Op-Ed

We aren't that Gull-ible

A sandspit tailor-made for healthcare reform

The Cape and Islands' demographics is tailor made for the coming healthcare reform. The area is densely populated with old crocks like me. Small businesses are as ubiquitous as the weeds in our gardens.

Our sandy chunk of the country rife with people requiring more medical treatment than average.

We are grateful that the big hassle back in 1965 that got us Medicare

We are grateful that the big hassle back in 1965 that got us Medicare was won by the "pro" side. They went through the same sort of scare tactics then as we see today. The lives saved and the volume of worry prevented have been a blessing to all who are on the program. I don't see anyone turning it down, even if it is a socialistic government-run healthcare program.

All our small business operators who have doubts should read the NY Times editorial of 8/13/09 "Health Reform and Small Business".

Most have 25 employees or less and an annual payroll of $500,000 or less, so they won't be mandated. Small employers will be able to join exchanges to get the same lower rates the big guys enjoy. The Congressional Budget Office, the NY Times, and Howard Dean's "Prescription for Real Healthcare Reform" all agree small businesses stand to benefit. A little research will give you the details.

Most American industries are at a competitive disadvantage because the bulk of our health insurance is employer based. In single- payer countries the government picks up the tab. And their people have better care than we do, according to the World Health Organization.

All of us old timers should prefer the public option, because we want to play it safe with supplements like Medex that kick in when the costs exceed what Medicare will pay. The private insurers, sanctified by reform opponents, have doubled their premiums in a decade. Without the public option nothing will stop them from doing it again.

All of us old timers should prefer the public option.

The medical industry's attempts to buy a bill that mandates coverage without a public option's protection is their pitch to win themselves an open-pit gold mine. Our premiums

When there is talk about comparing the rate of increase in health insurance premiums with the much slower gains in wages, we know who gets shafted. But what about us retirees on fixed incomes? We are vulnerable, but the opponents and the stallers in both parties don't seem to care. But we ancients vote, and will remember which politicians worked for us, and which were too interested in the appalling amount of cash the special interests use to make them virtual employees.

Richard C. Bartlett. Cotuit

3 comments »

Heed the Will of the Voters

A few pols seem tone-deaf to the desires of their constituents

By Nathan Miller

When 65% of Massachusetts voters approved a law that made possession of an ounce or less of marijuana a civil infraction punishable only by a $100 fine, they spoke loud and clear - it is time to change the way Massachusetts punishes low-level marijuana offenses.

Despite the overwhelming majority with which the new law was approved, a few holdout legislators seem tone-deaf to the desires of their constituents. They have introduced several bills that would seriously undermine the intent of Question 2, which was to keep marijuana users out of jail and possession crimes off their permanent records, which can result in loss of student aid, employment, and housing.

Question 2 made possession of an ounce or less of marijuana punishable by just a $100 fine. But, taken together, the recently introduced bills would reduce the areas in Massachusetts where that limited penalty would actually apply to almost nowhere. The proposals would effectively recriminalize the possession of an ounce or less of marijuana in school zones, on municipal property, in places of employment, and areas open to the public, just for starters.

Localities would be allowed to opt out of the new law, a formula guaranteed to create confusion. Even stranger, anyone who possesses an ounce or less of marijuana in a vehicle would once again face jail time in Massachusetts. This legislation contains no requirement that the marijuana be in use or even that it be in an open container; it's the functional equivalent of making it a crime to drive to a dinner party with a sealed bottle of wine as a gift for the host.Another bill actually provides for anyone possessing an ounce or less of marijuana to be arrested if they fail to show a police officer their ID -- solving a completely imaginary problem, since citizens not showing their ID to police officers upon request has never been an issue in Massachusetts. But if this ever becomes a real problem, it should be addressed across the board and for all crimes.

Marijuana is less addictive, leads to less violence, and contributes to fewer health problems than alcohol.

Voters intended the new law to apply across the entire state, not to just a few select few places. Not only would these bills undermine the will of the voters, they would create uncertainty among those in possession of an ounce or less of marijuana, as well as for police officers. And for legislators to dismantle the statewide uniformity of the current law while it is still in its infancy shows nothing but contempt for the very people who put them in office.

The current approach voters have elected to take is much more sensible than the previous one. We have learned over the years that marijuana is less addictive, leads to less violence, and contributes to fewer health problems than alcohol. The new law represents a better understanding of marijuana and those who use it. It is time to embrace it.

Complaints about the implementation of the new law are coming almost entirely from people who opposed it from the beginning. Now that legislators have thrown these naysayers a bone by introducing this ill-advised legislation, they should respect the will of the voters, move on, and start tackling the bigger issues currently facing Massachusetts.

The bottom line, drawn by the citizenry itself, is that responsible adults whose only crime is possessing small amounts of a substance that is safer than alcohol shouldn't be punished with jail and saddled with a life-long criminal record. Legislators should respect the will of the voters who elected them and leave this sensible law alone.

Nathan Miller is a legislative analyst with the Marijuana Policy Project.

