Birthright citizenship, illegal orders, solar energy and more: Letters

Birthright Citizenship protected by constitution

Dec. 16 − To the Editor:

The writer of the letter “Ban Birthright Citizenship” is entitled to his opinion about Birthright citizenship being a bad idea. He is even allowed his opinion that the original intent of birthright citizenship was to allow in Europeans not Somalis to become citizens, his words not mine. He is perfectly within his rights to use any logic he chooses, like his assertion that only white Europeans can fully assimilate into our culture, that others should be limited to 2 percent, the percentage of non-white Americans in 1800 (not including the enslaved) Again his words not mine. BUT, changes to the Constitution must be done thorough a Constitutional amendment, with a specific set of rules clearly spelled out in that document, not through an executive order, or even by a majority of nine unelected Justices with lifetime tenures. I suggest the writer draft his amendment and send it to the President and see how far it gets. 

Jeffrey Cooper

Portsmouth

Taking away citizenship is a step toward autocracy

Dec. 17 − To the Editor:

A local writer advocates for the elimination of Birthright Citizenship guaranteed in our Fourteenth Amendment. He wants us to believe that there is an immigration problem. He claims Somali immigrants are unable to assimilate into our society. Only white Europeans are acceptable. No doubt the writer thinks this belief makes him a patriot and therein lies the problem. This is how autocracy begins to dismantle our laws and Democratic principles. This is how Hitler got his start in Germany. Those Nazis thought they were patriots because they aspired to a concept of white Christian nationalism. Before adopting the swastika as their symbol, they used the Christian cross. The swastika came later.

First, there is no Somali problem in Minnesota. Somalis have settled all over this country. The writer is obviously unaware of this fact because Somalis and so many other immigrants have quietly assimilated themselves and contributed to our society.

Second, there was no open border policy during the Biden Administration. In fact, that Administration aggressively deported thousands of illegals.

Certain politicians know that by spreading fear and targeting someone to blame it on is how to get elected. There will always be evil people in this world. Someone once said: “if there are eight good people and one Nazi at the dinner table, there are actually nine Nazis.” That is because the good people are tolerating the one evil person.

Bill Kingston

New Castle

Kudos to Rye for leading on solar energy

Dec. 17 — To the Editor:

I would like to commend the Town of Rye for their forward thinking in continuing past solar projects and the installation of new ones. Hopefully Rye and other towns and cities around the country will continue to use common sense and adopt projects that will take full advantage of the sun. This is in contrast to the lack of leadership at the federal level. To have all of the federal tax credits eliminated for solar projects in 2026 going forward is simply insanity. 

China, while still a major polluter, at least has the good sense to go all out in promoting electric cars, solar panels and renewable energy. One has to wonder why the current administration is so opposed to solar. Am I just too cynical to think that there might be a quid pro quo between Saudi Arabia and the current administration?? OMG ..  we might have to drain another swamp.

John Maher

Portsmouth

Eye care needs to be delivered appropriately

Dec. 17 − To the Editor:

Recently an op ed has been appearing, written by two of my colleagues in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, encouraging a positive vote on HB349 which would expand the scope of practice of optometrists, allowing them to perform procedures hitherto restricted to M.D. or D.O. ophthalmologists. 

I come from a family with numbers of medical people. I am entering my sixth year chairing the Department of Health and Human Services Oversight Committee. Both family ties and legislative work keep me in regular contact with both medical people and with the medical needs of our citizens.

Years ago, my Aunt Janet was a member of one of the first classes of R.N.s training to be Nurse Practitioners.  She had had many years of practice with a family medicine physician but didn’t have the time to get an M.D. or D.O. degree and go through a residency, both requisite to become a physician.  But now, a new intermediary step was established.

She regularly told me two things, especially when I became a legislator:

First, “Make sure you work towards establishing various legitimate intermediary steps on the medical ladder.” But second, “Do not allow people to go outside their appropriate scope of practice.”  She knew there would be Nurse Practitioners who thought too highly of who they were and what they could do medically. (It happens in every field.)

Concern has been expressed that certain eye procedures were not available in various areas of the state, necessitating some travel. I recall some years ago a study indicating there were various medical “deserts” in New Hampshire, that is to say, places where various medical services were in short supply. 

Such a desert was identified in the North Country for advanced eye care among other needs, but here’s the update.

Androscoggin Valley Hospital, Berlin, has now partnered with North Country Ophthalmology to provide advanced eye care treatment for North Country residents.  My research has discovered that other ophthalmologic eye care practices are similarly identifying remaining advanced eye care deserts and work to site ophthalmologists in them is under way.

A recent survey of over 1400 New Hampshire residents demonstrated that people understand what’s at stake.  When asked which was more important, expertise or convenient location, 88% of respondents said having procedures done by physicians was more important than proximity.

In the North Country that forced choice is now gone.  One can have advanced level eye care and have it nearby.

That recent column speaks of optometrists “who earn doctorate degrees.”

While that is technically true, it isn’t the whole truth.

When people hear the word “Doctor” they think “physician,” someone with a four-year undergraduate degree, four years of medical school, and several years of post-doctoral residency. 

I have an earned doctorate, but when someone calls thinking they’re speaking to the physician Doctor Pearson I am quick to say no, you want my wife. Yes, I am Dr. Pearson but I am not the medical doctor Doctor Pearson.

Very simply, optometrists may have an O.D. degree and are doctors of optometry but they are not physicians. When medical complications arise – and ample research indicates they do − you want and need a physician, not a technician, however good they are in their current scope of practice.

That recent survey of New Hampshire residents demonstrated that people understand the risk. 76% of New Hampshire people oppose allowing non-medical doctors (people who have a doctorate but are not physicians) to perform eye surgery. Only 8% support it.  Even the majority of political Libertarians agree.

I appreciate the wonderful work optometrists do.  Our effort should be to assist in siting highly qualified people in those medical care deserts we have, not inappropriately expanding optometrists’ scope of practice.

NH Rep. Mark A. Pearson

Rep. Mark Pearson is entering his tenth year in the New Hampshire House of Representatives.  He serves Rockingham County District 34, Hampstead, Kingston and East Kingston.  He has a Masters from Oxford University and a Doctorate from Boston University (but not in medicine).

It’s not sedition, it’s the law

Dec. 17 − To the Editor:

Recently, a writer submitted the letter “Video regarding illegal military orders was despicable.” I am unclear how the writer, or for that matter the Air Force in which she served, interpret the Uniform Code of Military Justice ( UCMJ ). Article 92 of the UCMJ is clear on the issue; members of the  military may refuse an order that is illegal or unconstitutional.

As an enlisted  Marine I had an understanding of article 92 which was explained in detail by NCO’s and officers to all enlisted men. Presently , as a Marine veteran and in light of the issue as it pertains to Sen . Mark Kelly’s response to Sec. or War Hegseth’s labeling his act as sedition ( “No, it’s not sedition. It’s the law. “),  article 92 has even more significance. It is interesting to note that in 2016 Hegseth made the following statement :  “ Military should disobey an order that is illegal or unconstitutional. “ The letter writer conveniently overlooks the fact that all of the six Congressmen and one woman were all former members of the military including Sen. Mark Kelly, former Navy Captain and astronaut.

Peter Rice

Portsmouth

Send your letter to opinion@seacoastonline.com

Please keep letters to 250 words or less. Submissions must include the writer’s first and last names, city or town and a daytime telephone number (which is for verification purposes only and will not be published). Send letters or commentaries to opinion@seacoastonline.com. Letters from Seacoast-area writers addressing local topics will be given priority for publication.