The recent editorial commending Gov. Nikki Haley for refusing some $3 billion in federal Medicaid funds deserves a response.

There are three major components to consider. One is moral, a rejection of the biblical command to heal the sick. Some 200,000 South Carolinians will remain without adequate health care.

It includes roughly 40,000 working age adults in Charleston, Berkeley and Dorchester counties.

The second is economic. Accepting those funds would create a healthier work force.

It would mean healthier poor children, who would learn more in school and be better prepared later to join the work force. And it would create an estimated 44,000 new jobs related to health care. In terms of national health care rankings, South Carolina ranks 43rd.

Meanwhile, the state would pay none of the costs through 2016. Thereafter the state would pay only 10 percent. That amount would be significantly more than covered by increased tax revenue the state would receive from new jobs.

A third component is giving federal tax money, which South Carolinians pay, as a bonus to other states. In other words, money that South Carolinians pay in federal taxes will help pay for better medical care in other states, but not here. It makes no sense.

Jack Bass, Ph.D.

Queen Street

Charleston

The United States government could never condone torture.

As Dick Cheney recently stated on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” torture was “what 19 guys armed with airline tickets and box cutters did to 3,000 Americans on 9/11.”

Under such moral logic, it’s torture only if the “bad guys” do it. And “officially sanctioned forms of torture” could not possibly be torture because they’re “officially sanctioned.” How’s that for Orwellian speak?

Every time Cheney was asked about U.S. torture, he replied that “what al Qaida did on 9/11 was worse.” It’s pretty clear that for perhaps America’s most vindictive vice president, torture was nothing but a means of revenge.

Philip J. Murphy

Ventura Place

Mount Pleasant

Is The Post and Courier readership so low that it has to pander to the egocentric generation of “selfies” to at least get them to buy the paper?

The “See and be Scene” feature of Jan. 5 showing the prominently displayed photo of two guys in a Miley Cyrus tongue-thrusting pose was disgusting and unnecessary.

Instead of continuing to promote the excess of wild partying in this town, could this feature be replaced with one that has some real social value, say, small organizations or ordinary citizens candidly “caught” doing something good for our community?

Beverly O’Brien

Highwood Circle

Charleston

After more than 21 ignored years, the S.C. Legislature is now forced to respond to the landmark ruling stating that South Carolina violated its duty to provide a “minimally adequate education” to many students in this state.

Brian Hicks in his column talks about no silver bullets for this ongoing inequity.

I maintain that unless lawmakers come together in a non-partisan manner and put together a law that places a high value on education, then no amount of educational problems and academic growth can be solved or gained.

No one would consciously build a house starting with a faulty foundation, and that is exactly what exists in South Carolina.

Yes, education is expensive; however, as we’ve seen at the state level, a lot of money is continually wasted because of partisanship politics. Just look at the money spent to rewrite Common Core standards. Expensive is a relative term.

Start with a foundation that puts education in a category of importance. “Minimally funded” wording in the S.C. Constitution is antiquated, prejudicial and an embarrassment to our industries, businesses and most importantly to the children of South Carolina.

If you want a workforce of self-productive citizens then give everyone the tools that will enable all students the opportunity to be successful. Start with the foundation, and change the S.C. Constitution’s wording regarding education. There is a silver lining of rewards to be gained.

ANNE SBROCCHI, M.Ed

Palomino Court

Charleston

The truth about those who accelerate diversity of African Americans in the health care profession often goes unnoticed. These good people work diligently behind the scenes and do not seek credit because they realize that it is the proper course of action.

Dr. James B. Edwards, former president of MUSC, was that kind of man.

I know this better than most people because I had the pleasure of serving as director of the office of diversity, supported 100 percent by his office, during his administration.

He understood the poor history between MUSC and the African-American community and the barriers faced by African-American students who attended the university. The office of diversity was tasked to ensure that necessary actions were taken to make the university a place of which those students would be proud.

Dr. Jim Edwards’ favorite saying was, “This is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.”

Thaddeus J. Bell, M.D.

W. Montague Avenue

Charleston