The Washington Post - USA (2022-05-07)

A16 EZ RE THE WASHINGTON POST.SATURDAY, MAY 7 , 2022

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[email protected]

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-

ABCDE

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER

EDITORIALS

W

HAT HAPPENS when a dictatorship sends its brutal en- forcers to intimidate or cap- ture dissidents, journalists, activists, business executives, members of ethnic minority groups and religious be- lievers who are living in a free and open democracy? No rule-of-law state should tolerate such trespasses. Yet they go on — especially those involving China’s long arm of repression, which often reaches deep into the United States. While keeping a lid on free speech at home, Beijing sends agents to the West to harass, intimidate, surveil and abduct those who have spoken out. This can include brazen attempts to kidnap people and bring them back to China, or the misuse of extradition procedures and the international law enforcement platform Interpol. Other dissidents are silenced with threats to their relatives in China. The Post’s Christian Shepherd reported April 29 that activists and lawmakers in Europe and North America are raising the alarm about China’s use of such coercive tactics. Beijing’s issuance of Interpol “red notices” asking for a suspect to be de-

tained and returned to China has jumped from around 30 a year to more than 200. Among the targets are not only political dissidents and business executives but also ethnic minority Uyghurs or Tibetans who fled repression in their homelands. In 2002, Chinese agents seized dissident and democracy advocate Wang Bing- zhang while he was visiting Vietnam; he remains in prison in China. So does Gui Minhai, a Swedish citizen and Hong Kong bookseller and publisher whose volumes contained rumors about the private lives of China’s leaders. In 2015, he was abduct- ed in Thailand and taken back to China. Shadowy agents often carry out China’s intimidation overseas, demanding writ- ten pledges of obedience lest a relative be arrested or punished inside China. Such underhanded blackmail is terrifying for those on the receiving end. A 2021 study by Freedom House identified 31 countries that have aimed transnational repression at 79 host nations. The report document- ed more than 600 cases between 2014 and 2020, and found that 26 of the 31 nations also used nonphysical methods of intimidation, such as spyware, online harass-

ment and sending threats by proxy. The report concluded, “China conducts the most sophisticated, global, and compre- hensive campaign of transnational repression in the world.” Other leading per- petrators are Russia, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Rwanda. A glimpse of China’s efforts in the United States came in March when the Justice Department brought charges against five people accused of variously “stalking, harassing, and spying on U.S. residents” on behalf of China’s secret police. The U.S. government has a spotty rec- ord when it comes to combating such activity. The Trump-era “China Initiative” against economic espionage and trade- secret theft was a misguided flop and created a perception of anti-China bias. Any effort to stop transnational repression must avoid this. In a positive step, State Department human rights reports are now highlighting more cases of transnational repression. It is vital to stop this ugly byproduct of dictatorship from spreading in democratic nations that re- spect rule of law.

The long arm of the lawless

China’s d ictatorship reaches into the United States.

A

S D.C. emerges from the covid- 19 pandemic of the past two-plus years, it faces numerous challenges. Combating a rise in vio- lent crime, addressing student learning loss and spurring D.C.’s post-pandemic recovery are just some of the issues confronting the city. Never has there been a clearer need for the D.C. Council to have grounded and thoughtful members. Seven of the 13 seats are up for election this year, with contests for five seats — council chairman, an at-large seat and seats in Wards 1, 3 and 5 — on the ballot in the all-important Democratic primary. Ward 6 council member Charles Allen (D) doesn’t face opposition in the June 21 vote, and at-large member Elissa Silver- man is an independent who won’t appear on the ballot until the general election in November. Recent years have seen a leftward shift on the council, marked by moves to raise taxes and cut funding for the police and by efforts to undo mayoral control of the public school system. This year’s elec- tions afford voters an opportunity to bring the council into better balance with the real needs of D.C. residents. In the race for council chairman, we endorse incumbent Phil Mendelson over challenger Erin Palmer. First elected to the council in 1998 and chairman since 2012, Mr. Mendelson is a meticulous lawmaker with an encyclopedic knowl- edge of city government. He has pro- duced results on such issues as strength- ening gun laws and invigorating early-

