Archive for Friday, July 7, 2017

Letter to the editor: ACA distortions

July 7, 2017

Advertisement

To the editor:

Mr. Starnes June 30 letter claims several matters that are misleading.

  1. He says the Affordable Care Act was crafted in secrecy. That is false. Adding that it shares secrecy with the GOP Senate health bill is a false equivalency. GOP repeal efforts have had zero public hearings. The ACA was debated in three House and two Senate committees. The ACA proposals were made public at every stage of development.

  2. Starnes is tarring me with the logical fallacy of guilt by association by implying that my views mirror those of U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi. They don’t.

  3. Starnes claims that the ACA is imploding. Of the two components, Medicaid expansion and the other private insurance, the first is a success with 11.2 million new enrollees. The insurance part has had mixed results. Premiums in 2017 are up 22 percent. Young healthy people did not enroll in the numbers expected by insurance companies. About 12.2 million did enroll, which is not a sign of collapse. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that the marketplace would be stable in most areas. The Trump administration canceled advertising, withdrew enrollment enforcement and threatened to cease making payments to insurers. That has caused marketplace confusion and insurer withdrawal. None of this is an implosion, and the problems are fixable.

Comments

Bob Smith 1 month, 1 week ago

Insurance companies all across the country are ending their participation in the ACA because they're losing money. The ACA is circling the drain, Stu.

Ken Lassman 1 month, 1 week ago

Wouldn't you pull out too, if the feds promised subsidies were stopped, along with the incentive for healthy folks to enroll? It's not that the ACA has been deflating of its own accord; it's more like the Trump Administration has poked pitchfork holes in it and are jumping up and down on it, saying that it's flawed and is collapsing. Duh!

Carol Bowen 1 month, 1 week ago

Insurance companies rely on population trends, not politics. They are pulling out of the market because of instability. Costs are not predictable.

Michael Shaw 1 month, 1 week ago

The phrase "all across the country" reveals this remark to be mere anecdote. The evidence shows the insurance market as a whole to be stable.

Bob Summers 1 month, 1 week ago

Why does the Liberal want "sustainability" with energy but, demand furiously, with emotional temper tantrums, unsustainable welfare by living off of other peoples money?

What kind of horrible greedy selfish behavior is this?

Liberal people=greedy

Don Brennaman 1 month, 1 week ago

I feel there is a robob in the room. Republicans are all about wealthcare not healthcare. I hope your medications don't increase 500%. Soon, entering the ER with a gunshot wound will be a pre-existing condition that won't be covered by the greedy liberal insurance industry.

Michael Shaw 1 month, 1 week ago

Your sentence illustrates who is being "greedy" in this debate.

Thomas Bryce Jr. 1 month, 1 week ago

"Liberal people=greedy". By Bob's conclusion, the ultra rich are Liberal. So now we know. The Koch's must be Liberals too, right? The Trump's Must be Liberals too, OK? Warren Buffet is a Liberal. Healthcare Corporations are Liberal. The Wall street Banks are Liberal.Who would have known without Bob's insight! Thanks Bob! Have a great Day!

Ken Lassman 1 month, 1 week ago

Haven't you noticed? Bob Summers' genetic defect theory afflicts us all, even himself. I quote him from another posting: "There are no pure non Liberal lodestones. Every human has a little dopamine receptor d4 polymorphism in them."

Bob's genetic behavioral determinism reminds me of General Turgidson's "precious bodily fluids" theory in Dr. Strangelove: since he pays no attention to scientists who discuss the real meaning of said condition, he is free to project onto it any conclusion he wants to, which is absurd and funny at best....

Bob Summers 1 month, 1 week ago

Your lodestones are definitely bigger than mine.

btw. The genetic condition is NOT a "genetic defect".

But, it is science that those with bigger lodestones take their condition as a "genetic defect".

Ken Lassman 1 month, 1 week ago

My lodestones are bigger than your lodestones? How rich. And how does the size of your lodestones relate to the maternal nurturing frequency of your formative years? Or your oxytocin (OXTR) receptor? Or the AVPR1A variant associated with altruistic behavior? Or how about the possibility of the introduction of PTSD at critical developmental junctures? Or nutritional quality of your mother? Or the emotional intelligence of your second grade teacher? Or your birth order?

You do realize that these environmental and genetic influences, among many, many others have been studied for their impact on your behavioral patterns, don't you? Genetics seem to be anywhere from 30 to 60% of the factors, and well it sounds like the environment is anywhere from 40-70%, so go figure. If you want to go play with your lodestones theory, that's just fine with me--just do it in the privacy of your own home, OK?

