<
Demand answers to flood questions
<
I appreciate your editorial in the Feb. 24, 2017 edition. It asks some serious questions about recent flooding from the overflow of the Anderson Dam and the operation of the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
<
You question the preparation in advance of the flooding based on the dam known to be in an unsafe, “overfilled state for more than two weeks prior to” the disaster, “botched” communication, the evacuation plans and the outlet pipe being to “too small to prevent the reservoir from reaching unsafe levels.” You noted that an overfilled dam in the event of an earthquake would be “catastrophic”.
<
It appears you gloss over or misstate the details of the reasons for the flooding of U.S. 101, but note that the highway’s closure would add to the catastrophe if broader evacuations needed to occur.
<
Additionally, you comment on the “scandal-plagued district” and the “conflict of interests” and as example note “no-bid sweetheart multi-million dollar contracts to consultancy firms owned by spouses of district officials.”
<
These are important concerns and questions that you raise. Public trust is essential. Transparency, credibility and competence are what consumers of services want.
<
However, government has none of these as essential to its operation unless it is forced to gain them by consumers, voters and by the press through real accountability. Government—locally, as well as at the state and federal level—lack transparency, credibility and competence because of a lack of accountability. This is amply demonstrated all the time, last week being a great example.
<
Public trust is also essential for the media. There was recently an election where directors of the Water District were on the ballot. I do not recall the local media, including your paper, asking any of these questions during the election.
<
I would recommend that based on the concerns, raised by the editorial, that your newspaper begin a concerted investigative effort to get to the bottom of recent events by pursuing the concerns and questions you have raised. I think there are a few more questions to ask. It will not make you many friends in the local political cocktail circuit, but it is more what was intended by the founders when the media was granted a special place in regard to the rights of a free press.
<
Mike Brusa
<
Morgan Hill
<
Remember cancer patients in ACA overhaul
<
As Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren considers the future of the Affordable Care Act, it is critical that cancer patients, survivors and those at risk for cancer don’t face any gap in coverage to prevent and treat their disease.
<
American Cancer Society research shows that the uninsured and underinsured are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer at its more advanced stages when treatment is more expensive and patients are more likely to die. More than 30 million people, including many cancer patients and survivors, now have insurance thanks to the current law. Any changes to the law should stabilize and hopefully increase the number of insured Americans.
<
As an American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network volunteer, I want to thank Congresswoman Lofgren for remembering the cancer community as you consider proposals to change the current healthcare law and for working to ensure we have continued access to meaningful health insurance.
<
In the coming days and weeks, I hope you urge your colleagues in Congress to do the same. Linda Roma
<
American Cancer Society
<
Cancer Action Network Legislative Ambassador