childhood education. We have not always agreed with Mr. Mendelson, but he has proved to be a steady hand for the council in tumultuous times. Ms. Palmer, an ethics lawyer who has served as an advisory neighborhood commissioner, has mounted an energetic campaign but is untested. Moreover, her views would push the council even further to the left. Ward 1 incumbent Brianne K. Nadeau is facing two challengers in her bid for a third term. We previously backed Ms. Na- deau, but she is increasingly on the wrong side of important issues: She has voted to cut the police budget and raise taxes and no longer favors mayoral control of schools. Of her opponents, the clear choice is Salah Czapary over Sabel Harris, an advisory neighborhood commissioner whose positions on many issues mirror those of Ms. Nadeau. Mr. Czapary is a former D.C. police officer who has made public safety a focus of his campaign. His experience in uniform and later in civilian positions that included community outreach gives him unique insights, and he has smart ideas about how to build the public trust in police that is so crucial in crime prevention. Mary M. Cheh’s decision not to seek reelection in Ward 3 opens up a seat, and voters there are fortunate to have a wealth of smart, committed candidates to choose from, such as longtime community activist Tricia Duncan and Phil Thomas, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser’s (D) former outreach staffer in Ward 3. Most impressive, though, and our choice, is

Eric Goulet. The 19 years Mr. Goulet has spent in D.C. government — including as budget director, director of the D.C. Council Committee on Health, adviser in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and to the attorney general — give him unparalleled expertise. More than any other candidate, Mr. Goulet has a grasp of the issues and an understanding of the financial realities that must be a part of any policy. In Ward 5, seven candidates are vying to fill the seat left open when incumbent Kenyan R. McDuffie (D) decided not to run for reelection in his ill-fated bid to become attorney general. Our endorse- ment goes to Faith Gibson Hubbard. As an educator and community organizer who later led the Mayor’s Office of Com- munity Affairs, she has been steeped in the most pressing issues confronting the city. She has a reputation as a collabora- tor with a common-sense approach to government, qualities that would be valuable to the council. In the at-large race, incumbent Anita Bonds is seeking a third full term. She is well intentioned and well liked but has not been an effective lawmaker. Nate Fleming, a lawyer whom we endorsed in 2014 when he first unsuccessfully ran against Ms. Bonds, offers an opportunity for improvement. Having grown up in Ward 8 and served as an elected advocate for D.C. statehood and as a D.C. Council legislative director, Mr. Fleming under- stands the issues and is committed to finding solutions.

For D .C. Council

Never has there been a clearer need for the city to have grounded leaders.

continued presence on the legal market amounted to a huge hole in the nation’s anti-youth-tobacco policy. Antismoking activists argue that the real villains are not federal regulators try- ing to save lives, but the tobacco companies that marketed products such as menthol cigarettes to Black people in the first place. Despite decades of progress, smoking is still the leading cause of preventable death in the country, and the Black community disproportionately feels the im- pact. Smoking kills an astonishing 47,000 Black people every year. A new study in the journal Tobacco Control

found that a U.S. menthol ban could per- suade 1.3 million smokers to quit, including 381,272 Black smokers. Some fear that the FDA’s forthcoming ban would increase tense interactions between police and Black Americans. But the agency emphasized that it would not ban consumers from possessing menthol cigarettes, only distributors from selling them. Some critics nevertheless call for yet more study. No; menthol cigarettes have killed huge numbers of Black people and will continue killing as long as their sale is legal. The FDA should finalize its ban as quickly as possible.

T

HE FOOD and Drug Administra- tion proposed Thursday to ban menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars, eliciting criticism that the Biden administration was cracking down on products popular among Black people. The critics are wrong; the FDA’s move was long overdue, and it will save many lives, including many Black people’s lives. Menthol cigarettes have, indeed, been singled out — for light treatment. The 2009 Tobacco Control Act banned flavored cigarettes because they appeal to children first experimenting with smoking. But, amid concerns from the Congressional Black Caucus, lawmakers excepted menthol cigarettes because of their popularity among Black smokers; some 85 percent of Black smokers puff on menthols. Yet menthol is a flavor like any other, making cigarettes more appealing to young and inexperienced users. The minty taste dis- guises cigarettes’ harsh tobacco flavor, and menthol’s soothing properties limit throat irritation. In other words, menthols are almost perfect gateway tobacco products. Instead of banning menthols, Congress ordered the FDA to study what to do about them. But the agency moved slowly and, 13 years later, nearly 20 million people continue to smoke menthols. Flavored cigars and cigarillos should also have been banned in 2009, along with flavored cigarettes. After the flavored ciga- rette ban, these products were natural substitutes for teenagers seeking tobacco without the off-putting taste, and their

Ban menthol cigarettes now

The time for studies is over.

