Hampton Roads, VA - 11/08/2009
Clear55°Clear
Forecasts | Doppler Radar
Traffic Cameras & VDOT Alerts

Letters to Editor - bLetters

We welcome your opinion on public issues, in either of two ways. You can submit a letter to the editor for possible publication in the printed edition. The Virginian-Pilot welcomes letters to the editor on all topics, although concise letters (150 words or less) on public issues will receive priority. Letters may be edited for length, style and clarity and writers are limited to one published letter every month. Please add your name, city, street address and daytime telephone number for confirmation.

The other way is to comment on the published letters in this blog. In this online forum, you can comment as much as you want by using the comment box at the end of each entry.

By e-mail: letters@pilotonline.com

By mail: Letters to the editor - P.O. Box 449 - Norfolk, VA 23501-0449

By fax: (757) 446-2051



Single-payer surrender

AT A RECENT meeting of the Virginia Interfaith Center, Sen. Mark Warner discussed end-of-life health care issues. He asked for discussion and suggestions regarding his proposed legislation and other health care issues. He has extensive knowledge of health care issues, is a great listener and is attempting to craft some excellent and needed legislation.

I am a supporter and admirer, but when I asked about financing, and specifically expressed my preference for a single-payer health plan, I was politely cut off, and the phrase 'It's not going to happen' terminated the discussion.

Over the past several weeks, I have seen this phrase repeatedly used to halt any discussion of single-payer health care. This includes Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Now the White House is beginning to back off from its core concept of extending a Medicare option for all as a moral and financial solution to our health care crisis. What is going on with the Democrats that they are stonewalling further discussion of this option?

Beaumont Hodge, M.D.
Norfolk

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its Web sites. Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Report Violation" link below the comment.

Wrong concept

A single payer system is not the answer. These systems are notorious for abuse (see Medicare and all the scams and fraud that are committed), rationing, delays, denials, and sub-standard care. If you think Medicare and Medicaid do not reject claims or deny procedures then you are seriously naive.

We need to stop mandating that insurers cover every little bump or bruise under every policy. Women don't need coverage for ED, and men don't need coverage for pregnancy, but it is in their policies. The examples of these types of mandated coverages are legion....and they are a yoke around everyone's neck.

We need a system where individuals purchase their own policies independent of their employers. Policies offering basic preventive care and catastrophic coverage should be available at reasonable prices. Option like low co-pays and low deductibles, should be covered by additional riders or higher premiums. People should have more control of the level of coverage that is right for them, not less.

Bi-Partisan Greed

GuyfromChesapeake: In case you didn't know, special interest OWNS our Congress. Wepublicans, Democraps, Hooter Party, it doesn't matter. The WAY we elect our officials demands huge amounts of money and it has to come from somewhere. Until We The People demand election reform and term limits, it will continue to be so.

Sue...

I'm way ahead of you as far as knowing who the 'special interests' own and operate. I've been harping for term limits for years now, ALL reforms become possible when TLs' become a reality. Campaign contributors are investors first and foremost, and they expect their 'investments' (the politicians they buy) to deliver some real returns. Until that pipeline is interrupted, it will be business as usual in washington DC. Cap-and-trade, bailouts, no enforcement of immigration laws, they are all paybacks to the special interests who paid for those initiatives.

Gee, all this time...

I thought it was just those evil Wepubwicans who were holding up the left's beloved socialization of the health care industry. You mean the same ol' usual suspects now own the Dems too? Of course, Baucus is now saying they have miraculously pared the costs down to 'only' 1 trillion dollars to pay for this monstrosity. I get all goose-bumply when I think of all the other govt predictions for the costs of programs and other initiatives, they all proved to be true, right? Medicare drug plan, Medicare itself when it was introduced, any given weapon system, yeppers, they always live up to the price tags presented to make them palatable to begin with, do they not?

Geezz, Louise...

ran out of space.

Something has to give and, since no one has any better ideas and no previous administration has had the testicles to take on this issue, I'm willing to trust this President to at least shake things up.

Dr. Tabor is dead on

Dr. Tabor is dead-on when he says we have a broken market. The insurance companies only care about two things: making enough profit to pay the million dollar bonuses promised to their highest executives, and making enough profit to drive their stock price up in the market. They do NOT care about the people they insure.
For the same two reasons American companies eliminated domestic jobs and started buying cheap products from China -- NOT so that they could reduce the cost of the goods, but so that they could increase their profit margins to make enough to pay the million dollar bonuses and make the stock go up.
In the "other America," the one we THINK we live in, companies cared about their employees, and they cared about their customers, and they cared about the products they sold. Now it's all about greed, greed, greed.
And Mr. Rothman's estimate on the cost of insurance for a family of 4 is only valid if no one gets sick. I have a chronic condition and my insurance just went up to $7,000 a year for ME and I have been denied prescription drug benefits, from a company I have been insured by for the last 20 years.
Something HAS to change and since no one has any better ideas, I

An article in the Montana Standard says:

"In the past six years, nearly one-fourth of every dime raised by Baucus and his political-action committee has come from groups and individuals associated with drug companies, insurers, hospitals, medical-supply firms, health-service companies and other health professionals.”

