Fitting Tribute Groton, Mass. October 21, 2014 Dear Sir, I have been meaning to write you for a while about the Aug. 14 obituary for my mother, Helen Cordier Johns. Although we sent you the obituary published in the local paper here, or some edited version of it, yours was researched, edited, and in large part re-written. The result was a really beautiful and fitting tribute in a newspaper she always loved. Thank you so much for this good work. Sincerely yours, JEAN J. CASSIN Remains of the Display Montauk October 24, 2014 Dear David, I am writing to inform the public of the garbage left in the Umbrella Beach dunes by Grucci fireworks following the annual fireworks display on Oct. 11. Year after year, I find myself cleaning up the remains of plastic tape in the trees and plastic fuses left all over the ground and in the dunes. I contacted the fire marshal of East Hampton, who promptly came down and assessed the situation. The chamber of commerce then dispatched some guys to clean up the mess. The following morning I walked my dog down to the beach and noticed that barely anything was cleaned up. The dunes were still littered with plastic fuses and remnants of the Grucci fireworks display. This is where I pick wild berries, beach plums, beach peas. This is my garden, my beach, and my front yard that has been carelessly destroyed. I would like to know if there is anyone out there who would like to help me clean the rest of the mess up. I can be emailed at chefshawnchristman@ gmail.com. Thanks for listening. SHAWN CHRISTMAN Allowing Parking East Hampton October 27, 2014 Dear David, I attended a recent town board meeting to discuss allowing public parking on Dolphin Drive. Now that South Flora beach has been designated a preserve by the town, it only makes sense that parking should be allowed on the east side of Dolphin Drive. At the meeting, Police Chief Michael Sarlo alluded to two important facts: The road, if used appropriately, can easily be adapted to handle parking, and the current parking signs are not backed up with any enforceable regulations. Apparently, no one can locate the original documents that were on record authorizing the many sign changes there, so while the signs once said, “No Parking,” it has been changed to parking allowed with different types of permits. The bottom line: The town couldn’t prosecute anyone for parking there. I know this because I have parked there and seen many other sports people and families parking there without getting hassled or receiving parking tickets. As of two weeks ago, there were signs that allowed for public parking with town permit still up and the town code presently allows parking there. Why fix what isn’t broken? To the homeowners who claim that there wouldn’t be room enough for two vehicles to pass if emergency vehicles were needed there: That’s rubbish. The road never would have been used as an off-road vehicle access road for decades if some government officials hadn’t determined there was sufficient room for two vehicles to pass each other safely. Drivers always give emergency vehicles the right of way and also the public is only asking for a small area on the eastern side of the road to be set aside, which means that you would never find two vehicles parked on opposite sides of the road, blocking traffic or creating too narrow a space for people or vehicles to safely pass. No less than four organizations, including Citizens for Access Rights, the Montauk Surfcasters Association, Surfrider, and the New York Coalition for Recreational Fishing, had members at the session who all spoke (including myself) and agreed that public parking could easily be accommodated without having any negative environmental impact on the beach. In fact, it was pretty much everyone’s contention that the same careful strategy that has been used to mix public access with conservationism at other beaches and preserves, could be employed at Dolphin Drive. The town trustees felt that a relatively few people should not have the right to disenfranchise the vast majority of the public when it comes to parking at public beaches! While the homeowners on Dolphin Drive may be okay with shooing us all away for no good reason, the rest of us disagree with their attitude. We all live on narrow streets, but we have no problem allowing our neighbors to park on them. It’s all part of the social contract if we are ever to get to anyplace worth going to, right? If public money was used to secure South Flora, then public parking must be provided. Not all of us can afford a house located steps from a beach. Not all of us drive off-road vehicles, so public access is threatened if no parking is allowed. Is the town board comfortable with allowing a relatively few homeowners to make a now-public preserve into their own private beach? Would the town board have us risk our lives, dodging traffic while crossing Montauk Highway with our children, elderly parents, and heavy beach accessories to access the beach near Dolphin Drive? Lets all hope that Supervisor Larry Cantwell and the town board are not intimidated by the homeowners. This may test their mettle somewhat, with regard to their desire to preserve beach access for the majority of their constituents. In the end, we all have faith that our elected officials will do the right thing and fight for public beach access. I urge the town to take a stance that will set a good precedent for other beaches and preserve access for the public. Allowing parking on Dolphin Drive is a no-brainer. Anyone who doesn’t see that must really feel entitled. Any elected official who caves to the homeowners on this should be replaced at the polls as soon as possible. Sincerely, JAY BLATT Montauk Master Plan Springs October 27, 2014 Dear David, Thank you for last week’s editorial “Save the Structures but Lose the Beach,” which echoes concerns shared by many residents. If our own town tax dollars were being spent, many more residents would object to a project that has received no professional approval from anyone except the Army Corps of Engineers. It makes no sense to save a dozen or so inexpensively constructed and outdated structures at a cost of about $9 million, and at the same time risk the loss of what beach we have left. At the very least, our town board should be hiring a coastal expert to analyze the Army Corps proposal. Further, given the risk of damage to these structures from future storms, how much are these properties actually worth beyond their underlying land value? The only real worth comes from the tourist dollars they bring to Montauk. My suggestion is to move the tourist dollars elsewhere and purchase these fragile oceanfront parcels with community preservation fund monies. Thus, we need a solution that is both environmentally and economically sustainable. This approach will require that we retain a coastal geologist to evaluate how to rebuild the dune that was destroyed decades ago. It will also require that we hire a competent planning consultancy to engage in the research and analysis necessary to relocate the motel rooms and ancillary service businesses elsewhere in Montauk. It might take three to five years for these consultants, working closely with Montauk business operators and with our own Planning Department, to devise and begin executing a workable master plan for central Montauk. But it can be done. East Hampton wants to be seen as an environmental leader. To radically re-vision downtown Montauk, to restore what was once a magnificent beach with a natural protective dune, and to ensure the vitality of Montauk’s resort economy requires boldness and vision. Our town’s work over the next three to five years could stand as a model for other coastal towns. It is time for our town board to be bold and visionary. Sincerely, PAMELA BICKET Rental Registry East Hampton October 27, 2014 To the Editor: It is easier to enforce the law when the rights of citizens are weakened or taken away. Unfortunately for law enforcers, but fortunately for the citizenry, that’s not the way our society works. Whether intentional or not, the draft rental registry legislation promulgated by the town board is an egregious example of government’s attempt to trample on the rights of its citizens. Absent legislative intent in the draft, I assume implementation of a registry purports to solve the problems of overcrowding, short-term rentals, and share houses. If enacted, a registry would create a community where homeowners who rent their homes are presumed guilty until they prove themselves innocent — a concept that stands the Constitution on its head! Suppose Supervisor Cantwell moved his aunt, uncle, cousin, nephew, or niece into his home and he moved elsewhere. No problem, right? Wrong! Under registry definitions those relatives would not qualify as the supervisor’s “immediate family,” therefore, under registry Section 199-1-5, the “presence . . . of the following shall create a presumption that a dwelling unit is being used as a rental property: (1) The property is occupied by someone other than the owner or his/her immediate family.” This would not happen under the definitions in Chapter 255 of the town code, where the problems of overcrowding, share houses, and short-term rentals are an integral part. The overall reaction at the work session discussion of the registry last week was that the legislation would not solve the problems and likely would create new ones: potential