Letters to the Editor | Nov. 18, 2024

During the early 2000s, I worked as a doctor in South Africa during the height of the HIV epidemic. Thousands of South Africans were dying from the virus while the president of the country, Thabo Mbeki, an otherwise reasonable and intelligent man, fell under the spell of a conspiracy theory that denied HIV was the cause of AIDS.

He appointed like-minded health ministers who pushed bogus cures and then obstructed the rollout of effective antiretroviral treatments. Thousands of preventable deaths resulted. Never in my most dystopian dreams did I think someone who distrusted basic scientific facts could ascend to power in this country. But with President-elect Donald Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), it is about to happen.

Kennedy is a proud purveyor of anti-science conspiracy theories and expresses skepticism of the efficacy and safety of vaccines. He promotes baseless theories that vaccines cause autism, that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, that antidepressants cause school shootings, and that fluoride in the drinking water lowers the IQ of American children. None of these claims have the remotest connection to reality.

Let me be clear, this is not a matter of politics. Regardless of whom one voted for, we must agree that elevating a man with Kennedy’s beliefs to our country’s highest scientific administrative position is dangerous. The thought that this man could soon preside over the crown jewels of this country’s scientific and medical community — including the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — should send a shiver down the spine of every rational, science-believing citizen.

We must communicate to our fellow Americans that science knows no politics, only truth. And where medicine and health policy are concerned, lies can kill.

David Oxman, Philadelphia

The solution to the “courtesy tow” problem (Nov. 14) is contained in the article itself. Give the Philadelphia Police Department and private towing companies “input only” access to the Philadelphia Parking Authority database, which has been online since 2020. The police commissioner can simply order that all police tows be entered there, and City Council can impose penalties on private companies that tow and fail to report. With such an easy solution, why is this an ongoing problem?

Richard Crossin, Philadelphia

In January, SEPTA fares will increase by over 20%. While I’m privileged enough to be able to absorb this cost, many Pennsylvanians cannot. Over one million people use public transportation daily in our state, with more than 700,000 in Philadelphia alone. These are kids getting to school, workers commuting, and families shuttling to be near each other. They are our community members and integral members of our economy and workforce.

Gov. Josh Shapiro has the option to “flex” federal highway funds and allocate them to SEPTA — something done in 2005 and 2010 — to mitigate this fare hike. This is a crucial moment for bold, empathetic leadership. With the financial strain many Pennsylvanians are under, it’s unfair to further burden those who rely on public transportation simply because they cannot afford cars.

Flexing highway dollars would demonstrate Shapiro’s commitment to his constituents, especially those already struggling to make ends meet. A 30% fare hike is not just an inconvenience, it’s an additional hardship for our most vulnerable. It’s time for a creative, compassionate solution to keep public transit accessible and affordable for everyone.

Kyle Perry, Philadelphia

Letter writer Barbara Patrizzi tells us what we don’t want to know: We have to save ourselves from the two-party system. For many of us, the terror aroused by the outcome of the recent presidential election is a ratcheting up of an underlying awareness that we do not live in a democracy.

While the president-elect makes no pretense that he will uphold the rule of law, we have only to examine the barriers set up by the two major political parties to confront the fact that it is party leadership, not voters, that determines who will get elected and what laws will be passed. Saving ourselves would require that citizens have input into both, but citizen input is systematically excluded in a myriad of laws passed by the parties.

In a democracy, all voters, regardless of party affiliation, or lack thereof, would be able to vote in primary elections; legislative districts would be impartially drawn so that their votes would count; rank choice voting would reflect consensus, and citizens would be able to put initiatives on the ballot to be decided — up or down — by the voters.

But through a variety of efforts, some barriers are being challenged. Victory is elusive, but progress can be seen in the number of voters who are abandoning the two major parties and registering as independents. If you would like to participate in one or more of these efforts, please contact me at the email address below and we can discuss the options.

Norma Van Dyke, Philadelphia, nvandyke121@gmail.com

I’m heartened by the incisive questions from some members of City Council during the first hearings on moving the 76ers arena to East Market Street. But, alas, there are more important issues facing Philadelphia than the perceived “problem” of Market East or the 76ers’ attendance figures. Why isn’t City Council addressing real issues of concern such as food insecurity, poverty, and violent crime?

Those who live within city limits are aware of the most important issues facing us because we deal with them every day. The potential ruination of one of the nation’s oldest Chinatowns and the parking issues for area residents that an arena would generate are unnecessary. Creating additional problems for residents is not what we elected the mayor or Council to do.

Amy Dougherty, Philadelphia

In a Nov. 11 article, Trump voter Chris Gregas dismisses the president-elect’s authoritarian aspirations. “Trump’s personality lends itself to people thinking he’s going to be a dictator … he’s a strong leader,” he says, adding: “I do think those who have been detrimental to this country, he’s going to come after some of them — and rightfully so. I don’t think he’s going after the moderate person, the average person.”

Who are these “detrimental people” who deserve what’s going to be done to them? Donald Trump has demonized and targeted a wide swath of people, inciting harassment and violence toward them — election workers, immigrants, any number of people and communities.

The blind spot that waves away Trump’s authoritarian designs obscures the trajectory that accompanies targeting “those people.”

Authoritarian regimes require perpetual “others.” What begins with “those people” never ends there. “It won’t affect me or mine” is immoral — and ill-fated.

It’s time to revisit the admonition by the German theologian Martin Niemoller after his experience in Nazi Germany:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist …

Then they came for the trade unionists …

Then they came for the Jews …

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

Rosalind Holtzman, Elkins Park

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.