Opinion: Tampa Bay isn't perfect, but it is a great host

Mary Jo Melone doesn't really like us or know us here in Tampa Bay. Instead of joining us in welcoming all visitors who come here for conventions, business meetings and vacations, Melone's negativity warns our guests and future guests that our communities aren't perfect. Instead of telling the Republican National Convention's site selection committee (and therefore all potential convention business) of Tampa Bay's wonderful opportunities and successes, Melone suggests that somehow we don't want or need visitors to come and experience our amenities that do attract millions of people from all over the world.

We are a state and a region with experience in hosting large meetings. Tampa Bay citizens are proud of the facilities we have to accommodate the number of guests who will attend this convention. We are proud of our many cultural venues. We are proud of our beaches and parks. We are proud of the many partnerships that support our community and nonprofit organizations. We are proud of how the leadership here in Tampa Bay has developed new and exciting retail opportunities. We are a community that is now the model to many other cities across the country that are challenged to improve their regional needs.

Of course, this week's site visit is only the beginning of the committee's evaluation of Tampa Bay, New Orleans and New York City. Of course, we want them to see our modern facilities where the delegates and national and international media will be served. Of course, the other two cities will have their neighborhoods evaluated (with and without sidewalks). Of course, the other two cities will have their adult businesses evaluated. (Have you ever been to New Orleans or New York City, Ms. Melone?) Of course, a number of the delegates will want to bring their families to the location of this historic event. (Which location would you consider bringing your family to, Ms. Melone?) Of course, there isn't enough time for the site visit team to see all the attractive, fun and interesting aspects of our Tampa Bay community (the many reasons why so many people move here and bring their businesses here).

The reasons are clear why we should host the Republican National Convention here in 2004. Our Tampa Bay region can certainly meet the criteria listed by this organization. We are a friendly community that understands what it takes to enthusiastically welcome our guests (based on years of experience). We have the infrastructure in place to support all the planning that is necessary for a successful presentation. Other large national organizations will recognize our efforts and will consider bringing their meetings, their business and their investments here. It is a "win-win situation" for everyone.

Maybe Melone could volunteer to help us promote and showcase Tampa Bay and our citizens to all future convention business. If she did, she would learn who we are, what we do and what we value. I bet Mary Jo Melone would benefit from this experience, too.
-- Scott Daniels, Clearwater

Just trying to stir things up

Re: The RNC tour bus will bypass these sights, by Mary Jo Melone, Aug. 6.

Mary Jo Melone's column was fallacious from the "git-go." She knew perfectly well, before sitting down at her keyboard, the Republican National Convention group was coming to our area solely to determine whether or not we could provide a sufficient number of hotel rooms and convention meeting spaces, restaurants and recreational facilities, to host a successful national convention.

It would be absurd for her to suppose they were coming to decide if Tampa Bay could be the site of some mythical peoples' Utopia. Therefore, methinks her piece was not only entirely and intentionally misleading, but fraudulent -- intended to stir the political pot. Gee, I wonder how Mary Jo is registered?
-- Steven C. Nicolo, Clearwater

Let New York have convention's benefits

I love Tampa Bay, but as far as laying out millions of dollars and attempting to lure the next GOP convention here, I hope New York City gets it. Have we been hit by a terrorist attack that took out two landmark buildings? Have we lost 2,823 citizens? Have we lost billions in damages, lost revenue and tens of thousands of jobs? Of course not.

Let New York City, the "Big Apple," host the next Republican National Convention. Let New York City gain back a tad of what it lost on Sept. 11. Let New York City reap the windfall of visitors, cash flow and exposure.

We are all Americans, and now is not the time to compete against New Yorkers for an event that we can wait for and they need so desperately.

Bruce Springsteen was at the beach along the Jersey Shore the week following Sept. 11, when a fan yelled, "We need you." Those words inspired him to write the music on his new CD.

Well, New York City is in the same position: It needs the GOP convention.
-- Richard Unger, Sarasota

Parties should pay for their conventions

Led by the GOP and, to a lesser extent, a number of Democrats in Congress and state legislatures, tax cuts have been largely responsible for the budget problems on every level. Even as these same politicians exult over their ability to cut taxes, they now are coming to Florida, begging for some of the diminished tax returns to help to pay for their quadrennial time of "fun and games" they call "conventions."

With their proven ability to raise millions of dollars, each party should pay the cost of these meetings and prove that they really believe in "less government spending."
-- James Smith, Kenneth City

Capitalizing on a tragedy

Re: Making sense of a friend's death, by Steve Persall, Aug. 2.