violation of our constitutional rights, interference by government with our right to control our own property, and establishment of new burdensome, nonrefundable fees and intrusive requirements. The fact is that after careful review of the current code, the tools to do the job already exist. If there is something of substance in the registry draft that will help enforcement, then amend the code to include it. Does this board have the will to enforce the laws already on the books? The few people who spoke at the work session in favor of a registry live in the “war zones,” and no one can blame them for wanting an end to share houses, short-term rentals, and overcrowding (violations covered in Chapter 255 of the code). However, there is no guarantee that a registry will accomplish the task. At the work session, when Michael Sendlenski, assistant town attorney, discussed the affidavit to be provided by homeowners attesting to code compliance, he materially misstated the requirements of the registry in both his presentation and his response to Councilman Fred Overton’s inquiry as to how a homeowner could be expected to know if his home is in total compliance with the code. On both occasions Mr. Sendlenski said that the homeowner would be “attesting to the best of their knowledge.” Not so. Under Section 199-1-2 (B)(5) of his draft, it requires that the affidavit must state that “the property fully complies with the provisions of the Code of the Town of East Hampton.” An unequivocal statement that no homeowner should be required to make under penalty of perjury. This leaves the homeowner with a Hobson’s choice: swear to something about which he has little or no knowledge, or pay costly fees to outside professionals to certify compliance, or give up his right to privacy and invite the town in to do an inspection. Not only is the homeowner left with difficult choices, but this is a repetitive process every time he rents, renews, or re-rents. From the language in the draft, it is not unreasonable to believe that the one-page document Mr. Sendlenski handed out at the meeting, purportedly representing the rental registry application, could quickly be replaced with requests for much more invasive information. Why do I say this? According to the draft legislation, the questions in the application are what is required today, “at a minimum,” and we are subject to providing “such other information and/or documentation as deemed reasonably necessary by the Building Inspector.” A registry will certainly result in unintended consequences. The nonrefundable fees either will be passed on to tenants directly or as higher rents; current or future landlords may remove their homes from the market rather than pay to bring them up to code, which may ultimately force them to leave the area when they lose the extra rental income; our difficult rental market may become an impossible one; lawyers, professional inspectors, and the town will gain at the expense of the people in Springs, Amagansett, Montauk, and elsewhere, who are least able to afford these new costs imposed upon them. I wonder if these hearings are just a charade. Even though fee amounts are as yet undisclosed and our first public discussion of the legislation only occurred last week, the board has seen fit to include $50,000 in rental registry fees in the 2015 budget! Have we lost the fight before the first punch was ever thrown? This issue is too important for a knee-jerk reaction. Before deciding what is best for yourself, your neighbors, and the community, I urge you to read the draft legislation. BEVERLY BOND Bad Renters Amagansett October 27, 2014 To the Editor, After attending the town board discussion about registering rental properties, I had a realization that was so obvious I am surprised that nobody brought it up: When you clear away the smoke and cobwebs, there is really one issue here: bad renters. And given that bad renters are the problem, both the town and the landlords are on the same side. So why then is the town taking an adversarial tack with the landowners instead of working with them for the common cause? I heard one comment after another by the landowners that they agree there is a problem with bad renters, and they made suggestions about how to deal with it. I know of one landlord who got a bunch of bad renters who lied about how many people were coming and threw a huge, loud, and destructive party at the house. When he confronted them in a nice way, they insulted him and told him to go away. They even taunted him, saying, “Go ahead, call the police, we don’t care.” He didn’t call the police. Why? Because if he did, he would have been the one harassed by the government, not the bad renters. They would investigate his house, his rental records, his building compliance, etc. He would possibly have to pay serious fines and go through a big hassle. This is an example of the results of the current policy of the town’s adversarial relationship with the landlords. Instead of looking for ways to work with the landlords on the problem, the town is looking to fortify its contradictory, failed policy. They seek to get around the Constitution and the Supreme Court and create loopholes so they can inspect houses without a warrant. They talk about houses being up to code and use that as grounds to harass. They want to create lists of people who rent — which will be public and can be used for many unintended purposes in the future. They want to make landowners jump through bureaucratic hoops to register and they want all of us to pay with our tax dollars for a new bureaucracy that will only grow. All this will result only in driving the rental market underground. Landlords will do their best to stay away from the government, just like what happened in Southampton, where the compliance with their new rental registry is only 10 percent. Will this help with the problem of bad renters? A better approach would be for the town to work with the landlords for the common cause. Clear away the smoke. It doesn’t matter if the house has an extra mattress in a bedroom that doesn’t measure the correct square footage. What does matter is that if a landlord is afflicted with bad renters he can count on the town to help him eliminate all these laws that effectively make landlords afraid to call for help. If the town attorney can work to create a law that sidesteps the Supreme Court with the current bill, he can certainly create laws and policies that can tame bad renters. For example, if a landlord is stuck with a house that is jammed with illegal immigrants, the town can call on ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. If bad renters disturb the community in a big way, visits by the police and vigorous enforcement of current noise laws, etc., would calm it down. I’m sure they can find ways. Most important is that the landlord has an incentive to work with the town agencies, not to hide from them. It is the bad renters who should be penalized, not the landlords. The rental registry bill is a bad idea. Government should leave us alone, and we should not accept this further intrusion into our lives, especially since it is an irrational idea that won’t fix the problem. Both the town and the landlords have a common problem with bad renters. Policy should make them allies, not enemies. DAVID E. CALDWELL Never Discussed Springs October 24, 2014 Dear David, I was appalled to watch the town board work session on rental registry and hear Loring Bolger say that this proposed law had been discussed by the Springs Citizens Advisory Committee. It was never really discussed because one member of the audience had to be asked to leave because of boisterous, rude, disruptive behavior. Our liaison, Councilman Fred Overton, was not there to tell about the law — not that he has ever truly discussed any proposed legislation with us, i.e., the truck law. Someone must have gotten to Fred and he called a meeting of the people who sit up front — voting members. As a voting member who sits in the audience with the citizens, I could not not attend. I also objected to this law being discussed by only some voting members and no ordinary folk. I think it is time for us to have some objective reporter witness these meetings in which no minutes are read or ever taken (no real secretary). The Star needs to send a reporter the likes of Joanne Pilgrim to verify the goings-on of the Springs (most densely populated hamlet) Citizens (?) Advisory Board. By the way, when I objected to the undemocratic way the exclusive meeting was being held, without benefit of nonvoting members, Fred retorted he served his country in the service, what had I done for my country? As an educator who could have earned big bucks in the money world but chose to support my country by educating the next generation of citizens in a poor district (Yonkers), I truly resent that remark. Thanks for listening, PHYLLIS ITALIANO Problems for Owners Amagansett October 22, 2014 To the Editor: This letter discusses the legislation proposed by the town board in reference to rental registration and its implications for the residents of East Hampton. The compilation of a list of properties that are rented, along with the names of the property owners, could pose serious and costly problems for the owners. Disclosure of this information — either intentionally, accidentally, or in response to a third-party subpoena — could start a process that would