LETTERS

WHAT'S WRONG AT THE FBI?

"Sloppy work by the FBI has come to typify what we now expect of the U.S. government. No one seems to be in charge." DOUGLAS H. SCHEWE Madison, Wis.

What has happened to institutions like the Federal Bureau of Investigation [SPECIAL REPORT, April 28] that we have traditionally relied on to set the example for doing the right thing? These agencies are supposed to give us confidence in their vision and respect for their reputation of being rock solid. But now there are allegations about the FBI crime lab; President Clinton has several unresolved issues, including alleged improper White House visits and political contributions; House Speaker Newt Gingrich has admitted ethical violations. Where are the new leaders who will help restore our lost confidence? FRED STROM Rye Brook, N.Y.

What's wrong at the FBI is not new. Back when J. Edgar Hoover was the director (1924-72), we did not hear of mistakes because he flooded the media with propaganda. Today's director, Louis Freeh, is not a master cover-up artist like Hoover. For decades, FBI scientists have not been qualified as experts in their field. In 1989 Frederic Whitehurst blew the whistle on the FBI lab, and now he is viewed as the culprit. But in 1979 William C. Sullivan, former assistant director in charge of the domestic intelligence division, published a book that stated, "The FBI laboratory is in fact a real-life counterpart of the busy workroom of the Wizard of Oz--all illusion... No one at the lab they run in Washington knows what he is doing." M. WESLEY SWEARINGEN Tucson, Ariz.

To say the Clintons have politicized the FBI seriously understates the case--from Janet Reno's pathetic refusal to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate political-campaign contributions to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' fiasco in Waco. The Justice Department, the ATF and the FBI have been totally compromised, and their leaders are doing the White House's bidding. Obstruction of justice, not pursuit of truth, now seems to be the FBI's specialty. When the lid finally blows off, the media will have to account to the American public for their soft-pedaling. DAN WISMAR Wadsworth, Ohio

Why has the FBI become so huge? Our Republic was founded on the idea that law enforcement should be a local responsibility. There is a good reason why America's Founding Fathers wanted it that way. They knew that power corrupts. Perhaps the answer to the bureau's problems is to make it perform better by downsizing it. Isn't that the rationale for downsizing corporate America? GARY SCHWARTZ Fort Lee, N.J.

You cite among the few successes of the FBI the conviction of Mob boss John Gotti and the arrest of Unabomber suspect Theodore Kaczynski. If it had not been for a plea bargain with mass murderer Sammy ("the Bull") Gravano in exchange for his testimony, Gotti would probably still be the "Teflon Don." If Kaczynski's brother had not gone to the FBI with incriminating evidence, the Unabomber suspect might still be living in his Montana cabin. ROBERT J. QUIRK Sarasota, Fla.

GORE SHOULDN'T COUNT ON CLINTON

You said President Clinton "must choose between making history and smoothing the way for Gore" [NATION, April 28]. But it would be a mistake to ascribe any of Clinton's quixotic policy shifts to a desire to advance Gore's candidacy in 2000. Quite possibly Clinton and Gore have the closest personal and professional relationship of any President and Vice President in history. Nonetheless, Presidents are notorious for demanding unwavering loyalty from subordinates without ever contemplating returning that loyalty, and Clinton has already demonstrated that he is no exception. He is concerned about how historians will rank him as a President. If he is forced to choose between a policy decision that will burnish his image and one that will advance Gore's candidacy, it is unlikely that Gore's interests will prevail. NATHANIEL H. KAROL Highland Park, Ill.

SWEETHEART DEAL

Why aren't politicians real? It seems that once a person enters the political arena, he lives a fairy-tale existence [NATION, April 28]. In the latest episode, House Speaker Newt Gingrich's fairy godfather, Bob Dole, gives his old friend a sweetheart loan (possibly from campaign contributions) that most Americans would be unable to give their own son or daughter. Mother Goose couldn't write a better fairy tale. SANFORD DU ROFF Tarzana, Calif.

What is the big deal about Dole's lending Gingrich some needed money? Friends do it often--can't public servants? Dole was raised in an era when integrity and kindness were venerated. Dole's bailing out Newt saved his career and probably his marriage. JASON M. SILVERMAN Harleysville, Pa.

