Letters to the Editor
Letters To The Editor, 6/23/09
Will Regulation Give Altria Immunity?
Editor, Times-Dispatch: At last, the dreams of Altria (Philip Morris USA) have come true, and all the money it spent lobbying legislators has paid off. Congress has now passed legislation that Altria has wanted for years -- namely, to get the federal government into the cigarette business.
Why would a big company like Altria advocate federal regulation of its business, if it weren't for an ulterior motive? Certainly not for any altruistic reason. Could it be that once the government regulates nicotine and tars, Altria can dodge any further cancerand health-related lawsuits, and simply point to the FDA, saying, "You can't sue us, it's not our fault, the government said it was OK."
This is a greater boondoggle than Sen. Ted Stevens' Bridge to Nowhere. We've all known since 1776 that Congress is still for sale, and that taxpayers will provide the legal tender for said sale.
Ernest Irby.
Henrico.
Phone Exec Needs Education on Facts
Editor, Times-Dispatch: I am writing in response to the letter, "SCC Decision Costs (Most) Virginians," by an AT&T president who complains that the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) should do more to lower the costs of his global phone giant at the expense of Embarq's local telephone customers.
In his letter, J. Michael Schweder complains that the rates his company pays to use Embarq's local telephone network contain support that helps keep basic service rates affordable, especially in high-cost areas of the state. Based on his comments, it appears he has not read the SCC's May 29 order, which reduces by half the rates he finds troubling.
As a resident of Pennsylvania, and not Oakton, Va., Schweder may not know that although Embarq serves less than 10 percent of the local telephone customers in Virginia, those customers live in the more rural parts of the state where the cost to provide basic telephone service is extremely high.
The support Schweder complains about exists because, as a nation, it was decided many years ago that all Americans should have access to basic telephone service and that it was a benefit for everyone to be able to call to -- and from -- places where telephone service would otherwise be cost-prohibitive. In some areas of Virginia served by Embarq, the real cost of service is more than $100 a month per customer. Without some form of support, many of these Virginians could not afford even the most basic telephone service.
Although further access reductions might be welcomed by an AT&T president in Pennsylvania or by its corporate headquarters in Texas, they would only harm Virginians. The SCC was sensitive to the needs of rural consumers in the recent order reducing Embarq's access rates. Although the SCC did not adopt the Embarq position in the case, it certainly did not adopt the extreme position taken by AT&T and others. Rich Schollmann, State executive, Embarq.
Richmond.
Obama Health Plan Makes No Sense
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Do people think the Obama administration's health care plan, whereby pre-existing health conditions cannot be used to exclude coverage nor increase the premiums for coverage, is good? Does it make them feel good that the government is going to take care of that unfortunate person with poor health?
Well, think a moment about this theoretical situation whereby all of the car owners in my neighborhood participated in a single group automobile insurance plan. This plan would not allow the insurance company to limit pre-existing conditions nor charge policyholders anything extra for them.
So all of the car owners in the neighborhood sign up for this group policy. Then, one day a new neighbor moves in. He has a badly damaged car from a recent wreck. He decides to participate in our neighborhood group car-insurance plan, and because the plan stipulates that the insurance company cannot limit coverage for pre-existing conditions nor charge extra for them, this new neighbor signs up for coverage with the exact same rate that I am paying.
The next day, he files an accident claim, and the insurance company pays him $12,000 to repair his wrecked car. At the end of the month, all of the neighbors receive bills from the insurance company increasing their premiums to cover the new neighbor's claim.
Now, if you were me, would you think that was fair? That the new neighbor with the already wrecked car could pay the same premium that the rest of the neighborhood was paying, get his car repaired the next day, and then everyone's premiums are increased, even though they are good drivers and are taking good care of their cars?
Well, that's exactly what the Obama administration proposes to do with its government health care plan. I don't know about others, but it seems ludicrous to me.
William E. Kahl.
Moseley.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
An organization that regulates and enforcing the law should not be in the healthcare business, there are some who cannot see or otherwise understand that gigantic conflict of interest which makes this a huge problem.
With no record of success, despite numerous forays into the healthcare business, some people want the government to take a third bite at the apple - I don’t have any basis to trust the government with health care and I don’t understand, with their existing track record, why some people believe the government can make this work efficiently and cost effectively.
Feb 1, 2009: Insurance companies involved in the Medicare prescription drug benefit have overcharged subscribers and taxpayers by several billion dollars, according to the inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services. 80% of the participating insurance companies owe the program an estimated $4.4 billion for 2006 alone. (Not only do they charge double or more to us than to citizens of other countries, that is not enough! They gotta overcharge the already overcharged amounts!)
June 24, 2009: Congressional investigators said Wednesday two-thirds of the U.S. health insurance industry used a faulty database that overcharged patients for seeing doctors outside their insurance network, costing Americans BILLIONS of dollars in inflated medical bills. (Who knows what all is hidden under the covers? Tip of the iceburg?)
