I was very thankful that no one was hurt, when a section of US RT 11, collapsed into the Salt Lick Creek, across from the truck repair shop. That was a lucky stroke.  This creek has been flooding since the maintenance of the water channel stopped.

To me, that is an idiot policy, but one that is entrenched in a way, that to try to put sense in it, it would have to be scrapped, totally. For those who have never had the experience of dealing with the DEP et al., you cannot believe how policy really works. In today's world, policy has turned into neglect. I can't be the only one in this area who would remember stopping along a pull off, on RT 11, and buy sweet corn from the farmers, Hedges and Cal Summers. Or the creek being able to support the trout that, for years, was stocked in this stream. Now, the trout cannot pool, the gravel bars have created islands that disrupt the waters' flow, and habitat. It's a shame that there is no fishing along the creek anymore. Due to the lack of maintenance, the banks have been de-stabilized, there are areas of drop off, deep drop offs, as the water is allowed to create new pathways. Not what one would expect from a stream with a rating of HQ. There was a time when the local townships were not regulated, out of maintenance. Government was local, and it was a common practice to remove the sand bars, then reuse the washed material to maintain the townships' dirt and gravel roads. In some townships, there are miles of these roads.  The think tank policy is to control the resources, not with best practice policies, but rather, a do not touch approach. Now, the politics of land management is an example of land grabs. The folks who make these policy, do not live by the streams they would regulate. They instead listen, to someone in a think tank, whose progressive ideas of saving mother earth, actually cause more harm to mother earth. In an effort to save the earth, we have swung from practical and land steward conscious action, to penalty and protest.

What is even more remarkable about the land policy, is that it has created different departments who overlap, and set up competition between the government agencies. DEP and DOT, are often at cross purposes. If you think it's only at a state level you forget the federal and local policies. Often times, the agent does not know policy, or the loop holes, so the decision of permit, or not is based on how the agent understands what the book "says". If you have ever read the PA CODE, you can appreciate my comment.

I see the dept. is slapping in a quick fix, and not a repair. The reason is because the DOT keeps traffic moving, so RT 11 will get rock, fill and the guard rail repaired and re-installed. That quick fix is because the DEP/EPA will require studies and permits to really fix the erosion, the fish and water dept. will have their bit to do, and let's not forget the Pa Historical dept. they too have a sign off and that could take years, and millions of dollars, for the paperwork.

 This will also not address the fact that the lack of maintenance has created loss of property, and inconvenience, for the citizens of the township, so that we should agree that the whole of the creek, should be dredged. Do not cringe at the word, dredge. What do you think the word is the creek is doing? It is dredging, naturally. It is my hope that by writing and calling the elected, productive action will happen regarding the state of the streams. One would think, that this is a necessity. NOAA has listed 212 storm events, from 1980 to last month that have resulted in loss of lives, and property damage in the billions. 13 of those events have effected NE Pa. Imagine that. 13 storm events that resulted in huge loss, from water. Maybe its time to put maintenance back into vogue, at the local levels. Get rid of the unnecessary paperwork, which only serves the policy and encourages government land grab. This policy only hinders and bankrupts. It also disrupts and forever changes those who have experience with loss from water. I hope no one has to be an example of collateral damage to get the Salt Lick Creek back into the original water channel. Sadly, that is what usually gets a thing done in government.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Allen

New Milford, Pa

The pages of the Transcript have lately been the site for some rather tedious hashings on jurisprudence.  A widespread obsession.  Too many people who learned Political Science in Sunday School see the Constitution as a sort of political Bible:  God-inspired (wrong), perfect (wrong), and to be zealously guarded against interpretation, or any attempt to adapt it to modern times.  I think the motive here is to make modern times go away, but unfortunately for the hidebound, time only moves in one direction.

Their orientation is one that the Founders would not recognize.  Particularly Jefferson.  One of his favorite points, expressed in various ways, was this:  That the world belongs to the living-- we are not bound by what our ancestors did, nor can we bind future generations.  This idea kind of undermines the fetish some have for "Original Intent".

And there's something peculiarly ironic here.  Those who make the biggest fuss about "Original Intent" invariably are opposed to church-state separation.  They foolishly deny it even exists!  But if there's any concept that can be established as Original Intent, this is it.

