Limiting emissions will improve childrens' health
Thank you for publishing an update on Arkansas Children's Northwest (Dupps Family Gives $1 million to Arkansas Children's Northwest)! I know two families whose children have received care at Arkansas Children's Hospital in Little Rock. Each family praised the care received. Both, like the Dupps family referenced in your article, were challenged by the distance between home and needed services. I am grateful that in 2018 Northwest Arkansas families will no longer bear this geographic struggle on top of the stresses of a child's illness.
In tandem with celebrating this expansion of quality pediatric care, I am hopeful that environmental conditions contributing to health issues for Arkansas' young people may be ameliorated. For example: According to the 2013 State of Asthma in Arkansas report released by UAMS, 6-13 percent of children 0--17 years of age suffer from asthma (percentage varies across ethnicity). For ninth--12th graders, the level is at 23-25 percent. About one in four!
Cutting atmospheric CO2 levels reduces a serious trigger for respiratory illnesses, as aggravating pollution declines with reductions in CO2. Decreases in CO2 are also key to addressing climate change, and thus, lessening related health impacts.
A carbon fee and dividend initiative such as that outlined by Citizens' Climate Lobby (citizensclimatelobby.org) would accelerate the reduction of carbon emissions, while driving job growth and financially protecting families via the monthly dividend. Surely our elected officials (Sens. John Boozman and Tom Cotton, and Rep. Steve Womack) could give serious consideration to this market-driven plan that will improve environmental conditions for children.
Again, my appreciation to you, the Dupps family, and to all who support improving the well-being of Arkansas' youth.
Jan Schaper
Eureka Springs
Income gap real culprit for poor educational achievement
Disturbing links between academic achievement and income disparity were a lead story in the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette July 18. Research data show highest achieving schools have fewest students drawn from low income families -- and of course, vice versa, as shown in the table on page 2.
Far and away, the two highest achieving schools -- which have zero low income students enrolled -- are private. But almost 80 percent of the children in some of Northwest Arkansas's lowest-performing public schools are drawn from low-income families.
Impacts, both positive and negative, fall squarely on children. Children have no control over such things. If they are born well-to-do, they may enroll in a high-achieving private school. If they are born to poverty, they go to public school, where there is great variation in overall academic achievement.
Our society's extreme income disparities are the main sources of differences in educational achievement. If our futures require a well-educated and well-trained workforce, wouldn't it be common sense to support government actions that narrow the vast income differences in society? That is, evenout in so far as possible, the differences in income that have such direct impacts on children and their education?
Sure, we can spend a few more years talking about Hillary's emails or when life really begins, but wouldn't we be stronger as a country if we had fewer children enrolling in our schools who are stuck just because we aren't willing to do anything about it? Why not better incomes and more children who as a result are better off? We can fix this. It is what our democratic political system is all about.
Joe Neal
Fayetteville
Commentary on 07/26/2016