In the last few days, it has become clear that Democratic governors across the country are making a quick 180-degree turn on the subject of mandatory vaccines and masks. Has science really changed, or do they understand that the perpetual promotion of fear and calling out those who doubt their credibility will not win the next election?
Perhaps they see a canary in a coal mine with current events in Canada, the most polite, law-abiding nation on earth. Of course, the hereditary media on both sides of the border have been obediently calling the last two weeks of the protest “predominant, racist and marginal.”
I think we are witnessing a turning point when a critical mass of people are not only tired of mandates, but also tired of being talked to by left-wing politicians who do not have to follow their own rules and can overcome the eternal pandemic in their pajamas.
Rick Tanis, University Place
Shortage of nurses
As a nurse and former manager, I would like to thank the Chief Nursing Director of St. Joseph’s Medical Center, Ruth Flint, for writing a report on the shortage of nurses and the 1868 House of Representatives bill. I agree with her on issues related to hospital overcrowding, but I do not necessarily agree with her position on HB 1868.
Nurses are asked to take on dangerous patient care assignments. Hospitals are asking nurses to do more with fewer staff, creating a dangerous patient-nurse relationship. This is what the bill intends to fix.
We were not recognized as an integral part of the healthcare team. We are constantly fighting for salaries, benefits and vacations. Although the unions were not perfect, they were a mechanism for nurses to solve the problem of dangerous staff, low wages and benefits.
This bill is being introduced because hospitals refuse to recognize staff shortages and refuse to pay nurses what they cost. The fact that hospitals are in crisis does not mean that the bill is not needed.
We ask for a safe staffing model. Our patients and nurses deserve better.
Brian Halpern, Tacoma
Citing an article in The News Tribune on the front page of February 5 entitled “State lawmakers are pushing for a bill to combat homeless camps“I don’t understand why we don’t use a solution we already have: Section 8 of the Federal Housing Act of 1937, which is often referred to simply as Section 8.
With repeated amendments, the law allows the payment of rent assistance to private owners on behalf of low-income households. Unfortunately, it is terribly underfunded, the waiting lists for vouchers in section 8 are very long – up to 10-20 years – and many city or county programs are permanently closed to new applicants. The law also allows landlords to refuse to comply.
If we can’t get the federal government to update and properly fund this law, how about when our state replenishes spending and improves the implementation of this law. The problem is solved! Please!
John Selby, Edgewood