Justices like Gorsuch, although praised for having proper Constitutional fidelity, get credit they don't deserve.  They don't really adhere to the text of the Constitution-- they interpret it through the lens of their personal religious beliefs.  This should disqualify them from the job, but their boosters are acting out of a theocratic impulse, inviting the dead to bury the living.  Given that it's a wholly secular document, they're not really Constitutionalists at all.

Sincerely,

Stephen Van Eck

Rushville, PA

Something is radically wrong. In a free market economy, competition guarantees the highest quality product at the lowest possible price. But in health care, it's the opposite. We're getting the worst service at the highest price. And medical expenses continue to metastasize. What's going on?

Childbirth was the most common and costliest medical bill for the average family in 1955. It cost $74. The average weekly paycheck was $85. So childbirth cost less than one week's pay. Ten years later delivery cost doubled. But even at that, it only cost about two weeks pay.

It was President Lyndon Johnson's keen eye that identified a problem that didn't exist and provided a solution that was worse than the non-existent problem.

In 1965, LBJ signed into law Medicare and Medicaid. They were supposed to provide government help (Uh-oh!) for medical expenses.

Now, 50 years after Medicare and Medicaid became law, childbirth with a two-day hospital stay cost $11,000. At the average weekly salary of $900 (men), it takes 12 weeks to pay that bill.

During that time the cost of drugs also soared. Not to worry. The government will fix the problem that it made. President George W. Bush was going to help fix us. It was only later that we learned that the “us” was himself and Big Pharma. But we're getting ahead of ourselves.

The 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore was the closest in U.S. history. Gore edged out Bush in the popular vote but narrowly lost the electoral vote. Bush became the 43rd president.

Bush knew that the 2004 election would be just as close. He needed a brim-full war chest. Five and ten dollar contributions wouldn't fill it. He needed big-dollar donations from deep-pocket corporations like Big Pharma, and he got it.

The drug companies contributed $516,000 ($670,000 inflation adjusted) to the Bush campaign almost double the sum given to his presidential opponent.

Now, what Bush needed was something to throw to the masses, a bread-and-circuses program that would help him win the popular vote and payback Big Pharma. He got both in the Medicare Prescription Drug Act Part D.

Part D was designed to help the nation's 40 million senior citizens purchase their prescriptions. It also helped Bush.

In 2000, Bush garnered only 47 percent of the senior vote. In the 2004 election, he reaped 52 percent. That 5 percent increase translates to two million potential votes.

This time around Bush won the electoral vote and the popular vote by a sizable 2.4 percent. But what about Big Pharma?

It turns out that Part D had a glaring “omission.” There is no cost-containment provision. Well, we all make mistakes. But this “mistake” allowed Big Pharma to jack drug prices up to the moon. Which they did.

Now the race is on for the $1,000,000/year drug. Why a million dollars? Why not?

Leading the pack are Avastin at $50,000/yr; Erbitux at $80,000/yr; Provenge at $93,000/yr; Arcalyst at $250,000/yr; and as yet an unnamed drug peddled by Sarepta Pharmaceutical at $400,000/yr.

Sarepta's CEO, Dr. Edward Kaye, said he “tried to be reasonable.” Nice try, Ed, but you failed.

Taking the lead for the $1,000,000/yr drug is Blincyto at $770,000/yr. Close, Blincyto, but no garland of roses. We'll have to wait a bit longer.

So then, what shall we make of Part D. Some see it a boondoggle, others are convinced it's a bust.  Both are correct.

And now we have Obamacare or its knock-off, Trumpcare, that will provide more Americans with affordable health insurance while reducing health care spending. If you don't see any here-we-go-again hardheadedness in that, you should run for public office.

The men who wrote the Constitution of the United States were creatures of extraordinary brilliance and wisdom. They knew that government is a parasitic entity that if not contained would devour its host. Therefore, they enumerated the areas of responsibility for the federal government in Article 1, Section 8. Nowhere is health care listed. It is unconstitutional from stem to stern.

The presidents and members of the U.S. Supreme Court took an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” If they were faithful to their oath, then we would indeed have the best possible health care system at the lowest possible price.

They weren't, and we don't.

Sincerely,

Bob Scroggins

New Milford, PA