TRANSPORTATION
Response to “A first step toward ‘Plan B’ solutions” and “Openness, ideas can get Georgia rolling” (Opinion, Oct. 7)
The ideas presented here for re-starting the transportation debate are a good beginning. Diverting external traffic away from Atlanta would have an immediate impact on congestion.
On the other hand, I think we are missing the voters’ point on MARTA rail. T-SPLOST failed for several reasons, but not because Atlantans don’t want more heavy rail. The truth is that the existing rail system is useless for most suburbanites, and the proposal failed to significantly address this; also, it required voters in outlying counties to pay for rail that they would never use.
There are thousands of people living in Cobb, north Fulton and Gwinnett counties who would pay for a rail system that alleviated their horrible auto commutes by extending north past the current gridlock zones. MARTA may need reform first, but unless we want to become a transportation backwater, we need to upgrade MARTA heavy rail so that it achieves critical mass, and serves more of the metro population.
RANDY HOWARD, ALPHARETTA
TORT REFORM
Proposed fixes won’t resolve problems
Kyle Wingfield (“A real tort reform”, Opinion, Oct. 7) touts creation of a new government bureaucracy to replace juries as decision-makers in cases where Georgians have been harmed or killed by the negligence of a health care professional. Proponents claim this is necessary because, for cost reasons, patients are having a hard time finding lawyers able to file such cases.
This new state agency would use health care professionals to judge peers. That is the same kind of fox guarding the henhouse scenario exhibited by the current, ineffective Georgia Composite Medical Board.
Proponents also claim that there are so many medical lawsuits that doctors order unnecessary medical tests. Really? When was the last time you and your doctor were able (with no hassle) to get even medically necessary tests approved?
Proponents claim the changes would greatly increase the number of patients able to recover money damages. They claim the new system would alleviate doctors’ worries about being sued. If the number of patients able to get money as a result of their doctors’ conduct dramatically increases, how is that going to reduce doctors’ concerns?
Rather than undermining the centuries-old jury system, legislators should examine why medical malpractice cases are so expensive for patients and their lawyers.
JAMES SADD, PRESIDENT, GEORGIA TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
PAUL BROUN
Beliefs won’t keep U.S. competitive in 21st century
Recent remarks by Rep. Paul Broun reported in the AJC (“Ga. rep says evolution a lie”, Metro, Oct. 7) are extremely disappointing, coming from someone who attended a reputable medical school.
As a duly elected representative of the 10th Congressional District, Dr. Broun has every right to advocate his points of view in the halls of Congress. However, someone who is so clearly anti-science should not sit on the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. This is not a sound strategy for keeping our country competitive in the 21st century. I urge Speaker Boehner to re-assign Dr. Broun to committees more suited to his unusual understanding of the physical world.
PAUL FRIEDERICH, DECATUR
CHARTER SCHOOLS
Parents who want more control should pay for it
Charter schools take us back to the separate but equal/unequal debate. Children should not be segregated because of their parents.
It’s the parents who are irresponsible, uncaring, or just plain incompetent that we need to deal with. It’s their neglected children that I’m concerned about.
Parents who want charter schools want control (but for someone else to pay). Let them send their children to private schools, get their control, and then let them pay for it.
J.M.M. HARRISON, ATLANTA