5 comments »

Mary Jo Kopechne died 40 years ago today

"We Can't Find Mary Jo" - Kennedy at Chappaquiddick
The accident which changed his life and ended hers

By Mary Wentworth

Just past midnight on Saturday, July 19, 1969, Senator Ted Kennedy drove his black Oldsmobile sedan off a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island near Martha's Vineyard, just off Cape Cod. The Senator escaped a watery death, but a passenger in his car, twenty-eight-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne, below on right,, did not.

Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin were preparing to be the first human beings to walk on the moon. The Black Panthers were holding a national convention in Oakland, California, while the Vietnam War troubled the consciences of millions of Americans. What brought Kennedy to Chappaquiddick, however, was the Edgartown Sailing Regatta, an event in which the Kennedys had participated for many years.

A police diver examines the inside of the Kennedy car in the water aside the Dyke Bridge in Chappaquiddick.

The accident at Chappaquiddick has cast a long shadow over Kennedy's political life, crippling his quest, for example, for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1980.

At the time, and since then, nearly all newspaper and magazine articles, and even books, have concentrated on discrediting Kennedy's account of his actions both before and after the incident.

Nation didn't believe his story

According to a Time-Harris poll (Time 8/6/69), the account offered by Kennedy over nationwide television on the Friday following the accident was not accepted by a majority of the American people. Fifty-one percent felt that it was an inadequate explanation of what he was doing at the post-regatta party and of what he was doing with Kopechne, on right. The responses questioned his honesty. Even for that minority who believed him, the event raised questions about his ability to handle a crisis.

Many questions about this case have never been satisfactorily resolved. At what time did Kennedy actually leave the party? Was his turn on to Dyke Road a mistake as he claimed in his statement to the police and in his television address to the nation? Or was it intentional? After the accident, why didn't he seek help from people in nearby cottages? If he had been, in fact, too traumatized to ask for assistance as he claimed in his television talk, why didn't his friends immediately contact authorities when they were told of the accident?

The lack of credible explanations to these questions touched off speculation that the truth about Mary Jo's death was more shocking than Kennedy's statements about it. Teddy Bare, published by the John Birch Society in 1971, disparages the handling of the case by judges and prosecutors and ridicules the testimony of Kennedy's friends and associates, leaving the reader to believe that Kennedy was guilty of criminal negligence.

A plausible explanation 40 years later

Now, as the fortieth anniversary approaches, it is high time to present a plausible explanation of what actually happened that fateful night. The following reconstruction, developed from general descriptions of the scene, numerous eyewitness interviews, investigative reports, and Kennedy's statements that have been published in newspapers and magazines, explains why events unfolded as they did.

Below is the New York Times story on 7/24/69.

This approach demonstrates conclusively that the only hypothesis that fits the overall picture is that there were three people in the car. This theory has been mentioned in the media from time to time. For instance, Herb Caen, a well-known columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, noted in his column of July 9, 1981, that locals have come to believe that this was the case. In a step-by-step process, however, this reconstruction shows for the first time exactly how such a theory is the only credible explanation.

Kennedy's version is built around the premise that he knew that Kopechne was in his automobile when he only knew that in retrospect - after her body was discovered to be there by a scuba diver.

At a party hosted by Kennedy, attendees included Esther Newberg, an Urban Institute employee, Rosemary Keough, a secretary on Kennedy's staff, Maryellen Lyons, an assistant to Massachusetts Senator Beryl Cohen, Ann Lyons, Maryellen's sister and a Kennedy staffer, Susan Tannenbaum, an aide to Congressman Allard Lowenstein, and Mary Jo Kopechne, an employee of Matt Reese Associates, a campaign consulting firm. All six had worked in what we today would call "the war room" of Robert Kennedy's presidential campaign that ended tragically with his assassination in June of 1968. These young, unmarried women had been looking forward to this weekend reunion (NYT 7/24/1969).

In addition to Kennedy, the other men who attended the party were Charles Tretter, a lawyer who had been on Robert Kennedy's staff, Ray LaRosa, a civil defense official, who along with Tretter, was often a sailing companion of the Senator's, John Crimmins, a Kennedy employee and chauffeur, Paul Markham, an Assistant District Attorney for Massachusetts, and Joseph Gargan, a Kennedy cousin. All but one were married (NYT 7/24/1969).

Edgartown Police Chief Dominick Arena took photos...

of the car recovery.

Kennedy's police statement. A full size version is below.

After an afternoon of watching races from a Kennedy yacht, the party got under way about eight Friday evening with cocktails and barbecued steaks at a rented cottage.

Newspaper reports described Mary Jo as being dedicated to politics, particularly where the Kennedys were concerned. Not a "swinger" by any means, she was relatively quiet, perhaps naive, and noted for her "thoroughness, industriousness, and discretion" (Time 8/1/69). The summer sun and ocean breezes combined with the day's activities, one or two drinks, and a full meal could easily have motivated her to look for a peaceful place to nap before the others were ready to call it a night and head back to Edgartown. Since the cottage was a small ranch-style with only three rooms, the darkened and quiet inside of the Olds with its commodious rear seat must have looked inviting.

