Training crucial, but not state's job

As a previous letter writer advocated, lawmakers should implement the voter approved Initiative 1163, to increase training requirements and background checks for health-care workers (for the elderly). However, mandating that the state pay for the costs of the requirements of employment are out of line. Did the state pay for the training and licensing of doctors, nurses, nurses' aides, truck drivers (CDL license) and many other vocations that are the individual's choice of pursuit?

Background checks: We paid for ours to obtain a concealed weapons permit with no guarantee of issuance. Besides, background and drug screening is usually done after all other requirements are met for the position.

There is an argument to be made that police, firefighters and other public employees receive additional training at the expense of the taxpayers, but we feel that qualifications needed to apply and be hired for a specific job shouldn't be the responsibility of the state, but of the applicant. Check the job listings in the paper -- most have listed minimum requirements for consideration of employment.

The intent of the initiative, as we interpret it, is not to create a training program, but to put qualifications in place for those who are providing a service to those in need of said services.

We thank all caregivers. Your calling is one of the heart.

Mark and Cathy Miller
Arlington