Readers write for March 20, 2010

We continually hear how the health care bill would affect the deficit ("Dems reveal $940B bill," March 19), but I would like to hear how much it would cost compared with the current system. The deficit is only a measure of how much more is spent than is taken in. If you assess enough taxes to pay for something, there will be no increase in the deficit, no matter how much it costs. Whether there is a deficit or not, our economy must eventually cover the costs in the form of taxes or, indirectly, in higher prices.

We can argue about whether this increased cost is justified and worthwhile for health care, but whether justified or not, the cost will still be there and will have to be paid.

RICHARD ASLESON, ROGERS

• • •

I can't help it, but I'll admit to a self-induced grin at the thought of the contortions every Republican must be going through after the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued its latest report on the cost of the health care bill. Republicans want to assure you that they will do everything in their power to ensure that American taxpayers never have $1 trillion in savings over the next 20 years "rammed down their throats."

What has changed since the days when Republicans would have gladly embraced such savings to the taxpayer? Gosh, could it be a Democratic president?

RICHARD POMMIER, LONG PRAIRIE

There are many reasons why we shouldn't want the U.S. government to "fix" our health care system: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, Amtrak, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are broke.

It's clear that government doesn't know how to run these entities, so why would we allow government to run the entire health care system? Hang on to your wallets, taxpayers.

GEORGE GAIDA, WINONA

The health care bill must be good for workers: The big bosses oppose it.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, two of the most antilabor groups, oppose health care reform legislation now before Congress. This is a good enough reason for every worker to support the bill, even with its shortcomings. No organizations have done more to undermine wages, benefits and working conditions than these two.

WAYNE NEALIS, MINNEAPOLIS

I'm disappointed by the baseless attacks against Teach for America found in the recent commentary from Education Minnesota President Tom Dooher ("The teachers union is not an obstacle," March 16) and in a letter to the editor from St. Paul Federation of Teachers board member Nick Faber.

We at Teach for America were honored when the Twin Cities invited us to come here, and we are grateful to the hundreds of local champions who support the work of our 42 talented teachers who help underserved students achieve remarkable academic gains. We're focused on improving outcomes for underserved children in the Twin Cities until educational equity is realized for all students.

Unfortunately, Dooher and Faber suggest troubling fallacies about our program through fundamentally flawed arguments. The Stanford University study that Dooher cited received substantial criticism for its faulty methodology. The Mathematica study he referred to explicitly excluded Teach for America and other highly selective alternate-route programs.

The evidence is clear: Rigorous independent research from the Urban Institute and others shows that our training and support yields successful teachers who have positive impacts on student achievement. Moreover, 94 percent of principals who work with our teachers report a positive impact in their schools.

The top college graduates we recruit fill many hard-to-staff positions in districts that work in partnership with our program. That's why it's crucial for the state Legislature to approve an alternative certification measure that would open the pipeline for certified teachers in Minnesota from proven programs such as Teach For America.

DANIEL SELLERS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TEACH FOR AMERICA'S TWIN CITIES REGION, MINNEAPOLIS

I'm a Boy Scout, and I don't really read the actual newspaper very much, but I do read the comics. I think that your paper has the best comics in Minnesota. However, there is always room for improvement. My favorite comic is "Pearls Before Swine." The writing is hilarious, and slightly inappropriate (which is perfect for a teenager). If all of your comics were exactly like it, you'd have the perfect paper.

But there are a few comics I just don't get. "Family Circus" might have been funny a long time ago, and I know it's a classic, but times change. The same goes with "Dennis the Menace." I think that you could really improve your comics by adding more like "Pearls Before Swine" and "F Minus."

NATHAN EVANS, ST. PAUL