Archive for July 6th, 2009
Hey folks, how about some responses to this piece? Here’s one to get you started:
Hey jerk, do a little REPORTING (since you work for an alleged newspaper) and TALK to a few locals before you get here. Good cheap Mexican food in Fort Stockton?
The piece (which can be found here):
Some of you warned me about El Paso, the latest stop on my two-week, reader-driven road trip. Reader Daniel Anaya e-mailed to say that the city “has little to redeem it in general.” Based on what I saw, I wouldn’t come to that harsh a judgment, but it’s certainly not the most lively city on a weeknight.
An article in New Yorker Magazine that has become an important part of the health care discussion nationally focused on health care costs in McAllen, with a little comparison of El Paso. Click here for more background on that.
In the Dallas Morning News last week, columnist Jim Landers continued the discussion. Please read the entire article yourself to see what jumps out. But this was the quote that jumped out at me:
“The uninsured and underinsured do not have the luxury of prevention,” McAllen internist Linda Villarreal said. “We have epidemic morbid obesity and epidemic diabetes. We have individuals who are not getting health care until they turn 65 and get that little [Medicare] card.”
My thought was this: Prevention, especially of the diseases mentioned in the quote, ought to start with eating right and getting a bit of exercise, neither of which ought to cost much more to do than eating crap and sitting around. If poor folk want to keep from spending so much on health care they can’t afford, prevention is not a luxury, it’s a necessity, and that’s where the largest effort and the most money ought to be. I get the feeling that the problem with the health care system is that it’s so much more about the money than the health that it’s a systemic preference to go for an expensive pound of cure than a cheap ounce of prevention.
– Sito Negron
Vital discussion distributed in an e-mail being sent around last week:
Diario has two articles today from different groups in Juarez commenting on Federico De La Vega’s statements to the El Paso Times on Sunday in regard to his family’s decision to move to the US [http://www.elpasotimes.com/juarez/ci_12705107].
In a nutshell, representatives of government and the legal system say that if De La Vega has evidence of the corruption at all levels of government that he cites in his interview, then he has the responsibility to denounce it to the Public Ministry, else he becomes an accomplice. He should come back and (in my words) “put his money where his mouth” is and work to improve the situation from within….
This article also has a statement from Governor Reyes Baeza saying that the situation is improving, but that the security operation has strengths and weaknesses, peaks and valleys…
Perhaps one of the valleys is the body count for June which is now at least 202 and counting… [see article from El Norte today, posted below]
To the contrary, representatives of the business community express their support and understanding for De La Vega’s decision to protect himself and his family by leaving Juarez and they call upon the government to make real improvements in security. Someone quoted in this article also points out that it is not only the super-rich empresarios like Sr. De La Vega who are leaving Juarez, but also members of the upper-middle and middle classes. No mention of the alternatives that might be available to the other 99% of the population of the city of Juarez.