Kennedy maintained in his statement to the police (NYT 7/26/69) as well as in his address to the nation (NYT 7/26/69) that he and Kopechne left the party at 11:15 p.m. to catch the ferry to Edgartown before its last scheduled crossing at midnight. This claim is not plausible for several reasons. If Mary Jo had decided to return to her motel in Edgartown she did so without bothering to retrieve her purse from the cottage or ask her roommate for the keys to their room. When she stretched out on the back seat of the Olds, however, she had no need for these items because she was not going anywhere. Or so she thought (DHG 4/14/1980).

Judge Boyle doubts story

No less a person then Judge James Boyle, who presided over the inquest, wrote in his report that if Kennedy's destination had, in fact, been Edgartown he would have asked his chauffeur to take him there so that the car could be driven back to Chappaquiddick to provide transportation for the ten remaining guests. They would have only the Valiant, a compact car rented for the occasion by Gargan, to get them back to Edgartown (NYT 4/30/79).

A witness further undermines the Senator's story. Deputy Sheriff Christopher Look got off duty at the Edgartown Yacht Club at midnight, crossed the channel to Chappaquiddick in the club's launch, got into his waiting car, and drove up the Main Road toward his summer home. His claim that he saw the Kennedy Oldsmobile at the intersection of this road and Dyke Road at about 12:45 a.m. has been regarded as reliable.

The Deputy Sheriff got a good look at the car because it crossed the path of his headlights at the sharp curve where the Main Road goes to the right. Entry into Dyke Road for someone coming in the opposite direction also requires a right. The driver was unable to negotiate this very tight turn and ended up on Cemetery Road, a narrow dirt lane that runs perpendicular to Dyke Road. Look continued around the curve at the intersection and braked his car on the shoulder. He got out and started back toward the other car, thinking that the driver must be lost. As he called out, the car backed up with the rear lights revealing the license plate and then completed the turn, proceeding down the unpaved, bumpy Dyke Road.

Look stated that his first impression of the car was that there was something or someone in the rear seat - an article of clothing, a large handbag, or possibly a person. Perhaps Look caught sight of Kopechne's white blouse. Look thought there were two people in the front seat (NYT 7/22/69).

The Dyke Bridge goes off at a left angle as it crosses Poucha Pond. Since it is narrow, hump-backed, and roughly constructed, it is normally traversed on foot or in a jeep or beach buggy. At its end are dunes and a beach. Several members of the party, including Kennedy, had been driven to the beach that day to go swimming (DHG 4/14/1980). The marks on the bridge indicated that the car was driven straight off it with the undercarriage scraping the four-inch high planks along the sides as the right front wheel went over. The car turned, hitting the water on its right side, denting the doors and blowing out the windows. It landed in about seven feet of tidal water, resting on its hood ornament and brow of the windshield so that the rear of the car was slightly more elevated than the front (BG 7/20/69).

Kennedy said he didn't know how he got out

Kennedy maintains that he does not know how he got out but a possible exit for him and his companion, most likely Rosemary Keough since it was her purse that was later found in the car, would have been the almost completely withdrawn window on the driver's side. Then, too, a door could have been pushed open when enough water had gushed into the car to match the inside pressure with the outside (NYT 7/26/79).

The walk to the cottage from Poucha Pond, a distance of one and a quarter miles, would have taken about twenty-five or thirty minutes. This would have brought the twosome, dripping wet if they were fully clothed, back to the cottage shortly before one-thirty. Foster Silva, the neighbor whose cottage was nearest the party house, reported that the rather noisy gathering that had disturbed his family abruptly quieted down at just about that time (NYT 7/24/69).

It is not hard to imagine that Kennedy, consulting with the two people at the party who were closest to him, Joseph Gargan and Paul Markham, decided that it would be imperative for him to get off the island as quickly as possible in order that he suffer no damaging political repercussions in connection with his presence at the party and with what appeared to be an accident involving only his car.

The night was clear and warm with the moon shining brightly. Since it was Regatta weekend, there was much activity around the Edgartown harbor. People were strolling about, fishing from the pier, or visiting back and forth amongst the boats moored there. Two hotel employees on the Edgartown pier saw the lights of a car being driven onto the Chappaquiddick landing around one or one-thirty, they thought (LAT 7/29/69).

Car lights are a signal to Jared Grant, operator of the ferry, that someone needs to make a crossing. But these lights were quickly turned off. Since the plan was to give the impression that the Senator had spent the night in Edgartown, Markham and Gargan, after driving Kennedy to the landing in the rented Valiant, would not have wanted to reveal the Senator's presence on Chappaquiddick by calling out the ferry at that hour.

But there remained the problem of the Senator finding another means to cross the five-hundred-foot wide channel. He later claimed that after making valiant efforts to save Mary Jo he was in such a state of shock that he impulsively plunged in and swam the distance (NYT 7/26/69). However, it is not at all unusual - in fact, it is customary - for a person in need of getting to Edgartown to borrow a dinghy if it is promptly returned (NYT 7/24/69). In a Jack Anderson column that appeared a couple of weeks after the accident, confirmation of such a crossing came from a group on a yacht who identified Kennedy as one of three men on a boat docking at the Edgartown pier about this time.
The Senator then appeared, dry and calm, before the co-owner of the Shiretown Inn where he was staying, ostensibly to complain about a noisy party, but really to ask the time, establishing his presence in Edgartown at 2:25 a.m. (NYT 7/27/69). Markham and Gargan recrossed the channel in the borrowed dinghy and drove back to the cottage. Esther Newberg confirmed that the two men had left the party at some point but was not sure about the exact time or how long they were gone (NYT 7/24/69).

