To the editor:
An editorial in Wednesday’s Review-Journal (“ObamaCare looms”) points to probable inconveniences and consequences connected with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare. The plan is similar to one proposed by then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney several years ago. Unfortunately, the editorial also implies a few inaccuracies that have dogged the ACA since it passed both houses of Congress.
The shortage of physicians and other medical resources, particularly in Nevada, is not a new problem. It’s unfortunate, and it makes perfect sense for our governor to take steps to mitigate this problem. It would be most unfortunate if we tried to contain the problem by denying care to people who do not have conventional health insurance, which is essentially what would happen if ObamaCare was not soon expected to be available. No one wants access to doctors made more difficult, regardless of one’s health insurance status.
Another frequent misinterpretation of ObamaCare is that it will be free to new subscribers. The program is insurance, paid for on an ability-to-pay basis, with most enrollees making substantial premium payments. “Free” medical insurance and services have long been available to many low-income persons through the Medicaid program.
The present medical insurance crisis is as much one of denial of coverage as it is of cost. Many lower-income persons who do not qualify for Medicaid can’t obtain affordable insurance that includes coverage for pre-existing conditions, which is often just what they need to have covered. Presently, they often must choose between purchasing insurance that fails to cover their known medical needs, or paying directly out of pocket for such care. This often comes at exorbitant rates, far in access of what the insurance companies pay doctors and hospitals for such care.
The basic purpose of ObamaCare is to provide health care access to all citizens, not free medical care to persons who have the ability to pay.
Take a bow
To the editor:
Congratulations Nevada, take a bow! Your state and Las Vegas have the worst school systems in the United States. Coming from Pennsylvania, I ask myself every day why I moved here.
To be clear, politicians are not loved in Pennsylvania, but thank God the Keystone State’s governors and officials in nationally elected offices — a mix of Republicans and Democrats, mind you — each had a vision of how to improve the state’s education system. In Nevada, the politicians don’t even have a clue, let alone a vision.
Gov. Do-nothing Sandoval only speaks when spoken to. Mayor Photo-op Goodman is only seen when the stars are aligned and the county commissioners have to spend $300,000 for a study on how to clean up the Strip. Can’t these people think for themselves? These are supposed to be educated people we elected.
Nevada voters, it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. Like anything else in life, the old adage holds true: You get what you pay for. If you want an undereducated workforce, you’ve got that now. Just remember that an undereducated work is a cheap workforce, and that’s what the hospitality industry loves.
Last in line
To the editor:
Is it any wonder that Nevada ranks last in education? My grandson goes to Foothill High School, and I was amazed that the school doesn’t have enough books to allow each student to bring one home.
How are kids expected to succeed when they don’t even have the basic tools, such as books, to utilize at home?
Education level is directly related to economic success for both the student and the state of Nevada. This problem can be laid directly at the feet of the gutless state Legislature.