Yet, some still don’t like government interference in our “free” enterprise system. Hosing feels good to some, as those their brains already got hosed. Just as out-of-control mortgage lenders were allowed to run greedily wild, we have the insurers, pharmaceuticals, others. What do we expect? The nation’s vault door is opened to them. It‘s like we say to them, “please, take more”.
Just make sure you each have extra $450,000 saved for your extra health care costs during retirement years after age 65. Good luck.
R - yes - the people who regulate or otherwise enforce shouldn’t be in the business - it’s a conflict of interest.
Second - medicaid and medicare - not a glowing testimony to government run health care.
Attributing the public health infrastructure to tax codes and Miranda rights is rhetorical.
I think if you look at the programs and initiatives sponsored by HHS you’ll find that the services provided have been unequivocally successful.
Is there a direct criticism of HHS, NIH, HRSA, CDC, et al, held by opponents of healthcare reform?
Your last post was hilarious - “greedy thieves” - what do you think politicians are? They aren’t public servants anymore.
Your faith in the government is scary. Your faith that the new president might finally do something right, while statistically probable, isn’t supported by his performance thus far.
thetruth wants to give your healthcare over to a group of people who have never administered a massive healthcare plan, are in bed with lobbyists, are corrupt and have not demonstrated a detectable trace of fiscal restraint. YEAH, let’s give the healthcare system over to the folks who ran Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, to the folks who can’t operate their own cafeteria at a profit, to the folks who have social security, medicaid and medicare in trouble. Let’s turn it over to the people who’ve made compliance with the tax code a confusing, excruciating ordeal and believe we need to give Miranda rights to people captured on battle fields in foreign lands.
You have confidence in this group of people to get your healthcare right? I’m glad you’re not in charge of anything.
When we hear Randy, mrright, and GOP members of Congress so concerned about the well-being of private insurers more so than well-being of our society, keep in mind the degree of well-being the insurers have for us…
WASHINGTON (AP)—Congressional investigators said Wednesday two-thirds of the U.S. health insurance industry used a faulty database that overcharged patients for seeing doctors outside their insurance network, costing Americans BILLIONS of dollars in inflated medical bills.
No doubt it was a faulty database. Do-do in; out comes more greedy stolen profit for the insurers.
We can be sure the insurers certainly don’t want any involvement. Anyone still don’t want a non-profit public insurance option? Oh my! Private insurers might have to reduce stealing so much from us in order to compete.
One thing for sure. If when my wife gets a public plan option that is even $100/mo higher than lowest public insurer’s plan I find, I’ll go with the public plan. Am tired of getting hosed and it would be worth extra cost to not associate with greedy thieves.
Antiques, my wish for you is for quality care and for our nation’s reform of a very sick medical system built primarily as a profit-driven business rather than a health care system. Sadly, there are some who care not for fellow Americans suffering health problems that soon couple with financial problems caused by our greedy system. Those who care not are as with noted William Kahl, who value you no more than a automobile, and Randy and mrright who value the profits of insurers and other corporations who see only profit, while you seek only fair play and justice.
Let us pray our President will push hard and our society will push harder all in Congress to finally devote our nation’s energy to amputating the cancer of waste and profits from our sick system to better afford a less costly, broader coverage of health care to all.
The Germans and ALL other advanced civilized democracies believe something a minority of Americans do not. Germans call it “solidarity.“ The idea is that everybody’s in it together, and nobody should be without health insurance. We trust we will someday be as civilized as today’s Germany that has come so far since their darkness of pre-1945. Maybe we can someday duplicate their empathy and compassion.
I recently had to retire due to health issues requiring my having to use oxygen at all times. I am lucky to have health insurance for now. In order to receive SS benefits; I must wait 6 months and by that time I am sure all of my utilities will be shut off and my modest home will be in foreclosure. Where is the common sense in government? I have worked all of my life; but due to the rediculous way the system works; I will end up being homeless or living in one of the crime infested welfare apartments. This is our government and the genius plan at work.
Tort Reform has nothing to do with health care costs… Texas, which has 200k limit on med-mal, still has expensive health care. See Atul Gawande’s recent article in the New Yorker for a further examination of health care costs.
It’s a fact: The most successful and competitive exports of the American economy are the very same that receive government subsidies: Agriculture, technology, education, defense, health science…
To pretend that privately sponsored research could ever produce the same expanse of medical discoveries that our state universities (VCU should come to mind), NIH, HRSA, et al, denies the extent of those advances.
Does anyone here believe that private competition will research and stockpile flu shots at a loss without government subsidies?
The healthcare system will not function without some amount of state regulation and intervention; there is not a single free-market healthcare system in the world worth mentioning because it is a cost heavy industry that will never be truly compatible as a commodity.
Further, it should be pointed out that it was a concentrated government sponsored effort to eradicate Polio, Cholera, Typhoid, et al, in this country. If you do not treat people in your community who cannot afford treatment for infectious diseases, what happens? Will an epidemiologist cite the tax burdens of treating Cholera? Without a coordinated health system, could our cities support the concentrated populations?
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement