Health care advocate
We agree with Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse’s plan to establish a health care advocate, in an industry that seems to only produce more volatility every day. But we don’t agree that the advocate should have full access to individual’s health records. There are those who support the advocacy plan, and suggest that there is no better agency in which we can put our trust than the Attorney General’s. But that begs the most important of issues, and that’s our right to privacy.
And there are few records more precious to our privacy than our health records. It is within those that we may not only learn of irregularities maybe within certain health agencies, but they also reveal, in many cases, a life history that some individuals may prefer remain the sole custody of themselves and their physicians.
We urge Attorney General Whitehouse to modify his proposal to require an individual’s written consent before any records are released to a health care advocate, or any agency or individual outside the doctor-patient relationship.
On-site lobbying
State Sen. William Irons, D-East Providence has some sound advice, echoing what we have said many times – businessmen and women should invite legislators into their stores, offices and factories, helping them to better understand their businesses, and their problems.
Small businesses in particular suffer legislatively because staff size is often small and owners are too involved in the every day operation of their business to spend adequate time lobbying for business friendly bills in the legislature. Yet, those bills can sometimes have an enormous impact on the well-being of an individual business, or even an industry.
Too often legislation is proposed and even passed that inadvertently creates problems for businesses, only because the legislators don’t have a full understanding of the issues involved.
Inviting legislators to spend a day at a business can go a long way toward improving relationships, and increasing understanding. It is an opportunity for the business man or woman to share their concerns with legislators, and to demonstrate how vital their particular business is to not only the overall state economy, but to each and every employee in the business who relies upon its viability for their personal and family well-being.
Regulating farms
Farmers nationwide are hurting. With the collapse of Asian markets that followed the region’s overall economic breakdown, the world market for U.S. crops has virtually vanished.
The loss of markets is bad enough. But in Rhode Island farmers face another threat: regulation.
No one would argue that some controls on farming practices are needed. But it is unrealistic to expect farmers, who work day and night during their busy seasons, to keep pace with the myriad federal, state, and municipal regulations governing their business. A particular problem is that towns have different rules, meaning farmers like William Stamp Jr., who has a farm on the Exeter-North Kingstown line, must grapple with two sets of regulations.
We may not be able to change the fact that local communities govern themselves differently. But we can change our attitudes toward agriculture in general. Communities can, for instance, follow the lead of towns like Portsmouth, which have created agricultural advisory committees to assist them in forming policy.
And we can do something else: buy local. Stamp has said the public often speaks of its support for farmers, only to buy the cheapest goods available. He has a point. If we as consumers value agriculture, we should buy foods grown at local farms – even if it is a little more expensive and a little less convenient.
