Park service should complete Saarinen's vision of Arch grounds
Now, I love the Arch, but changing the Arch grounds is not historic preservation. I grew up in St. Louis and watched the Arch being built when I came home on visits from college.
Efforts in the 1930s to clear the oldest, most historic part of St. Louis in the interest of "historic preservation" were hypocritical.
When it was proposed, the National Park Service balked, saying that it was a travesty of historic preservation and should not be funded by the federal government. The city's mayor approached Franklin Delano Roosevelt and said he'd better approve the proposal if he wanted to carry Missouri in the next election. FDR caved. The Park Service, however, did manage to preserve one small bit of historic significance. It required that the Manuel Lisa warehouse, the oldest structure along the waterfront and the last one from the fur-trading days, be disassembled carefully so that it could be restored and rebuilt as part of the new riverfront park.
The city proceeded to disassemble it and put it in storage, only to forget about it as the years passed.
Eero Saarinen's original design for the Arch and grounds included several additional buildings. I think he conceived of them serving as museum space, but the original, award-winning design included a plan for more buildings. The idea was dropped to reduce the cost.
Instead of sponsoring a new design competition, why not complete Mr. Saarinen's original plan?
Mike McGill — Alexandria, Va.
Prescriptions won't
solve meth problem
Regarding "Town hails its new meth law" (Oct. 26): As a sufferer of chronic sinusitis who must purchase three boxes of Wal-Zyr D a month (24 tablets per box, 12-hour relief per tablet), I find it unconscionable that I be forced to obtain a prescription to obtain allergy relief.
Only those who do not suffer from extreme allergies would be in favor of this sort of law.
Because allergy sufferers are not as vocal as public figures does not make us any less important. Unfortunately, temporary solutions only beget further "break-throughs" for aspiring meth cooks, as the new "shake 'n' bake" method proves. In the meantime, those who suffer from extreme allergies must have insurance to get help.
I understand the frustration our law enforcement must feel, but this Band-Aid solution is not going to stop the determined.
Craig Grenier — St. Louis
FoxPAC
Regarding the editorial "After the Fox" (Oct. 28): The problem with Fox News is not its biased reporting or its fact-free commentary. The problem is that Fox organized, promoted and helped orchestrate the "tea party" protest rallies. This is not the work of a news organization; it is the work of a political action committee.
If you are a Fox News viewer, consider this thought experiment. What if tomorrow morning, Moveon.org relabeled itself as a news organization and began "covering" virulent anti-Republican events that it had created?
What if it demanded the right to interview Republicans as though it were a news organization, even though those Republicans knew that they were dealing with a PAC, and knew further that the PAC's mission was to put those same Republicans out of office? Would such a scheme seem like reasonable news reporting? Would the mainstream media let Moveon.org get away with it?
There is nothing wrong with organizing a "tea party" demonstration. But once you do, you cease being a news organization.
It is amazing that the so-called liberal media continue to let Fox get away with this obvious conflict of interest.
Ron Ebest — University City
Time to read
More than 60 days have passed since Gen. Stanley McChrystal's Afghan war assessment was given to President Barack Obama. It is 66 pages long.
Congress' health care reform bill is expected to have about 20 times more pages than the general's report, give or take.
The president says he needs 60 days to "vote" yes or no on his Afghanistan strategy. He can't rush it; it's too complicated.
The Democrats and Mr. Obama had better not pull that "24-hour 'read it or weep'" bull they perfected on the stimulus bill and probably will try on cap and trade bill. We need to read the whole health care reform bill before it is voted on.
If you extrapolate the time the president took to read Gen. McChrystal's 66 pages, the American people should just be finishing up reading the health care reform bill around January 2013 — at the end of Mr. Obama's first (and probably only) term.
Patrick Guilfoy — Kirkwood
Public option questions
Many Democrats are leaning toward a public health insurance option in the health care reform plans pending in Congress.
President Barack Obama says that no one would be forced to change health insurance if a public option is included. By having a national public option, some Democrats hope to increase competition among insurance providers to reduce insurance costs.
A public option may increase competition, but at what cost to the public? Will a public option bring down the costs of health insurance or increase the health insurance cost for middle-class Americans? These questions have not been satisfactorily answered.
As an advanced practice nurse, I wonder if a public option will effect the quality of care provided by health care providers who may be forced to cut corners to become more competitive. Will a government-funded plan force some insurance companies to pull out of the marketplace because they can't compete? That would force some people to change plans. I hope we will not see this happen.
Susann Farberman — Creve Coeur
Coming soon:
Free money
I'm sure anyone who watched the Oct. 25 TV news program "60 Minutes" was significantly disturbed by the segment on Medicare theft. One of the perpetrators described how easy it was to rip off Medicare for millions of dollars, and there were thousands of people doing it. Apparently, the government has no way to control or stop it.
I bet the boys are licking their chops waiting for the public option in the new health care bill to be approved. It will be like money in the bank for them, and it will be coming right out of the taxpayers' pockets.
Dan Diehl — Richmond Heights
Moral equivalency
What was the point of the article saying that Yum Brands, Hersheys and Yahoo made more money last year than health insurance companies ("Health insurers' profits lagging," Oct. 26)? Is there really a moral equivalency between selling tacos and saving someone's life with cancer treatments? Medical care is a vital necessity. Having a Yahoo account is not.
There is no comparison, but the article leads readers to think there is. Medical care, just like basic education, should be a public service. Providing public health care and public education does not prohibit people with extra money from paying for private insurance or private schooling.
I, for one, don't want my stock portfolio fattened because one of my neighbors was denied life-saving treatment. What kind of soulless creature would want that kind of blood money?
Susan Cunningham — Pacific