Was Mary Jo Kopechine unconscious?

What about Mary Jo Kopechne? Did she wake up at any point during the short trip from the cottage to the bridge, but decide not to make her presence known? When the car went into the water, was she momentarily knocked unconscious, only coming to as the others were escaping?

At any point did Mary Jo's friends begin to wonder where she was? Given the atmosphere of the party, its setting, and the activities of party goers, reminiscing, singing, dancing, going in and out of the cottage, and taking walks there was probably no time when someone specifically thought to ask about her whereabouts. There was no way for someone who was inclined to check with the motel to see if she had quietly returned to Edgartown to do so since there was no telephone in the cottage (NYT 7/24/69),

As the night wore on, the accident went unreported. The plan obviously called for someone other than Kennedy to claim responsibility for the car's being in Poucha Pond. It would be better, too--it must have been argued--for that person to wait until morning and face charges of leaving the scene of an accident than to report it promptly, submit to a Breathalyzer test, and risk a drunk driving charge.

The two-car "On Time" ferry began daily operations at 7:30 a.m. Several members of the party, Markham and Gargan and two of the women, Tannenbaum and Keough, made an early crossing that would have taken less than four minutes (NYT 7/24/69). It is likely that the women were driven to The Dunes, their motel, which was not in the center of town, to shower and change before eating breakfast. In the process, it would have been discovered that Mary Jo had not returned there the previous night.

This sobering and unsettling fact was the first indication that something may have happened that was more serious than a car submerged in Poucha Pond.

No doubt alarmed by this news about Mary Jo, Markham and Gargan found Kennedy chatting with Ross Richards, a Regatta winner and old friend, on the inn's deck about eight o'clock. The three immediately went to Kennedy's room for a conference to try to figure out where Mary Jo might be since her body had not yet been discovered in the Oldsmobile.

The game plan changes

The game plan might have to be changed. At one point, Kennedy came to the front desk, ordered newspapers, and borrowed a dime from the clerk to make a phone call, which he was unable to complete, to Burke Marshall, his lawyer and longtime friend of the family (NYT 7/14/74). Surely, they were all hoping that Mary Jo, wherever she was, was safe and sound.

At just about this time, two young men knocked on the door of Mrs. Pierre Malm's cottage near Dyke Bridge to tell her that they could see the wheels of a car submerged in Poucha Pond. Later, she would tell reporters that she read past one o'clock the night before but that no one came to her house seeking help (NYT 7/27/69).

Edgartown Police Chief Dominick J. Arena was notified and left Edgartown at 8:20 a.m. to cross to Chappaquiddick to the scene of the accident. Putting on trunks, borrowed at the scene, he dove into the water, which was less than six feet deep by this time, but the strong current prevented him from getting deep enough to determine if anyone were in the car. He then called John N. Farrar, a scuba diver with the Edgartown Rescue Squad, to come help out (BG 7/22/69).

Even if events had taken place in the manner in which Kennedy depicted them, the nine-hour delay in reporting the accident would have given them more than enough time to come up with a better story than the one that Kennedy and Markham concocted on the spot at the police station, and which was later revised for national television.

Putting on his equipment on the way to the scene, Farrar quickly entered the water and saw Mary Jo Kopechne's feet through the rear window of the overturned automobile. He swam around to the right side window and found her with her head cocked back and pressed up into the foot well with her hands gripping the edge of the rear seat. He thought that the position of her body indicated that she had found an air bubble in her struggle to stay alive. Even though the car was upside down with the open windows allowing the seawater to rush through, it was possible, he thought, for an air lock to form. Air bubbles that emanated from the car when it was hauled out and the lack of water in the trunk were further indications of an air lock. Farrar felt that it would have been extremely difficult for Mary Jo to extricate herself from this situation without help (NYT 7/22/69, USN & WR 11/3/69).

If Mary Jo had been one of the two people that Deputy Sheriff Look saw in the front seat, how would she have gotten to the rear of the overturned car? Even in its quest to disprove Kennedy's rendition of the accident the press did not expend ink on examining this mystery. Given the manner in which the car had overturned, it is unlikely that someone would have been thrown from the front to the rear. It is even more unlikely that a passenger could have crawled from the front to the rear once the car was submerged. Mary Jo's body was found in the car's rear section because that is where she was when the accident happened.

By now, the area was buzzing with news of the car accident and the commotion that it had caused. A wrecker had been contacted to come pull the Oldsmobile out of the water. Assistant Medical Examiner Donald Mills had been called to the scene to determine the cause of death and a local undertaker had also made the trip over. It would take almost half an hour to remove the body from the car.

While these activities were taking place, Kennedy, Markham, and Gargan caught the ferry to Chappaquiddick. Kennedy claimed at the inquest, probably truthfully, that he returned to Chappaquiddick in order to have more privacy in calling Burke Marshall (NYT 5/1/70). Then, too, they may also have been intent on locating Mary Jo.

