Monday, July 31, 2017 1:00 am
Drivers should treat bikes same as any other vehicle
I recently read a letter from Bill Richardson of Churubusco (July 16) concerning safer streets. His points regarding safety on the highway, specifically U.S. 30, make some sense. Misguided drivers who believe they are driving at the posted limit and therefore are allowed to drive in the left lane can cause accidents when encountering drivers who wish to exceed the posted limit. People should always drive in the right lane unless passing a slower motorist. Makes sense.
Richardson's comments on bicycle safety, however, are a little misguided, As an experienced cyclist, I know of many reasons to ride with traffic. For example, a cyclist on the left side of the road is subject to collision at intersections when a driver on the cross street is making a right turn into his lane. Most drivers do not check for traffic to their right, especially when turning on red. There is no specific advantage to seeing oncoming traffic as a cyclist, and riding on the “wrong” side of a street or road has disadvantages at intersections.
Cyclists like myself are completely aware of traffic approaching from the rear. All we need is that the driver passing us give the proper clearance as he passes. Richardson's statement that the roads are not made for cyclists exhibits a bias present in some drivers who do not see a bicycle as a vehicle simply because it does not have an engine and weighs 40 pounds. This is an erroneous conception. Bicycles are vehicles, subject to the same traffic laws as automobiles as well as the same protections.
Edward J. Frank
A thank you for SDI
I would like to give a big shout out to my husband's employer, SDI, for giving $75,000 for the next Honor Flight.
I believe this is a great way to honor those vets.
SDI also gives donations to many other things for the community. It would be great to see more businesses do this type of thing.
Thank you, SDI.
One way or another, we all pay for the uninsured
I don't know everything about the Affordable Care Act or the proposed Trumpcare, but I do know it is impossible to have a medical care plan that covers everything and pleases everyone. There will always be people who truly can't afford coverage, and there will always be people who refuse to spend the money on a medical policy.
Since Medicaid was started, all of us who have jobs and have taxes deducted have been paying for others' health care; we just never saw the bill. I am addressing what I do know about the ACA that is important.
As a former ER nurse, I met the uninsured and the uninsurable. When someone came into the ER and didn't have coverage, they were not turned away. Often they came to the ER with colds or other things a family doctor should treat. Another example of what makes medical costs go up is three 20-year-old uninsured people involved in a critical-injury accident. The hospital will be out millions by the time these young people leave; then what happens? Do you think the hospital will have to raise rates, then do you think the insurance companies will have to increase rates? Had these young people still been covered by their parents, the hospital would not have lost millions.
Everyone reading this could become “uninsurable” at any moment. Anyone could also meet the lifetime limit for insurance, especially as drug costs continue to rise.
I was shocked by President Donald Trump's statement that it is OK if someone doesn't want to have medical coverage; I know the uninsured have been a drastic burden to all of us. The congressmen making the decision on medical coverage will never have to worry about being covered.
It does not make any sense to be against Planned Parenthood and having policies cover birth control pills and be against abortion since birth control eliminates the need for abortion and Planned Parenthood provides birth control pills.
I hope if there are changes to ACA, they do not involve the above mentioned. National health care would solve a lot of the problems, but I have never met anyone who wants that to happen.