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 1 month, 1 week ago

Isn't it funny. Maybe Bob is right. Some of us are born human, others, like the non caring hateful conservatives, are not.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 1 month, 1 week ago

The Bobs just don't get it. All their conservative leaders who they worship do not need insurance. They have enough money to write a check. But they hate paying taxes to help others get health care and pay that pesky fine when they don't have insurance. Their rich lords wouldn't lift a finger to help the Bobs if one of the them got cancer, or one of their children were born with a birth defect.

But that's okay. Because god loves their rich masters more, because they have money. You too can be rich, if you would just love god more. God doesn't love you if you are poor or have a disease. And if you have a disease, just die. like god intended you to.

Sam Crow 1 month, 1 week ago

You realize that Dottie has read the Bible twice, don't you ?

Bob Smith 1 month, 1 week ago

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

Theodore Calvin 1 month, 1 week ago

"Grab em by the p*$$y." People all say things they may regret, or may be an embellishment, or may be completely false. Being the logical giant you are, I'm sure you can surely agree that it is silly to judge a whole body of work or legislation by a single sound bite.

Bob Summers 1 month, 1 week ago

Surely,

"Welfare" is just one word.

Welfare describes Obamacare perfectly "silly".

Don Brennaman 1 month, 1 week ago

I'm paying for my congressional representatives healthcare. I think I should have the same coverage they have. Have you asked your reps why you don't?

Greg Cooper 1 month, 1 week ago

What, then, Bob, does "welfare" mean in the United States Constitution?

Don Brennaman 1 month, 1 week ago

If you like your money you can keep your money is the right wing wealthcare plan.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 1 month, 1 week ago

You can keep your plan if unless you have a lousy plan. Sure pay $100/month which will only pay if you have someone catastrophic, and you still have to pay half of the $200,000 for your chemo. And it pays nothing to make sure your cancer is caught early enough to cure, so you won't have to worry about the other $100,000 anyway. And all for just $100/month.

William Cummings 1 month, 1 week ago

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

Actually, this essentially remains a true statement. You are still able to send money to the insurance company and not get meaningful coverage for it in return, just like before the ACA.

Deborah Snyder 1 month, 1 week ago

MISTER SUMMERS, That Is Enough. Whether or not you support universal health care is immaterial to its potential efficacy or its obvious benefits.

Selfish condemnations do not provide a solution to children, the elderly and infirm, nor does it solve fiscal needs in rural

Deborah Snyder 1 month, 1 week ago

...areas of our state or nation.

Since you appear to be ready and willing to condemn any and every effort to solve escalating medical costs which are EQUALLY UNSUSTAINABLE, you can provide us all with the answer(s) to "the nation's common welfare" as stated in our constitutional preamble, "We the People..."

Otherwise, cease your prattle.

Marc Wilborn 1 month, 1 week ago

You have hit the nail on the head. Controlling medical costs is the key to providing universally available health care for all. Forcing one group to subsidize another is not the solution. The federal government has one solution for every problem which is to launder a group's money for the use by another group. Get control of costs first.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 1 month, 1 week ago

But controlling costs would be socialism, wouldn't it? Conservatives consider profit to be godly.

Marc Wilborn 1 month, 1 week ago

There are a lot of ways of reducing the cost of health care that do not involve socialism. Our health care system is wide open for corruption and misuse by the providers, patients and government.

Steve Hicks 1 month, 1 week ago

Thanks, Stu, for your fact-based rejoinder. Right on.

That factuality also stirs the weak-minded to their usual angry bloviating is a side-benefit. They never show themselves more ridiculous than when they're talking.

We all enjoy a good laugh.

Richard Heckler 1 month, 1 week ago

About ObamaCare:

“The people in favor of a public alternative can’t scrape up the millions of dollars Baucus has received from the health sector during his political career. In fact, over the last two decades, the current members of the entire finance committee have collected nearly $50 million from the health sector, a long-term investment that’s now paying off like a busted slot machine.”

"In Washington, Revolving Doors are Bad for Your Health" By Bill Moyers & Michael Winship

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2009/10/bill_moyers_michael_winship_in.html#more

In just the last few months, the health care industry has spent $380 million on lobbying, advertising and campaign contributions. And -- don’t bother holding onto your socks -- a million and a half of it went to Finance Committee Chairman Baucus.

The health care industry alone has eight lobbyists for every member of Congress and more than 500 of them are former Congressional staff members, according to the Public Accountability Initiative’s LittleSis database.