After waiting around for twenty minutes, hoping maybe that his phone call would be returned, Kennedy and his entourage left the shelter of the landing house on the Chappaquiddick side just about nine o'clock. When a ferry operator asked them if they knew about the accident, one of them replied that they had just learned of it. Upon getting back to Edgartown, Kennedy, accompanied by Markham, went directly to the police station (LAT 7/22/69).

It is not clear exactly when the three learned that Mary Jo's body was in the car. It might well have been that Kennedy and Markham had it confirmed for them at the police station. In any case, Gargan, after leaving the landing house, got into his Valiant and driving up Main Road found Newberg and the Lyons sisters heading for the ferry landing. He drove them back to the cottage, where he told them, "We can't find Mary Jo." Perhaps he did not want to be the person to break the news of Mary Jo's death to her friends at that time or perhaps he really didn't know that she was dead. Later, after depositing them at their motel, he telephoned to tell all five that Mary Jo had drowned in the car and that Senator Kennedy had tried to save her (NYT 7/24/69). At least one of the group would have known that this last bit of information was not true.

The car had been quickly identified as belonging to the Senator. Look, who was at the scene, recognized two "L"s and a "7" as being on the plate of the car he had seen hours earlier at the intersection. After Farrar's discovery, Arena called the police station to ask that Kennedy be contacted although he did not know then that Kennedy had been the driver. He immediately left the accident scene when he was told that the Senator was at the station and wished to see him. Since Arena assumed that the purse that had been found in the car after it was pulled from the pond belonged to the dead woman, when he arrived at the station he asked Kennedy if Rosemary Keough's relatives had been notified of her death (DHG 4/18/80).

The discovery that Mary Jo Kopechne had drowned in his Oldsmobile changed everything. Kennedy now had to acknowledge responsibility for the accident since it was out of the question for someone else--that someone else most likely would have been his cousin, Joseph Gargan--to claim to be the driver.

The effort that had been made to show that Kennedy had been in Edgartown for the night--his conversation with the motel owner at 2:25 a.m.--now became a major sticking point in preparing a new version of events. How could it be explained that Kennedy was in Edgartown at that hour when a young woman had met her death in a car he acknowledged he had been driving in an accident that he had not reported?

Kennedy and Markham sat in the Edgartown police station, cobbling together a story that would incorporate an improbable answer to this question, generate some amount of sympathy for the Senator, and provide him with a defense--"I don't remember" and "I can't explain this"--in the event that criminal charges were brought against him.

Later, an added feature of his television statement was its attempt to cast him in a hero's role through his valiant but imaginary efforts to rescue this young woman.

Kennedy also claimed in his television address that he had alerted Gargan and Markham concerning the accident and they, too, had tried to rescue Mary Jo. This may have been an effort to explain their absence from the party. But the claim that they undertook rescue efforts are just as ludicrous as Kennedy's, since none of them knew at that time that Kopechne was in the car.

Even if they had known that Kopechne was in the car and Kennedy had been incapacitated as he claimed, it is inconceivable that one of them would not have alerted the authorities. After all, the firehouse with its alarm was across the street from the cottage. Clearer heads than Kennedy's would have understood that, come morning, the body would not have disappeared from the car.

Even if events had taken place in the manner in which Kennedy depicted them--that he and Mary Jo had been on their way to the ferry, he had taken a wrong turn, he, and then Markham and Gargan, had tried to save her and had failed--the nine-hour delay in reporting the accident would have given them more than enough time to come up with a better story than the one that Kennedy and Markham concocted on the spot at the police station, and which was later revised for national television.

Within five days of the accident, his lawyers arranged for him to be charged with leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injury. He pleaded guilty, thus avoiding any possibility of a cross-examination, received a two-month suspended sentence, was placed on probation for one year, and had his driver's license temporarily revoked. An inquest was held the following winter, as well as a grand jury investigation in the spring, but no further charges were brought against him.

Why didn't Kennedy simply tell the truth in his statement to the police? In doing that, he would have had to admit that he and a young woman, not his wife, were going to the beach for a midnight swim (that they were both under the influence of alcohol could not have been proven), that he did not have his automobile under control, and that because he, along with everybody else at the party, did not know that Kopechne was in the car no attempt was made to save her, and that since he did not know this, he planned to foist responsibility for the accident on to someone else.

Could the truth have been worse than being stuck with the image of being a cold-hearted monster as well as a liar that many people have retained of him to this day? Like many politicians before and since, he did not want to 'fess up to anything that made him look other than honorable and upright. But like many before and since, he came off looking worse than if he had come clean.

In general, people find it easier to forgive the truth-teller than the liar. By telling the truth early on he might have won his bid for the presidency in the 1980 campaign. By telling it now, he can remove a stain from his own legacy as well as from his family's.

Mary Wentworth is a regular contritutor to Op Ed News and Cape Cod TODAY.com. Her blog is called "My Day". Notes: NYT - New York Times, BG - Boston Globe, LAT - Los Angeles Times, USN & WR - U.S. News & World Report, and DHG - Daily Hampshire Gazette.

78 comments »

Health Care or Health Scare ?