leave the resident with significant financial problems. For a resident renting a two or three-bedroom cottage for $40,000 for the season, the bill could run $6,000 to $9,000 a year, and could be retroactive for several years, additionally possibly affecting the mortgage and homeowner’s insurance. Many of our residents, particularly our seniors, depend on this income. It enables them to afford to live here, help their children and grandchildren to go to school, afford their oil bill and medicines. I do not rent out my house and we should all pay our taxes, but the reality is that some of our residents may well not be able to make it if some of the items I’ve mentioned come to pass because of this rental law. Perhaps this is why after six years, in Southampton Town I have heard numbers as low as 10 percent compliance with the law. I did not read about this in any of the comments made by Larry Cantwell or the other board members, or, most surprisingly, the assistant town attorney. I would think that he would bring these types of legal issues to their and our attention. The laws are on the books to solve the problems, they just need to be enforced. The police are not the ones to do it, we need them elsewhere. The enforcement people have to be able to be on the scene later at night and on the weekends and holidays, when the trouble happens. If the town is expecting the law to provide $50,000 of income, then that’s too bad, especially after enforcement costs. If they did not realize the problems this could cause for residents‚ that’s worse. If they were willing to possibly cause these problems for our residents for maybe $50,000 in income, that is incredibly bad. I would hate to see the East Hampton Town Board join the growing group of government agencies in America whose competence has sunk so badly in the past few years — the Centers for Disease Control, the Secret Service, the Veterans Administration, the F.B.I. Let us all work together. GREG MANSLEY Housing Is a Right East Hampton October 26, 2014 To the Editor: The East Hampton Star and The Press wrote front-page stories about the Wainscott School Board objecting to a proposed 49-unit apartment project in the Wainscott hamlet. While there are only 79 school-age kids in the 141 apartment units in East Hampton, the school board estimates that there will be between 70 and 110 in the 49-apartment project. However, numbers, real or exaggerated, have little to do with the story of affordable housing. It’s really about people. About 49 families having a better chance to make it and survive in a difficult world. Like food, work, and security, housing is a right. Everyone has the right to a decent place to live. It is a part of the essence of our country and certainly something that is affordable. It is a simple, straightforward issue that is complicated by a litany of exaggerated beliefs that we are not all in this thing together. Reality and 6,000 studies tell us that when people have decent, affordable places to live, they prosper, and those around them do as well. It’s not about welfare, or doing good, or even helping the needy. It’s about how we grow smartly as a country. How we foster and utilize our resources smartly. How we sustain the integrity and power of our local community. East Hampton, due to market factors or design, has become a housing nightmare. The most minimal house requires hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get a mortgage, and apartments start at $2,000 a month, which requires an income of $90,000 a year to keep housing costs under 33 percent. Most of the older and younger populations have moved out of town. Too many of the people who filled their places live in overcrowded, poorly maintained lodgings. No one wants to raise their kids in an overcrowded, undersized basement that violates the town’s building codes. The 700 people on the East Hampton Town housing waiting lists and the massive lines of traffic every morning raise the question as to who can live and work in our community. My children can’t afford to live here. The housing situation is dire, and the need for affordable housing is enormous for everyone except the second-home owners. So, because our school taxing system is ridiculously and unfairly skewed to favor one hamlet over another, the burden of solving the housing problem falls on the hamlet where the project is constructed. Unfairness is built into the system, and feeling aggrieved is normal. Not in my backyard resonates, always, but is it a function of perceived unfairness or self-serving —*%+—? We elect politicians to serve in the best interests of the town. Solutions to problems are not always equitable — sometimes unreasonable. Yet we count on them to do the right thing to improve the conditions of our lives — if, in fact, that is one of their objectives. NEIL HAUSIG Chairman Whalebone Village Apartments Fortress Attitude Amagansett October 17, 2014 Dear David, Louis A. Piccolo might well look for a change of address. (“If these misguided projects are undertaken, I, for one will sell my house.” — letter, “Low Income Projects,” Oct. 16) Mr. Piccolo’s agita in extremis is prompted by the prospect of 50 or so affordable homes coming to Wainscott, the 43rd-richest ZIP code in the U.S., according to Forbes. Wainscott homeowners pay very low real estate taxes because the hamlet educates 20 children. With 20 more children in their school, their taxes might go up from very low to low. It has been estimated that the working, professional parents who will own new homes in Wainscott might have some kids, maybe 20. I would suggest that, given the fortress attitude of the Piccolo types, they might want to home-school them. “Nothing, absolutely nothing good could come from constructing these projects . . . these projects will raise our property taxes with no attendant benefit.” — L.A. Piccolo Oh, I don’t know, Mr. Piccolo. You’ll move. Let me know the date. I’ll bake a cake. All good things, DIANA WALKER Autumn Days The days drop gently Flutter by unnoticed Then, more swiftly In a torrent. Barely enough remains To live by. The days tumble down. Clouds of color race Toward the waiting dark. The inevitable, annual Dwindling of the light. SUSAN PASHMAN Here We Go Again East Hampton October 26, 2014 Dear David, I wrote to you last winter about an overzealous neighbor who was looking for a natural resources special permit and six variances to construct a swimming on the edge of Three Mile Harbor. The Z.B.A. at that time denied the application because it would “cause an undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood and to nearby properties. Applicant is attempting to shoehorn and overburden the western side and with numerous structures within wetland and side yard setbacks.” The report also mentions “the adverse effect on the environmental conditions in the neighborhood.” Well, here we go again. Miss Deep Pockets now has a “new team” to address the application. She still needs a natural resources special permit, but now we only need four variances. I guess the “new team” juggled things around on the survey. While last winter I wrote in to the Z.B.A. to oppose this application, this time I decided to attend the “public hearing.” While many people, including myself, spoke against the project, our main concern was pool chemicals leaching into the harbor and the consequences, it was not a fair playing field. As I listened to lawyers, land planners, and the owner I realized that we laymen in the audience were outgunned. When weighing in the odds, how can a layman at a Z.B.A. hearing who has had only 10 days to prepare his or her case go up against a lawyer or land planner who has had months or in some cases years to compile information? So, due to some quagmire with the notices to the neighbors and the fact that the public notice sign was up, then down, then back up, written public comment is open until Nov. 4. If you are in favor of overburdened property with numerous structures and a swimming pool on the edge of Three Mile Harbor, then you do nothing. If you want to maintain traditional neighborhoods and keep pool chemicals from leaching into Three Mile Harbor, then speak up and write to the Z.B.A. against the pool construction at 11 Breeze Hill Road, East Hampton. The eel grass is gone, the blowfish are gone, the scallops are gone, the horseshoe crabs are gone! Let’s save what’s left. Write that letter. Respectfully submitted, JEFFREY R. PLITT Mental Health Funding Bridgehampton October 21, 2014 Dear David, Senator Ken LaValle and I have been joined by Suffolk County, Southampton Hospital, and South Fork towns and school districts in helping to fund a new, unprecedented, community-based effort to help address the mental health crisis facing school-age children in our area. Collectively, nearly $250,000 of funding has been secured to help initiate implementation of what is expected to be a longstanding, wide-reaching regional effort. This funding is not a “slight increase” (Editorial, Oct. 16); it is entirely new funding for entirely new programming which has never existed before. Senator LaValle and I assembled several South Fork Mental Health roundtables in 2014 to initiate a needs assessment, seeking input from schools and mental health service providers. Admittedly, school districts on the South Fork do not have the financial ability to adequately address mental health crisis situations. And, there is lack of