Letters To The editor
Acknowledge Both Slavery and Civil War
Editor, Times-Dispatch: I endorse the comments of staff writer Michael Paul Williams, "Richmond Is Right Place for Slavery Complex," that supported the development of the slave museum on the site of Lumpkins' Jail near the Main Street Station.
We should follow this by moving the White House of the Confederacy and its collection to the Second and Canal Streets property -- the current site of the folk festival. This can be done without materially affecting future folk festivals.
The establishment of these two historic realities at each end of the Canal Walk and near the Tredegar Civil War Center could be a major historical tourism site.
The reality is that both slavery and the Confederacy existed. Both should be recognized and neither extolled. Just the facts.
Walt Pulliam Jr.
Richmond.
Can Citizens Opt Out of Bill?
Editor, Times-Dispatch: The Senate appears to be prepared to push through the government-run insurance program by introducing a compromise wherein states can opt out of the program. OK, fair enough. But how does a state's citizen opt out of paying for it?
I haven't heard any discussion that federal taxes will be amended to provide state-by-state deductions for the newly levied surcharges, taxes, and fees it will take to pay for this program.
Glen Kelley.
Glen Allen.
Medical Student Sees Public Option Need
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Although there has been much public debate about health care reform, I am disappointed that so few physicians in Virginia have vocalized their support for a public option. As a student at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, I have witnessed many of the unfair practices of private insurance companies.
While working with local doctors, I have heard patients complain about having to switch their diabetes medications without much notice because their insurance company decided to no longer cover them. Another patient had to postpone for months necessary gall bladder surgery while his doctor appealed multiple times to have it covered. At free clinics, I have met patients who lost their insurance when they were laid off from their jobs or who simply could not afford coverage because a pre-existing condition made the premiums unmanageable. Without the introduction of a public option, insurance agencies will continue to monopolize the market, drive up premiums and costs to patients, and reduce the quality of care that physicians can offer.
All other industrialized countries have recognized the important role that the government must play in offering health care to its citizens, and a public option in the United States is long overdue. A 2009 survey by Mount Sinai School of Medicine found that 73 percent of U.S. physicians supported a public option. It is time that more physicians speak out to their patients and to all Virginians to ensure Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb vote for meaningful health care reform that includes a public option.
Jeremy Kidd.
Narrows.
Wall Street Insists On Health Care Profits
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Correspondent of the Day Paul Knapik ["This Isn't About Health Care At All"] is right. The real issue in the health care reform debate isn't health care, but neither is it "increasing government control." The real issue, as always, is money.
The fact is that health care is big business in this country and most health insurance companies are publicly traded. Wall Street has one mandate for publicly held corporations: Increase revenues and decrease expenditures as much as possible to maximize net income. Therefore, for health insurance companies, raising premiums while limiting coverage and lowering reimbursement rates is good business practice and what Wall Street rewards them for.
I don't make this statement to criticize the health insurance industry but simply to acknowledge the environment in which it operates. As long as Wall Street is running health care, costs will continue to rise and coverage and reimbursements will continue to decrease. That is the nature of the beast and, in the absence of a public option or some kind of government oversight, it will not change. The market-forces argument does not hold water in this case because most consumers cannot afford to cancel their policies and do without in order to force insurance companies to offer better coverage options -- not when the main cause of personal bankruptcy in the U.S. is catastrophic illness or injury.
The personal responsibility argument is also spurious since the wealthy and well-insured receive whatever care they need whether their health problems are lifestyle-related or not.
Consumers and health care providers are prisoners of the insurance industry. The insurance companies are enslaved to Wall Street. Many people agree that our country needs health care reform but they don't want the government involved. Who else do they think is in a position to do anything about it?
LuEllen Buhrman.
Richmond.
Reader Reactions
One person says his monthly health care cost os $452.50 per month. Appears it is full premium cost. Don’t know if for one person only plan or a family plan. If an individual plan for one person age 55-65, might be a reasonable premium. If a person age 25-55, it’s likely too much. Virginia has plans regardless of age, for individuals at $265, $268, $305, $355, $357, $372 FULL premium cost, under the Federal group insurance program for its employees. So what?
IF the guy who pays $452.50 per month (yes, the full premium, not just his small co-share of such, is expensed before any consideration for pay or merit pay increases; something me-only people just don’t comprehend…there is no “free” employer insurance) would agree to support other Americans buying into a non-profit option via their paying FULL premium costs (NO taxpayer expense), thousands of $‘s per citizen could be saved.