This article was about Jim Fitzpatrick's new play/film, An American Reunion. Those of us who knew and loved Lori feel the need to bring some sense of reality to the self-aggrandized fictional account Fitzpatrick has used to (I'm sure he hopes) further his career.

That he took a tragedy of this proportion and trivialized it, twisting the facts and minimizing the pain suffered by her friends and family, is immoral. One almost has to feel sorry for a playwright whose creativity is so lacking that he has to open terrible, agonizing wounds in order to get his 30th attempt into celluloid.

Let's start with the facts:

1. Fitzpatrick never had a relationship with Lori, and he saw her only once in the last 10 years of her life. Indeed, when Lori died, he offered no condolences to the family, odd behavior for someone who cared for her so deeply.

2. In that he was not there and has not "spoken to the family in years," his reference to any detail is sheer speculation and fantasy. Lori was never taken to Sun Coast Hospital. The situation was far too tragic for that to have happened. Fitzpatrick says, "everything I write is cathartic." This strikes me as a peculiar since catharsis requires an emotional investment that is difficult for the self-centered.

Suicide is not fodder for frustrated actors looking for a career boost. It is an excruciating tearing apart of soul from soul. In an instant, Lori's hopelessness and pain were fractured into a thousand shards of hopelessness and pain, shards that pierced the hearts of all those who loved her, and the family who worked tirelessly for months to save her from the demons that took her life.

Fitzpatrick's embarrassment should not be limited to the lackluster film he is now promoting. He should be embarrassed by the way he has wantonly hurt the good people who suffered such a catastrophic loss. And he should regret the fact that he never knew Lori, for there was, indeed, a story to tell, one of brilliant smiles, a warm open heart and a kindness that would never, never cause pain for personal reward.
-- Toni Glover, a friend, Scranton, Pa.

Try to reduce the malpractice

Re: Bush calls for malpractice-suit restrictions, July 26.

It mystifies me, as a trial lawyer, why conservative politicians are always talking about reducing the cost of medical malpractice insurance by limiting the amount of damages an injured person may recover. I never see these politicians calling for reducing the amount of medical malpractice that goes on, which would lower malpractice premiums and protect malpractice victims at the same time. The financial needs of doctors get a lot more attention from politicians than the damage done by medical mistakes.

A statistic sometimes cited in support of the "medical malpractice crisis" is that one in three doctors will face a medical negligence claim in his or her professional lifetime. That means that two out of three doctors will never face a medical malpractice claim. I think that says a lot of good things about the high quality of medical practice in this country. Just a third of physicians are the ones making mistakes and injuring people -- a small enough number that repeat offenders should be easy to identify and rehabilitate if possible. Why shouldn't physicians who repeatedly make mistakes and hurt people be sued out of business by the people they hurt?
-- William M. Schneikart, Esq., Largo

Physicians blamed for bad outcomes

Re: Lawyers, doctors ready for turf war, July 17.

After reading about the trial lawyers' fatuous, retaliatory actions, one can understand why physicians are forced to seek tort reform.

The reality is that physicians are sued for bad outcomes and not actual malpractice. It is specious to assume that because a physician is found guilty of malpractice by a jury that an actual act of malpractice occurred. We ask a jury, culled from driver's license rolls, to determine liability involving complex medical issues.

While I do not wish to appear condescending, I wonder if it is really fair to a physician to have his or her future determined by individuals who have a difficult time understanding complex medical issues. This really is not a jury of one's peers. It would be better to have a court-appointed medical review board to determine if malpractice really occurred.

Juries award astronomical amounts of money to people for "trivial" damages and for injuries that they cause themselves, like burning themselves with hot coffee and tripping over their unruly children in stores. Faced with this situation, it is no wonder that medical liability insurance companies decide to settle suits. Under the trial lawyers' proposal, this would have potentially disastrous effects on a physician's ability to practice medicine.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reports that more than 40 percent of board-certified obstetricians/gynecologists will be sued more than twice in their careers. The rate of medical liability suits has increased tremendously over the past 30 to 40 years. It seems incredible that as physicians can do more, save more lives and keep tiny babies alive, there would be more bad doctors. Rather, I think there are increasingly unrealistic expectations of perfect results.

If the constitutional amendments proposed by trial lawyers even make it to the ballot, I believe it would be impossible to attract physicians to Florida. I wonder if members of the Bar will really want to do that. Like the polio virus, they will cripple society and kill off physicians who are the victims they sue. However, with no physicians to feed off of, they will ultimately be eradicated just like the polio virus.
-- Jesse A. Kane, M.D., Palm Harbor

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731.

They can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675 or by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com (no attachments, please).

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page