The right to die

On March 15, The Times Record ran an op-ed piece by Christine Flowers which, in my opinion, belonged in the religion section.

“Euthanasia may be seen as a form of kindness, but it’s not” is a Catholic’s rejection of a proposed Pennsylvania “death with dignity” bill working its way through that Legislature. If successful, the law would allow physician-assisted suicide (not euthanasia, illegal in all 50 states) as an option for terminally ill patients in Pennsylvania.

Flowers bases her argument almost entirely on religious dogma: The seamless garment of life, from conception to its ‘natural’ termination shall not be tampered with. At the end of her days, she is entitled to act according to her sincerely held beliefs. She will be uniquely able to evaluate her own suffering, and in fact have the only valid assessment of it. It would be presumptuous of anyone else to speak for her. To deny the same freedom to decide to others, who don’t share her beliefs, is just plain wrong.

Whether Pennsylvania joins the 10 other states, including Maine (since 2019), where assisted suicide is legal remains to be seen. In Oregon’s 25-year experience, the number of terminally ill patients availing themselves of this option is slowly increasing but remains a statistically insignificant proportion of Oregon deaths (less than 1%). The terminal conditions leading to the choice to end suffering have been cancer, cardiac diseases and neurological diseases (think ALS). While intractable pain is frequently imagined to be the primary problem, with hospice care and an attentive medical team, most pain can be adequately controlled, accepting some side effects. In fact, loss of autonomy and dignity, inability to enjoy life and a loss of sense of purpose are more commonly cited.

Flowers accuses supporters of physician-assisted suicide of mistaking the suicide option for intractable suffering as misplaced kindness on their part. Kindness seems to me to be an action granted by one person to another. Loss of bodily control being central to the suffering at end-of-life, having the option of choosing what to do about their own suffering restores some autonomy, a kindness they can grant themselves.

Steven Zimmerman, MD (retired),
Topsham

Stick with CMP

Central Maine Power workers were out in full force on Christmas Day putting their customers first repairing downed lines sustained from severe winter weather. As a CMP district manager, I’m proud of all the work we do to keep the lights on. It doesn’t matter to us whether it’s a holiday or what the weather is. We’ll always show up ready to restore the grid.

For many of us that commitment carries into our lives outside of work too. We’ve learned from our jobs that we can make a difference. So, we show up for our communities. You’ll find us volunteering, coaching, helping out wherever we can.

If Pine Tree Power’s referendum question passes this November and CMP is taken over by the government, what are the chances the new electric utility, run by politicians, will show up on Christmas Day, severe weather or any other, for that matter?

When it’s time to vote on Pine Tree Power this November, think about who you would rather have at the ready when your lights go out — CMP time tested crews or politicians? I’ll be voting with my coworkers against Pine Tree Power.

Patrick Araujo,
Brunswick

What’s the point of CMP corridor?

In recent weeks, various letters to the editor have continued to claim that CMP’s New England Clean Energy Connect (the corridor) will bring “clean” energy to New England. There is nothing further from the truth.

CMP’s own spokesman stated, “So, the question about whether, whether this [NECEC] will make a difference in climate change. CMP has no, no doubt that it will — we can’t guarantee it. That’s not our job, that’s not our business.”

During the Department of Environmental Protection permitting effort, CMP’s lawyer made it very clear this project was not about climate change at least six times. Here’s one example of what he wrote in this letter, “In fact, nowhere has CMP stated the project’s purpose and need includes GHG (greenhouse gas) reduction.”

In the project’s report to the PUC, they state that huge carbon reductions will take place once the project is built. Yet in 2016, Maine Senator Carson introduced a bill (L.D. 640) that would have verified whether or not these claims were true. It would have answered this question once and for all. Interestingly CMP hired 30 lobbyists to stop the study.

So, what is the truth? What was CMP afraid of? I know; they know these greenhouse reductions are not real. This project needs to be permanently stopped!

Linda Lee,
Bowdoin

Time to move on climate

How does one persuade the unconcerned that climate change is real? Climate activists are told, not with doom and gloom. However once again the world’s scientists tell us, “Humanity still has a chance, close to the last one, to prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms” in a report issued Monday. In order to avoid the worst, the world needs to slash carbon emissions by 60% below 2019 levels by 2035.

On the same page, The Times Record reports that eelgrass meadows in Casco Bay, which provide food, habitat, refuge for marine life and shoreline stability, have retreated 54% in four years due to climate change. Casco Bay, one of the world’s fastest warming bodies of water, may be approaching a tipping point and will be too hot to support eelgrass.

What will it take to get the citizenry of the U.S. to tell Congress and the president to slash carbon emissions?

The Inflation Reduction Act passed last year will reduce carbon emissions to 40% of 2005 levels by 2030 if we quickly improve permitting reform. 27% if we don’t improve transmission infrastructure quickly. Thousands of large renewable projects are on hold due to insufficient grid capacity. 40% is not enough of an emissions reduction.

Fossil fuels are still our go to energy source because the energy market has not gotten the signal that we are serious about transitioning away from fossil fuels. A carbon fee levied on fossil fuels would give the signal to all consumers, investors and innovators that the country is serious about slashing carbon emissions. If revenue from the fee were returned to American households as a monthly carbon dividend, the carbon fee and dividend policy would benefit more than two-thirds of American households. (i.e. The dividend would be greater than the increase in prices due to the fee.) Call Sens. King and Collins, Reps. Pingree and Golden and tell them, it is time to slash carbon emissions — pass a carbon fee and dividend policy.

Dorothy Jones,
Brunswick

Our relationship with China

China’s increasing hostility to the United States is impacting my business. I have designed and now build an automatic fireproof door system for fire poles; the kind people slide down.

Most of the automation equipment comes from this country and Japan. There are a few parts that the Japanese company Mitsubishi outsources to China. These parts are the ones I cannot get except directly from China. The distributor I buy most of the automation parts from has millions of dollars in backordered parts, these parts are primarily Chinese made.

One part, a breakout block, is back ordered way into 2024 from the distributor. I can get it right away, however, from China. This is a deliberate attempt to hamstring the distributor and to siphon off money that would otherwise go to that distributor. Many automation manufacturers are experiencing the same thing. There is a push to pull away from Chinese parts, but this takes time. Some companies were able to pull all manufacturing in house. Those companies are reaping the benefits while others suffer.

It is long past time to pull away from cheap Chinese labor and switch to countries and companies that do not have the demise of the western world as their goal.

Bart Chapin,
Arrowsic