On Feb. 18, an Associated Press article printed in the Tribune reported that House Speaker Mike Johnson holds the key to U.S. aid to Ukraine. It noted that that could mean President Joe Biden would not get the $95 billion bill on his desk for weeks.
I object to the bill’s scope, but the likely delay in considering it is stunning — though not unanticipated. The bill offers $95 billion in aid for Ukraine, Israel and Indo-Pacific partners such as Taiwan, and it includes humanitarian assistance to those in the war-torn Gaza strip. But the administration deliberately omitted policy or financial commitments that would put a stop to our border mess. As if on cue, Johnson pronounced the bill dead on arrival. He is now the bad guy for objecting, and Biden becomes the hero for proposing a faulty bill.
Delay in considering it is troublesome for many reasons. First, our leaders are not serious people. However, the matters before them now are serious. Every day, what is going on in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza and in U.S. border towns is taking a serious toll on lives, finances, and our nation’s security and standing. Issues with Iran, China and other unfriendly nations could explode at any minute. Yet our leaders dilly-dally, playing politics to gain advantage in the national power and blame game. Decisions concerning these matters should have been made weeks or months ago!
This is a time for action. If members of the Congress do not want to work, they should resign.
Second, where is the $95 billion in aid money coming from? Certainly not the U.S. budget — because our country does not yet have one. It now operates on continuing resolutions because, once again, our leaders are too busy playing political games to create, discuss and pass a budget on time. Is other spending being dropped to accommodate this new spending? Who knows? I bet that the $95 billion will be added to the nation’s credit card account — the one with the $34 trillion balance due.
Elections are coming. Sink that D.C. “ship of fools.”
— Charles F. Falk, Schaumburg
Moral standing toward Ukraine
Congressional Republicans are withholding support for Ukraine’s battle against the unconscionable Russian invasion. A despotic state is waging war against a fledgling democracy that was established in 1991. Daily, we witness the devastation that Russia has unleashed upon Ukraine. Nothing has been spared as targets: hospitals, schools, museums, shopping centers, water treatment and utility plants, apartments, governmental facilities and more. Are those on the right of the political spectrum turning a blind eye to the tens of thousands of Ukrainian children who have been forcibly displaced or taken by Russia?
These acts are a clear violation of the children’s human rights and of international humanitarian law. Doesn’t that fact have any effect on the moral standing of some of our representatives?
— Sam Solomon, Deerfield
How to define ‘personhood’
In his op-ed (“Conservatives are targeting IVF. Women deserve a choice.”, Feb. 22), Illinois state Treasurer Michael Frerichs says that proposed laws defining personhood as starting at conception would outlaw in vitro fertilization, or IVF. So they would, but there’s a simple way to avoid that.
I am no biologist, but my understanding is that while intercourse may result in a fertilized egg, only a very few fertilized eggs that end up implanting in the womb will develop into babies. All the others get naturally flushed out of the woman’s body.
The obvious solution is to legally define “personhood” as starting at implantation. That would allow IVF or other modes of artificial insemination. And no question of abortion arises, since the woman wants the child.
Also, we would be spared having to regard as people all those eggs that get fertilized but fail to implant and then get swept away naturally.
— George W. Price, Chicago
Why I’m happy to be in Illinois
In recent years, I’ve been hearing about people leaving Illinois, often for states such as Florida, Georgia, Alabama and Texas. All I can say is: Good luck, and I hope you’ll enjoy life in places that are taking away women’s reproductive rights, making it harder for doctors to treat their female patients, refusing to let students discuss racism or sexuality, banning books — Moms for Liberty? Not the freedom to read, though — and, lastly, getting into fights with Disney World.
I am quite happy to be living in Illinois, where we have a governor who appears to be sane, fair-minded and kindhearted.
— Margaret Burka, Wilmette
Suffering at the end of life
In the op-ed “Assisted suicide is not health care” (Feb. 20), Dr. Errol Baptist refers to “the problem of pain that doesn’t exist” and that a suffering person can “be provided comfort … by readily available means at physicians’ disposal in every Western health care system.” I would love to believe this is true, but I have read many articles that indicate the opposite. These articles contain examples of invasive procedures conducted on frail elderly patients who cannot endure such procedures and examples of patients unable to procure the medications necessary to manage their pain due to restrictions on opioid use.
I’ve saved many of these articles to include with my estate planning documents in an attempt to ensure that I will not suffer needlessly at the end of my life.
— Patricia Biron, Chicago
Doctor leaves out dark side
While op-ed writer Dr. Errol Baptist might believe there is no space for assisted suicide from his high pedestal, his position is a shocking example of someone wearing antiquated, if not elitist, Hippocratic oath blinders. Furthermore, his conclusion that “assisted suicide is a final solution to the problem of pain that doesn’t exist” is infuriatingly false!
Let me share the circumstances of an extraordinary and vivacious woman, my mother. She was an ovarian cancer patient who, after five years of rigorous treatment, was told by her doctor that no further treatment options existed for her. Yes, thanks to modern medicine, those five years were a gift, if not also a very challenging period. But then what?
Let me tell you.
Because the cancer had metastasized so much, nontreatable intestinal blockages developed. When that happens, people can’t process food, which ultimately results in starving to death, an agonizing process that takes weeks. And, let me assure you, there is no amount of pain medication, or palliative care, that can assuage that level of suffering. That is a problem.
Under Baptist’s “umbrella of ethical medicine,” thousands die what can easily be described as agonizing deaths. His examples to support his overly broad conclusions are convenient and tidy, but they are not the complete story. What he does not do is account for hopeless situations in which “modern medicine” delivers no comfort. Simply pointing to advances in modern medicine doesn’t address the real suffering that occurs, despite the best possible care.
Baptist’s version glaringly omits the heartbreaking circumstances that cause a woman, while literally wasting away from starvation, to lean over to ask her son if he is still thankful to have those extra weeks together with her.
There must be a better way, Doctor. Assuredly, it doesn’t come from telling a dying person in need that their feelings of despair aren’t real.
— Michael Sackar, Chicago
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.