Health care reform needs conditions
I too have some serious concerns about the proposed health
reform bill.
First, I feel it needs to be stated in the bill that no tax
money will be used to fund abortions.
Secondly, no doctor who refuses to do abortions because he or
she morally objects should be in any way censured.
Third, there is talk of limiting treatments, which would be
helpful to older persons. What age? One mentioned is past 55!
Unless these conditions are some others are addressed, the bill
could be a death sentence for many.
Marie Cosgrove
San Juan Bautista
Dismantling employer-based insurance is wrong approach
Although it’s clear that change is coming to the U.S. health care system, doing away with the employer-based insurance system is not the answer. The employer-based system currently provides more than 160 million workers and their families with comprehensive health insurance coverage. Disrupting the current private U.S. health care system would be an imprudent policy action that would jeopardize the health benefits that millions of Americans currently receive.
Rates of private employer-sponsored coverage have remained relatively constant over time, with the proportion of workers having coverage through either their own employer or a family member’s employer averaging between 70 and 74% over the past 15 years. The Kaiser Family Foundation’s annual employer benefit survey indicates that 99% of large firms (200 or more workers) and more than 83 % of firms with 25 or more workers offer health benefits.
The federal government supports employer-sponsored coverage through the tax code by recognizing that insurance premiums paid on behalf of workers is a business cost and is generally deductible for tax purposes. This is a strong encouragement to employers to offer coverage. But most employers offer coverage for a different reason: a healthy workforce is directly linked to productivity. Employers’ ability to offer health insurance as a non-wage related benefit helps them attract the best workers and remain competitive.
For individuals, there are a multitude of advantages to employer-sponsored coverage, not the least of which is the significant financial contribution most employers make towards the cost of coverage for the employee and often towards coverage for dependents as well. The Kaiser Family Foundation indicates that in 2007, employers on average paid 84 % of the premiums for single employees and 72% of the premium for individuals with family coverage, and these percentages have remained stable over the last several years. To help encourage the provision and acceptance of employer-sponsored health insurance, the premium payments made by employers are not included in an employee’s taxable income. This exclusion from taxation is a significant benefit of employer-sponsored coverage
The actual cost of coverage relative to the benefits provided is often much better in employer-sponsored plans. Group purchasing power helps employers obtain preferential pricing and provide benefits that are generally much more extensive than what is available to consumers spending a similar amount in the individual market. Administrative costs are lower because coverage is provided to many individuals through a single transaction with one employer. And controlled entry and participation into an employer’s plan ensures a balance of risks that are spread more efficiently and effectively than is possible in the individual market, further adding to the cost advantages of employer sponsored coverage.
In spite of the success of employer-sponsored coverage, there remain more than 44 million uninsured Americans. More than half of these individuals are the working poor or near poor, many of whom already have access to health insurance through an employer-sponsored plan. If employers already provide access to health plans and pay a significant portion of the premiums for many Americans, why are so many uninsured? The problem isn’t access-it’s affordability. It is important to remember that health insurance is a financing mechanism for health care. As the cost of care increases, so does the cost of health insurance. The biggest reason there are 44 million Americans without coverage is that they just can’t pay for it. Thus, because the cost of health care drives the cost of health insurance, we need to address the drivers of health care costs before we change health insurance benefits for millions of Americans.
Real solutions will not happen overnight, but a good starting point is to look at what part of the cost of health care we can change. Studies show that as much as 40% of our health care costs go towards the treatment of preventable, lifestyle-related conditions: obesity, lack of exercise, smoking – all things that hinder wellness and can be changed. We must create incentives for individuals to participate in healthy behaviors that will improve their health and decrease the cost of financing health care for everyone. We also need to look at excesses in our system and pay more for the right outcomes. We need to ensure that the use of evidence-based medicine is the rule and not the exception, and that we use every means at our disposal to encourage high quality care, which is ultimately also the least expensive care.
As we debate which proposals will change the way we deliver, ensure, receive and finance health care, we must carefully consider the impact these changes will have on Americans and the American economy as a whole. In the long run, doing away with the efficiencies of the employer-based system will result in higher costs, lower productivity and fewer health care choices. We must implement solutions that reduce the cost of care and focus on changing those areas that need to be changed rather than those that already work and provide the coverage that insures so many Americans today.
