The Washington Post - USA (2022-04-10)

A30 EZ RE THE WASHINGTON POST.SUNDAY, APRIL 10 , 2022

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[email protected]

MICHAEL DE ADDER

ABCDE

FREDERICK J. RYAN JR. Publisher and Chief Executive Officer

NEWS SALLY BUZBEE....................................Executive Editor CAMERON BARR.....................Senior Managing Editor KAT DOWNS MULDER.......Chief Product Officer & ME STEVEN GINSBERG............................Managing Editor KRISSAH THOMPSON.........................Managing Editor

SHARIF DURHAMS.................Deputy Managing Editor MONICA NORTON..................Deputy Managing Editor LIZ SEYMOUR.........................Deputy Managing Editor MARK W. SMITH.....................Deputy Managing Editor SCOTT VANCE.........................Deputy Managing Editor BARBARA VOBEJDA...............Deputy Managing Editor

EDITORIAL AND OPINIONS RUTH MARCUS................Deputy Editorial Page Editor KAREN TUMULTY.............Deputy Editorial Page Editor JO-ANN ARMAO............Associate Editorial Page Editor

OFFICERS JAMES W. COLEY JR.........................................Production L. WAYNE CONNELL............................Human Resources KATE M. DAVEY.....................................Revenue Strategy ELIZABETH H. DIAZ...Audience Development & Insights GREGG J. FERNANDES.........Customer Care & Logistics SHANI GEORGE......................................Communications STEPHEN P. GIBSON.....................Finance & Operations KRISTINE CORATTI KELLY....Communications & Events JOHN B. KENNEDY...................General Counsel & Labor

MIKI TOLIVER KING..................................................Arc XP SHAILESH PRAKASH..Digital Product Dev./Engineering MICHAEL A. RIBERO....................................Subscriptions JOY ROBINS..........................................................Revenue

The Washington Post 1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-6000

ABCDE

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER

EDITORIALS

I

N UKRAINE, a relative lull in the war has set in now that Russia has re- treated from Kyiv, the capital that President Vladimir Putin tried — and failed — for six weeks to capture. There is no letup in the danger Moscow’s forces pose to Ukrainian civilians, however — as evidenced by Friday’s wanton missile strike on a train station in Krama- torsk, where throngs were trying to evac- uate ahead of a new offensive for which Russia is evidently regrouping, reequip- ping and rearming. At least 50 people died. The impending offensive, centered on eastern Ukraine, is pivotal. Ukrainian success could blunt Mr. Putin’s ambitions lastingly; Russian success could lead to a renewed push on Kyiv. The United States and other Western democracies must ensure that Ukraine’s forces have the weapons they need to win. Troop recruitment is no problem; Ukrainians have mobilized to fight for a cause that belongs to them and to everyone who believes in international law, self-determination and human rights. Ukraine’s achievements so far also vindicate NATO’s strategy of eco- nomic sanctions against Moscow and military support for Kyiv — $1.7 billion

of which the Biden administration has sent since Feb. 24. NATO’s own success has raised a need for recalibration. Ukraine has far ex- ceeded initial expectations, which were that it would be able to hold off the Russian army for a while until switching to guerrilla warfare against a presumed occupation. Now, planners must scram- ble to equip Ukraine for something more like a conventional war. Kyiv’s forces still need rifles, drones, grenade launchers and shoulder-fired antitank and antiaircraft weapons. More impor- tant for the coming fights, however, will be tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, long-range surface-to-air missiles — and antiship missiles to counter Russia’s navy in the Black Sea. Nor should NATO rule out aircraft, both fixed-wing and attack helicopters. Providing such equipment swiftly is always easier said than done, in part because Ukrainian forces are accus- tomed to Russian-style weaponry and would need time-consuming training to take advantage of advanced Western- made equipment. Still, the United States and its allies must err on the side of speed and creativity. An example is the Senate’s