“The govt. will create rules that will
drive the insurance companies out of business”? What rules have been proposed for such? NONE. Are not Aetna, United, BCBS, others who administer the paperwork for 9,000,000 enrollees in the FEHB program still in business? Yes; same as contractors who are behind with the swine flu vaccine; same as contractors with our Defense Dept; same as thousands of other gov’t contractors.
One among many are still blinded by insurer propaganda, while millions of Americans suffer the financial pain from a sick delivery system, including 46,000 who died in 2008 from lack of affordable insurance. 46,000 died, but some still feel pity for the insurers. What, not sadness for those who die daily?
Lower costs for Americans would drive insurers out of business? Our weekly shopping at Walmart where 70% of dry goods come from China drove a lot of American companies out of business, but we still shop at Walmart for “everyday low prices”. We are subsidizing health insurers, just like Anthem BCBS of VA and their 14% premium increases; and some people feel that support should over-ride financial needs of citizens? That’s nuts. Insurers involved with FEHB program make reasonable amount for simply money-changing. Those who are too greedy to compete with FEHB ought change their line of work. WE ought not sacrifice thousands of $‘s a year per family to subsidize thieves.
Truth? My health care costs are $452.50 per month of which I pay $49. So what? I see yours is through Aetna. Private Ins. Co. rates are determined by the nunber of participants and the cost experience of that group. Both private insurance companies that will soon be out of the health insurance business once the govt. takes over. The govt. will create rules that will drive the insurance companies out of business since the govt. dosen’t have to make a profit or break even since they have our tax dollars to rely on. I’m glad you like Medicare because you’re going to see your Medicare benefits cut cut so they can “pay for” this new takeover. It’s already going broke and they are going to drastically cut the money put into Medicare so what can occur other than to cut benefits, which they have already told us they will do. The govt. does nothing efficiently why do you insist they can do this? You’re amazing.
Some folk seem to not care enough to open up our Fed government’s web site: ww.opm.gov/insure/health and look at “premiums” chart for how much it costs for plan options. Here is an example: Aetna’s individual plan #224 (self-only) at full Y2009 monthly premium of $268.04 per month, paid 75% by employer (we are the employer of 9 million active and retired Fed non-military employees) and 25% by employee. Aetna’s family plan #225 is currently at $587.02 per month.
For full year 2010 these plans’ premiums will be for self-only $299.02 per month, split $224.27 by employer and $74.75 by employee. 2010 premium for family plan (employee, spouse, whatever # of kids they have) will be $654.85, split $491.14 by employer and $163.71 by employee. Those plans at those premiums are offered in Virginia and 48 other states. In one state, Hawaii, Aetna does not offer noted plans at noted low premiums. However, Kaiser has similar plans there….at lower premiums, like for Y2010 at full premiums of $192 per month for self-only and $412 for family.
I noted where to find good plans and low costs, certainly lower than today’s national average for employer-sponsored insurance for one employee with a family at $1,115 per month full premium for Y2009; increasing in two months. Now I have noted examples.
One person noted, “I know exactly how much my employer pays and I’ll bet it’s less than the feds are paying for yours.” So. Tell us how much your employer pays for your insurance monthly premium + how much extra you pay of premium costs. What is important is FULL monthly premium cost for your plan, whether it is self-only or family coverage, and the name of insurer & plan name or number? If your employer has received 2010 premium increase info, how much is its new $ monthly FULL costs? Don’t need to tell us employer name nor your name. We’d just like the truth, and you don’t even have to bet on it, as the truth is always a sure thing.
So. You gonna tell us?
By the way, I’m an old geezer who has been on Medicare for several years, and I, like all my elderly friends, like our Medicare; and no, Medicare enrollees do not face the 20% denials for procedures for-profit-only insurers practice on physicians.
Last time I checked the Feds didn’t have any money of their own.
It reminds me of the female on tv who said she was waiting for money from Obama.
“Obama money”
When asked where he got it she said “I don’t know, from his stash.“
You know Obama money.
