Probably one of the most controversial columns we run in The Oakland Press — now on the Opinion Page — is Sound Off.

The feature, which is published Saturdays and Mondays, allows people to express their opinions without having to sign their names to a letter. In fact, they don’t even have to identify themselves. Participants call in to our Sound Off line (248-745-4646) and need only leave their home town.

The policy is diametrically opposite of what we require from those who wish to have letters to the editor published. These individuals must supply us with their name, specific home town address and their phone numbers. We only run their name and home town but we need the other information for our records. We also call to confirm that an individual did write a specific letter.

Sound off callers, on the other hand, don’t provide us with much information and we don’t check on the call. However, at this point, I must stress that we do edit extensively the calls that come in to Sound Off. We have to because too many are libelous and just plain hateful.

Are we being hypocritical for requiring so much identification for letters and hardly anything for calls? After all, everything is basically an opinion.

Well, let’s look at the balance sheet.

Sound Off provides people who are afraid to identify themselves with a way to express their opinions. However, there’s no guarantee that their phone message will get printed and, as I’ve mentioned, the items left on the recorder are heavily edited for libel and just plain decency.

On the other hand, we do try to publish every letter we receive.

In both cases — Sound Off or letters to the editor — items can express an opinion but must be factually accurate.

Certainly, letters that are signed and get published give their authors more creditability than just an anonymous message. It takes courage to express your opinion and then back it up by signing your name to it.

Of course, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and as part of a newspaper, The Oakland Press Opinion Page tries to serve as a medium for this purpose.

With these two outlets, practically everyone has a chance to express their views.

So is this policy fair? Or should we require Sound Off callers to leave their name and a return phone number?

You tell me.

The Oakland Press Opinion Page has received a number of letters in response to Gov. Rick Snyder’s controversial state budget proposal.

While I’d love to run them for you tomorrow or even yesterday, most will have to be run over the next week of so.

However, for letters such as these, that’s not a bad timetable. We do bend our policy a bit, if necessary.

Generally, we run letters to the editor on a first come, first serve basis. Consequently, if we receive a letter from you today, we will be able to publish it in one to two weeks.

But if the topic you’re writing about deals with a very current event or a circumstance that might change soon, then we do try to put a priority your letter.

The governor’s budget will no doubt continue to create much heated debate over the next few weeks. But because he might decide to change portions of it — possibly because of political or public pressure — before a final draft is approved by the legislature, we will try to be as timely as possible with budget-related letters.

Unfortunately, we do get letters that are outdated because circumstances surrounding their topic have changed.

For example, if a person writes in support of a particular piece of legislation and that bill has already been passed into law or was rejected, then his letter is pretty much useless.

Another example is during the election season. As I’ve written, we don’t run election-related letters or guest opinions a week before the actual balloting. So, if we get a letter for or against a ballot issue after deadline, then we just have to dispose of it because it won’t make any sense to run it after the election. By the same token, letters received a day or two ahead of the deadline we will put a special rush on to get them. If people are conscientious enough to meet our deadline, they deserve to have their letter published.

Generally, we’re quite proud of our ability to run almost every letter we receive in a timely fashion.

The first come, first serve policy really works and is the most fair, under normal circumstances.

As I’ve often said, topics for editorials come in all shapes and sizes — figuratively and literally.

And they can come from all over country.

I continually get letters and comments from not only Oakland County readers but also many former residents who have retired and moved out of state.

For example, one retiree in Arizona wrote of a situation she found herself in that is very scary and unfortunately, probably is a sign of things to come for many of us.
She has been in very good health but finally gave in and decided to see a doctor because her cold seemed to be getting worse than better.
She was shocked to learn that many doctors in Arizona don’t even want to look at you if you have Medicare for health coverage. She also has a Blue Cross supplement but that wasn’t enough for a number of physicians.
The doctors wanted lump sums of $1,500 or more just to see her and then every bill had to be paid upfront.

It’s not a pleasant situation, to say the least, and it probably will get worse.
There are numerous causes but one is the doctor shortage. Physicians are being over burdened with too many patients and the shortage will only worsen as doctors retire.
I’m not alone when I say this.

The reputable Remapping Debate website reports that the U.S. has failed to increase medical school or residency slots significantly in recent years. So — with a still growing and fast-aging patient population and an impending wave of physician retirements — the U.S. is poised to suffer even more serious physician shortages in the next decade, with estimates ranging from 90,000 to 200,000 fewer doctors than will be needed.

Also, for some other interesting facts, as of September 2009, at least 80 million Americans lived in areas with a shortage of medical practitioners in at least one field, according the Health Resources and Services Administration. Many of those areas have a lack of access to primary care doctors, dentists, or mental health professionals. In 2006, 30 percent of U.S. counties lacked a single surgeon, according to the American College of Surgeons. Shortages have also been reported in several other health fields in recent years, including pediatrics, radiology, and endocrinology.