Does anyone really believe that when Gingrich is no longer in Congress and there will be no political repercussions for him, he will actually pay back this loan with personal funds? He should start paying off the loan while he is still serving in Congress. This would enable the public to verify that Gingrich is paying with personal funds. CHUCK ROBERTSON Morganton, N.C.

Gingrich has broken faith with all the American people with a frivolous response to his $300,000 liability. It is time for him to relinquish the Speakership of the House. He is not a leader worthy of our trust and confidence. OREN M. SPIEGLER Pittsburgh, Pa.

MEDICINE OR MENACE?

I read with interest your article on morphine and the hesitancy of U.S. physicians to prescribe it [MEDICINE, April 28]. I worked for several years as a physician in one of the world's leading burn centers in the Netherlands, where patients were given relatively massive doses of morphine for years without ever inducing addiction. It is my unequivocal belief that if a body needs pain killers, it will not get addicted to them. During many visits to burn centers all over the world, I have seen no harm from administering morphine. What I have seen is patients who have suffered excruciating pain. It is a physician's duty to provide proper pain relief. Suspending the license of a doctor who prescribes morphine is an unethical act. MICHEL H.E. HERMANS, M.D. Newtown, Pa.

When a physician prescribes narcotics to treat severe pain over a long period of time, his treatment becomes the trigger for an investigation by the state pharmacy board and the state medical board for the healing arts. Both boards are powerful state agencies that have the ability to revoke licenses. This is the answer to your question "Why don't more doctors prescribe narcotics?" RAYMOND J. DRONEY, D.O. Viburnum, Mo.

My father died in 1994 after a long illness. In the end, his heart simply wore out, and morphine was the wonderful drug that allowed him to relax and breathe easily. My father wasn't "snowed under" but, rather, was kept comfortable with small doses as needed. He no longer worried about dying (as he had for years), because he felt good mentally, emotionally and physically. And when his time came, he died in peace. SALLY A. FALL La Jolla, Calif.

When I had an operation several years ago, I asked my surgeon to start giving me pain killers while I was still in surgery, since I had read that this procedure would help curb postoperative pain. Not only did he do so, but he also gave me a morphine pump so I could administer my own pain medication. But most important, I was controlling a part of my recuperation. I didn't end up a drug addict, and was out of the hospital sooner than expected. LISA GONZALEZ Los Osos, Calif.

THE WILD MARKET IN CEO PAY

You discussed the phenomenon of highly paid corporate CEOs who earn millions a year [BUSINESS, April 28], often as much as 200 times the salary of the average factory worker. How does a salary of $24,000 a year for the typical employee relate to the $20 million to $30 million annual salary that a company executive may earn? The long-ago TV quiz show Dollar a Second provides a clue. With 60 seconds in a minute and 60 minutes in an hour, at a dollar a second the overpaid CEO makes $3,600 an hour. Since he might put in a 12-hour day regularly, his daily rate is $43,200. If the CEO works a six-day week, his weekly rate is $259,200. And if he takes an annual four-week vacation, he still works 48 weeks and gets a salary of $12,441,600. It costs the company $15 every time the CEO takes time out for a drink of water. RICK ROFMAN Van Nuys, Calif.

After reading about Michael Eisner's $204 million salary and Lawrence Coss's $137 million in compensation, I find the answer to the question "How much is too much?" ridiculously obvious. What a tragedy to hand over increasingly exorbitant amounts of money to these CEOs as "pay for showing up, not pay for performance." Corporate America needs to rethink its priorities. YASMEEN AHMED San Francisco

TACKLING THE WELFARE MESS

I applaud the Wisconsin department of human services for its tough program of welfare reform [NATION, April 21]. In November 1990, as a single mother with a three-year-old son, I walked into a welfare office. I was self-employed, receiving no child support, and was seeking assistance for a few months until business picked up. I was denied benefits because I owned a car worth $5,000. At the time, I felt the decision was unfair, but I came to be thankful because it made me fight harder to survive. States need to get tough to break the cycle of welfare, or the problem will never go away. Wisconsin's rule requiring recipients to work enables people to be contributors to society. TINA M. CAPARELLA Cameron Park, Calif.

