Which state votes more like America?

The Democratic National Committee has decided they want to have their first primary vote in South Carolina in 2024, unseating New Hampshire, because it looks more like the country. It’s more diverse.

I can’t argue that fact. What I would like to bring up is that South Carolina’s diversity does not show up in its voting patterns. In fact — it’s just the opposite.

In December 1860, South Carolina was the first to secede from the union and was a founding member of the Confederacy. It maintained a strict anti-civil rights voting record, first as a member of the “Dixiecrats” and then, when Lyndon B. Johnson signed the voting rights bill, along with the other southern states, they became staunch members of a changed Republican party.

South Carolina has voted for Republican presidential candidates 11 times out of the last 12 elections, including 2020. They have seven representatives to the U.S. House, and have elected six Republicans and one Democrat over the last six elections, excluding 2018, when they picked two Democrats. Of their seven representatives, five voted to overturn the 2020 election after the insurrection attempt on Jan 6, 2021. In addition, their voting turnout is always near the last in the nation — in 2020, it was 44%, which was 50th.

New Hampshire is a small state that is easy and less expensive to campaign in and offers a chance for lesser-known candidates to shine. New Hampshire voted for Democrats in the last five presidential elections, and seven of the last eight. We picked Democrats for 13 of the last 16 house races, and seven of the last 12 governors were Democrats. We are committed voters. We have 41% independent voters and were 10th in the nation in voting in 2020 with 64%.

The Democratic party would do well to have its primary in a small, committed state that at least shares its values. Easy voter access to candidates is a valuable thing and should be considered as worthy of a first-in-line status.

Andy Kargacos

Grantham

Upside of Dartmouth Health’s consolidation unproven

I read the response (“Health care in Upper Valley has improved,” Jan. 28) from Susan Reeves and Joseph Perras, leaders of DHMC and Mt. Ascutney Hospital, to the Valley News’ editorial “Are we now receiving better care?” (Jan. 22) They make the argument that the care we are receiving is better by virtue of the consolidation of the hospitals that now form Dartmouth Health.

The usual rationale for consolidation is increased efficiency resulting in lower costs and better care. Unfortunately, published research shows that costs usually increase after consolidation and benefits in patient care are difficult to demonstrate. What is clear from these studies is the patient experience is often adversely affected.

Reeves and Perras do not provide any data that substantiate their claim that the technologic upgrades, increased support of member hospitals, joint purchasing agreements and other improvements have actually reduced costs and improved outcomes. We have no reason to believe that DH results are better than those reported in the literature.

DHMC remains an extremely valuable resource for its service area. It provides an inclusive scope of medical services at the highest levels: It is a Level 1 Trauma Center and an Emergency Service that accepts all comers. If you have a serious illness or injury, you cannot do much better that to seek treatment at DHMC. Your experience with a routine illness will probably not be as good.

The professional and support staffs are excellent, often going the extra mile to provide good service, but they labor under staffing shortage. The shortage is particularly obvious in Internal Medicine, where there is a moratorium on accepting new patients and obtaining a timely appointment for routine acute illness with one’s personal care provider is rarely possible. This is problematic, especially for the large number of patients, especially seniors, with complex medical histories. At the very least, this certainly diminishes patient satisfaction and may lead to less-than-optimal care for some patients.

In summary, the Valley News editorial is pretty much spot on. Though not unique to DH, one can only wonder if the energy and resources that were dedicated to consolidation — the benefits of which appear elusive — were dedicated to strengthening the staff, whether the current crisis would be as severe as it is.

Howard Trachtenberg, M.D.

Hartland

Howard Trachtenberg is a retired anesthesiologist who previously practiced in Massachusetts.

Arm yourselves, ladies. Sin is all around

Greetings from New Hampshire. I write to encourage the ladies to arm yourselves with handguns to protect you from the criminals. Sin is all around. The police can’t be everywhere, and a nice .38 revolver can’t be beat for self-protection. Just read the newspaper stories about street crime and ask yourself if a .38 would have been handy. Get some training before you carry though, because accidents can happen. I have been concealed carrying since 1992, with no accidents. I carry a Glock 17 when I am out of this nursing home. I’m 67 years old. Stay safe, folks.

Mitchell Ota

Lebanon

]]>