HEALTH CARE REFORM
Republicans have little credibility on the issue
Republicans in Congress claim that they would work with the president on health care reform if only he would toss out his current bill and start from scratch. But what reason is there to believe them? President Bill Clinton tried to reform health care policy in the '90s, and congressional Republicans killed it.
They then held power for eight years under George W. Bush (six of those with majorities in Congress) and did nothing as millions of working Americans were denied or lost coverage. If Republicans really wanted to control costs or ensure coverage, why didn't they act then?
It's time for Democrats to move ahead with or without the Republicans and pass a bill that finally puts America on the path to affordable health care for all.
PAMELA J. SNOPL, MINNEAPOLIS
• • •
What a joke. After watching much of the health care summit, I'm amazed that Congress gets anything done. I've been in business meetings where more was accomplished in an hour.
Tear up the current versions of the bill and use these bloated documents for firewood. Then start from scratch. Who put the time limit on passing this in a hurry anyway? This is too important to push through.
CON RIVARD, SPRING LAKE PARK
•••
Poor Paul Krugman may be a brilliant economist, but he doesn't know quack about health insurance ("Inconvenient: Health care premiums rise," Feb. 22).
He decries a Republican proposal to allow policy purchases across state lines (enlarging the loss pool) while touting mandated health insurance purchases for people who don't need it (like a tax).
There are two very fundamental things Krugman does not understand.
First, in a nation where two-thirds of adults are overweight -- and a third are obese -- mandated affordable health insurance is an illusion. Equivalently, automobile insurance would be unaffordable if two-thirds of drivers had moving violations, including a third with DUIs.
The second is more fundamental. Insurance was designed to compensate for a loss. During high income, child-raising, mortgage-paying years, one insures health to meet responsibilities and obligations of life. Health insurers "underwrite" those years.
The responsibility for health does not lie with the government, insurers or even health providers. It lies with each individual. Health insurance won't make you healthy any more than auto insurance will make you a good driver. You reap what you sow.
DONALD M. PITSCH, EDEN PRAIRIE
snowmobile deaths
Why aren't we more alarmed by the numbers?
Sixteen snowmobile deaths, and the winter has a long way to go! Just imagine if there were 16 hockey deaths in a winter, or 16 skiing deaths or 16 basketball deaths. There would certainly be a great hue and cry to stop the carnage, yet where's the outrage?
Mamas, don't let your babies grow up to ride snowmobiles.
FRED OLSON, EDEN PRAIRIE
DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL
The time to change the policy is now
A Feb. 17 Star Tribune article ("Love and war") celebrated two people who continued dating throughout their deployment in Afghanistan and recently married. In the same paper there was an article on the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The Army and Air Force chiefs were concerned about changing the policy during two wars.
If a romance can endure through a war, a change in policy should have no problem. No matter what religious beliefs exist, no person should have the authority to say that another is inferior because of their sexual orientation.
The government is supporting segregation, just as it supported Jim Crow laws and the exclusion of both African-Americans and women in the military.
BECCA EBERT, EDEN PRAIRIE
THE NEED FOR GAMC
Recipients make do at a 1975 level
State Sen. Julianne Ortman's Feb. 22 commentary, "The state can't afford GAMC," does not describe the impact upon the General Assistance Medical Care recipients. The reality is that the state only increased the cash benefit from $193 to $203 in the second year of the GAMC program, and that benefit amount has been frozen for the past 35 years.
The GAMC recipients are living on 1975 cost of living standards, not 2010 cost of living standards. Now, to the problems of homelessness that exist for the poorest of the poor, Ortman would like to add the medical care problems that will arise if GAMC is unfunded. That $10 increase back in 1975 does not cover such MinnesotaCare program costs as premiums, copays and deductibles, and the $10,000 medical care would close the door for many GA recipients.
MinnesotaCare was originally established by the Legislature to assist low-income people who had medical needs beyond their limited resources. Setting premiums, copays, deductibles and a $10,000 ceiling was appropriate for this population. To dump the GAMC program upon the MinnesotaCare program means that we are abandoning public health care. We should not worship at the alter of "no new taxes" like some politicians seem to do.
DON OLSON, BLOOMINGTON
