‘A Glimmer of Hope’
Thank you to Joe Sexton and Seven Days for sharing the stories of people connected with Enough Ministries and other community leaders in Barre [“Acts of the Apostles,” December 4]. My older sister was one of the early fentanyl casualties, in 2011. We were raised in a church family, and I saw how she was shunned in her darkest days.
The reminder that we are all “imperfect, even broken, people” is important. It’s easy to dismiss people who are lost in addiction. It’s harder to look them in the eye and meet their pain. There are no easy answers for solving the addiction epidemic. Thank you to the community leaders in Barre for providing a glimmer of hope for people who desperately need it.
Hilary Casillas
Monkton
‘Gritty’ Sounds Sh*tty
With all respect and admiration for this newspaper and the people who make it an important part of Vermont, I hope that Seven Days will rethink reporting that categorizes Barre with negative stereotypes. Love Joe Sexton’s story, “Acts of the Apostles” [December 4], but Paula Routly’s preamble to the story [From the Publisher: “Leap of Faith“] describes Barre as “perhaps the state’s grittiest … city.”
It is this kind of continued, incorrect stereotype of our city that perpetuates an untrue narrative of this wonderful place. Barre is a town of folks who are considerate of others and take pride in their downtown, as well as the many neighborhoods and countryside that encompass it. We have a deep and wonderful history, as well as a vibrant and supportive current population.
Bill Sugarman
Barre
Editor’s note: A definition of “gritty” is “showing courage and resolve.” Synonyms include brave, gutsy, bold and resolute.
‘Support the Stickerers’
[Re “Sticky Situation: A Proposed Burlington Ordinance Would Let People Sue Over Hateful Graffiti and Stickers. First Amendment Lawyers Have Concerns,” November 6]: The hate is not coming from the stickerers; it’s coming from the authoritarian city council.
“No one was ever born in the wrong body” is not a hateful message. Nor is “woman = female adult.” Nor is it hateful to oppose a local news channel’s report on “people who pump in the workplace.” Yet when I did so, I was verbally attacked in an email — called hateful and transphobic. Women, not people, pump in the workplace.
It is utterly unconscionable that the council, starting with the Miro Weinberger administration, has devoted so much effort into singling out Bill Oetjen to punish for acting on his moral convictions.
It is not hateful to fear for the children. More people in this extremely dysfunctional city need to find the courage to do so.
I think back to the vile, exploitative trans resolution passed by the council when Fern Feather was murdered; it came very close to linking the stickerers with the murder. Despite the fact that Outright Vermont, with its outsize influence in Burlington and Vermont, put a lot of effort into making it so, Feather’s murder has not been deemed a hate crime.
It is not hyperbolic to say young people’s bodies are being mutilated. Having listened to as many tragic de-transitioners stories as I have, I can only support the stickerers. May the law be on the side of Oetjen and the stickerers. Much gratitude to the lawyers.
Marianne Ward
Burlington
Witch Way
Reading about the story of Margaret Krieger in Ken Picard’s article [“The Accused: Why Vermont’s Only Documented Witch Trial Still Has Relevance Today,” October 30] made me think about the ways that women have been treated historically and the way that our history repeats itself.
I am deeply saddened by the habit our society has of burying the voices and stories of women and outsiders throughout history. I feel that especially now, given our current political climate, it is extremely important that we pay attention and listen to the stories of the past, lest we repeat them. As we watch our rights being threatened every day in this country, we cannot forget about the way that we have been treated in the past.
Sure, women nowadays can own property and have control over their finances without being accused of witchcraft, but women with power are still given far harsher treatment than their male peers. Picard draws a parallel between the accusations Krieger faced and the misogynistic tactics and so-called “witch hunts” of current-day politics. In times like these, I feel it is particularly important to be familiar with history, especially the history that they have tried to erase.
I deeply admire Joyce Held for her commitment to telling Krieger’s story and the care and passion she shows for the stories of the past. I truly believe that by understanding our history we can learn to do better in the future.