mental health care providers and facilities on the East End. Immediate attention and care for crisis situations has been impossible. This first round of new funding, contributed mostly by our state officials, will increase child and adolescent psychiatric services and presence of professional staff at various locations throughout the area. FRED W. THIELE JR. New York State Assembly Two Support Groups East Hampton October 17, 2014 Dear Editor, Regarding the successful fund-raiser in memory of Tyler Valcich, here is a reminder of two support groups, one for families and friends of those with mental illness and the other a peer support group for those with a mental health diagnosis. The group is sponsored by the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. It meets on the third Wednesday of the month at the Grace Church, Scuttlehole Road and Route 27, in Water Mill, at 7 p.m. Congratulations to those who worked on this fine tribute in Montauk. Thank you, KATE EPSTEIN Radiation in Air Ocean City, N.J. October 27, 2014 To the Editor: The Millstone nuclear plant in Connecticut is close to eastern Suffolk County. The eight ZIP code areas farthest to the east are just 11 to 25 miles from the plant. About 30,000 people live in these towns all year long and many more spend summers there. Millstone’s two aging and corroding reactors are licensed to operate until 2035 and 2046. As the reactors age, mechanical problems and leaks become more likely. In the past month, citizens, plus state and federal officials, have increased oversight of the plant, citing various safety concerns. The huge amount of radioactive waste in Millstone’s reactor cores and deep pools of water must constantly be cooled both pose risk of a meltdown. But while a meltdown is possible, actual radiation from the reactors routinely escapes into the environment. Historically, Millstone has emitted the third-most radiation of any U.S. nuclear plant. These radioactive particles and gases represent over 100 chemicals and enter the body through breathing and the food chain. They damage or kill healthy cells, leading to diseases such as cancer and birth defects. Plant owners and regulators measure levels of escaped radiation, but measurements are only occasional and mostly close to the plant — not in places like Long Island. A decade ago, citizens and scientists studied levels of one radioactive chemical (strontium 90) in thousands of baby teeth. Researchers found that in Suffolk, child cancer risk rose as radiation levels in teeth rose. Many locals have been concerned about high cancer rates for years. In the late 2000s, breast and prostate cancer in the eight most eastern ZIP codes on Long Island were somewhat higher than the rest of Suffolk and well above the state and nation. Many factors cause cancer, but Millstone emissions should be regarded as one potential risk. A new way for citizens to make their own measurements of radiation in air is with hand-sized devices. These gadgets have become more popular since the 2011 Fukushima meltdown. They can be easily connected to a home computer, and minute-by-minute radiation counts are automatically entered into a data file. Such programs are already under way near the Indian Point and Oyster Creek plants, just north and south of New York City. Citizens of eastern Long Island are encouraged to help establish a local program by contacting the New York-based Radiation and Public Health Project research and education group, radiation. org. JOSEPH MANGANO Executive Director Radiation and Public Health Project Stop Lyme Disease Poughkeepsie, N.Y. October 23, 2014 Dear Editor, We all must work together to stop the progression of disease through research, which is so poorly funded, and stop ticks to stop Lyme disease. This fight has made no progress for sick people in almost 40 years! This is what we are up against: It’s about power, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America has it. Those who do not comprehend the complexity buy their protocol hook, line, and sinker. People really understand that only when someone close to them or they themselves are very sick and don’t recover. Sad it is. Research actually proves persistence exists; even the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, and the federal Department of Health and Human Services had a webinar about the current state of persistence research in May, which proves the persistence of the Lyme bacteria is not settled science. It is not just about years of I.V. treatment, which is what the I.D.S.A. portrays. It is about any treatment at all beyond just two to four weeks. We are not all alike and react differently. People’s lives have been restored to functioning, and many are no longer wheelchair-bound. There are two differing standards of care for Lyme disease. In all other diseases, patients are given options and consequences. For example, with prostate cancer, chemo, radiation, hormone, surgery, or wait and see, and are given the consequences. Lyme is a kissing cousin of syphilis, yet has a much more complicated genome. Would you leave someone with potential ongoing syphilis untreated? Of course not! So why Lyme disease? Why are patients discriminated against and left to suffer needlessly? What is needed is research money, which is a pittance for a disease that in the Northeast is the second most common infectious disease (chlamydia is number one) and is fourth in the nation! The C.D.C. itself admits that up to 20 percent are left with ongoing symptoms (illness) following the I.D.S.A. treatment guidelines. I’d say that represents a huge failure of their treatment! So where is the research to improve patient outcomes, or to protect us from exposure to tick pathogens? Lyme cost the U.S.A. in 2013 over $3 billion just that year, and it increases yearly as numbers of cases increase. In New York State in 2013, the estimate of cost was $700 million. The cost of ongoing illness uses 85 percent of our health care dollars. Ouch! Sad it is not to find solutions. In almost 40 years, the plight of patients has not changed, nor is there an accurate test (H.I.V. test is over 99 percent accurate, so it can be done and that would settle the question). Sad it is to withhold treatment of sick people who can be helped! I was one, as were many others who were given our lives back again. I was able to return to work as a contributing member of society. I do not know where I’d be without the compassionate care of a physician. What a waste of lives, and so inhumane to close treatment to them! JILL AUERBACH Chairperson, Dutchess County Legislative Tick Task Force Lingering Effects East Hampton October 27, 2014 Dear David, Chronic Lyme does exist. I suffered from it for years before collapsing from it and winding up in the hospital. Very long story short, two and a half years later I returned home with lingering effects still, even after having received, according to one doctor, every antibiotic known to man. My advice is, if you’re not getting better after your treatment, go back and tell your doctor! I very sincerely regret not having a more rigorous antibiotic regimen prior to my collapse. Yours truly, PETER OSBORNE On Chronic Lyme Washington, D.C. October 24, 2014 Dear David: I was shocked to read the conclusion of your editorial “On Chronic Lyme” that appeared in last week’s paper. The Barrett bill was approved unanimously by both the Senate and the Assembly last June. This bill was carefully crafted under the guidance of the professional staff to both the Senate and Assembly health committees. The bill will end the ongoing practice of allowing the New York State Office of Professional Medical Conduct to bring action against doctors who are treating patients with Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases with longer-term antibiotics. It is estimated that there will be 700,000 cases of Lyme disease in New York State this year. This represents massive human suffering and costs nearing $700 million. While most cases can be successfully treated with a standard two to four-week antibiotic program, a certain percentage will not see relief. Maybe it is 10, 15, or 20 percent, these figures are not readily available. But there is no doubt that thousands of patients have symptoms that are not successfully treated with a conventional course of antibiotics. And for many of these patients with severe symptoms, antibiotic treatment is the only thing keeping them functioning at any level. Currently, doctors who specialize in Lyme are caught between a rock and a hard place: They risk their careers and massive legal fees for prescribing antibiotics beyond the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines, yet they know that doing so would provide the best outcome for their patients. So when the New York State Legislature recognizes this problem and finally takes responsible action to protect these doctors, The East Hampton Star concludes that it would give the doctors “too much latitude,” calls them “cowboys,” and says that the bill “is not ready for signature.” Other states have passed similar laws to protect their doctors and they are better off for having done so. How best to provide treatment for a disabling condition should be a clinical decision made by a patient and his or her doctor — not some government agency that acts with secrecy and intimidation. I sincerely hope that no one in your family gets bitten by the wrong tick and comes down with a disabling tick-borne disease. But if they do, and they are still seriously ill after a conventional round of antibiotic treatment, I suspect that your position on this issue will change quickly. TONY BULLOCK Become an Angel East Hampton October 20, 2014 Dear Mr. Rattray: East Hampton Meals on Wheels needs volunteers. Can you spare an hour and a half a week to become an angel? One of our clients, a World War II veteran, refers to the volunteer drivers who deliver his meals as his angels. The best part is, it only takes an hour and a half a week, from 10:15 a.m. until noon, to become one of the angels. With the Meals on Wheels program growing larger, we continue to need new people to deliver meals to our homebound neighbors Monday through Friday. Our volunteer drivers derive enormous satisfaction from helping their neighbors. We also need volunteers to pack the meals from 9 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. Monday through Friday mornings. East Hampton Meals on Wheels is a nonprofit organization that receives no federal, state, county, or local funding, and although we employ two people to help in the office, volunteers make up the bulk of our program. If you are interested in joining this wonderful group of people who are taking meals to our homebound neighbors, please call Meals on Wheels in East Hampton at 329-1669 today for further details. