Readers Write (Sept. 28): Met Council, Kersten, polls, nonprofits, breast-feeding

As we watch the Metropolitan Council plan our lives for the next 30 years ("Dispersing affordable housing is coercive, condescending," Sept. 21), Minnesotans would be wise to learn about Robert Moses, a New Yorker who created his own version of the Metropolitan Council and single-handedly reshaped New York City and New York State. Never elected to any office, Moses manipulated the law through cronyism to create massive public authorities that had the power to spend money, seize land and operate their own police departments. (Sound familiar?)

Moses confiscated private property, plowing under entire neighborhoods for enormous bridge piers, rail lines and highways. His authorities borrowed millions and levied tolls and fees. New York's infamous bridge tolls were supposed to be temporary. They are still collected 80 years later.

Moses sneered at all ideas but his own. The Metropolitan Council, originally created to ensure the water ran and the toilets flushed, is becoming the Robert Moses of Minnesota. High time they got back to basics.

• • •

I am always glad when a commentary by Katherine Kersten is published. She never fails to get my adrenaline pumping and remind me why I am a liberal. It takes me a long while to read her pieces because I am mentally debating and challenging her every assertion. Last Sunday Kersten stated it was "condescending" to assume minorities might want to move away from their de facto segregated neighborhoods and into areas of higher income or whiter skin. Of course people want to "live near family, friends and cultural support systems." But what does this say about our suburbs if minorities cannot find family, friends or cultural support systems there? Why not?

I'm not surprised that D.J. Tice is surprised at recent polls about Minnesota's gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races (Column, Sept. 21).

Why no backlash against what Tice calls Gov. Mark Dayton's "signature tax hike on the rich"? Because most Minnesotans think that tax hike is sensible public policy.

Why is Democratic Sen. Al Franken doing well in the polls? Because he's doing a good, workmanlike job — and because he never was the ridiculous caricature Republicans dishonestly portrayed him as.

Tice would be less surprised if he wasn't wearing ideologically tinted glasses.

It hardly took a minute of time for politicians to start blaming other politicians over the exit of PreferredOne from the health exchange. It was good of business columnist Lee Schafer to point out that Dayton had nothing to do with that happening ("Strategic error led to exit from MNsure," Sept. 21). Rather, PreferredOne simply did the math wrong when entering that marketplace.

And did anyone catch the responses from Bill Davis ("Nonprofit accused of abusing state funds," Sept. 21), the chief executive of Community Action of Minneapolis, trying to defend the 54 percent administrative cost of his budget? They're obviously getting way too much money from the state and feds if they're inventing ways of spending it on themselves instead of the people they're supposed to be serving.

If a single politician out there wonders why the public rates them at the bottom of the scum pile, here are two articles I highly recommend for their reading enjoyment — I mean, enlightenment.

A Sept. 22 letter suggested removing the NFL's tax exemption and using the windfall to fund domestic- and child-abuse prevention. While a noble thought, one need only look to Community Action to see that throwing money at problems only creates opportunities for other abuse.

I'm referring to the alleged misspending for lavish vacations, alcohol, spa treatments, bonuses and golf, to name a few things.

This is but one example of people given large amounts of money who lose sight of their missions and feel they are justified in wasting tax dollars for a "small gesture on our part to offer them a moment of relaxation or entertainment. It's not like we do this every single week of the year." Wow. How about having a bar-b-que at your house, with your own money?

No, throwing money at problems is rarely the answer. Surely there are already tons of programs in place that deal with domestic- and child-abuse prevention. Maybe a better idea is to audit them to make sure the millions they are provided are being spent wisely and ethically.

When did the Science + Health section become an editorial page, rather than reflecting interesting new research? "'Baby friendly' isn't pure bliss" (Sept. 21) was just an extended rant from women who want to publicly justify their personal decision not to breast-feed. Woven into the article is some of the evidence detailing why breast-feeding is better for both moms and babies. Less discussed was the evidence showing how the practices recommended by the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative actually improve breast-feeding rates.

Yes, breast-feeding can be hard. Yes, it doesn't work out for some mothers and babies. Yes, some mothers are heartbroken they can't breast-feed. Yes, some mothers are comfortable with their decision not to breast-feed.

But here are the more important yeses: Yes, breast-feeding saves babies and mothers lives. Yes, the medical system should do everything it can to help mothers breast feed. Is there another health issue on which we give medicine a pass to not pursue the best practice because it makes some folks uncomfortable? I don't think so.