-million dollar studies of the “mythical” train.

What is the potential ridership of the proposed single-track rail system between the Boardwalk and Pajaro Station? One meaningful way to analyze this is to ask “how many people will it take off Highway 1?” Studies show that the answer is: The projected “train” ridership is 2.5% of people currently on Highway 1.

Is the train project a wise use of public funds? No. We, the taxpayers, are being asked to fund a train project when it has little impact on reducing the actual number of people commuting on Highway 1. This single track rail plan will likely increase traffic congestion on surface streets.

— Della Davis, La Selva Beach

Reagan policies remain root of today’s troubles

I agree with almost all of Mike Rotkin’s column (Jan. 2) critical of George Will’s column (Dec. 31) critical of Jimmy Carter. However, I would point out that the immediate cause of the Iranian students’ hostage taking of American Embassy workers was that Carter, against the advice of almost all of his advisors, compassionately allowed the deposed and dying Shah to enter the U.S. for cancer treatment when no other country would accept him.

I also agree with Rotkin’s criticism of Ronald Reagan and would further posit that Reagan’s economic policy is at the root of most of our social disruption today. The stupid “trickle down economics” (embodied in the Trump tax cuts, both existing and proposed) has never worked and has created the worst income inequality in American history. When the richest 5% of American families hold 248 times the wealth of the median, you can expect class resentment, cultural division and political disruption.

— Rosemary Sarka, Aptos

In difficulties, ask: ‘What would Jimmy Carter do?’

What measures would you use to rank U.S. presidents? Wealth? Power? Material accumulations? Would you consider integrity, honesty, ethical behavior and dedication to service as measures of value or instead as tools for fools?

The former measures suggest negative characteristics stereotypically associated with male adolescence, i.e., strong independence with little regard for others’ welfare, overly assured self-confidence, selfishness — “what’s in it for me,” desires for more, then more, then even more. Such characteristics inappropriately support adolescent development into individuality.

The other measures suggest reasonableness, humility, awareness and acknowledgment of the other as human. In other words, maturity — a maturity born of life’s experiences, viewed through the lenses of a shared human condition; a maturity that recognizes the inter-dependence of all life and that life is more valuable than money or power.

We struggle to mature into fully adult creatures worthy of the sobriquet “sapiens.” When we face the difficult decisions ahead, let us ask, “What would Jimmy Carter do?”

— Jeff Rudisill, Aptos

Dignity Health Advanced Imaging imperils women

At my last OBGYN appointment, my doctor ordered a mammogram. Because I have dense breast tissue, she ordered a breast ultrasound also. I had these procedures done last year at Dominican Breast Center (DBC).

DBC was recently sold to Dignity Health Advanced Imaging (DHAI). I scheduled the procedures there, but was not informed until I arrived at my appointment that I would have to pay out-of-pocket for the breast ultrasound. DHAI, I learned, no longer bills any insurance for it.

The only other nearby place that does the breast ultrasound is Palo Alto Medical Foundation Santa Cruz. They have no appointments until March.

I can’t be the only woman affected by this change. Delaying such a procedure and making it more difficult to obtain is not only inconvenient but possibly dangerous.

Who made this decision at DHAI and why? Are men, yet again, making ill-advised decisions regarding women’s wellness?

My hope is that you’ll investigate why DHAI made this change, leading to another instance of women’s healthcare being made difficult or impossible to access.

— Belana Torrez, Santa Cruz