Additionally, a 2009 survey by the health care consulting firm Merritt Hawkins showed that — even in more than a dozen cities with high physician-to-population ratios — physician appointment wait times had risen considerably, and across a number of specialties, since 2005.

Yes, the topics are many and the debate is heated. From health care in general to Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid in specific, these issues are now brewing and will undoubtedly keep bubbling over in intense debate for years to come.
We’ll write about some issues involving these topics but the list will just grow as will the problems associated with them.

We editorialize about topics when we believe we can make a relatively logical argument for or against an issue. Yes, many people will contest this statement and say we write too many illogical pieces.

But the point is that the issues are many while the space is limited. The editorials are basically opinions and the topics we write about are judgment calls. We can’t please everyone and many people often disagree with our stand on an issue, but hey, as I’ve said before and will undoubtedly remind you in the future, that’s why it’s called the Opinion Page.

There many things that appear in a daily newspaper that logically can stir the emotions of readers.

A heart-warming feature story can bring tears to your eyes while a straight news piece on a local government planning to raise your taxes can move you to anger, among other sentiments — some too strong to repeat here.

But rarely does a cartoon create such strong emotions and literally divide a readership. However, Mallard Fillmore seems to be one feature of The Oakland Press that evokes diametrically opposite feelings. You either love the cartoon or you hate it.

Admittedly there are some readers who don’t quite get so upset with each cartoon that gets published but even those people will still form an opinion, pro or con.

For those of you not familiar with Mallard, the feature is a political cartoon that supports Republican and generally conservative issues. It takes some often strong shots at Democrats and liberals.

Consequently, I think you see how the two sides might face off.

I don’t think there are very many Democrats who enjoy the cartoon, although some may be less affected by it than others. But most Democrats that we hear from are adamantly incensed by the cartoon and wish we would drop it. Some even threaten to cancel their subscriptions if we don’t.

On the other hand, as you might expect, we have many Republican readers who just love the cartoon and tell us it’s one of the first things they read in the newspaper. Some also threaten to cancel their subscriptions but that’s if we drop the comic. There are even a few who say the only reason they take The Oakland Press is because of the cartoon. We’d like to think we offer these readers other features that they might enjoy but the bottom line is we’re glad they’re taking the paper.

Politics has always been a divisive issue and it seems today Americans are even further apart than they were a mere 10 or 20 years ago.

So a political cartoon stirring such debate is understandable.

At this point, we are going to continue to publish the cartoon, so we hope our Democratic readers will either ignore the feature or accept it as just being part of the Comic Section.

Whether you like it or hate it, most people would have to admit it's hard to stay impartial when reading it.

For those of you who haven’t discovered this, e-mail is wonderful but it’s not perfect.

If someone types one wrong character of your e-mail address, the message won’t get to you.

It’s that simple.

Also, that’s why using some old fashion methods with all this hi tech stuff is not only prudent but wise.

The old saying “never assume” is quite popular among journalists but it really applies to all people and in all circumstances.

In reference to e-mail, never assume that if your e-mail doesn’t come back to you that it reached its intended destination. There is a chance it may just be lost in cyberspace.

That is what apparently happens quite often to e-mail that gets sent to me. I can’t count the number of times someone wondered why I didn’t respond to their e-mail because from their end, “it went through.” Well, you can’t assume.

They should have done a number of things to ensure that I got the message or the letter to the editor or the notice of a meeting date.

The first thing is utilize a very old-fashioned apparatus called a telephone. No, not necessarily the versions that you carry around in your pocket and can text on, access the Internet, take photos and otherwise consume all of your time.

Those could be used but so could that simple little desk model with the funny thing called a receiver and a key pad that actually allows you to touch one number at a time.

Whether you use this old desk model or your new cell phone, call to confirm that an e-mail was received. It only takes a minute and it can eliminate or avoid some very embarrassing situations — like the e-mail that didn’t get to me and I was expecting a time sensitive guest opinion. I finally called the individual to ask where the guest opinion was and the person was shocked to learn I hadn’t already received it. “But it didn’t come back to me,” the person almost indignantly screamed.

When I asked her to double check my e-mail address, it turns out the person forgot the period in: allan.adler@oakpress.com.One wrong character can ruin your whole e-mail experience.

Internet mail is probably 99.9 percent reliable but it’s 100 percent guaranteed that if you have the wrong e-mail address, it won’t reach the intended party.

The moral of this story is don’t be afraid to call me if you send a letter or guest opinion by e-mail. It never hurts to double check to make sure I got it. I promise to always answer my phone if I’m at my desk or return your phone call if I’m not.