Advertisement

Archive for Friday, September 14, 2012

Details needed

September 14, 2012

Advertisement

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.

Comments

Richard Heckler 1 year, 7 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.

0

Richard Heckler 1 year, 7 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: http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2008/0508harrison.html

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-resources Physicians for a National Health Program

0

gbulldog 1 year, 7 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.

0

uggadyboogadyboo 1 year, 7 months ago

Michael S

When you go to Mcdonalds and order grits, the next thing the cashier wants is payment. I don't mandate that those in the restaurant pay for me. Why do you think going to a doctor is different? If you don't plan ahead, your going to die. Tragically your child too. Do you really think the government is going to take care of you? I ask because the financial planning for the programs now on the books. ... ( T h e y .. a r e .. i n .. t h e .. r e d) nobama is speeding it up. If you can't understand this, you aught to check in to Larned as a ward of the state. ( Its free, its free) and this brings us back to grits. We have grits in the morning, PBJ for lunch and some kind of wheat gruel on toast with what looks like chunks of carrots in it. (I'm purty sure its meds) Swimming is free, no thongs. Don't be scared. When you get here just ask for uggady. I'll hold your hand.

0

MISTERTibbs 1 year, 7 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.

0

OonlyBonly 1 year, 7 months ago

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

0

Lawrenceks 1 year, 7 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."

1

jafs 1 year, 7 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.

4

Jayhawks64 1 year, 7 months ago

Michael,

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.

0

JonasGrumby 1 year, 7 months ago

I find it amazing that neither Joe Biden nor Barack Obama talked about the Affordable Healthcare Act during the convention last week. This was by far their greatest accomplishment, yet they avoid it. What a wasted opportunity to do exactly what the letter writer said the admin should do.

2

LadyJ 1 year, 7 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.

0

Ron Holzwarth 1 year, 7 months ago

"Some lives may depend on it."

Some? Only some? I would say many.

2

Commenting has been disabled for this item.