recent unanimous approval of a lend- lease bill modeled on the law that en- abled swift U.S. supply for the anti-Hitler coalition in Europe before the country entered World War II. Another: Slovakia’s recent declaration that it will provide Ukraine with a Soviet- made S-300 long-range air defense system, with which Ukraine is already famil- iar. The United States will replace them for Slovakia by deploying a more mod- ern, U.S.-made Patriot battery, including troops to operate it. This bolsters Patriots in Slovakia already staffed by Dutch and German troops. Also exemplary is the Czech Republic’s decision to send Soviet- made tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, and Britain’s offer to help with antiship weapons. Unfortunately, Ger- many balks at supplying 100 Marder light tanks, ostensibly because its own military cannot spare them. Ukraine pleads for weapons not only because it needs them to fight now, but also because it is transitioning to a prolonged war. So comes a political gut check to its supporters: Are we with it for the duration? In response, the United States and its fellow democracies must not equivocate.

A worthwhile investment

The West must supply the weapons the next phase of war demands.

C

ONGRESS PASSED the Afford- able Care Act more than a decade ago, but reflexive GOP opposition to the law — with Republicans demanding repeal or nothing — prevent- ed lawmakers from clarifying its some- times confusing language and mitigating its unintended consequences. President Biden announced Tuesday that his administration was finally moving to patch up one of Obamacare’s most glaring problems, potentially helping millions. The Biden administration is proposing a rule that would fix the so-called family glitch, an obscure issue of wording bur- ied deep in the law’s text that prevents a shockingly large number of people from getting cheaper health premiums. The law provides people government subsidies for health insurance plans, but only if their employers do not offer them affordable health coverage. The law deems an employer-sponsored plan unaf- fordable if premiums would top about 10 percent of an employee’s household income. So, if workers would have to pay sky-high premiums for their employer- sponsored plan, they could always seek coverage on the Obamacare marketplaces and receive assistance from govern-

ment subsidies. The problem comes when workers try to add spouses or children to their employer health plans. Doing so could raise employees’ premiums substantially. But a 2012 Internal Revenue Service interpre- tation of the law says that does not matter; as long as the cost of covering a worker, and only the worker, on an employer-sponsored plan remains south of 10 percent of that worker’s household income, the employee is ineligible for government help. This is not the only plausible reading of the law’s words, and it is an absurd one in the context of the law’s broader purposes. Nevertheless, the Kaiser Family Founda- tion reckons that the family glitch affects some 5 million people. More than 4 million of them have accepted employer- sponsored coverage, meaning they are paying a huge share of their incomes — an average of about 16 percent — on premiums, even though Congress designed Obamacare to help people in their situa- tion. Others simply go without coverage. The Biden administration is finally proposing to interpret the law more sen- sibly, providing subsidies to families who would have to pay more than 10 percent

of their incomes to cover every member on an employer-sponsored plan. Doing so will cost money — about $45 billion over 10 years. But that is relatively small in the context of national health-care reform, and for the good it will do the families it will help. Moreover, those caught in the family glitch skew younger and healthier than those currently buying plans in the Obamacare marketplaces. If they buy subsidized plans, the stability of the marketplaces’ risk pools will improve, which could lower premiums for all those on Obamacare plans. But there is only so much Mr. Biden can do on his own. Democrats in Con- gress are considering long-term Obama- care fixes that would restrain market- place premium costs and ease the still- high burdens some families face paying for health insurance. This should be a priority between now and the August recess. Obamacare fulfilled its primary goal, cutting substantially the proportion of Americans lacking health-care coverage. It is now an indispensable part of the health-care system. Congress has a re- sponsibility to ensure it does maximum good.

A longtime glitch finally patched

Mr. Biden moves to fix one of Obamacare’s most glaring issues.