Let's face it, nothing of substance will result from these healthcare "improvements". There will be a lot of speechmaking, and posturing, and many accusations, but when the dust has settled, the taxpayer will continue to pay through the nose for a fragmented system, still ruled by the insurance and drug companies.

As is generally the case, government is swayed not by the opinion of the voters, but by the money of the special interests.

Don, I know you are bullish on the

marketplace for insurance. But I see no evidence that the premiums will go lower than they are now with a completely free market in insurance, other than it seems to work with retail goods. But much of that is competition from cheaper goods made in Asia.

Whether the employer pays or you are privately underwritten, the cost for a family of 4 is around $12K+ per year from any number of plans. If insurance companies are as efficient as you say (I don't think they are even close to that), then savings are not coming from thin air. And the plain fact is that insurance company profits come from two places: investments of premiums and denial of claims and the better companies are both, the more profitable they are.

Insurance premiums are symptoms, not the cause. The present day medical system needs overhaul to put profit in prevention, not treatment. Until then, whether we have single payer, private insurance or, like in Germany, a combination of government oversight with private companies, nothing will change.

Contrary incentives

I agree that there are fundamental changes needed in health care toward more efficiency and less overtreatment. But as things stand now, the incentives for those who control health care choices are contrary to greater efficiency.

When a person becomes seriously ill, they quickly reach the 'stop loss' limits of their policy and have no reason to question additional testing or treatment, since at that point the cost falls ultimately on their employer and not them. The provider has no reason to limit treatment as he is paid by the test or service and he doesn't even know the employer. The employer, through the insurance administration, seeks to deny ALL claims he can, whether they are justified or not, as total cost for all his insured is his only incentive.

As I pointed out in the Tidewater Liberty series, what we have is a broken market, not a free market, but if we restore normal market forces, the market will deliver just as it does with everything else.

I agree, Doc.

To take it a step further, I feel once goverenment contols health care we will see rationing. I do not feel this is rhetoric. The "Boomers" will become the major target. They have paid into the system for 40+ years and now they are major liabilities. If those in government feel that this Pubilc Health care is so great they should lead by example and forgo their lucrative benefit plans and sign up for what they are going to give us and specifically the elderly. Only then will this program have any validity. Fat chance of that happening!!!!!

Strategic retreat, not surrender

Rest assured that Obama and his ilk have not given up on socializing the 1/6 of our economy represented by health care. This is just a ruse.

They know if they are open about their intent to seize control of the economy piecemeal, opposition will rise, so they are doing it incrementally. The plan will be to allow private insurers to exist temporarily, but make them "compete" with a government alternative, which will, of course, be subsidized and given advantages which private sector companies will not have and which will make them non-competitive.

Then they will either go out of business, or be 'bailed out' and taken over by government just like GM.

And then you will have your single payer system just like every other socialist country in Europe. Unless people wake up and see the strategy for what it is.

pwned!

The truth is they are OWNED by the insurance industry. The billions paid by all of us for insurance over many years have made that industry the most powerful lobby in the US. They back candidates like Baucus who has received more campaign money than anyone else from the insurance industry. In spite of the fact that over 70% of Americans want Single Payer, those beholden to the insurance industry, including Obama, will do everything they can to keep it "off the table." Instead they will propose new ineffective scams that funnel taxpayer money to big insurance companies. It's up to us to fight this and demand single payer. We should also demand that those on committees involved in health care policy have no conflict of interest or connection with the insurance industry!

Oh Pleeeze!!!

Come on. Can't you come up with more original rhetoric than "..they are OWNED by the insurance industry." You really show your ignorance when you say things like that. The fact is, our politicians (no matter which flavor they are) always promise BIG things. Then when they realize the price tag is clearly out of reach, they begin to back-peddle and in a way that makes them not look so bad. It's much like saying that they are willing to leap from a a cliff...until they realize that the cliff is 500 feet high. Our health care system does need some reform. The system is good (even with the "evil" insurance companies), but has many flaws that keep many people out. But looking at recent proposals from our politicians, government health care would be no different and come with an unsustainable price tag.

70 percent?

By who's standard? Nobody I know wants the govt to take over the insurance industry. Nobody.

Just last night Charlie Gibson quoted a poll that said close to 70 percent thought we needed a govt health program - but that number was cut by half if it meant the end of private insurers. (Numbers may be off but that was the gist.)

Remember, people shop at Wal-Mart because it's cheap and convenient, not because it's better. Most Americans will opt for the government subsidized plan for the same reason - the end result will be the scenario Doc Tabor painted above.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

Toolbox