MARIO TAMA/GETTY IMAGES Menthol cigarettes in an arranged photo in Los Angeles on April 28.

Zein El-Amine’s story, as recounted in the April 29 Metro article “For adjuncts, subject is economics,” resonated with me. My first experience as an adjunct profes- sor came during the late 1970s when I was enrolled in my second doctoral program and also serving as a graduate teaching assistant. My assumption was that having a lot of hands-on experience would help me find a tenure-track faculty position. I had a couple of perfunctory interviews, but I found that then, as now, schools were laying off faculty members because of decreasing numbers of students. I faced reality and found employment in the private sector. However, I did not give up on finding a teaching position. Over the next 25 years while working for various employers, I served as an adjunct for six universities, two colleges and two community colleges. I taught at the graduate and undergraduate levels, on campus and off campus, online and on cable television networks. I also taught for two prominent national seminar providers. I wrote and published material. Some of the 10 schools for which I taught employed me for as long as seven years, and I carried a teaching load as large as that of a tenure-track faculty member. But I found myself stuck in the world of adjuncts with a small paycheck, no office, no secretarial help and no job security. Again, I was told the problem was that student enroll- ments were down, which meant that I couldn’t be brought on board. Eventually, I got the message, aban- doned teaching and moved on to government contracting. Gaylord Reagan, Alexandria

The April 29 Metro article “For adjuncts, subject is economics” succinctly demonstrated the plight that many adjuncts face, even in a region awash in institutions of higher education and the seeming job opportunities they should present for highly qualified people. There are other types of “contingent” faculty in addition to adjuncts, called “term faculty.” These faculty are consid- ered “full time” and get paid somewhat better than adjuncts, but there is no tenure track for them, their pay is nowhere near as high as that of tenured faculty, and they typically work on short-term contracts of just one to three years, so there is no job security. I have colleagues who have worked as college professors for 20 or 30 years on year-to-year contracts. Though unionization efforts are ex- tremely important to improving this situation for all contingent faculty, this solution is not available for everyone. Virginia, for example, is a so-called right- to-work state that prohibits by law its faculty at public institutions from union- izing. This is unlikely to change with the current administration in Richmond. Ironically, though adjuncts and term faculty barely make a living wage, students are going into debt to take their classes, especially at expensive private schools. Who is getting all this money? While the factors driving college costs are complex, top administrators and business and engineering faculty making six- figure salaries certainly must add to the problem. If higher education wants to retain talented teachers who have the mental and emotional energy it takes to deliver quality education to students, it must begin to pay them fairly and give them job security. Lori Rottenberg, Arlington

The hard life of an adjunct

Though it is heartening that Derrick Johnson, president and chief executive of the NAACP, has praised the Food and Drug Administration’s proposed ban on menthol cigarettes “as a huge win for equity, justice, and public health concerns” [“FDA moves to outlaw menthol cigarettes,” front page, April 29], we should not forget that it took the NAACP decades to come to this position. At the association’s annual Spingarn Medal awards banquet in 1990, which was exclusively sponsored by Philip Morris, the Rev. Benjamin Hooks, longtime executive director of the NAACP, lauded the company “as one of our greatest contributors across the years... a pio- neer in hiring Blacks for nontraditional jobs in industry... a company that cares

