To the editor,
Making health insurance accessible and affordable for employers and employees of small businesses affiliated with national associations are a commendable goal, but not if it means some small businesses--especially those employing older workers - will be priced out of the market.
Supports of S.1955, which the U.S. Senate will soon vote on, claim it would help small business, but there is more to the story. The bill would remove state regulatory protections in Oklahoma and other states relating to rates and benefits, allowing insurers to "Cherry Pick" groups with the youngest, healthiest workers and leave older workers out in the cold. Insurers could also get by with stripped down plans that do not cover basic services, like cancer screening that is recognized as both essential and standard in many states.
As our population ages, and labor markets tighten, older workers are becoming increasingly important to the continuing strength of our economy. But S.1955 creates a disincentive for employers to hire or retain them. That may be an unintended consequence, but it is one this country can ill afford.
Jerry Peddy
AARP
To the Editor:
Almost daily George W. Bush, Rumsfeld, and others make this claim: “We are a nation at war!”
They use this claim as a reason for doing anything they want to do, from cutting taxes for the rich to cutting services for the poor; from torturing prisoners to spying on American citizens; from destroying the Alaskan wilderness to destroying our Constitution--the War claim is an excuse for every outrage. You can almost see them smiling and smirking when they make the war claim, because they think Americans will put up with anything as long as we are “at war.”
But my question is this: If we are a nation at war, who is the enemy? It can't be Afghanistan; we conquered that country and saw a new government installed. It can't be Iraq; we invaded that country, overthrew the regime, and saw a new government installed. Those wars are over. Our only stated purpose for being in those countries today is to police them against internal strife until their own forces are strong enough to handle the chaos and nascent civil war.
And don't tell me we are “at war with terrorism.” Terrorism is not a country, it is not a government, and it is not a person. It is a word describing criminal behavior carried out for political purposes. We can oppose terrorism and we can fight it, but this does not make us a “nation at war,” any more than the so-called “war on drugs” makes us a nation at war.
The time has come that we say to Bush, no, we are not at war. The two wars that you started are over. Mission accomplished. The War excuse can no longer be used to hold our country and our constitution hostage.
Billye Van Schuyver
To the Editor,
As a chiropractor who has seen my own patients overcome chronic and debilitating pain to lead healthy and happy lives, I know how critical prevention and proper treatment are to many families.
Musculoskeletal problems, like back pain and headaches, keep millions of Americans away from work or unable to perform simple, everyday tasks. And many of these patients find relief only through chiropractic care.
Yet a bill working its way through Congress could take critical health care benefits -- like prenatal care, cancer screenings and chiropractic treatment - away from many hard-working Americans and their families.
The Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act, or Senate bill 1955, would enable health insurers to bypass existing state consumer protection laws, resulting in the loss of critical health coverage that millions of Americans have come to depend on.
The bill would eliminate key health care benefits, including screenings for breast, cervical, colorectal and prostate cancer, well-child care, maternity care, emergency services, mental health care, and diabetes supplies and education.
The full Senate could vote on S.1955 during the first week of May. I strongly urge Senators Coburn and Inhofe to stand up for the people of Oklahoma and vote against this legislation.
We all want to make health care more affordable. But by taking away basic health care coverage we depend on, our Senators will be doing more harm than good.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jennifer Logsdon
