Private insurance and health care don’t mix
To the editor:
In his Jan. 13 letter, S.G. Hayes excuses the "pre-existing condition" reason for insurance companies denying coverage, but the fact is that little clause in health insurance policies is a direct cause of death for thousands of Americans.
I realize these companies could hardly stay in business without it. Therefore, we need a "public" plan that provides coverage for these people, plus all others who for whatever reason do not have and cannot get coverage.
Or we could do as the GOP and a few conservative Democrats in Congress want to do, which is essentially nothing that would threaten the existence or massive profits of the health insurance industry.
Therein lies the dilemma: Do we do something that saves lives or do we do nothing, which keeps insurance companies in business with huge profits?
Well to those such as the Review-Journal editorial page staff, Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats and tea partiers, the answer is simple: Insurance company profits and preservation of our arbitrary, capricious and cruel private system takes preference over saving lives. The fact that everybody, except the very rich, is vulnerable to acquiring a pre-existing condition, makes absolutely no difference to these people.
I reiterate what I have been saying for years: As good, necessary and efficient as it might be in other fields, private insurance has no business in a life-or-death field such as health care, simply because to stay in business it can't possibly do what it must do -- provide health care coverage to all Americans regardless of age, income, wealth or health history.
DANIEL OLIVIER
BULLHEAD CITY, ARIZ.
Numbers game
To the editor:
In response to the Wednesday letter from Vernon F. Pechous on a state lottery and education:
I lived in Illinois when the state lottery referendum passed. I voted for it. Illinois voters were told that lottery proceeds would benefit schools. For that reason it passed.
What was not publicized, however, was a law tucked away in the Illinois statutes that stated funds raised for a specific purpose in Illinois must still be designated to that purpose by a vote of the Legislature before they can actually be assigned to that purpose.
You guessed it. When the millions of dollars in lottery funds began piling up in the Illinois treasury, state legislators in Springfield began looking at them with an interest other than helping school kids learn about Dick and Jane and Spot. Pet projects financed by lottery funds popped up all around the state to help politicians in re-election bids. Less than half the total lottery funds received actually were assigned to education.
Therefore, may I humbly suggest to Nevada voters who see the value of education that they read the fine print in the referendum and insist that if a Nevada state lottery is allowed, "any and all funds collected will be designated for use in education." It's regretful, I know, but you just can't trust politicians anywhere.
John Dombek
SANTA CLARA, UTAH
Pocket liner
To the editor:
A state lottery is just another way for politicians to line their pockets and divert funds to further their own longevity in office. In California, the money that was designated for schools was diverted into the politicians' war chests to extend their stay in office. Instead of supplementing the budget for education that money was diverted to everyone's pork projects.
Donald J. Harand
LAS VEGAS
A rose is a rose
To the editor:
In response to John Alvord's Jan. 21 letter responding to Geoff Schumacher's column, "Stop calling Democrats 'socialists' ": Let's stop this childish name-calling, gentlemen. It's like debating the degree of a politician's marital infidelity.
After all, what's in a name: Democrat, socialist, Republican, fascist? The rose will still smell as sweet and the stench of the impossible shambles the Republicans left Mr. Obama will still reek of ineptitude no matter how desperately they strive through "name-calling" to divert the fragile attention span of the American electorate -- an electorate that in its so-called wisdom will always separate a president, two years after his election, from a Congress of like political persuasion. It's their contribution to the separation of powers and inevitable as seasonal change.
Yet there is always great surprise and consternation when it happens. It happened to Bill Clinton and even to that Republican icon Ronald Reagan.
The worst name I can think of to call anyone is "politician."
JAMES J. BEGLEY
LAS VEGAS
Ad time
To the editor:
Chrysler Corp. has been chastised by Washington politicians and bureaucrats for purchasing costly ad space during the Super Bowl broadcast when it hasn't paid back TARP money. How do you sell your product if consumers don't know what it is?
The Super Bowl provides the biggest bang for the buck. Just ask the Clydesdale horses.
Perhaps the complaint is a page out of chapter three of dictator Hugo Chavez's book requiring those on the dole to use only government media outlets. And we know which those are.
Robert S. Tobias
LAS VEGAS
