Archive for Friday, September 14, 2012

Details needed

September 14, 2012


To the editor:

At the Democratic National Convention, Stacey Lihn provided moving personal insight into her family’s positive experience with the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Stacey talked about how her 2-year-old daughter, Zoe, survived a congenital heart defect due to the fact that the Affordable Care Act removed lifetime limits for health insurance. Zoe’s health challenges are far from over, but their family can find comfort and relief in the knowledge that she will continue to receive the vital health care she needs to live, grow, and prosper.

That is, unless Gov. Romney is elected president. Romney has stated openly that repealing the Affordable Care Act is a top priority. Shortly after Stacey’s speech, CNN asked the Romney campaign, “Are you going to do anything after you repeal the health care act. Is there an alternative proposal?” Romney spokesperson Andrea Saul stated, “The last thing our health care system needs are more expansive and expensive federal mandates that drive up health care costs and make it harder for patients to find the care they need. That is why Governor Romney has put forward reforms that focus on greater patient choice and control, lower costs and better access for every American.”

Repealing the Affordable Care Act will be devastating for a great number of Americans with critical care needs. Informed voting requires a clear statement of the candidate’s platform. We need to start hearing his plan right now. Some lives may depend on it.


Ron Holzwarth 5 years, 6 months ago

"Some lives may depend on it."

Some? Only some? I would say many.

Bob Forer 5 years, 6 months ago

Why argue with the guy, Ron? i think you are both probably on the same side of the issue.

LadyJ 5 years, 6 months ago

Odd, I just got a statement from BCBS that says I have a $2,000,000 lifetime maximum minus the $300 I have used this year.

Jayhawks64 5 years, 6 months ago


I'm not arguing that lifting lifetime limits is a bad thing, but I find it hard to believe that a 2 year old survived a congentital heart defect because of the ACA lifetime limits provision. I know many, many children that have successfully survived this defect well before the ACA became the law of the land.

Also, Romeny will keep parts of the ACA in place like pre-existing conditions and keeping children on their parent's plan.

P Allen Macfarlane 5 years, 6 months ago

What Romney said about pre-existing conditions was later corrected by a campaign spokesperson who said that Romney would back insurance companies covering those already with insurance that have pre-existing conditions. This correction still leaves millions who do not have insurance and have pre-existing medical conditions out of luck with no means of coverage.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 6 months ago

"Also, Romeny will keep parts of the ACA in place like pre-existing conditions and keeping children on their parent's plan."

But the way those provisions get paid for is through the mandate to pay for insurance.

Bottom line, no matter how much you might dislike Obamacare, Romney has absolutely no plans on healthcare other than going back to the old status quo of having 1/3 of the US population without any coverage for all or part of their lives prior to going on Medicare, and healthcare costs increasing at at least double the rate of inflation.

jafs 5 years, 6 months ago

Romney will not offer any substantive details of his plan before the election.

He will offer vague and sweeping generalities, like the one quoted.

deec 5 years, 6 months ago

That's because his plan is to get rid of Medicare, Medicaid and ACA. Then the lovely lovely free market will magically offer low-cost high-benefit insurance plans that everyone everyone everyone can afford.

Lawrenceks 5 years, 6 months ago

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

tomatogrower 5 years, 6 months ago

Yeah, maybe that 2 year old just needed to get a job. Or maybe her parents should have taken on 2 jobs each. Oh wait, then who would take the 2 year old to the doctor and the hospital? Besides, they have insurance. The insurance company just wouldn't pay if they could get away with it.

kernal 5 years, 6 months ago

Sorry, tomatogrower, but the parents would need to take on four jobs each and file bankruptcy as often as the law allows. Maybe they could also pitch a tent down by the river during the summer to save on living expenses.

As for the doctor visits? The kid should be old enough to pedal a tricycle by the 3rd birthday.

Greg Cooper 5 years, 6 months ago

Citation, please, or are you just plagiarizing for fun?

Greg Cooper 5 years, 6 months ago

Citation, please, or are you plagiarizing for fun?

tomatogrower 5 years, 6 months ago

Let me explain health insurance to you. The insurance company plays a gambling game. You pay a premium, then they invest that premium. They are gambling that you will stay healthy. When you do, they win. When you don't, they lose. In the past 10 years they have been trying to fix it so they never lose. The Affordable Care Act changes that. There are plenty of healthy 2 year olds for which the insurance companies win. Their wins outpace their losses. I'm sorry you consider a 2 year old such a horrible burden on society. But guess what? If they fixed her, she may grow up to help pay into social security for your retirement.