“I

T IS hard to find the words to express the depth of my grati- tude,” soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson declared at the White House on Friday. Her gracious acknowledgment of her as- cent to the nation’s highest court follows what, in today’s light, might be called a normal Senate confirmation. And that’s precisely the problem: Her 53-to-47 confirmation vote was an unjustifiable parti- san slap at the nation’s first Black female Supreme Court justice — and a sign of how off the rails judicial confirmations have become. Unlike in other recent confirmations, there were no questions regarding her character or temperament, and no pro- cedural chicanery in the Senate. Judge Jackson’s ascension to the high court should have been free of controversy. Some Republicans concocted absurd smears about her record to justify opposing her; others acknowledged her qualifications but complained that she probably would not rule the way they preferred — which is not the standard that has traditionally been applied to nominees. This reflexive tendency by the opposition to deny a president a chance to fill judicial vacancies has become a new norm. And it is unlikely to end, absent intentional reforms. Easiest would be ad- justing confirmation proceedings, such as Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. Rather than force nominees to endure marathon grilling sessions, senators could consider letting them answer questions over more days. Instead of allowing grandstanding lawmakers to attack nominees without limit or consequence, perhaps they should be confined to asking only questions that are relevant to the

proceedings. For a time, a group of centrist senators made a pact to vote as a bloc for all reasonable nominees, regardless of which president nominated them. Those few senators still interested in repairing the tattered confirmation process should res- urrect this strategy. A more enduring and effective change would be imposing term limits on federal judges, of perhaps 18 years, and spreading out vacancies so that each president gets to make a predictable number of appoint- ments. This would dramatically reduce the stakes of any single Supreme Court pick and limit the element of chance when vacancies arise that could tip the court’s ideological balance. Moreover, term limits would cut the pressure presidents feel to pick young ideologues for the court or to select only

judges with similar pedigrees. More people of more varying experience would be considered to serve. Supreme Court prec- edent would be less likely to reflect the idiosyncratic preferences of one or two justices. And term limits would guard against justices experiencing mental de- cline on the bench. This idea is neither new nor without complications. Some scholars argue it would require a constitutional amend- ment. Safeguards would have to be crafted to prevent judges from timing their retire- ments to give presidents of their preferred parties extra picks. And rules might have to be drafted to prevent former judges from taking big paydays at private companies after leaving the court. But these challeng- es do not eliminate the reform’s appeal. What is clear is this: Things cannot continue on their current, corrosive trajectory.

The process must change

Judge Jackson’s confirmation fight proves this yet again.

ANDREW HARNIK/ASSOCIATED PRESS Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson with Vice President Harris on the South Lawn of the White House on Friday.

“Victory for the virus” is a fitting name for the decision to cut global aid from the bipartisan $10 billion covid deal [“Lawmakers agree on $10 billion in coronavirus funds, but drop global aid,” Economy & Business, April 5]. Ameri- cans are at risk as long as covid is spreading globally. Until we see global herd immunity, this pandemic will continue. As of April 3, 11.5 percent of individuals in low-income countries were vaccinated, compared with 65.7 percent in the Unit- ed States. Researchers estimate that we need at least 80 percent of the world population to be immune before reach- ing herd immunity. The bill called on investment of at least $750 million to fight future variants; the most effective way to prevent future variants is to develop herd immunity through mass vaccination. Variants are born as the virus evolves in the human body. The virus replicates faster and longer in unvaccinated individuals, increasing the chances of a variant developing. We need to increase global vaccination rates to prevent new variants and further coronavirus-related fatalities in the United States. Therefore, it is in our best interest to fund global efforts to increase vaccination coverage. This approved funding falls far short of what is necessary. Elizabeth Sklar, Baltimore

Victory for the virus

Regarding the April 5 Metro article “Legislators make quick return to Capitol as budget impasse continues”: Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) was right that people in Virginia are having difficulty making ends meet amid rising inflation and shortages. His plans to eliminate the grocery tax and invest in educa- tion and mental health are much needed. I also suggest that he persuade the commonwealth’s legislators to suspend the gas tax for 90 days and eliminate Virginia’s pesky car tax. Pradeep Ganguly, Herndon