... and a model of corporate social
responsibility.”
In 1986, I described the tobacco indus-
try’s aggressive marketing of menthol
brands to African Americans on bill-
boards and in the print media and its
financial support of the NAACP, the
National Urban League, the National
Newspaper Publishers Association and
other cultural and civic organizations.
One byproduct of this largesse was the
long opposition by most Black lawmak-
ers to restricting smoking in public plac-
es — legislation that tobacco companies
compared not very subtly to laws de-
signed to bring back segregation.
It is little remembered why the bill to
give the FDA regulatory control over
tobacco products, signed into law in
2009 by President Barack Obama, did not
ban menthol, despite the well-known
targeting of menthol brands to Black
communities. The reason is that an un-
likely proponent of the bill threatened to
withdraw support if a ban on menthol
were included: Philip Morris.
Alan Blum, Tuscaloosa, Ala.
The writer is director of the
U niversity of Alabama Center for the
Study of Tobacco and Society.

The road to banning menthols

Nicholas Eberstadt’s May 2 op-ed, “How demographics could thwart Putin’s ambitions,” described how, notwith- standing ample natural resources and good higher education, “the Russian system produces remarkably little private wealth.” But the headline focused on a symptom rather than the underlying issue: We all respond to the incentives we face, and even the “talented, enterpris- ing, impressive people” Mr. Eberstadt mentioned won’t spend their time creat- ing value just to have it expropriated. Living in a kleptocracy means facing a high and capricious “tax” on everything. Despite the complaints of crass material- ism and stark inequalities in our own country, it might be that capitalism is the worst economic system “except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Mark D. Richardson, Takoma Park

Capricious kleptocracies

government, begin to save for retire- ment? None of that was possible until the loans were paid and even thereafter for a long time. There are many of me out there right now, repaying the debt but not accomplishing greater things because of it. Because the prior generation’s taxpay- ers pulled me up the ladder, I am honored to do it for this generation with my tax dollars. Margaret Fonshell Ward, Baltimore

The May 1 Drawing Board cartoon by Michael Ramirez mischaracterized the student loan situation. Society needs ed- ucated young people. Giving them impos- sibly large loans stops these same gradu- ates from starting families, buying hous- es or choosing less remunerative jobs. Students need to take these loans because politicians have underfunded the very educational institutions we want these young people to attend. Tuition is free in much of the world. It should be here as well. It was low-cost in many states until the 1970s. President Biden has legal authority to waive some or all federally backed student loans. He should do so uncondition- ally. And people who have paid off their own costs should applaud because it would make life better for their peers and build a better society. Nick Radonic, Derwood

I can answer the question posed by the taxpayer in Michael Ramirez’s May 1 Drawing Board of Joe’s Student Loans Bar: “Why are you handing me their bill?” I’m why. I was an intelligent, capable high school student with a single parent who was inconsistently employed for all the usual reasons. Only because of government grants and loans, I went to college and law school. I paid all my loans because that education put me in a place where I could. Since then, I have paid back the grants and loans more than 100-fold in tax dollars and created a next generation who will not need help but who can, instead, help others. What would I have been able to do if I had not spent the first eight years after school repaying debt? A public service job, charitable contributions, work in

Investing in the future

Regarding the May 2 Metro article “A bite from this tick, found locally, can cause lifelong allergy to red meat”: There is life after alpha-gal syndrome. I had anaphylaxis and was the second alpha-gal allergy victim in my central Virginia county when diagnosed in 2009. The syndrome had been isolated at the Allergy Center in Charlottesville by Scott P. Commins and Thomas A.E. Platt-Mills. They were among the writers who published a technical article in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in 2009. Subsequently, I consulted directly with Dr. Commins and took three blood tests, 18 months apart, that reflected a gradually decreasing sensitivity. Early on, Dr. Commins predicted a decline and advised me to challenge my system with small meat samples. After beginning with half an ounce of ground pork, over the course of four years, I slowly built up to normal servings of lean pork, crispy bacon and ham. At 10 years, I could eat small portions of lean beef. At 13 years, I ate a full serving of beef tips. In none of those challenges did I experience any significant reaction. In retrospect, I suspect I could have pro- gressed faster. Perry Cabot, Jeffersonton, Va.

There is life after alpha-gal

 Letters can be sent to [email protected]. Submissions must be exclusive to The Post and should include the writer’s address and telephone numbers.

The Washington Post - USA (2022-05-07)

Get our desktop app

Company

Features

Documentation

Resources