Stella Martenis
Charlotte
Down on Dems
As a supporter of community public schools, I found it humorous to read [“Weakened Senate Dems Say Property Taxes Are ‘No.1 Priority,’” November 16, online]. It is reminiscent of the same major pronouncement Vermont Democrats made following the 2012 election based on what was heard on the campaign trail. What eventually followed was the passage of Act 46 in 2015.
Well, we all know how Act 46 turned out: top-down forced mergers of local school districts; increased administrative costs on the state and supervisory levels; more unfunded legislative mandates; and no reasonable stabilization of education taxes. To top it off, Act 46 required there be a study of its effects, which has never been done.
One of the chief architects of Act 46 was Sen. Ann Cummings (D-Washington), who was chair of the Senate Education Committee at the time of its passage. Serving on that committee was Sen. Phil Baruth (D-Chittenden-Central), who was an ardent supporter of Act 46 and later resisted reasonable changes to Act 46 when he subsequently served as Senate Ed chair. Sen. Cummings now serves on the Commission on the Future of Public Education in Vermont, and Sen. Baruth is now driving the legislative train as president pro tem of the Senate.
So hang on to your hat, once again!
Michael O. Duane
East Montpelier
System Is Sick
[Re “Urgent Scare,” November 6; “UVM Health Network Announces Service Cuts, Blames Regulators,” November 14, online]: Two recent articles by Colin Flanders portray a health care system on the verge of collapse. Premium increases, hospital closures and diminishing access will cause more Vermonters to forgo health care and insurance. Healthy people will leave the system, and sick people, deprived of services, will just get sicker.
No part of the system is healthy. Hospitals and community health centers are facing closures, layoffs and service cutbacks. Patients face increasing costs and scarcer services. Health care workers will be asked to do more with less. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont is in trouble. The failing system is spawning serious ripple effects. Health care premium increases contribute to ballooning school budgets and property taxes.
We need leadership, not more finger-pointing. Gov. Phil Scott’s administration has no plan. The University of Vermont Medical Center management, threatening major service cuts, appears to be in the “see what you made me do” stage of responding to calls for cost control. Rural hospitals and community health centers face pressure to “restructure” or close.
The ideas of the Green Mountain Care Board, UVM Medical Center management, legislative leadership and the governor’s administration offer no comprehensive solutions.
This is why I’m a member of the Vermont Workers’ Center, organizers of the Healthcare Is a Human Right campaign. Thirteen years ago, we won passage of a law to create a publicly financed universal health care system for all Vermont residents that would have avoided this mess. Our voices deserve center stage in any discussion of how we finally solve this mess.
Scott Earisman
Colchester
Possible Cure?
Our current health care system is unsustainable [“Urgent Scare,” November 6]. While completely understandable, our inability to face mortality is part of the problem. The other part is our increasing ability, often at great expense, to prolong life. The result is that we have the costliest system in the world, but our health outcomes are below that of many other countries’. We need to address this root cause of the problem. Here is one way it might be done.
First, determine and fund an amount of health care spending that can provide all Americans with a basic national package of good health care, including dental, eye care and mental health services. Then determine with the amount raised what kind of services could be provided. Prioritize those services on prevention and services weighed toward our youngest first. There would be no need to have insurance for these health services, and a considerable amount of what we now spend on health care bureaucracy could go into actual care.
Second, allow individuals to buy private insurance to supplement this basic national health care. Individuals who want to try every possible way of extending their lives or expensive treatments, beyond what is in a set plan, would have the opportunity to do so, but it would be on their own dime.
Clearly this is an inequitable two-tiered system, but what we have now is also inequitable, as well as wasteful and unaffordable. The current system prioritizes expensive care at the end of life instead of affordable, sustainable and comprehensive health care for all.
John Freitag
South Strafford
The French Figured It Out
It amazes me that America cannot or will not solve this issue [“Urgent Scare,” November 6]. Ridiculous medical costs in developed countries are confined to the USA. Medical bankruptcy only occurs here.
My daughter and her husband live in Paris and explained somewhat how it works. I just watched a YouTube video by a family of expats living in France who did a great explanation of their experience: Search “How France’s Healthcare is BETTER — French Medical Care System Overview.”
Everyone should watch it and ask: Why not here?
