Readers Write

PHIL SKINNER / PSKINNER@AJC.COM
PHIL SKINNER / PSKINNER@AJC.COM

Credit: pskinner@ajc.com

Credit: pskinner@ajc.com

Term limits could minimize partisan divide Founders didn’t foresee

If the current, extreme, populist political polarization of the nation proves to be a one-term anomaly, as now seems likely, what can be done to moderate its lasting impact on the Supreme Court? The partisan court appointments by the administration, confirmed by the McConnell Senate, are creating a major imbalance in the court. Increasing the size of the court seem likely to merely trigger a backlash. Our Founding Fathers did not anticipate a deep partisan divide when they established lifetime judicial appointments. Retaining balance in the court requires staggered term limits for Supreme Court justices. Work to achieve this goal must now begin.

ARNOLD C. MCQUAIDE JR., BERKELEY LAKE

Pitts never satisfied with national situation on matters of race

Regarding “Trump’s order chills any discussion of truths on race” (Opinion, Oct. 11) and myriad other Leonard Pitts columns, it’s hard to tell whether Mr. Pitts is more social justice warrior or old man with a grudge — or both. Regardless, to coin a phrase: “Mr. Pitts, the dogma of systemic racism lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern.” And whether your written voice keeps hope alive or harm alive remains a question with which readers and periodic letter writers wrestle. Constant chronicling both real and perceived racial slights and injustices may serve a purpose, but whether such efforts on balance help or hurt race relations remains a conundrum. Calls for conversations or discussions about race have echoed for decades. Leonard Pitts perpetually presents elements of such conversation. But the questions in the instant situation are, exactly what discussion would satisfy Mr. Pitts, and is such satisfaction even possible?

GREGORY MARSHALL, MARIETTA

Trump’s poor performance on pandemic should be clear by now

A letter writer in Sunday’s paper (“Don’t have to like Trump to see his strengths,” Readers Write, Oct. 11) said Biden would have performed no better than Trump relative to the pandemic. That is quite a critique; virtually anyone would have performed better than Trump. Trump was not merely incompetent (it’s a hoax, it will just go away, you should try ingesting disinfectants), which would have been bad enough. He went further and undermined at every step scientists, health care workers, and conscientious officials who were trying to provide state and local leadership and guidance. This is truly unforgivable. It is the reason the U.S. response to the pandemic has been, proportionate to population, so poor relative to other developed countries.

GARY NAGEL, SNELLVILLE

Hospitals should rethink no-visitation policies

I read Bill Torpy’s column on Arthur Blank’s donation to Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta (“Arthur Blank’s $200M gift to Children’s Healthcare is a win,” Metro, Oct. 15). I was touched by Mr. Torpy’s recollection of the experience he had with his son at Egleston. Now to the point: The adult hospitals need to take a few pointers from Children’s where COVID-19 visitation is concerned. Children’s has allowed visitors for months. The Atlanta adult hospitals have “no visitor” policies. It is causing extreme anxiety in patients and their loved ones. Two examples: A frail, near-hysteria 20-year-old, on her way to surgery, being kissed goodbye by her mother, knowing they would not see each other again until discharge. An 89-year-old patient who speaks only Russian is denied Russian-speaking family visitation. Multiply these incidents by thousands of other hospitalized patients. I urge the leaders of the health care community to rethink what is really essential for quality patient care.

MARY BETH BOVA, TUCKER

In Other News