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, EDWARD D. McLAUGHLIN President The Oil in the Tank Las Vegas October 24, 2014 Dear David, The oil bill. They fill the tank, I pay the bill. It was so automatic for nearly 15 years that I never knew the sound of their voice or had to call them. Nor did they ever have to call me. But now I needed something from them. I was closing on my house and I needed them to certify the amount of oil in the tank. Sounds simple enough, I thought. I called to set an appointment to have them certify the remaining oil in the tank. Three calls later, someone actually answered the phone and told me no, it wasn’t so simple. Turns out that the only way they certify the tank is that they must come and fill up the tank first, and then they would certify it. Never mind that it was mid-August and the temperature outside was approaching 85 and I was being required to fill an already full tank, but, hey, this is East Hampton; everybody has to draw blood. Okay, I said, the lawyer for the closing needs the certification one week prior to closing. Can you do that? We made an appointment for Friday. They were a no-show on Friday. Another three calls and they said they booked it for Monday. And yes, I had to pay for the delivery on the spot for them to certify the letter to the lawyer. On Monday, they delivered eight gallons. I wrote a check for $31. I asked them if they needed to check the tank. No, they had that information, they said. They just needed to fill it to capacity and they could certify it as full. Fast forward to the closing. At the closing, the buyer is to pay for a full tank. The certification arrived from the oil company for 165 gallons, instead of what I believed to be 200 to 250. There was a protracted debate around the closing table whether there was anything like a 165-gallon tank. No, no one had ever heard of such a thing — 200, 250, 275, 300 was the norm, everyone agreed. No one had ever heard of a 165-gallon tank. Even the buyer’s lawyer said that isn’t right and suggested I call W.F. McCoy Petroleum, Route 27 in Bridgehampton, and try to correct their certification. So, in the middle of the closing, I am calling. Again three calls, and again the person in charge is unavailable. I am screwed. Since the closing is a relatively amicable thing, the buyer’s lawyer suggests his client would pay the difference if the tank turns out to be larger than 165 gallons, but only up to 200 gallons. I agree to this contingency. Several days later, their service manager, Steve, proudly returns my call and informs me that he finally went to inspect the tank and the true capacity of the tank is 275 gallons. So, the buyer pays us the total for 200 gallons, but because McCoy failed to actually properly certify the tank capacity, we end up 75 gallons short, at approximately $4.20 a gallon. We explained the discrepancy to the buyer, who was only willing to pay for the amount determined in the closing, 200 gallons. So the buyer’s first month of heating is on me! So, if W.F. McCoy delivers your oil and you are thinking of selling your house, caveat emptor. JOSEPH TOBIAS Tim Bishop’s Seat East Hampton Oct. 26, 2014 Dear David: This year’s November election is extremely important in that the right wing of the Republican Party has targeted Tim Bishop’s seat in our district. His opponent’s campaign is being financed by funding from supporters with unlimited funds, such as the Koch brothers. They’ve waged a smear campaign with TV ads that not only distort but lie about the facts. Just this week the ads have claimed that there are ethical charges pending against Bishop, in spite of the fact that the Deptartment of Justice’s investigation has cleared him of any wrongdoing and has closed the case. When comparing the candidates’ positions on major issues the choice couldn’t be clearer: 1. Gun control: Bishop favors gun-control legislation, while Zeldin has vowed to repeal the New York State Safe Act and opposes background checks on those purchasing guns. 2. Women’s issues: Bishop is pro-choice and has actively supported legislation that guarantees equal pay for equal work regardless of gender. He voted to make it illegal for insurance companies to charge women more than men for coverage. Zeldin is anti-choice and has publically stated that he does not support the Women’s Equality Act. 3. The environment: Bishop has been a leading advocate for legislation that protects the environment and has been endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters. Zeldin has voted against the clean air, clean water act and the strengthening of fuel efficiency standards. He received a rating of 36 percent by Environmental Advocate. 4. Seniors: Bishop is committed to the preservation of Social Security and Medicare, while his opponent favors privatization of these vital programs. 5. Health care: Zeldin has vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act, bringing us back to the bad old days when insurance companies would deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. While acknowledging the problems with the initial rollout of the program, Bishop is committed to doing what is necessary to ensure that affordable health insurance is available to every American. 6. Immigration: Bishop supports immigration reform that would secure our borders and provide a pathway to citizenship. 7. Local issues: Bishop has lobbied for FEMA funds to bury transmission lines, obtained funding for Brookhaven National Labs (thus creating more jobs), and has gotten grant money to upgrade local Veterans Administration facilities. He co-sponsored a bill that would fund high-tech start-up companies in our area, again helping to create new jobs. The fact is that Bishop has been a great asset to our district, while Zeldin brings nothing to the table. Every vote counts in this mid-term election, which typically has a low turnout. I urge every voter who cares about the future of our country and community to vote for Tim Bishop on Nov. 4. SUE AVEDON Useful Site Springs October 18, 2014 Dear David, I would like to share with Star readers a website that I recently discovered: timbishop.house.gov. To my surprise, it is a very useful site with all kinds of tips on how Tim Bishop, our congressman, has helped others and can help all of us. Perusing the site I learned that he has provided assistance with federal problems or concerns such as Social Security (e.g., a missing Social Security check, benefits and disability issues), I.R.S. problems, housing, passports (e.g., expediting a passport in an emergency), veterans’, affairs and issues around military policy, procedures, records and medals; immigration questions regarding citizenship, permanent residency, or form requests; and Medicare billing, such as problems that are not understood or may be incorrect — just to name a few. The site also has a section to help people understand the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). In Congress, Mr. Bishop has been actively involved in trying to get the minimum wage increased, despite strong opposition. And locally, he has been able to get via the federal government $50 million for roads and bridges in Suffolk County. I was quite amazed, when I first looked at the website, to see how easy it was to use and all the help he as an elected official has provided. We often don’t know or don’t think about this, so I just wanted to pass on my discovery in the event readers didn’t know about these services. And by the way, there is an election coming up on Nov. 4 and Congressman Bishop is again having to run for office, which is required by our Constitution every two years. Seems to roll around faster and faster. Sincerely, PEGGY BACKMAN Against Tyranny Montauk October 21, 2014 To the Editor, In Congressman Bishop, we have a man who wholeheartedly supports a president who is governing outside the framework of our Constitution. In Lee Zeldin, we have a man who will stand up against this tyranny. Sincerely, VINCENT BIONDO For Mr. Zeldin Springs October 27, 2014 