Pete Fjeld
Leicester
‘Federal Solution’
[Re “Urgent Scare,” November 6]: This story hit home for me as a former Vermont resident whose 90-year-old mom still lives in-state, just spent the weekend in the Central Vermont Medical Center and visited Gifford in Randolph Medical Center for X-rays.
As the saying goes, “If something can’t go on forever, it will stop.” And if nothing changes, how it stops won’t be pleasant.
But Vermont can’t solve this by itself. The problem, like so many others, starts with the consolidation of money and power in the hands of a few, who are mostly located out of state. A federal solution is required, and given the recent election results, the path to that solution is not clear.
I wish I had a more positive take on the situation.
Ray Charbonneau
Arlington, MA
We Had a Plan
I was dismayed, but not surprised, that Seven Days included only one dismissive sentence about Vermont’s universal health care law in the recent article about the health care crisis [“Urgent Scare,” November 6]. Plans to implement Act 48 did not “implode in 2014” because former governor Peter Shumlin “learned how much it would cost and abandoned the effort.” Rather, Shumlin made a political decision to protect large businesses and wealthy residents.
Shumlin’s 2014 financing plan would have raised net incomes for 93 percent of Vermont families, but it relied on a regressive, flat payroll tax that would have placed undue burden on small businesses and workers.
In contrast, the Vermont Workers’ Center and its partners proposed a financing plan for Act 48 that would pay for universal health care through equitable, progressive income, wealth and payroll taxes. We could cover 94 percent of medical costs for Vermonters, raise net incomes for the majority of families, and avoid an outsize impact on small businesses and working-class families.
Thirteen years after the passage of Act 48, health care costs continue to skyrocket while proposed solutions such as closing community health centers and hospitals threaten to exacerbate the lack of access to care. We need leaders with the political will to solve the health care crisis by implementing Vermont’s universal health care law.
Amanda Spector
Westford
Get a Load of These Salaries
A quick Google search turns up all you need to know about the University of Vermont Medical Center posturing to eliminate services and threatening the Green Mountain Care Board. From ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer, here are just a few key employees of the UVM Medical Center and their compensation amounts for the fiscal year ending in 2023.
• Dr. John Brumsted (network president and CEO until November 2022): $1,787,177 + $68,822• Alfred Gobeille (executive vice president of hospital operations until May 2023): $894,856+ $126,268• Dr. Stephen M. Leffler (president and COO): $837,011 + $67,056• Richard Vincent (network executive vice president and CFO): $812,391 + $60,841
• Eric Miller (network general counsel): $623,771 + $86,537
I would have expected Seven Days to include these numbers in [“UVM Health Network Announces Service Cuts, Blames Regulators,” November 14, online].
Ann Marie Dryden
Morrisville
Cut Executive Salaries First
Thank you for the November 14 story on the budget reductions by the University of Vermont Health Network [“UVM Health Network Announces Service Cuts, Blames Regulators,” online]. To cover a $122 million shortfall in revenue traceable to a 1 percent rate decrease in what they can charge insurers, UVM Health Network announced service reductions, including closing a primary care practice in Waitsfield and several dialysis centers in rural hospitals, as well as cutting up to 200 staff and reducing bed capacity in the main hospital.
No reductions to the number or compensation of top executives were announced. UVM Health Networks’s CEO merely said this would be discussed in December when they regularly review incentive-based performance.
Many Vermonters, including UVM Health Network staff, wonder why the highly paid executives didn’t first go after their own very generous compensation, especially given that Medicare reduced the hospital’s rating from five to four stars.
The Form 990 tax return UVM Medical Center filed last August reveals that the president made over $1.8 million, the VP made a little over $1 million, the COO made $904,000 and the CFO made $873,000. Thirteen more execs made between $710,000 and $440,000. By contrast, the governor of Vermont only makes about $222,000.
It’s very hard for patients to imagine that the UVM Medical Center’s budget reductions were made in good faith without significant reductions at the top.
We must wait to see whether and how much UVM Health Network executives will reduce their salaries and bonuses to help alleviate the system’s financial condition. I hope they live up to their stated values, which include communicating “openly and honestly with the community we serve.”
Ellen Oxfeld
Middlebury
Related Stories
This article appears in Dec 11-17, 2024.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!