Killing people won’t kill their ideas
To the editor:
Thank you for the May 8 commentary, "The high cost of killing by remote control," by Doyle McManus. Citing the testimony of David Kilcullen, former adviser to U.S. Army Gen. David Patraeus, that, in our response to the insurgency in Pakistan "we need to call off our drones," Mr. McManus observes that "the drone strikes play into the hands of the insurgents, who cite them to stir up anti-American and anti-government sentiment."
In recognizing the negative effect of the use of drones, aptly named Predator and Reaper, we have another invitation to question the widely held myth, which continues to fuel our war-making, that by killing people we kill ideas. When will we wake up to our knee-jerk tendency to follow the jingoistic voices calling us to kill, and think more deeply about the wisdom of voices such as Isaiah and Jesus and Gandhi and King, who call us to another way?
PETER EDIGER
LAS VEGAS
Higher costs
To the editor:
The Nevada Assembly recently voted to lay an expensive new burden on small businesses already struggling to provide health care. Assembly Bill 162, which is now being considered by the Nevada Senate, mandates new and unprecedented coverage for autism and requires small businesses to cover the costs. All but two Assembly members voted for AB162, yet lawmakers relieved state government of the same responsibility because, according to testimony, the coverage would be far too costly. Federal law already exempts most large firms from the mandate.
The Legislature has virtuous intent in addressing the serious epidemic of autism, but AB162 goes beyond coverage parity with other diseases and could cost millions of extra dollars for privately insured Nevadans and the dwindling number of small employers who provide health benefits. Preliminary estimates indicate that AB162 would increase the total cost of premiums for all insured Nevadans by approximately $165 million per year.
It is understandable that legislators consider the autism mandate too expensive for the state, but it is puzzling that, at a time when the ranks of the uninsured swell, they expect Nevada small businesses to shoulder a burden that government itself is unwilling to take on. In addition to the economic implications, lawmakers are also sending a highly contradictory message to their constituents. If this legislation is important, why shouldn't state workers and the thousands of low-income children covered by Nevada Check Up and Medicaid have the same access to this new coverage?
The unfairness of AB162 is compounded by federal law, which prohibits states, including Nevada, from placing such mandates on large employers who self-insure. So if you are a larger business, you can operate under one lower-cost, lower-mandate set of federal rules; however, if you are a Nevada small business, you must comply with 52 mandates (53 if AB162 becomes law) that drive up the costs.
Nevada insurance companies already cover medically necessary autism treatments, including physical, occupational and speech therapy, as well as pharmaceuticals. At an estimated cost of $36,000, AB162 requires insurance plans to cover an additional and unproven therapy called Applied Behavioral Analysis.
American small businesses, which employ 80 percent of the nation's workers, are at the dead center of the health-care crisis in the country. Whereas 99 percent of big companies and corporations provide health care for their employees, less than half (47 percent) of small business owners can afford to do so, according to studies by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners and the Kaiser Family Foundation. Small business that do struggle to provide health care for their employees also pay 18 percent more in premiums than the largest firms do --for the same benefits! --- according to a Commonwealth Fund-supported study.
If Assembly Bill 162 becomes law, its first and most lasting effect will be to increase the cost of health insurance and contribute to driving more Nevada workers into the ranks of the uninsured. No one should get trapped into an argument over whether or not it is important to include autism in health coverage. What small businesses have been asking for is the ability to work with health insurers to individually tailor health plans that fit the needs of their particular businesses and their employees -- which might or might not include autism coverage -- rather than be forced to operate under the one-size-fits-all, legal straightjacket of mandates. So far, states, including Nevada, have said no. "Pay up or drop health care if you can't afford it," has been the effective response.
Daniel Markels
LAS VEGAS
THE WRITER IS NEVADA STATE DIRECTOR FOR THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS.
Hate speech
To the editor:
Regarding last Wednesday's cutesy cartoon by Jim Day on Nevada's state bug and other artifacts: Could Mr. Day be prosecuted for committing a hate crime? His ridicule of state Sen. Bill Raggio certainly looks like hateful speech against the aged.
But no. Bill Raggio can't call the cops to investigate Mr. Day. Mr. Day isn't a student at UNLV. The students there are the only ones who would be limited by the proposed university-mandated speech code (April 29 editorial).
But don't worry, Sen. Raggio. You're a whole lot smarter than a dumb cartoonist who doesn't know that in these politically correct times, it's not cool to make fun of old people.
JANE HAM
LAS VEGAS