Just to be certain Congress sticks with the program, the industry has been showering megabucks all over Capitol Hill. From the beginning, they wanted to make sure that whatever bill comes out of the Finance Committee puts for-profit insurance companies first -- by forcing the uninsured to buy medical policies from them. Money not only talks, it writes the prescriptions.

Richard Heckler 1 month, 1 week ago

About secret meetings in which conservatives attend away from the halls of congress behind the closed doors of ALEC conferences in which legislation has been drafted then distributed to conservative elected officials who then pretend they did the work = corruption.

Maybe one day citizens throughout the USA will rise up and demand choice that would be voted in by the largest stakeholders in the USA which is you and me.

By choice I mean voting in 3 choices and this what the options could be:

=== ObamaCare which retains the health insurance industry

=== Single Payer Medicare for ALL = excellent coverage for those who wish to enroll. https://www.healthcare-now.org/docs/spreport.pdf

=== Self financed health care for those able to do so.

WE did not elect anyone to dictate what healthcare options we citizens should have nor did we elect anyone to steal our Medicare Insurance,Medicaid,Social Security Insurance nor squash public education.

And we certainly did not elect anyone to implement voter suppression.

Voters should realize by now that republicans are not republicans thus should stop voting republican. Where did the republican party go?

United States of ALEC – Bill Moyers http://www.democracynow.org/2012/9/27/the_united_states_of_alec_bill

ALEC Subversive Activity http://www.rightwingwatch.org/report/alec-the-voice-of-corporate-special-interests-in-state-legislatures/#Voter

ALEC – The Voice of Corporate Special Interests in State Legislatures http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/alec-the-voice-of-corporate-special-interests-state-legislatures

ALEC EXPOSED – The Koch Connection http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/alec-exposed-koch-connection

ALEC – Ghostwriting The Law for Corporate America http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/15044.htm

Richard Heckler 1 month, 1 week ago

If anyone believes that the very conservative Kansas delegation in Washington DC is going to vote against a conservative president forget it ..... it ain't going to happen.

Contract for America drafted behind closed doors in the halls of ALEC won'y allow conservatives to vote against conservatives. Newt Gingrich was the ALEC soldier promoting this document. My my Newt is a brilliant slick talking fool who works for ALEC not the voters.

MerriAnnie Smith 1 month, 1 week ago

Universal healthcare.

It's the only way the Cons can recover from their big loss of confidence by the country and that includes a lot of Republicans.

Polls show both Libs and Cons want universal care.

Obama was not allowed to have the plan he offered. The SCOTUS ripped big holes in it, and they were able to do that because it was before Scalia died. Now we have Gorsuch who is just as bad.

Expansion of Medicaid was important to Obamacare success, and they knocked it down and Kansas supported that idea.

But when Obama tried to pass his healthcare plan, he ran into a lot of pushback by Congress people who were in the pockets of big insurance and pharma people.

However, it is still the best plan anybody has yet come up with, unless Hillary Clinton's plan was better. She did say this week that the GOP is welcome to use her plan.

Michael Kort 1 month, 1 week ago

Yes, the first three letters of the word consevative are........ "CON" and they stay employed do the business of private businesses .

So the publics health care had to be tied to private insurance companies and their stock holders profits !

So, the cost to the government for the publics drugs had to be exempt from negotiation between our government and the drug companies who were seaking an expanded market on the bottomless public dime !

And now it is time once again for federal tax cuts and ever expanding foreign wars........but wait,......the government, they say, is already going broke so the poor must be dammed to fill the conservatives pockets for their ongoing misadventures in government !

Chris Golledge 1 month, 1 week ago

Math. In this country, if a person needs critical care, providers are obligated to provide it. Someone is paying for that. Who? Well, to some extent, providers charge extra to the people who do pay to cover the costs of those who don't. That's why simple things are stupid expensive at a hospital. If you can figure out a better way to make the freeloaders contribute something than an individual mandate, I'd like to hear it. Better, I'd like for our reps to hear it.

Also, because people without insurance have a hard time getting into a doctor's office, they tend to wait until the pain is really bad, then go to the ER. Now, an ER is about the least cost effective way to provide treatment. Not only that, but they are not obligated to treat the root cause; so, the person goes back again and again. In contrast, if they have insurance, whether they wanted to buy it or not, they can get into a doctor's office and get the problem fixed. Getting the problem fixed at a doctor's office is less expensive than repeatedly not getting it fixed at the ER, and the rest of us are paying for it one way or the other.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.

loading...