Dear truth, tghat’s very nice that the federal govt. can offer healthcare to it’s employees, how much does it cost the taxpayers to pay for it? I know exactly how much my employer pays and I’ll bet it’s less than the feds are paying for yours. The statistics show that Medicare has a higher denial rate for procedures than any insurance company. I know where Medicare came from and how much simpler it would have been to work with insurance companies to cover the elderly rather than the govt. taking it over. And regardless of what you say, it’s still going broke. And I don’t know where or what that statistic means about the VA, but I know what I read shows the VA care is substandard to other hospitals and personal experience with relatives only supports that info.You can talk around the issue all you want, but what program does the govt. run thatis run well?
What medical program does the government run that is successful and within budget?
One is the world’s largest group health insurance program; the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), a “managed competition” system through which employee health benefits are provided to full-time permanent civilian government employees and retirees of our U.S. government. The FEHBP allows insurance companies and employee associations such as labor unions to develop health, dental, and allied plans to be marketed to governmental employees. Plans and their premiums (2009 & upcoming 2010) can be studied via ww.opm.gov/insure/health. Typical share of premiums is 73-75% by employer and rest by employee. IF we all look at the plans and FULL premiums, we will see costs lower than non-federal plans, such as your individual or employer plans, but just don’t evaluate your copay share. Ask your employer how much is your total premium (his portion + yours), remembering, full costs is subtracted before any possible pay increases for you. Also, check plan details of FEHBP vs. yours; things like deductibles copays for procedures and hospital stays. Overall, government oversight of FEHBP insurer plans result in successful lower costs, but could be lower, if more use of Fed purchasing power was enforced. I’ve advocated for months allowing all Americans to opt for similar program, as long as each citizen pays FULL premiums listed on noted web site. After all, if better coverage at lower premiums is good enough for members of Congress, it should be good enough for all Americans. John Kerry in 2004 voiced such, but we chose to ignore his logic.
Medicare? Before it was enacted 40% of Americans age 65+ did not have insurance, as insurers refused to cover many and/or charged prohibitive premiums for that age group. If you ran a for-profit-only insurance company, would you want to insure those most in need of health care use; the aged over 65 and the totally disabled among those under age 65? During those August town hall riots, remember the “don’t touch my Medicare” demands? How many denials do we on Medicare face vs. the 20% disapproved by insurers? Medicare does need stronger oversight of duplication of procedures and other wastes by providers and that is being addressed by Congress, as after all, don’t we want to cut wastes?
V.A. Centers? The Annals of Internal Medicine, established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians, did a quality comparison between 12 V.A. hospitals X the nation vs. 12 community centers. Results showed by 10+ percentage points, a higher rating for V.A. Centers.
Research and study will lead to knowledge. Don’t be hoodwinked by insurers.
How many times must the question be asked before people get the message, what medical program does the government run that is successful and within budget? Is it Medicare? No, that ones going broke and their rate of denial for medical procedures is higher than any insurance company. I wonder if the medical student knows that? Is it the VA? No, that one is a disgrace to the members of the military who have to use it’s services. Are we to expect the Feds are suddenly going to become adept at handling your healthcare? You can get a sneak peek of that by the vending machine example. This is about power over you and how you live your life. If the govt. is providing healthvare then they have the “right” to tell you how to live in almost every facet because all we do is connected to our health. Just like in Medicare and Medicaid the costs are controlled by cutting the reimbursemnets to doctors and other providers. Then they cut services. At least presently the insurance companies can be pressured to add services, who will pressure the govt. not to cut but to increase health care? Also what programs or services has the govt. run or controlled that are on budget and well run?
Where in the heck at 2nd and Canal do you plan on moving the WHofC and the accompanying museum—the asphalt parking lot behind the hotel on Cary?
If the Tredegar area is what Mr. Pulliam is indeed suggesting, he’s off by about 7 or so blocks. Know your Richmond, mister.
“How low some will stoop, all because of politics that takes priority over suffering and deaths of so many Americans”.
There are roughly 300 Million people in the US. All credible accounts show about 12 Million legal residents cannot afford health insurance (that does not mean they are denied treatment).
It is already reported these Democrat bills will not provide coverage to everyone.
So it is NOT political that Democrats want to control the lives of roughly 288 MILLION happy and content Americans in order to possibly provide more coverage (not increase actual treatment, because we all know no one is denied treatment in America) to less then 12 million?
Explain how no politics enters into the equation from your side?
Pelosi’s bill has a monthly premium built in to fund abortions.
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