Virginia’s pesky tax

A welcome addition to the widespread problem of treating addiction is the concept of using a paid incentive to encourage abstention from drug use as revealed in Emefa Addo Agawu’s April 3 Opinions Essay, “She was paid to stay off drugs. Here’s why this approach could help many others.” The primary tool in that prevention program is frequent drug testing to verify the addict’s cessa- tion of drug use. This new strategy called “contingency management” is similar to several other successful drug prevention programs that use drug testing to confirm qualifi- cation for receiving valued incentives, such as continued employment or continued participation in a favored activity, such as school sports. It’s also used in drug courts to qualify for official ex- pungement of a permanent record of drug-related illegal activities. Although often opposed under the influence of lucrative addictive-substance industries, drug testing has been approved by the courts and widely used for decades. The technology has improved to where a simple inexpensive single oral swab drug test can detect up to a dozen different drugs, from tobacco to opioids including fentanyl, within about 10 minutes. Thus, the direct cash payment incentive revealed in this valuable article is a welcome addition to the nation’s drug prevention arsenal to help reverse the current tragic soaring rates of drug addiction, incapacitation and overdose deaths that are a blight on society today. As the essay stated, “With so many people in the United States battling addiction, why is a tested, effective treatment still barely used?” DeForest Rathbone, L eonardtown, Md. The writer is a d rug-use prevention activist.

Helping people stay drug-free

helping one another. Leading a reduction in climate change can also be leading a renewal of our core values as a people. Not having the most and best stuff does not have to be painful if you can substitute being with the most and best family, friends and neighbors. By leading, we can have a better life while avoiding a climate catastrophe. Patrick McGregor, Millersville

The April 6 editorial about the recent U.N. climate report, “We can still avoid a climate catastrophe,” provided some thin hope. Thin only because govern- ments, businesses and other sectors have yet to take seriously the looming climate catastrophe. The faith community should be among the leaders. Consider just the Catholic Church. Globally, all the land holdings of this one religious group approximately equal the size of France. If just half of some 80,000 U.S. Catholic-owned build- ings (parishes, schools, retreat centers, religious headquarters, universities, hos- pitals, etc.) put an average of 200 kilowatts of solar on their properties, 8 gigawatts of clean energy could be generated and the savings from reduced energy costs could be put toward the mission of feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, counseling the lost and accompanying troubled souls. (Eight gigawatts is the equivalent of powering 1 million U.S. homes annually.) One example is a 2-megawatt ground- based system benefiting the Archdiocese of Washington’s Catholic Charities. The site is home to Mother Teresa’s sisters, who are providing long-term care to poor individuals in Northeast D.C. The energy produced is saving hundreds of thou- sands of dollars annually, money that is used to benefit the ministries provided by the Catholic Church in D.C. And it is a wonderful witness to young Catholics wanting to see their church do more to protect their future. Dan Misleh, Washington The writer is founder o f Catholic Climate Covenant.

It is time for the United States to lead again. We all see climate change (rapidly rising destructions and costs from more frequent and severe weather events). We all know the causes (greenhouse gases from fossil fuels). And we all know how to slow it down (transition to renewable energy). Now we must lead. Now we must pass what climate legislation we can and work to pass more as soon as we can thereafter. Yes, leading will mean higher costs for energy and, in turn, higher costs for most everything. Just not as high a cost as doing nothing. Leading will require changes to our lifestyles, but these changes will not cause higher costs for family time, know- ing your neighbor, sharing experiences,

Step up on climate issues

Regarding the April 3 Metro article “Bowser eyes bike and bus expansion, safer roads in transportation budget”: It is obvious D.C. has a problem with road safety. But despite all the cameras currently used to “enforce” traffic rules for several years now, the problem grows. The automated traffic enforce- ment system seems to be more about enriching the city coffers than having an impact on road safety. Rather than adding 170 new cameras, maybe D.C. should find out how other cities manage traffic safety (and carjackings). Panos Varangis, Bethesda

D.C.'s traffic problems

The Washington Post - USA (2022-04-10)

Get our desktop app

Company

Features

Documentation

Resources