Stanford student deserves a full scholarship
Regarding “Stanford student returns to fields after losing 2 jobs” ( Front Page, Nov. 2): It is disturbing and shameful that Stanford Medical School, with all its money and privilege, does not provide Gianna NinoTapias with a full scholarship to medical school including tuition, room and board, books, medical insurance and a clothing allowance. Medical school is difficult enough without the added pressure of having to pay one’s own way by working long days in the fields for minimum wage. Here is a young woman committed to serving her community after becoming a physician.
I wonder how many Stanford medical students are in NinoTapias’ situation. Perhaps someone in the Stanford scholarship office will read Tatiana Sanchez’ excellent article, wake up and take action on her behalf. Or perhaps a wealthy, Stanfordtrained physician will become her benefactor. After reading this article about this inspiring young woman, it is clear that she deserves it.
Joel Resnikoff, Berkeley
Determined student
Gianna NinoTapias! What a strong, intelligent woman to struggle in the fields, picking blueberries! This woman shows such resilience and determination; may she one day walk proudly to receive her medical degree and help others.
I applaud anyone who has this determination and grit to get to their goal in life.
Dolores Gomez, Brisbane
Not a dictatorship
Regarding “Bring back monarchy” ( Letters, Oct. 31): I believe that was an incredibly naive comment, as he is asking for a dictatorship. Our current government, although not perfect, does work.
It works because people vote, and so everyone’s voice is represented in the government, and we have a separation of powers/ checks and balances, to make sure that power is not resting solely in the hands of one person. Finally, how would this dictator come to power?
Would we elect this dictator? If we did that, how would we make sure they remained altruistic, and equally distributed his wealth? Or would the dictator just take over, possibly in a military coup?
Ethan Moore, San Francisco
Solidarity in voting
I voted this past weekend. In prior years, I had the ballot mailed to me but often did not fill it out because I assumed I knew too little to make an informed decision. This year, however, voting seemed extraordinarily important. I attended a Zoom ballot party to learn more about the pros and cons of the various props and about whose deep pockets funded what.
I also had countless conversations with family, some heated, some constructive, as we fall all over the redblue spectrum.
Even though I surmise family members voted oppositely on many items, we felt a certain solidarity in driving together to a library drop box to have each of our voices counted.
Melody Cao, San Jose
Politicized process
Regarding “Abolish lifetime judgeships” ( Letters, Oct. 29): I want to agree with you. I do believe that the justices in this nation have become very politicized. But my worry with replacing the justices every four or eight years is that they will become even more politicized, and every ruling those justices would have made would just be overturned four years later. Although our current system doesn’t seem perfect, it is smart. Allowing justices to serve forever and not requiring them to worry about elections gives them the possibility of being impartial and not voting along party lines. This allows for politics to be kept out of the Supreme Court. For this same reason, I am against stacking the Supreme Court, as that will just set a precedent that will most likely end with thousands of justices on the Supreme Court.
Benjamin Malin, San Francisco
End the namecalling
The threats against the school board are reprehensible, as are all threats of violence. The First Amendment requires respectful listening and idea exchange.
However, the school board has recently used hateful and divisive rhetoric, with several members calling over twothirds of mostly nonwhite San Francisco Unified School District parents and students in the meeting racist. One should never make that accusation without hard evidence. Eradicating racism is one of America’s most cherished goals, which nearly everyone agrees on. Calling someone a racist in 2020 is like calling someone a communist in 1954. It can destroy one’s career, reputation, family, relationships and life and incite violence.
You must never say “you are racist” in lieu of “I disagree with you as to the best method to reduce/ eliminate racial inequality.”
I believe equal income requires equal test scores, which requires equal study hours, more spending on tutoring than acrosstheboard salary increases, parenteducation, and honoring high academic achievers as we do athletes and artists, as well as teaching kids that nonwhite immigrants from over 70 nations outearn whites significantly in
America by studying over double the hours. We must convince kids that more study hours will pay off and help them do better. Disagree? Let’s discuss. Without vicious namecalling!
Justin Van Zandt, San Francisco
Matter of interpretation
Regarding “Find common ground” ( Letters, Nov. 2): The author stated that, “the Constitution specifically provides that Supreme Court justices be given lifetime tenure.” The Constitution contains no such provision.
Here is the exact language regarding Supreme Court appointments: “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.” The concept of lifetime appointments is a matter of interpretation, not law. Whether applying term limits to justices would require a constitutional amendment is an open question, also subject to interpretation.
Ben Bayol, San Francisco
Global immunization
Throughout the course of this pandemic, I have kept harking back to the same hopeful sentiment. It could be another month or it could be another year, but there will come a time when Americans have access to a vaccine for COVID19. For many people around the world, though, the hope of access to vaccines is far less certain. Globally, diseases like polio and measles take thousands of lives every year. The difference between these diseases and COVID19 is that these diseases already have vaccines.
The reason people around the world are still dying from these vaccinepreventable diseases is access. But there is hope. Polio cases have decreased by 99% since 1988, and we are getting very close to completely eradicating the disease. Measles vaccines have saved 23 million lives since the year 2000, and a single lifesaving vaccine can be produced for less than $ 4. So when it comes to this issue of access, there is one easy, tangible way you can help. Please contact Sens. Kamala Harris and Dianne Feinstein and voice your support for global childhood immunization programs. No one should have to suffer from a disease we already have the means to prevent.
Kylie Clark, Novato