How does Cape Cod health care compare with that of Canada?
Let's have Wellfleet compete with Winnipeg

By Richard Bartlett

In Canada doctors run their own practices and are paid by provincial agencies.

In the current national debate about health care reform our northern neighbor is often cast as a reprehensible boogieman.

Those indebted to the medical insurance lobby's massive slush funds insist on calling the Canadian plan socialized medicine, even though it isn't.

In a socialized plan the doctors are on salary. In Canada doctors run their own practices and are paid by provincial agencies using national funds.

How does our good but expensive Cape Cod health care compare with that of Canada?

Using national averages let's have Wellfleet compete with Winnipeg.

Entries on Google for this comparison number 3,290,000 with some in conflict with others. Only the most recent posts from the most reliable sources are used here.

WHO ranks Canada 30th, with the USA trailing at 37th.

Winnie (Winnepeg) vs. Willie (Wellfleet)

Winnie of Winnipeg spends $630 (in American currency) of her own money on health care.

Willie from Wellfleet spends $2719 out of pocket.

Winnie's government spent $1533,

Willie's spent $2168 on health.

Winnie's doctor graduated with a $70,000 loan debt,

Willie's owed $140,000.

1% of Winnie's medical cost goes for paperwork, whereas it's 31% in Willie's case.

Winnie's doctor has absolute authority in deciding on expensive items like MRIs and special treatments with no government interference.

Willie's case is different. His doctor has an insurance bureaucrat intervening to keep profits up.

Canadians live longer and have a lower infant mortality rate than we do

Republican U.S. Senate leader  Mitch McConnell has taken $425,000 in medmoney since 2005

We hear a lot of fallacious talk about long lines for treatment in Canada. The Republican leader in the U.S. Senate Senator Mitch McConnell  (who has taken $425,000 in medmoney since 2005) said on CNN that a knee replacement in Ontario required a 340 day wait.

Checking on that, a skeptical CNN sent a reporter to the very hospital the Senator had referred to and found it was 91 days on average. The other 249 days were a fiction designed to scare us into sticking with the flawed status quo.

And even with all the cost savings, Canadians live longer and have a lower infant mortality rate than we do. In fact, the World Health Organization ranks Canada 30th, with the USA trailing at 37th.

The Boogieman Northerners are doing just fine. We could do as well if we can just avoid being conned.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

23 comments »

Rep. to Registrar: Don't close the Falmouth RMV branch

Editor's note: The following is a letter from Rep. Timothy Madden to Rachel Kaprielian the Registrar of the MA RMV regarding the proposed closing of the Falmouth RMV Branch.

June 30, 2009

Rachel Kaprielian, Registrar
Registry of Motor Vehicles
Office of the Registrar
Box 55889
Boston, MA 02205-55889

Re: Falmouth Registry of Motor Vehicles Branch

Dear Registrar Kaprielian,

I am writing with great concern regarding the proposed closure of the Registry of Motor Vehicles branch office in Falmouth.  Since this RMV office was opened, it has proven to be enormously valuable for the residents and visitors to Falmouth and its surrounding communities.

The closing of this branch would be particularly detrimental to the Upper Cape’s elderly population. As you may know, this area has one of the highest populations of residents aged 65 and over in the Commonwealth.  If the Falmouth branch were closed the three closest branches to the Town become the Yarmouth, Plymouth, and New Bedford registries, each nearly an hour away.  With waiting times of up to an hour at these Registry offices, this quickly turns into a half to a full day trip for many of our elderly residents, a huge inconvenience.  Furthermore, with the added influx of seasonal residents and tourists, these times can grow significantly.

I urge you to come to Falmouth as soon as possible to meet with the community and its elected officials. If the current site is being considered for closure because of costs, I would be happy to work with you and the town's leaders in finding an alternate site in Falmouth, cost-effective to the Commonwealth, to avoid losing this extremely important resource for the community and the Upper Cape region. 

Sincerely,

Timothy R. Madden
State Representative
Barnstable, Dukes, and Nantucket District

1 comment »

Celebrate Energy Independence Day with Win for Wind Raffle

On July 4, 1776, America's founding fathers declared independence from the tyranny of a far-off ruler, paving the way for the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in their new homeland.

100 years later, the Statue of Liberty arrived in New York Harbor and quickly came to symbolize freedom as she served as a guiding light to people traveling to America.

Today, in 2009, we have the opportunity to house a modern icon for freedom - freedom from pollution, volatile energy prices, petrodictators, economic stagnation and poor air quality. Cape Wind promises to usher in a new era of energy independence in America, opening doors for sustainable development in our nation's energy industry while simultaneously protecting our environment from the perils of global climate change. Much like the Statue of Liberty, Cape Wind's turbines will welcome people to Nantucket Sound as a beacon toward energy independence.

But to achieve this vision, Clean Power Now needs your support!

Only 600 tickets for the Green Car of the Year

This summer, Clean Power Now is raffling off a 2010 Honda Insight LX hybrid car, the Environmental Transport Association's Environmental Green Car of the Year and a stepping stone to energy independence. Tickets are $100 and sales will be capped at 600 tickets, giving you greater chances at driving away with this fantastic prize!

For full details, please visit CleanPowerNow.org and help us to score a Win for Wind!

