Do your part to protect our pollinators

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

To the editor: "The quest for a queen" (Eagle, May 17) was a very well-written article.

It covered some of the basics of beekeeping. I am also a beekeeper and enjoy my bees.

One important factor in this article was missing. Yes, it is important to sustain the honeybee, but more important we should be aware that there are other pollinators that should be protected also. The use of chemicals on our trees and lawns are killing many species of pollinators. Dandelions and clover are the first food source for many pollinators and the first thing we spray to kill.

Let's cut down on the pesticides. Let's think before we spray and decide what is important: your grass or your food source.

Sal Angelo, Lee

Why the Triplex Cinema brings me to Great Barrington

To the editor: Though I live in Columbia County, N.Y., some of my fondest memories of the region are visits to the Triplex Cinema in Great Barrington.

And I am not the only out-of-towner to make his way to spend happy hours there in the dark. The cinematic offerings were not the mass commercial product usually offered by corporate chains; the Triplex was more akin to Film Forum or the Thalia in New York City and Images in Williamstown. Smaller films, independent films and, of course, Berkshire International Film Festival. In addition, the upstairs theater was often used for live performances. (I have performed there myself, another fond memory.)

The maxim "buy local" should not be exclusive to food. This is why the survival of the Triplex is imperative not only to the economic health of Great Barrington but to its very character. Don't sell it to Hollywood or lose it to some other commercial concern. Help to save the Triplex, whether through financial contribution, other action or just your raised voice. Time is short.

Andrew Joffe, Craryville, N.Y.

The case for single-payer health care in Massachusetts

To the editor: Thank you to Eagle journalist Gillian Jones for her thoughtful March 28 opinion piece "Saying goodbye to my primary care physician - after three decades."

Without explicitly saying it, she eloquently highlighted the need for a single-payer, public health insurance system like the one proposed in H.1239 and S.744, the "Medicare for All" bills currently in the Massachusetts Legislature.

Jones detailed how her physician of 30 years was no longer accepting her health insurance due to its low reimbursement rates, compelling her to find a new primary care doctor. She also pointed out that employer-sponsored health insurance offers a very limited menu of plans to workers and that even those with insurance often rely on charity events such as spaghetti suppers to pay large medical bills.

Some people think a single-payer system would limit choice, but in fact it is our current system that does just that. Not only do we have very limited choices of insurance plans, many plans have limited networks of doctors and hospitals in addition to restrictions on which medications are covered.

Unaffordable co-pays and deductibles prevent many from seeking the care they need, not to mention the exorbitant prices of some drugs. While 98 percent of Massachusetts residents technically have health insurance, medical bankruptcy is the most common type of bankruptcy. And 4,000 of us die each year from lack of timely medical care. In my 33 years of medical practice on staff at Berkshire Medical Center, I saw more than a few people ration their medications and had patients not return for adequate follow-up because of cost at the point of service. Patients' efforts to save money resulted in worse health outcomes.

With H.1239 and S.744, all Massachusetts doctors would be in the same network, and emergency care while out of state would also be covered by our Massachusetts public insurance fund just like Medicare does now. These bills create a "Medicare for All"/public health insurance program with no premiums, no deductibles and no point-of-service costs. Vision, hearing and dental would be covered, and the state would negotiate for better drug prices.

Why don't we already have single-payer, public health insurance? A powerful private health insurance lobby and a state government that doesn't think affordable health care is a priority. It's up to us to make our elected officials do it.

Dr. Henry Rose, Dalton

This isn't my dad's Republican Party

To the editor: In his recent letter, Tony Smith argued that if Donald Trump were president, Vladimir Putin wouldn't have invaded Ukraine. ("Letter: Takeaways from the Durham report," Eagle, Tuesday.)

Of course, that flies in the face of common sense. Trump absolutely adores Putin and fawns over him like a smitten schoolgirl, calling that evil, murdering dictator a "very strong leader." Trump is attracted to dictators because he has that mentality himself. Trump would have thrown Ukraine under the bus immediately. He would have denied military aid by saying it's not our problem, it's up to them to work it out or some such excuse. That's because he hates Volodymyr Zelenskyy, because Zelenskyy refused to provide dirt on the Bidens in the lead-up to the election. Everything is personal with Trump.

So what is the basis for Mr. Smith's claim? According to him, Putin would have backed down because of the mere fact that Trump is a Republican. As evidence, Smith lists a bunch of hawkish Republicans from the past who wouldn't have tolerated such aggression. When I say "the past," I mean way back, as in dead people, except for Kissinger. I can only conclude that Smith has been taking a nap for the last couple of decades. He apparently hasn't noticed that the Republican Party is nothing like it was when those guys were around. Instead, it has mutated into a cult that worships one of the most pathetic excuses for a leader in the history of this country.

Smith didn't notice, but I certainly did. That's because I grew up in a staunch Republican household in a staunch Republican community. In fact, my dad was a Republican state senator in the Midwest. I'm stunned by the direction the party has taken. Just to be clear, none of those past leaders that Smith admires, including Reagan, would have a snowball's chance in hell of leading today's GOP. They believed in civility and compromise and didn't reflexively demonize government or the other party. That's all gone. Why do you think the term "RINO" was coined? In case you don't know, that stands for "Republican in name only." In other words, if you aren't a sufficiently radical right-winger, you aren't welcome. You old traditional republicans? Get lost, you bunch of losers.

There's a movement to abandon Ukraine, and who do you think is leading it? It's Republicans, led by Trump.

Arne Waldstein, Housatonic