To the Editor: Brad Loewen’s letter about me last week starts out okay. Yes, I am a Republican, of the conservative variety, and am partial to candidates who share my belief in our founders’ notion of limited government and maximal individual liberty. And Mr. Loewen certainly knows about partisanship, as attested by his four years on the town board. As to where I got my information, there are several commercial fishermen, some active, some not so, whom I count as friends and to whom I speak fairly often (names available on request). They are not “props,” Mr. Loewen, they are working men whom I respect and they all tell the same story — that the rules and regulations coming down from state and federal government get more onerous and more ridiculous and more destructive of fishermen’s lives every year. In fact, what triggered my original letter was my experience a few weeks ago when I worked with Capt. Al Schaffer and his son Kyle aboard the Leatherneck, lifting Al’s fishpots off Montauk. The stories I had heard were not exaggerated. I was astounded by the amount of time that Al, who often fishes alone, had to spend doing paperwork, and by the quantity, complexity, and absurdity of the reporting, tagging, and other requirements, including calling in an hour before heading home to make an appointment with the appropriate bureaucrat. And apparently it will soon get worse — the government wants to put cameras on longliners and other types of boats (no doubt eventually all boats) — cameras paid for, installed, and maintained by the fisherman! Okay, now to the partisan politics. Mr. Loewen admits that in 12 years as our congressman, Tim Bishop has done very little for our fishermen. I agree. But he says that in four years in the New York State Senate, Lee Zeldin hasn’t done anything either. But that’s not true. I have a list of Mr. Zeldin’s efforts in this area too long for this letter, but which I will, as asked, show to Mr. Loewen at the first opportunity. It is an impressive list for a rookie senator. Fishermen aren’t the only people Mr. Bishop has failed. His votes for Obamacare, for massive spending, for higher taxes, for huge increases in federal bureaucracies, indeed for the entire Obama agenda, have resulted in economic stagnation, higher costs, and flatlined incomes (except among the very rich). I believe Mr. Zeldin will reverse these priorities and help get this country back on track. I hope even Mr. Loewen will see that 12 years of not much is too long and cast his vote for Mr. Zeldin. Sincerely, REG CORNELIA The Clear Choice East Hampton October 24, 2014 Dear David, This year the race for the seat of Congressional representative is a very close one. I urge everyone to get out and vote on Nov 4 and re-elect Tim Bishop as our representative in Congress. Tim Bishop grew up on a potato farm here on the East End, raised his family here, and cares deeply about our local issues. He is in support of burying the power lines in East Hampton, of protecting our beaches and waters, has fought hard for veterans, and cares about our middle class and seniors. We need to keep Tim Bishop, a man who cares about us and votes for us, as our representative in Congress. I challenge everyone to find out more about Tim’s record on the issues and to read for themselves at Bishopforcongress. com and timbishop.house.gov. Tim Bishop’s record shows that he is the clear choice. Please get out and vote on Nov. 4 (look for Timothy H. Bishop in column 16 on the ballot). Sincerely, AFTON DiSUNNO Trying to Distract Amagansett October 27, 2014 Dear David: Representative Tim Bishop has time and again shown and proven his dedication to the interests of our community, i.e., standing against the repeal of background checks for gun purchases, support of women’s equality, clear air and water, upgrade of Veterans Administration facilities, to name just a few important issues he has fought for. The opposing party’s claim of campaign irregularities by Mr. Bishop involving fireworks and a bar mitzvah are not only laughable but grossly untrue since the Department of Justice has definitively cleared him of any of these claims. It would be much more respectful of voters and our democratic process, if Mr. Zeldin would present his record of contributions to the community rather than trying to distract our attention from his nonmerits. GLORIA DODD Elect Lee Zeldin East Hampton October 24, 2014 To the Editor: To my fellow citizens in Suffolk County: Let’s try something different for a change, like electing Lee Zeldin to represent us in Congress. The current campaign for the House of Representatives pits State Senator Lee Zeldin — an outstanding attorney, Army veteran, and experienced representative of our area — against the long-time incumbent, Tim Bishop. Tim Bishop is one of those entrenched tax-borrow-and-spend members of the U.S. Congress, under whom things such as the national debt, over-regulation of almost everything, and Washington’s recent lunge toward socialized medicine by means of Obamacare, have gotten worse and worse. He weathered a shameful scandal a few years back, indicating that he trades big favors for big campaign contributions — and, in fact, he is known for his “services” to constituents who, the scandal revealed, are then telephoned by his office for a contribution. Tim Bishop is the absolutely typical tax-and-spend entrenched Washington politico, voting for the big spending bills, never taking the disastrous growth of national debt seriously, supporting the Obama administration up and down the line on borrowing, and creating trillions of dollars of new debt. Lee Zeldin would join the sensible group of Republicans and Democrats in Congress who realize that lower taxes and private entrepreneurship — not regulation, new taxes, and special favors — create new business and new jobs. He would join the group that wants to take reducing spending seriously, so that the debt can be controlled before it destroys our economy. He would join that group that wants to roll back government’s huge new powers over our medical care. Every single time Tim Bishop is in a campaign he relies on smearing his opponent and very little else. To take one example: Any discussion whatsoever of the fiscal problems and frightening future of Social Security — and how to save and strengthen Social Security — becomes a Tim Bishop smear about “fails to support the elderly” and “would hurt our seniors.” And so it is with every issue. With a government that now has made so, so many of us dependent, it is easy to attack any change as taking something away from someone. Well, the country is rapidly heading into bankruptcy with a national debt that our children’s children will be paying off — or that will be inflated away by the creation of new money, destroying U.S. credit and the dollar. Tim Bishop just lets it happen, year after year. Nothing will change or get better with Bishop and his ilk in Congress. Lee Zeldin is well educated, experienced, and has identified issues that must be addressed before it is too late. Unlike Bishop, he is a veteran. Unlike Bishop, he has worked in the private sector and created a business, like many of the rest of us. Unlike Bishop, he dares to propose changes that are not just taxing and borrowing to give more to his constituents to buy votes. I’m going to vote for Lee Zeldin. WALTER DONWAY Vital Issues East Hampton October 25, 2014 Dear David, We are extremely fortunate to have Tim Bishop represent on eastern Long Island in Congress. He has proven to be a strong advocate for issues that are important to our community. He has intervened on our behalf in attempting to get FEMA funding to bury electrical transmission lines, as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure committee. He has worked to reduce traffic congestion on eastern Long Island, has obtained funding which resulted in saving jobs at Brookhaven National Lab, and has co-sponsored a bill that would fund start-up companies involved in high-tech research, thus creating new jobs. He has also intervened on behalf of 17,000 of his constituents who asked for his help. A staunch advocate for veterans, Congressman Bishop helped secure a $12 million construction grant to upgrade the Long Island State Veterans Home and has obtained funding for a Suffolk County post-traumatic stress training program for returning vets and their families. On a national level, Bishop has voted to prevent insurance companies from charging women more than men, is pro-choice, has been a leader in preventing the privatization of Social Security, has voted to extend income tax cuts for the middle class, and supports gun control legislation. His opponent is being supported by right-wing extremists. He is anti-choice, opposes common-sense gun control measures such as universal background checks, voted against the Marriage Equality Act in New York, has vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act, opposes comprehensive immigration reform, and is against raising the minimum wage. It is extremely important that those of us who care about these vital issues come out and vote for Tim Bishop on Nov. 4. VAN ELLMAN A Couple of Reasons Montauk October 26, 2014 Dear Editor: I went to the East Hampton debate last Thursday held at LTV. I watched Representative Tim Bishop and State Senator Lee Zeldin answer questions in hopes of convincing constituents to vote for them. On Jan. 1, the following happened. Top