Here's a quote for the Christians in Name Only. 41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' 44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' 45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' 46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

voevoda 5 years, 6 months ago

"If we give eagerly according to our means, that is acceptable to God; he does not ask for what we do not have. There is no question of relieving others at the cost of hardship to yourselves; it is a question of equality. At the moment your surplus meets their need, but one day your need may be met from their surplus. The aim is equality." II Corinthians 8:12-14. The "You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom." comes from "Pastor" Adrian Rogers. Who is the real Christian here? St. Paul or Adrian Rogers?

John Hamm 5 years, 6 months ago

At least one commenter sees life as it actually is. Congratulations Lawrenceks!

MISTERTibbs 5 years, 6 months ago

Personally, I am in favor of any healthcare reform act that is passed so long as our President, Senators, Congresspeople, Judges, et al all participate in the same plan that you and I do.

deec 5 years, 6 months ago

So my cousin's son who was born with a birth defect should die if his parents didn't have double insurance coverage? The kid had open-heart surgery 4 days after he was born due to a chromosome defect.

It's pretty hard to plan ahead when you're living hand to mouth, which more and more people are doing since 2007.

deec 5 years, 6 months ago

There are no death panels. Please stop spreading propaganda. Why didn't you answer my question?

deec 5 years, 6 months ago

No, I really want to know. Do you think it's cool if an uninsured newborn baby with a heart defect caused by a genetic abnormality ought to be allowed to just go ahead and die? Why won't you answer the question?

deec 5 years, 6 months ago

Well, I see several more comments from the poster to whom I addressed my question, but he/she refuses to answer the question. Apparently the poster is in favor of letting sick babies die. I'll bet he/she is pro-life, too.

bad_dog 5 years, 6 months ago

"Has anything changed?"

No your sources still stink.

tomatogrower 5 years, 6 months ago

You need to step away from Fox. There are no death panels. Insurance companies have been denying coverage for quite some time and letting people die. Obama is trying to insure that people don't have to deal with the "profit is the name of the game" of insurance companies. Do you really think they care about their customers? They are more concerned about profit.

voevoda 5 years, 6 months ago

The only death panels being planned are on the Republican side. They plan to set up panels to make life-or-death decisions for pregnant women.

gbulldog 5 years, 6 months ago

I want the Presidents and the Congress health plan. I understand they have a better health plan and thus are exempt from Obamacare. My my personal experience with co-pays. Don't get sick. Co pays will destroy you finacial worth and you will not get any government assistance because you work and earn money. And don't get old. Nursing home cost will take what you have saved in less than a year. And nursing home insurance is a scam.

jafs 5 years, 6 months ago

The exchanges that will be set up with the ACA are modeled on the health plans and choices that Congress enjoys.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 6 months ago

The U.S. health insurance system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health care bill is paid through taxes, according to a 2002 analysis published in Health Affairs by Harvard Medical School associate professors Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein.

Tax dollars pay for Medicare and Medicaid, for the Veterans Administration and the Indian Health Service. Tax dollars pay for health coverage for federal, state, and municipal government employees and their families, as well as for many employees of private companies working on government contracts.

Less visible but no less important, the tax deduction for employer-paid health insurance, along with other health care-related tax deductions, also represents a form of government spending on health care.

It makes little difference whether the government gives taxpayers (or their employers) a deduction for their health care spending, on the one hand, or collects their taxes then pays for their health care, either directly or via a voucher, on the other.

Moreover, tax dollars also pay for critical elements of the health care system apart from direct care—Medicare funds much of the expensive equipment hospitals use, for instance, along with all medical residencies.

All told, then, tax dollars already pay for at least $1.2 trillion in annual U.S. health care expenses. Since federal, state, and local governments collected approximately $3.5 trillion in taxes of all kinds—income, sales, property, corporate—in 2006, that means that more than one third of the aggregate tax revenues collected in the United States that year went to pay for health care.

Recognizing these hidden costs that U.S. households pay for health care today makes it far easier to see how a universal single-payer system—with all of its obvious advantages—can cost most Americans less than the one we have today.

Medicare must exist in the fragmented world that is American health care—but no matter how creative the opponents of single-payer get, there is no way they can show convincingly how the administrative costs of a single-payer system could come close to the current level.

More on this matter: Physicians for a National Health Program

Richard Heckler 5 years, 6 months ago

If 60% of those insured are covered by tax dollars why not the rest of us?

Excellent 24/7 health insurance coverage for less money seems fiscally responsible for all households.

Carol Bowen 5 years, 6 months ago

"The U.S. health insurance system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health care bill is paid through taxes, . . . "

The statement does not say 60% of those insured. The statement implies that our tax money pays for health care costs beyond what we pay individually.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.