THE CITY REBORN FROM THE ASHES OF AMERICA'S MOST DISASTROUS FOREST FIRE
From our readers
Issue Date: September 5, 2012
To the Editor:
According to the political pollsters, there are anywhere from 5 to 11 percent of the eligible voters in America that are undecided on whether to vote for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. I have put together a list of things that are taking place in our country that can help these people and other voters with their decision.
If you think that 16 trillion dollars in debt and the downgrading Americas credit rating are no big deal, then vote for Obama. Maybe you want unelected Federal Government bureaucrats to make all of your healthcare decisions and you want your tax dollars to pay for abortion on demand, then Obama is your man. How about selling guns to Mexican drug cartels, while at the same time working feverishly to take away your guns? Its Obama again. You feel open borders is a good thing. Once again its Obama. One more thing while the topic is voting. How do you feel about curbing voter fraud? If you think that showing an I.D. at the polling station is too burdensome, and you like the idea that the Federal Government is taking states to court to stop voter I.D., then just vote Democrat.
More than $700 billion is to be taken or will be taken from the Medicare Trust Fund to pay for Obamacare. Obama promises that this will not have a negative effect on Medicare beneficiaries, rather further cuts will be made to doctors and hospitals. Anyone who has received an EOB from a recent doctor or hospital visit cant help but notice that these providers are reimbursed at just a fraction of their actual cost. Even before these new cuts there are doctors in some areas of the country that are refusing to accept new Medicare patients. Will these additional cuts cause more doctors to do likewise? How will that not affect Medicare beneficiaries? Are hospitals allowed to refuse to provide care? If not, can hospitals continue to operate with such low reimbursements, or will they just increase the cost to non-Medicare patients. Maybe this is just another way to redistribute the wealth.
And what of the Medicare Advantage plans? An article in one of this Sundays papers explained it this way, Payments to Medicare Advantage insurers created to encourage participation will shrink to levels of traditional Medicare payments. Insurers must provide all benefits to participate in Medicare Advantage. What in heavens name does that mean? Shrink to levels of traditional Medicare. Does that mean that even with a Medicare Advantage plan members will need to pay the same 20% of costs as with traditional Medicare? Yikes! How quickly will that use up most of the savings of seniors? Or will the cost of Medicare Advantage plans escalate to the point where paying the premium will be as painful as paying the 20%? Then again, maybe insurers will just no longer offer Medicare Advantage plans. Undoubtedly, there are many more questions. Just how will all this not have a negative effect on seniors?
Most seniors now on Medicare have paid into this fund since its inception, expecting the government to use it for their benefit. Does Obama really have the right to use these monies for his private slush fund?