Medicare tax went from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent. Top income tax bracket went from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Top income payroll tax went from 37.4 percent to 52.2 percent. Capital gains tax went from 15 percent to 39.6 percent. These taxes were passed only with Democratic votes, no Republicans voted for these taxes. These taxes were all passed under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, and you thought it was a health care bill! Sure does raise your blood pressure. While Lee Zeldin was serving in Iraq, his wife went into labor during her 22nd week. He returned home and twin girls were born. They arrived just before their 26th week, weighing less than a pound and a half each. They are now healthy third graders. For your interest, Tim Bishop is in favor of abortions for any reason at any time during a woman’s pregnancy. Lee Zeldin is pro-life and does not apologize for his stance, as he stated during the debate last Thursday. These are just a couple of reasons I will cast my vote for Lee Zeldin and Rob Astorino. Gov. Cuomo is comfortable with full-term abortions. Sincerely, PAT FLYNN Straight Answers East Hampton October 27, 2014 Dear David, After eight attempts to receive a response from Zeldin’s campaign and New York Senate offices, I have been unable to get a straight answer to the question as to why he voted against the New York State’s “light pollution” bill. This bill was sponsored by Senator Marcellino (R), and was passed in the Assembly and Senate. (Both Senator LaValle and Assemblyman Thiele voted in favor). This bill would, at no additional cost to the state, require shielding on outdoor light fixtures and would address a gap in local zoning codes, which generally exempt state agencies (including schools and utility companies, e.g., PSEG). All of the towns that Zeldin wants to represent have passed “light pollution” bills. When I did talk to people on Zeldin’s staff, they misrepresented the intent of this bill and never got back to me as to why he voted against it. When I sat at the East Hampton Post Office to hand out absentee ballots to those who needed them on Saturday, I heard from people who had received straight answers and needed assistance when they called Representative Tim Bishop’s office. I vote for effective representation, not according to party. But this choice seems very clear to me now. Respectfully, Susan Harder The Only One Amagansett October 27, 2014 Dear Editor; Once again I have talked to many people in the community and asked how they felt about the Tim Bishop and Lee Zeldin race for Congress. All those I talked to indicated to me that they supported Tim Bishop because he always responded to them when they called him for help. One voter told me that although she had called many in the government for help with her problem, Tim Bishop was the only one who returned her call for help. Tim Bishop has also been endorsed by the Independence Party and now is the time for the voters to make their decision. Please vote on Tuesday, Nov. 4, for Tim Bishop. Sincerely yours, ELAINE JONES Chairwoman East Hampton Independence Party Part of the Solution Amagansett October 26, 2014 Dear David, Tim Bishop is an old-fashioned guy. There is no fanfare or media displays. When he has a job to do he is out there working on it. He is the only congressman that employs two people in his office to work on veterans’ problems. He is constantly helping people, and we need more politicians in Congress that are like Tim. He is not part of the political dysfunction in Washington, he is a part of the solution! There is no one better than Tim Bishop in helping his constituents. If his opponent wins, he will try to create an office, but it will take a long time to buy credibility. He will be a learner. If I am sick and need professional help at a hospital, I don’t want a learner, I want the experienced doctor to take care of me. Tim’s credibility enables him to use his experience to make a difference in people’s lives. As former President Bill Clinton stated in his support speech at Stony Brook University last week, “Tim Bishop is a get-the-show-on-the-road kind of guy.” Using one’s vote is a responsibility for everyone, so make sure to vote on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 4. The East End needs Tim Bishop as our representative in Congress. Your vote can make that happen. Experience counts! Sincerely, RONA KLOPMAN Important Questions Amagansett October 27, 2014 Dear David, The AARP, a strictly nonpartisan organization known for its meticulous research, just sent out to its members a voters’ guide to the positions of the two candidates for Congress in New York District 1, Lee Zeldin and Tim Bishop, on three important questions about Social Security, Medicare, and financial security. This should be read by all voters, particularly those who blindly insist on “term limits,” “we need someone new,” and “it’s time for a change.” In response to the question “How would you protect Social Security for today’s seniors and strengthen it for future generations?” Congressman Bishop responded that he opposes plans to privatize Social Security. In 2008, retirees would have seen the value of their Social Security benefits plummet as the recession deepened. Instead of privatization, Bishop supports efforts to strengthen Social Security and ensure its solvency for current and future retirees. When seniors faced two consecutive years without a cost-of-living adjustment in their benefits, the congressman supported legislation to change the index used to calculate cost-of-living adjustments that better reflect seniors’ buying habits. Candidate Zeldin replied to this question: “I firmly believe that we have a responsibility to honor and respect those who have spent their lives paving the way for generations to follow . . . That’s why I’ll continue to fight to keep the promise of Social Security for our seniors.” To the question “How would you help Americans save so they can secure their future and live independently as they age?” Congressman Bishop supported the legislation to change the index used to calculate the cost-of-living adjustments. In addition, he also voted for legislation that would have given a $250 check to Social Security recipients in lieu of an adjustment for 2011. Candidate Zeldin’s response: “I firmly believe that we have a responsibility to honor and respect those who have spent their lives paving the way for generations to follow. One way we can do that is to make sure that seniors’ lifetime of hard work isn’t eroded by the rising taxes, medical costs, and other expenses that can make it difficult to make ends meet, keep their homes and maintain the lifestyles they have planned for . . . It’s why I sponsored the nation’s strongest property tax cap to make it easier for seniors to stay in their homes instead of having to leave Long Island.” And to the question “How would you put Medicare on stronger financial ground and protect today’s seniors and future retirees from rising health costs?” Congressman Bishop opposes a budget that changes Medicare into a voucher system and requires seniors to pay up to pay more for their health care. Tim Bishop has also supported efforts to strengthen Medicare by reducing waste, fraud, and abuse so that taxpayer dollars go toward providing seniors the health care services they need and deserve rather than to people looking to scam the federal government. Candidate Zeldin’s reply: “Tough decisions must be made to reform entitlement programs in order to address our nation’s growing debt. But those decisions must not deny current beneficiaries the support they have relied on for their golden years. Instead these programs must be changed so that they can be made solvent for future beneficiaries.” Thank you to AARP for showing the voters what these candidates are saying about health and financial security in their own words. As we have heard in recent debates, the challenger is strong in one area: sweeping generalities. If older voters still have not decided on their choice for Congress, this helpful guide strongly points to the only candidate who represents their own best interests, Congressman Tim Bishop. Sincerely, BETTY MAZUR What He Does Best Montauk October 27, 2014 To the Editor: In the two debates I watched between Congressman Tim Bishop and Lee Zeldin it was clear that, as a senior member of Congress, Tim Bishop had a superior command of the issues. Due to his tenure, Congressman Bishop serves as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Education and Workforce Committee. Congressman Bishop’s long-developed relationships within the Beltway, coupled with his congenial demeanor, allows the congressman to do what he does best — deliver results to his district’s constituents. I have witnessed Congressman Bishop work within the U.S. agency bureaucracies to obtain concrete results whether it be helping veterans, the elderly, and the disabled, or securing the Army Corps of Engineers emergency project for Fire Island and Montauk. This is not something that can be accomplished by a freshman congressman, and certainly not by one that condones discourse as demonstrated by the woeful disrespect that his supporters shouted toward Congressman Bishop during these debates. What was also telling from these debates was that Lee Zeldin did not answer tough questions on how he would actually