I was disappointed by your report on Wisconsin's welfare-reform program. It assumes that the goal of welfare reform is simply to reduce the welfare rolls. But should that be Americans' only goal? After all, if the number of recipients is decreased but a significant number of children remain in dire poverty, have we been successful? Families use welfare for many reasons: a terminally ill mother, a father who has lost his job and exhausted his unemployment benefits, a battered wife escaping an abusive relationship. Most of these people use welfare as it was meant to be used, as a temporary safety net. Yet Wisconsin has designed a system that treats all recipients as if they are long-term dependents. It is clear to those of us working in the community that our effort and money would be better spent on eliminating poverty and creating equal opportunities for all our children, and not on merely reducing the number of families who are receiving welfare. PATRICIA DELESSIO, Staff Attorney Legal Action of Wisconsin Milwaukee

Welfare does not push people to be better but allows them to remain in a vicious circle of continuous struggle. DANA JOHNSON Sunnyvale, Calif.

You stated that under Wisconsin's welfare program, "mothers must go back to work when their youngest child is 12 weeks old." Did we read that correctly? Forget about the mother's regaining her strength or ensuring her child's well-being by breast feeding; forget about the critical mother-child bonding process. Let's just get that woman behind the counter of the discount store (where she will earn less than the licensed child-care provider she'll require). TRACY AND ELIZABETH HODSON Alameda, Calif.

PHARMACISTS PLAY DOCTOR

It is disturbing that a pharmacist would refuse to fill a prescription for emergency morning-after contraception because of personal moral objections, as described in your story [HEALTH, April 28]. And it is shocking that the California Pharmacists Association supports such an outrageous breach of professionalism. Emergency contraception is just that--contraception, not abortion. A pharmacist should not substitute his or her judgment for that of a licensed physician by refusing to fill any prescription that has been issued by a doctor. ALEXANDER C. SANGER, President Planned Parenthood of New York City New York City

I am encouraged to read that 82% of pharmacists surveyed believe they have the right to refuse to fill a prescription for a drug like RU 486, which facilitates abortions. You said "a new era of conscientious objection may be dawning." Indeed--one in which actions outweigh words and produce appreciable results. MICHAEL L. NYLEN South Holland, Ill.

TONY AND BILL

Tony Blair is like Bill Clinton [WORLD, April 28]? What's next? Will Blair borrow the fund-raising Lincoln bed for the Prime Minister's residence at 10 Downing Street? DICK MASON Orange, Conn.

A FORCE TO FIGHT THE MULLAHS

Re your report on the 30,000-member female-led army of Iranian women who have gathered in Iraq [WORLD, April 21]: I was excited to read about people's opposing the mullahs' regime. The women of my country, Iran, who have suffered for 17 years, are now able to create a force to defend their rights. Everyone knows that Iran's terrorist regime is one of the most savage governments of the 20th century. For countries experiencing a change in their system, alteration does not usually come about in a democratic manner; most of the time a high price has to be paid. MASSOUD NOORAHANI Anaheim, Calif.

As an unveiled and not particularly religious Iranian woman, I admire resistance leader Maryam Rajavi, who has brought hope and dignity to all Iranian women and men. Only a true Muslim woman like Rajavi can change the direction of historical misogyny, repression and exploitation in the Middle East. I hope the U.S. government will soon recognize the democratic and progressive nature of Rajavi's National Council of Resistance of Iran. MANIJEH NAHAVANDI Brentwood, Calif.

A RESOURCE FOR CONSUMERS

In "Backlash Against HMOs," you referred to the Pacific Business Group on Health and our Website, which allows employees of our member companies to get information [NATION, April 14]. You inaccurately described the online site as a place where people "can swap stories about how well or how badly they have been treated by managed-care plans." PBGH is not a source of anecdotal yarns about HMOs. We offer our Website, California Consumer HealthScope healthscope.org) as a resource to help consumers make more informed decisions about their health care. HealthScope contains report cards that rate California health plans and hospitals, and included is information for consumers to help them understand the managed-care system. PATRICIA E. POWERS, Executive Director Pacific Business Group on Health San Francisco