Thank you,

Lauren Dickerson,
Michael Pease,
Development Associates

Leave a comment »

Learning to love Cape Cod's history by writing it

I'm an artist, not a writer

By Kathryn Kleekamp

I'm an artist, not a writer, but I've always been under the impression that writing, like painting, is a very solitary process. I imagine this to be particularly true for writers of fiction who must shut themselves off from outside influences to create their imaginary worlds and dialogue.

A typical painting by MS Kleekamp is the Captain Edward Penniman House above. Penniman was one of Cape Cod's most successful whalers. He sailed the world, often taking his family with him. He was able to retire at age 53 and build his grand French Second Empire style house in Eastham on Cape Cod in 1868. Today's visitors to this historic house, now operated by the National Park Service, can still smell and taste the salt air at its stunning location on Fort Hill overlooking Nantucket Sound. See her galleries here.

So when I signed a contract with a major publisher to write my book, Cape Cod and the Islands: Where Beauty and History Meet, I expected to spend many months with my computer as only companion. I also faced an additional challenge. As one who abhorred every history class I ever had to take, could I really spend hour upon hour sifting through wordy documents, genealogical charts, town histories and the like, to create a volume that would come alive for the reader? I had an advantage of using my art to illustrate the book, 50 oil paintings done over five years, but I still needed to find a way to engage the reader's interest . . . and my own!

What I learned from undertaking the challenge of creating the book was an unexpected and delightful surprise. My research and writing world, although solitary, was not lonely. It became filled with fascinating and impressive players. Beyond dates and events, I was drawn back in time into the lives of real people . . . their dreams, struggles, and outcomes of their life decisions. Although I've visited Cape Cod over the last 30 years and have lived here since 1997, I never realized until writing the book, how significant a role this area played in our country's development. Onward from the very first settlers, the farmers, shipmasters and visionaries were individuals whose courage and persistence led to America's progress and success.

After the Mayflower dropped anchor in Provincetown Harbor, in 1620, and several expeditions had been made to explore the local area, 16 of its men boarded the ship's shallop, a small boat that can be rowed or sailed. Desperate to find a suitable place for settlement, they sailed along the northern coast of Cape Cod. In numbingly cold December weather that froze their clothing "like coats of iron," the rudder broke, the mast snapped and the sail fell overboard.

One of those explorers, William Bradford, would later write in his journal, "That which was most sad and lamentable was that in two or three months time half of the men on the shallop died." Were it not for those stalwart explorers, it's easy to imagine the entire boatload of newcomers would have perished in Provincetown.

"That which was most sad and lamentable was that in two or three months time half of the men on the shallop died."
          -William. Bradford, 1620

While those early colonists thought they discovered a new land, it was actually an ancient and sacred site. For thousands of years the Wampanoag Nation inhabited the entire southeastern Massachusetts region and parts of Rhode Island. Today's visitor to the Cape and Islands finds Wampanoag names at every turn: roads, ponds and villages . . . many exotic tongue twisters. I now have a much better appreciation of the contributions and, ultimately sacrifices, the Wampanoag tribes made enabling early settlers to survive. The affability of the natives, their hunting and farming skills, the vast acreage of woodlands they cleared, all proved invaluable to the survival of the newcomers. A letter back to England penned by Mayflower passenger Edward Winslow, related, "We have found the Indians very faithful in their covenant of peace with us, very loving and ready to pleasure us. We, for our parts, walk as peaceably and safely the wood as in the highways in England."

Cape Codders and Islanders went on to establish towns, farm the land and harvest the sea. Men such as Capt. John Sears of Dennis, who thought that he could produce salt from seawater by solar evaporation, were derided as dreamers full of folly. But he succeeded and the salt produced was invaluable for preserving fish carried to distant ports. Other visions became reality and had international significance, such as the Cape Cod Canal and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. In 1903, high on the cliffs of Wellfleet, Guglielmo Marconi brought to fruition wireless communication. President Theodore Roosevelt sent well wishes 3,000 miles across the Atlantic Ocean to King Edward VII. To this last feat, we owe today's cell phones, satellite TV and iPODS.

More recent history and the fact that the Cape and Islands have become a refuge for those seeking sanctuary and untamed beauty, bring us to the writings of such authors as Henry Beston and Nan Turner Waldron. At different periods, both spent time secluded in a tiny beach cottage in Eastham that Beston built and immortalized in his 1928 literary classic, The Outermost House: A Year of Life on the Great Beach of Cape Cod. Coincidently, my own book project led me to Nan's daughter, Les Waldron, who shared her recollection of being isolated in the natural world:

"Outermost wasn't just a cottage. It had a different purpose . . . a very different reason for being. It was a courageous little safe-harbor far along a spit of sand with no electricity or amenities save hand pump and gas lights. One chose to stay there (without cell phones) knowing there was not imminent rescue or neighbor to call. The house, and its guests, endured, baked by the sun, plagued by insects, beaten by rain, ice, tides and pelting sand. It was the symbol of modest human presence slipped into the raw world of natural wonder . . . humbling to say the least."

