Revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend
can boost economy, health
I strongly believe the most urgent issue of our time is that of climate change and its deadly effects we see in Alaska: coastal communities facing relocation, warming oceans, a melting Arctic speeding the release of methane, wildfires and unusual seasonal shifts. Salmon are threatened by changes in water temperatures, Arctic creatures dependent on ice are suffering, migrating birds are out of sync with the seasons, and many other anomalies are becoming common due to climate destabilization. Carbon pollution is a major contributor to all of this.
On a positive note, there is one market-based solution that can help. A revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend (the dividend is a payment to each American household) will help the economy grow in terms of jobs and GDP; at the same time it will reduce emissions of carbon and improve the health of Americans. (See the study by Regional Economic Models, Inc., at remi.com; follow the links.)
In addition, the EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP) allows Alaska to create its own path to reduce carbon pollution in our state and reduce other life-threatening air pollution including mercury, soot and smog. The CPP is about far-sighted stewardship: protecting our families and creating jobs with a new energy revolution. It also shows the world that we are serious about cutting greenhouse gas pollution — and will put pressure on China and India to do the same.
I support both the CPP and using a revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend to meet these new safeguards, which will help to minimize the effects of climate disruption. We have a moral imperative to reduce our use of fossil fuels, especially as it is the poorer countries and peoples of the world that suffer the most from climate extremes. I have faith in Americans as a people of conscience. Please join me.
— Robyn Lauster, member of Citizens' Climate Lobby
Anchorage
Imposing carbon fee for greenhouse gases would help the environment
The glaciers I have visited since my arrival in Alaska in 1982 have been rapidly receding. I have also watched coastlines recede and towns in Western Alaska fall into the ocean as the ground thaws. Extensive evidence clearly indicates this rapid climate change is closely associated with the carbon dioxide our modern civilization releases while burning fossil fuels. Some would throw up their hands and pretend the problem does not exist. Doubt has been cast by non-scientists and by people who are paid to confuse the public and our politicians. The recently released film "Merchants of Doubt" makes this case. Any policy change tends to make some people uncomfortable, but a carbon fee and dividend policy could help grow our national economy while protecting our environment. The policy would assess a fee for carbon and other greenhouse gases at the source, so, for example, coal or petroleum would be assessed according to the carbon content as it is extracted from the earth. Collected revenue would be returned to the citizens of the U.S., making this policy revenue-neutral. With this policy consumers will tend to purchase products that are not closely associated with greenhouse gases. This economic incentive will encourage the development of environmentally friendly technologies. I support a carbon fee and dividend and hope that you will join me.
— Charles E. Cox
Anchorage
Rhyner needs to meet the real world
Rick Wicks (Letters, June 5) made good points about Richard Rhyner's diatribe regarding Medicaid (June 1). Rhyner demands to know why "people (don't) work to pay for their own medical benefits." Rhyner needs to check the real world. Here are some realities: (1) Jobs are not easy to come by. (2) At the minimum wage (currently $8.75 an hour), you'd earn about $1,300 a month — no way could you add medical insurance to your expenses for rent, food and transportation. (3) Small businesses (fewer than 50 jobs) don't have to provide medical insurance at all. (4) Many Alaska jobs are seasonal or part-time.
Rhyner echoes the way many conservatives view the ordinary people who struggle every day to make ends meet. Most are proud to earn whatever they can — far from being content with hungry children, crummy clothes, poor housing and lack of medical care. It's a shame that Rhyner — and our Legislature — have forgotten the values that made our democracy: being an informed citizen, and offering respect and modest assistance for those who are less fortunate. Medicaid expansion should be a higher priority than subsidizing the oil companies, or funding the Bridge to Nowhere, Susitna dam, and new Juneau road projects.
— Vivian Mendenhall
Anchorage
Spread out Mat-Su tax burden
Mat-Su Borough government revenue is structured incorrectly. Our Mat-Su Borough budget is just over $400 million. Why must that revenue burden fall mainly on property owners in the Mat-Su? Why should borough property owners foot the bills for all who use, visit or live in the Mat-Su and use government services in the Mat-Su Borough? It is time to cut Mat-Su Borough property taxes and implement a borough-wide sales tax (at least to all the unincorporated areas of Mat-Su Borough). With a borough-wide sales tax, all who use, visit, or live in the Mat-Su Borough would contribute to paying for the government services in the Mat-Su, not just putting that revenue burden on the borough property owners of the Mat-Su. It is past time to for the Mat-Su Borough to realize the revenue stream Mat-Su Borough is missing: a seasonal sales tax on all who visit or live in the Mat-Su (not just the property owners).