implement goals that both candidates advocate. Instead, he kept repeating three legislative matters he voted on in New York State, while Congressman Bishop spoke to a significant amount of U.S. legislation that he wrote and that became law to the benefit of his constituents. Most important, in contrast to Congressman Bishop, Lee Zeldin has a dismal environmental record, including voting to not hold corporate polluters accountable. One of his main supporters is the climate denier Koch Industries, which is desperately trying to block dirty coal-fired power plants from finally being regulated by the Environmental Agency under the Clean Air Act. As a woman and a mother, I could never support Lee Zeldin, who seeks to take away a woman’s choice with respect to our bodies. Finally, I am appalled to see repeated senseless mass murders occur with the use of assault weapons. Lee Zeldin has received strong endorsements from the N.R.A., which continues to support the right to own assault weapons. These weapons are for the sole purpose of killing people. My vote goes to the clear choice — Congressman Tim Bishop. LAURA MICHAELS No Wrongdoing Amagansett October 27, 2014 Dear David, It is shocking and unconscionable that the Zeldin campaign continues to distort the truth when it says that Tim Bishop is under investigation for ethical violations, when, in fact, the Department of Justice has found no wrongdoing by Mr. Bishop. Now let’s look at the truth: Mr. Bishop’s position on protecting the environment has been endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters, while Lee Zeldin has voted against the clean air, clean water act. Mr. Bishop is pro-choice and is working to get equal pay for women for doing the same work as men. Mr. Zeldin is anti-choice and does not support the Women’s Equality Act. Mr. Bishop favors background checks on anyone buying guns. Mr. Zeldin opposes background checks. Mr. Bishop is for preserving Social Security and Medicare. Mr. Zeldin wants to privatize them — so you know where the profits are going to go. GEORGE RUBINO Local Treasures Springs October 23, 2014 Dear Editor, The other night I attended the LTV debate in Wainscott. This was held by The East Hampton-Southampton Press. I had never been to the LTV studios and was eager to see the debate between Lee Zeldin and Tim Bishop. In the rain, in the dark, we found 75 Industrial Road and saw friends and acquaintances from our fair town as well as others who had been bused in from upIsland to watch the debate. Everyone was well behaved at this debate, and we had a good and enlightening discussion covering everything from a woman’s right to choose, equal pay for women for equal work, local environmental issues, corporate inversions, local veterans’ affairs, immigration, education, and the improving of the local infrastructure and that longstanding, local, never-ending issue, control of the East Hampton airport. You know your Congressman, Tim Bishop, is doing a good job for you when he gets endorsements from local associations such as the League of Conservation Voters, the Coalition of Suffolk Police Unions, Veterans Visions, and even the Nassau County Detectives Association. Tim Bishop was born in Southampton. Why would anyone want to vote for someone from upIsland? He is a native son, born and bred locally, a son of Southampton, and he has represented us well. He is us. He knows our nooks and crannies, he has made it his business to be responsive to our needs. Whenever I hear the litanies of criticism that usually start with Obamacare and end with Benghazi, I question the sanity of the writer. I can’t help but feel the desperation in the criticism. The East End will vote for Tim Bishop. Let’s keep our eyes on the prize. Tim Bishop for the First Congressional District of New York — and, as long as we are talking about local treasures, Fred Thiele for State Assembly. Both have represented us well! Its a win-win with Fred and Tim. BETSY RUTH Formidable Candidate Amagansett October 27, 2014 Dear Editor, Our Congressional election is approaching. Our present congressman, Tim Bishop, has been in office for the past 12 years. Yes, he is a local; however, just because you may have grown up with him in the same neighborhood, have gone to school with him, or know one of his relatives, is not justification for him to now serve another term. Our State Senator, Lee Zeldin, from just up the road in Shirley, who will oppose Mr. Bishop in our next election for Congress, is a formidable candidate. Lee Zeldin will protect our interests as Americans, will protect our Second Amendment rights, and may even disagree at times with our misguided president if needed. The future is upon us. We need to have pride in our country and commitment and trust for our country’s long-term friends. I haven’t seen that in Tim Bishop. It is time for a change. Sincerely. DEBORAH ANN SCHWARTZ East Hampton Town Republican Committee A Vote Will Help Amagansett October 27, 2014 David, Bayman or beachgoer, longtime residents are aware of the deterioration of our bay waters. Thankfully, our town is now owning up to the challenge we face from the growing wastewater nitrogen discharges that are the principle source of this environmental deterioration. It’s a big problem that won’t go away until we invest in mitigating infrastructure. We’ll need all the help we can get to turn this problem around. A vote for Congressman Bishop, who clearly understands this issue, will help. I wouldn’t count on Zeldin, who owns the worst environmental score of any state senator in New York. ROBERT WICK President is AWOL Springs October 27, 2014 Dear David, It’s been about three weeks since I have been able to write a letter, and I am pleased I make people laugh, as laughter and peace are the foundation of our lives and existence. When I have time to watch TV I become dumbfounded with the news. The liberals rallied the war on women and Susan Rice became a fallen soldier again — they used her again and she fell for it. She went back on Sunday prime time a.m. and lied, or tried to protect who this time? Her statement that Turkey has committed to allowing the U.S. to use their air bases, etc. She didn’t finish the statement, and Turkey replied absolutely not, there is no commitment. Turkey is angry with the U.S. over air space concerning Syria, but there she was making women look stupid again. We are told 50 to 60 countries are working with us on the ISIS. Then what the hell are these countries doing? What part are they taking? The president, whose policies I have only pure dislike for (as far as the person goes, I don’t know him so I have no opinion about him), boasts of ending the war in Iraq and removal of soldiers in Afghanistan but needs to rethink what he has done. He could have worked out a plan and left 50,000 military in Iraq and perhaps ISIS would not be so strong and determined. This president, who is so headstrong, drowning in his own ignorance. He needs to put his sights inward to home. He is not paying attention to the goings-on in the world. There is no compromise from the president and Congress. The president needs to listen and compromise, and let’s note here, it’s not only the Republicans that will not listen. Everyone needs to listen. The president makes it clear: my way or no way. He refuses to close down traffic from Ebola countries, Gwyneth Paltrow being his advisor and his other advisor being Al Sharpton. This President is AWOL. I guess we need a teleprompter on his golf cart so he sees what is going on in this mixed-up world. In God and country, BEA DERRICO Beware of Repeal Westhampton October 23, 2014 To the Editor: Since the Affordable Care Act was passed, 870,856 New Yorkers have gained insurance through its expanded Medicaid component. I wanted to bring up the Medicaid figure and explain why it helps to offset health care costs in New York State. Millions of New Yorkers are uninsured, but that doesn’t mean they’re immune to illness, doesn’t mean they don’t seek treatment in an expensive emergency department, nor does it mean that they aren’t admitted to in-patient care through emergency departments. Hospitals incur costs to treat the uninsured. Very little reimbursement is received from these “self-pay, no-pay” patients. So where does the money come from to defray costs associated with treating the uninsured? Hospitals are reimbursed through a little known reimbursement mechanism known as the bad debt and charity care pool. It works like this: Every hospital pays into the bad debt and charity care pool; that is, reimbursement from other patients is diverted into the pool. During the year, hospitals submit B.D.C.C. reports to the state, and based on a formula, pool dollars are reallocated to hospitals based on their need — a Robin Hood arrangement, basically. With more money coming into the system via expanded Medicaid, this Robin Hood arrangement is offset. Further, with an insurance card in hand, people can seek help health care through a primary care provider rather than through the more expensive emergency department. Their health improves and less money is spent in the system. In this way, the Affordable Care Act helps all of us. Beware of those advocating the repeal of Obamacare, a k a the Affordable Care Act. MIKE ANTHONY Former Associate Executive Director North Brooklyn Health Network
Published 4 years ago
Last updated 4 years ago
Letters to the Editor: 10.30.14
October 29, 2014