To the editor:
Richard Strickland’s letter regarding the success of the Affordable Care Act reveals the absolute ignorance of the legislation from the liberal side of the aisle (“Obamacare wins, Republicans lose,” Monday Review-Journal). The writer claims 7 million more people now have insurance, which is completely false. We don’t know how many have actually paid their first premium, and the assumption that people will continue to pay is unfounded.
In addition, the number of uninsured in this country has barely been dented, as the vast majority of enrollees are folks who were previously insured. The purpose of the law — to insure the uninsured — has failed miserably. And what of the millions who are now paying much higher premiums and deductibles due to Obamacare? What of the millions who were kicked off their existing insurance and cannot afford the bloated premiums on Obamacare exchanges because they weren’t eligible for government handouts? What of the millions who are going to find out they can’t see their lifelong family doctor due to vastly shrinking networks?
The 7 million number looks good, but it is another mirage, like the many promises made about Obamacare. Reality is the budget-straining insurance bill in the mailbox. Reality is the two-hour wait to see an unfamiliar doctor. Reality is the extra couple of thousand dollars out of pocket due to higher deductibles. Those events will not only severely damage the liberal brand, but deliver the Senate to the Republicans, and that is no lie.
Pay the penalty tax
To the editor:
The Affordable Care Act deadline has passed. Obamacare is the law of the land, and if you believe the reports of 7.1 million sign-ups, this is really a very small amount of the population that has signed up to obey a mandatory law. President Barack Obama should be totally embarrassed, rather than claiming victory.
It appears that countless millions would rather pay the penalty tax for not having insurance under Obamacare.
To the editor:
I guess the Review-Journal’s conservative readers can now see that the readers on Team Obama do not understand statistics or Obamacare at all. President Barack Obama announces 7 million sign-ups for Obamacare, and Richard Strickland writes in his letter that “about 7 million people now have health insurance that they didn’t have before”(“Obamacare wins, Republicans lose,” Monday Review-Journal.
Does Mr. Strickland not understand the Obamacare sign-up numbers include everybody, not just those who were previously uninsured? We do not know how many new people are actually insured; the president chooses not to release those numbers, wanting his followers to think that all Obamacare sign-ups are newly insured. Why should President Obama disillusion them with the facts? In fact, many of those new sign-ups are the formerly insured who lost the perfectly acceptable insurance they had before Obamacare told their insurance companies to cancel those policies.
On the same day, letter writer John R. Rubino wrote that he thought that anyone should be allowed to sign up for Obamacare at any time, even if they just had a heart attack. The insurance companies must sign up those with pre-existing conditions, but if you had an open enrollment period all the time, no one would sign up until insurance was needed. Then it would not be insurance; it would be a hospital payment plan without any money put into it before the hospital bills came due.
Unfortunately, even though the Review-Journal has many articles about all the details of Obamacare enrollments and the need for firm enrollment periods, it seems that our Obama supporter friends don’t care to read those articles. Or they just decide they love their “he can’t do anything wrong” leader so much that it can’t possibly be true that the president would lie to them.
Social Security office
To the editor:
The local Social Security office not only takes care of Social Security cards, but also benefits such as retirement, death and disability. The office also helps many people get Medicare cards. Many of our citizens could not survive without the local office’s help.
Some time ago, the office cut its business hours, perhaps due to funding. Maybe I am wrong and the office can stay open to the public only 27 hours a week, including 9 a.m. to noon on Wednesdays, and take care of the many citizens who need help. Maybe our leaders have better priorities to use the money that could be used for expanded hours.
With the restoration of the office’s hours and funding, maybe my friend would not have had to be told to drop off her paperwork when the office was open because “sometimes it gets lost if you mail it.” Maybe another friend would not have had to wait three weeks to schedule an appointment to see someone at the local office to get help. The Review-Journal should find out what happened to the Social Security office’s funding. Maybe it got lost, like the mail.