— Mike Stoltz, owner Meandering Moose Lodging
Talkeetna
Refusing to expand Medicaid is wrong
Alaskans favor Medicaid expansion. Our tax dollars that we pay to cover the working poor and middle class who can't afford Obamacare but don't qualify for Medicaid need to stay in Alaska. It is not fair that the Majority is holding to influences of the tea party and ALEC who oppose the president at every turn. Depriving 40,000 working poor and middle-class Alaskans access to affordable health care is wrong.
— Richard Steele
Douglas
Move Sterling Highway to protect river
It seems everyone I talk to about the Cooper Landing bypass has a different idea of its purpose. Anchorage residents think it's to save them the slowdown through Cooper Landing. Some on the lower Peninsula think it is to spare the residents of CL the heavy traffic and noise. The only reason to move the Sterling Highway is to protect the river from a potential spill. As I write this letter there is a steady stream of motor homes, boats, cars, and tanker trucks hauling everything from fertilizers, gasoline and heating fuel to chemicals used for printing, mining, and basically every chemical used in every trade on the Peninsula. Every bit of it must travel through this corridor for more than 10 miles with the river as a roadside ditch. Now imagine the Kenai River with very few or no fish. Just for grins let's consider population growth and that the highway is already inadequate for the traffic. Here is an idea: Let's move the highway and build for the future, not the now.
— Andrew Brown
Cooper Landing
Women may be scared into unneeded or excessive breast cancer treatments
Please reassure Kendra Booth (online ADN, June 12) that she did everything right: She paid attention to her body and notified her doctor as soon as she found something abnormal. Most women find their breast cancers themselves.
The fact is, not all breast cancers are alike. Triple-negatives tumors tend to appear out of the blue and progress rapidly. A mammogram earlier might not have shown anything; the tumor might not have even been present.
Mammograms aren't particularly reliable for young women. Their normal breast tissue obscures the image. So-called 3-D mammograms deliver twice as much radiation, which may be more dangerous for women with hereditary breast cancer risks. And they offer false reassurance: If a screening mammogram is negative, a woman with a new lump may be less likely to see her doctor right away, thinking that the mammogram would have identified a cancer early.
The future of breast cancer screening may rely on developing a simple, inexpensive genetic test for all women, not just women with strong family histories, and offering high-risk women enhanced screening, preventive medications or even prophylactic surgery.
Mammograms work best on finding slow-growing tumors that appear in women ages 50-69. Even then, they may not decrease mortality; these tumors are usually not as deadly. Improved survival for breast cancer patients is largely because of the new therapies that have been developed in the last 20 years.
As a gynecologist and breast cancer survivor myself, I am concerned that we continue to scare women into ineffective screening, make them feel guilty if they develop cancer (they all feel they did something wrong), and overdiagnose and overtreat many cancers. Not everyone needs the most toxic chemotherapy, and some women with pre-invasive disease may not even need treatment, although currently they frequently end up with surgery and radiation just as if they had invasive cancer. They are scared into choosing bilateral mastectomies, which are not life-saving for average risk women, and may end up with chronic pain or crippling effects from medicine or surgery.
Kendra Booth was Breast Aware: She found a lump, she told her doctor and she got a diagnostic mammogram. She did the right thing.
— Susan Lemagie, MD FACOG
Palmer
Governments must stop free spending
Earmarks. I'm glad that our people in D.C. are waking up. We need to get out of the hole the government has put us in. Not just federal, but state also. This free spending has to stop, and governments must go back to necessity.
— James Christenson
Willow
Thanks for bears; now, about fowl
A special thanks is due to Gov. Walker for saving our bears that invaded Government Hill — relocating them instead of having them shot. As a longtime Alaskan I find such compassion for our animals is hard to find in Alaska.
Now, Gov. Walker, can you please follow through on your compassion for our animal friends. Please intervene and SAVE OUR CHICKENS!
— Jack Jacob
Anchorage
Beware what Hawker asks for
Rep. Mike Hawker (R-Anchorage) issues a request for proposals (online ADN, June 12) to hire yet another consultant to provide guidance on Medicaid expansion? The last time he did this we ended up with a "Ford Fiesta" state office building — with a Lamborghini price tag. Maybe the Hillside voters who re-elected him last year could give the rest of the state a break and elect someone else to look after our interests.
— Dave Shimek
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.