Summit Daily Letters: bait and switch
Health care bait and switch
There have been some articles in response to ColoradoCare that are interesting to me. I agree that it would be nice to fix the health care system. The opponents say that it will lower cost and it will give better care, there is no proof that this is true, only assumptions, and we can make assumptions until the cows come home. Remember that the Democratic congress and the president passed ACA, or better known as Obamacare saying the same thing. Obama said that it would lower cost, you could keep your provider and your doctor. That does not seem to be happening to a lot of people. Now people want to vote for an amendment that says it will do some of the same things that ACA would do. Only this amendment has not been fully written and can be added to later by a group of people that will be chosen later if the amendment passes, etc., etc. I find that it is interesting that people tell me it is my moral responsibility to vote for this. Where does their moral responsibility start and end? I make the assumption that some of the people that talk about moral responsibility own nice houses, maybe even two or three, plus a house full of stuff, one or several cars, and maybe a boat or RV, take vacations around the world, etc. What about moral responsibility to the environment, wildlife, nature in general, etc. Where does moral responsibility start and end? Where does moral responsibility start with the person that just wants to play around and live the good life and live off of free assistance for a while? What about moral responsibility to service in our military, they have their health care paid for and still would have to pay for ColoradoCare. Would the people who want us to vote for ColoradoCare sign and lock themselves into a legal document for purchasing a home, car or any loan with the understanding that an undetermined board will be picked later to decide the terms of the amount of money to be collected later. If that amount of money collected does not meet the desired amount necessary to cover what the undetermined board sees needed in the future, then they can collect more money until their terms are met. Interesting how the righteous mind allows us to pick and choose whatever information we want that will confirm our position on an issue.
Another argument for the gross increase in taxes to fund ColoradoCare is that these taxes will replace insurance premiums. While in some cases (and no one can tell me how many cases) this may be true, in many cases (and again we’ve not been told how many), it won’t do anything to lessen premiums, as Medicare premiums still need to be paid by those eligible for Medicare. These fortunate seniors on pensions will see their taxes raised 10 percent to start with, while those who don’t work will receive health care without any “premium tax.” Wife-retired military.
I have a couple of issues with Tom Castillo’s recent letter regarding ColoradoCare, Amendment 69. First, in it he misstates the “10 percent flat tax on all income for all residents.” The truth is that the resident is only taxed one-third of the 10 percent, the balance is paid by his or her employer, which, in fact, may be less than the employer is currently paying to provide employee insurance through a for-profit insurance company. Also, it’s hard to imagine that these so-called “healthy people,” to whom Mr. Castillo refers, picking up their lives and moving to another state in order to avoid a small tax which, may in fact, be less expensive than the deductibles and co-pays with which they are currently burdened. Besides, I’m not aware of any mass exodus of Americans to Canada or the UK where the health care systems are seemingly much better than ours.
I intend to vote “yes” on this amendment.
As an allergy sufferer I have had to deal with how CRAZY expensive the price of an EpiPen is. I’m glad this issue has received a lot of attention and that Congress demanded answers from Mylan’s executives. I hope that this hearing culminates into substantial action which allows us to learn more about how drug companies price their drugs — companies who use taxpayer’s dollars for research and development shouldn’t be allowed to overcharge consumers.
Lawmakers need to demand answers and solutions like open and honest pricing so that dramatic price hikes on life saving drugs don’t happen time and time again.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.