As the father of an 18-year-old girl who died from a single OxyContin pill in 2006 and as a creditor in the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy proceeding, I must voice my strong disappointment in Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s apparent decision to support the recent $7.4 billion settlement in principle with the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma. My daughter and countless other Illinois citizens were blindsided by this company’s aggressive and deceitful marketing of OxyContin, which resulted in the flooding of our medicine cabinets with a dangerous Schedule II opioid in order to maximize profits while the company and its owners were well aware of the harm being inflicted upon Americans.
In this country, we have a justice system for people and corporations that commit crimes — unless you are wealthy, in which case you can buy your way out of justice. We’ve seen this before with Purdue and the Sacklers. I testified at their 2007 sentencing hearing, after which they got off with no prosecution and no jail time and by paying a modest fine, which was nothing more than a cost of doing business to them.
What was the result of that miscarriage of justice? OxyContin sales increased in the ensuing years. Cha-ching.
This time, more money is involved, but this would be forthcoming over a 15-year period, in order to allow the Sacklers to continue to make money off of the unpaid funds. To add insult to injury, a Sackler defense fund would be set up for the benefit of the Sacklers that would be funded by creditors! Seriously? This defense fund would tip the scales in favor of the Sacklers over plaintiffs, and it would severely reduce, if not eliminate, the likelihood of a criminal trial with full accountability and public disclosure of crimes committed and no disincentive for bad actors in the pharmaceutical industry to stop pushing opioids.
We need a criminal trial with full public disclosure of crimes committed by Purdue Pharma and its owners. Let a criminal court decide a just punishment. That is what justice looks like as far as Purdue and the Sacklers are concerned.
— Peter W. Jackson, Crystal Lake
Parents deserve choice
In her op-ed “School choice does not equal education freedom. It drains public resources” (Feb. 3), Maddy Wheelock argues that “expansion of school choice programs deepens inequities and drains resources from public schools.” Her argument is a collection of misleading assertions.
She argues that school choice makes things only worse and that the solution is “to fully fund” (an expression she repeats) public schools that have been harmed by “underfunding.” She believes that the now-expired Invest in Kids tax credit scholarship program, which provided parents with school choice, shortchanged public school students. She professes to be concerned with addressing educational inequities, but school choice has been proved effective at doing so, which she is against. Choice is bad; it is a “distraction.”
Many public schools in large urban areas have records of dismal academic results. Chronic public school failures are the real cause of inequities in education.
The problem is not underinvestment. The Illinois Policy Institute reports that since 2012, Chicago Public Schools spending — for fewer and fewer students — increased 97%, while proficiency in math and reading declined by 78% and 63%, respectively.
Chicago parents deserve a choice in schools. The president of the Chicago Teachers Union acknowledges this truth: She sends her son to a private high school.
— Charles W. Mulaney Jr., Chicago
Enabling fossil fuels
Peoples Gas’ System Modernization Program (SMP) is an expensive, ecologically destructive disaster disguised as a safety initiative. Peoples Gas promised a safer, modernized pipeline system, but instead, Chicagoans are footing the bill for a bloated, mismanaged project costing nearly 10 times the original estimate.
Beyond the financial burden, this program locks Chicago into decades of fossil fuel dependence at a time when we should be investing in cleaner, renewable energy. Expanding outdated, polluting infrastructure exacerbates climate change and threatens our future.
I am only 22 years old. I should feel hopeful about the future. The idea of having children one day should bring me joy. Instead, I fear for the world they will inherit. As I watch greedy companies ravage our earth, I can’t ignore the mounting crises — rising temperatures, extreme weather, mass displacement and escalating political instability.
Climate change is no longer a distant threat; it is happening now, threatening lives, livelihoods and ecosystems. The most vulnerable communities with the fewest resources are already suffering. No amount of money can shield you from natural disasters forever.
Natural gas is increasingly questioned as a viable long-term heating solution, yet Peoples Gas’ expansion ensures we remain reliant on one of the industries driving the climate crisis while it simultaneously inflates energy bills.
Illinois is already falling behind on clean energy goals. As of October, Illinois achieved less than half of our 40% renewable energy target for 2030. Rather than investing in sustainable solutions, Peoples Gas is set on maintaining a soon-to-be obsolete fuel sector.
Peoples Gas is directly investing in the very forces accelerating our climate crisis. Every dollar poured into this flawed program is a dollar that could instead support clean energy and climate resilience. Peoples Gas claims the program is about safety, but it is really safeguarding corporate profits at the expense of consumers and the environment. We must stop funding the industries responsible for the crisis we are fighting to survive.
Chicago deserves a future in which our energy infrastructure is sustainable, safe, affordable and aligned with the realities of climate change, not one that forces residents to bankroll decades of environmental harm. It’s time to hold Peoples Gas — and the entire fossil fuel sector — accountable for its reckless overinvestment in fossil fuels and demand a system that truly serves the planet and its people, not profits.
— Ava Cohen, Elmhurst
Booing of our anthem
On Nov. 18, 2014, at a game in Toronto between the Nashville Predators and the Toronto Maple Leafs, an inspiring moment unfolded when the singer’s microphone failed during the U.S. national anthem. Canadians in the crowd took it upon themselves to finish the anthem, demonstrating respect, camaraderie and a shared appreciation for a neighboring nation’s traditions. It was a powerful reminder that despite national differences, there exists a fundamental respect between people when goodwill prevails.
Now, in stark contrast, we see incidents of Canadian fans booing the U.S. national anthem at sporting events. What has changed in the past decade? How does the United States present itself to the world today? National anthems are more than just songs — they represent the identity, values and global standing of a country. When Canadians, who once sang our anthem in an act of unity, now choose to boo it, it suggests that the perception of the United States has eroded.
This should serve as a moment of reflection for Americans. Are our actions, policies and attitudes fostering respect abroad? The 2014 moment in Toronto showed the best of international sportsmanship and neighborly respect. The recent boos, however, indicate a growing division.
If we value the goodwill of our allies, we must consider how we engage with the world — because national pride is not just about how we see ourselves but also how others see us.
— Steven Sapyta, Brookfield, Wisconsin
We’re better than this
I have been very upset by the rude NHL fans who have booed the Canadian national anthem at games in reaction to Canadian fans booing “The Star-Spangled Banner.” Aren’t we better than this? NHL hockey is not about politics and grievance; it’s about the game and about a sport and a league that connect our two countries.
I had the joy of being the bass guitarist and assistant coordinator of the St. Louis University Billikens Pep Band from 1970 to 1972, playing at home basketball hockey and basketball games.
The most powerful moment to me at hockey games is when the night opens with “The Star-Spangled Banner” and is followed by the Canadian national anthem. It is stirring to hear in music the pride and the connectedness of our two countries.
— Frank Vozak, Oak Park
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.