Those last five words easily apply to the experience I had writing my book. Taking time to discover the "story" in history, I found a treasure trove of learning and enrichment. Perhaps most important was the emotional connection and appreciation I felt for others who, although distant in time and place, experienced feelings very much like my own. Leo Tolstoy once said the purpose of history is to teach nations and humanity to know themselves. I must agree.

Kathryn Kleekamp, a retired microbiologist, is a painter and writer based in Sandwich. This appeared as an Op Ed in the Providence Journal on June 16, 2009. Read our review of her book here.

1 comment »

Help Clean Power Now fight Cape Cod Commission's appeal, other "frivolous" lawsuits

Cape Cod Commission appeals to state's highest court to overturn Cape Wind's "super permit"

Alliance, Town of Barnstable plan similar appeals

By Barbara Hill

Yesterday we learned that the Cape Cod Commission is appealing to the state's highest court to overturn the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board's approval of the composite certificate granted to Cape Wind. This "super permit" secured all state and local permits and was a huge victory for renewable energy.

Now, the Cape Cod Commission is using YOUR tax dollars to fight this project that 74% of Cape and Islands residents and 86% of Massachusetts residents support.

Now, the Cape Cod Commission is using YOUR tax dollars to fight this project that 74% of Cape and Islands residents and 86% of Massachusetts residents support.

The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound and the Town of Barnstable are planning on filing similar appeals. Clean Power Now plans to fight these "frivolous" lawsuits and we will continue to represent the majority of citizens who support Cape Wind. Please make a donation today to help us against these powerful interests and keep the Cape Wind project moving forward. 

These law suits are a waste of valuable tax dollars and delay the creation of new clean energy jobs. This action is indefensible, especially during an economic crisis when our state needs every dollar and every job possible.

Clean Power Now has been representing the voice of the citizens since 2003. Massachusetts can have the first off-shore wind farm in the nation and all the benefits that will follow. But we have to keep working for it, and fighting for it every step of the way. With your support, we can fight this appeal and keep the Cape Wind project moving forward.

Barbara Hill is the Executive Director of Clean Power Now, a non-profit grassroots organization based in Hyannis, Massachusetts with over 12,000 members committed to viable renewable energy projects and policies such as the Cape Wind project.

1 comment »

Crushing Health Care Reform

Alone in the galaxy of developed nations

By Richard Bartlett

We've known for a long time that the reason we alone in the galaxy of developed nations do not have universal health care is those vast sums of money big pharma and for-profit insurance companies spend on lobbying (bribery) and advertising. The 5 largest health insurers and their PAC spent $6.4 million on lobbying in just the first quarter of 2009. Pfizer (the world's largest drugmaker) alone spent more than $6.1 million just from January to March, 2009.

Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the senate's health committee gets the largest bribe of all.

Both houses of congress, both sides of the aisle, are recipients of this obscene gold rush. It is maddening when you think about it.

The source of all that money being spent to prevent us from getting the kind of health care we need is us. We ourselves. Those dollars come from our skyrocketing premiums and our overpriced prescriptions.

Our own money is being used against us! Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the senate's health committee gets the largest bribe of all. No wonder he says single-payer is off the table. But even just a public plan to bring down costs is said to be in jeopardy.

The AMA has come out against even the most elementary reform.

Now the AMA has come out against even the most elementary reform. Don't the good doctors who help us recover when we are stricken by disease or injury want everyone to have the right to good care? They will still prosper, even if we no longer get gouged.

Doctors with any compassion should oppose the AMA negativity. The "do no harm" philosophy that guides physicians surely must encompass financial harm to the victims of the economy. Idealism used to motivate doctors. Can it now be greed? We want to see them demonstrate their sense of responsibility by speaking up in support of President Obama's reforms now, while the issue is being resolved.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

1 comment »

An Unsuitable Suit

The Town of Barnstable's arrogance of power

By Richard Bartlett.

Isn't it amazing that at a time when the town of Barnstable is so impoverished that it has to fire dozens of town workers and scores of school department employees the town fathers (and mothers) can find the money, a lot of it, to pursue a futile court case against the state and Cape wind?

For the town manager and the town council to misuse taxpayer money is simply wrong. Why does an impecunious town government throw our money to lawyers fighting against a cause that is supported by the citizenry?

If the Alliance wants to spend private money to block our major local weapon for fighting climate change that is their business. But for the town manager and the town council to misuse taxpayer money is simply wrong. They have a fiducial obligation to use our money responsibly.

3 out of 4 Cape citizens want Cape Wind to be built. 7 years of exhaustive study has led to a favorable impact report, and Sec. Salazar has made it clear he will soon issue the long awaited permit.

The state's siting board has unanimously ruled the cables can use state ocean and land areas, trumping county and local obstructionists. It is extremely unlikely any court will hear a case that flouts the law. Or if it goes to trial, what judge would want to risk being overturned? This forlorn lawsuit hasn't a prayer.

So why does an impecunious town government throw our money to lawyers fighting against a cause that is supported by the citizenry?

These politicians owe us an explanation of what motivates such undemocratic behavior. They should tell us how much has been spent on this case so far, and how much more the town's budget will allow to continue this foolhardy lawsuit. And we who vote have an obligation to consider this issue when we next determine who will be managing our money in the future.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

8 comments »