Rick Shelton
Hollister
Health care reform needs conditions
I too have some serious concerns about the proposed health reform bill.
First, I feel it needs to be stated in the bill that no tax money will be used to fund abortions.
Secondly, no doctor who refuses to do abortions because he or she morally objects should be in any way censured.
Third, there is talk of limiting treatments, which would be helpful to older persons. What age? One mentioned is past 55!
Unless these conditions are some others are addressed, the bill could be a death sentence for many.
Marie Cosgrove
San Juan Bautista
Questions about vector control abound
I attended the San Benito supervisors meeting that dealt with:
Item 1) Approving next year’s budget for Vector Control at over a quarter of a million dollars. This budget included the maximum raise in taxes to cover the program. Vector Control handles the mosquito abatement, among other duties.
The mosquito Abatement program is mandated as to what is required, by the state. And we, the taxpayers, pay for the program.
Item 2) The laying off of the ONE Vector Control Tech in the county as of Oct. 1, 2009.
Several things were said at this meeting that I felt needed further investigation. So far I have found out and out lies were told in regards to these issues.
Included in the budget are wages and employee benefits of more than $135,000. Where this figure comes from needs an explanation. The Vector Control Tech (the one losing his job Oct .1 is paid more than those replacing him) makes under $45,000 a year.
Question – Who is getting payroll and benefits to make up the other $90,000?
Questions on the budget brought forward the information that two permanent full-time employees would be spending 30 percent and 40 percent of their work load to cover the Vector Control and mosquito abatement program. The remaining 20 percent would be done through administration staff, ensuring we had 100 percent of a full-time employee equivalent to do the job. Looking at this I must have made a mistake in my notes because 20+30+40 is not 100.
We were assured over and over again that no seasonal staff would be used to take any of the duties now covered by the Vector Control Tech we were losing
First the Vector Control Tech job is to be handled by one full-time Agricultural Department employee and one seasonal employee.
Several times we were assured the laying off of the Vector Control Tech would not impact in anyway what the taxpayers received in way of services under the program.
We were assured there were trained qualified full-time employees to continue our full Mosquito Abatement and Vector Control programs.
My investigation has found the above statements to be wrong.
One part of the mosquito abatement program has always been a flock of chickens used to screen/monitor for West Nile virus. This is done through blood testing bi-weekly. My understanding is that without the current Vector Control Tech the chicken monitoring will stop
The state has agreed to this change, but has required (see required, not suggested) San Benito triple the amount of mosquito traps, taking counts of numbers, including sex and species found weekly.
We can hang the traps, we can collect the mosquitoes, but after Oct. 1, there is not an employee in San Benito that can identify male from female mosquitoes, let alone what species any of them are. So not only will we not be in compliance with the program, we will have no mosquito monitoring in the county.
The Supervisors when asked several times assured everyone that we do have qualified staff. And what I found out was that was just another big fat lie. There are no qualified employees and no continuance of same level of coverage.
Part of the Vector Controls job includes fogging (spraying) for mosquitoes. The only person remaining in San Benito employed after Oct. 1 who is licensed to spray just barely has qualified to spray. And is only qualified to start at an entry level position under supervision to spray for mosquitoes. He has no hands-on knowledge and no idea where it is allowable/ not allowable to spray.
Just think if he sprays poison in the wrong place and the County becomes liable for his mistakes, which can include lawsuits and fines. Think if he sprays an organic farm, or a sensitive stream. Can we afford this?
Did you know Vector Control also handles control of animals that carry disease that can spread to humans? That includes rats, ticks and spiders, to name a few. These are other reasons Vector Control fogs.
After Oct. 1, there will be zero, nada, no one qualified or licensed to handle anything but mosquito fogging. Are we getting the same coverage? Are we getting the same bang for our buck? I don’t think so.
Were you aware the State wrote a letter supporting keeping the current Vector Control Staff, and expressing their feeling we needed to keep our current trained experienced staff to ensure compliance?
One supervisor made a comment like “When the State starts giving us money toward the program, we will then listen to their concerns.” Is he mad? The state gave our county more than $200,000 in equipment to help set up and operate this program. This included two trucks and two ATVs.
What happens when the state finds out San Benito County is not complying with the mandates? Will the state demand the return of the equipment, and possibly rent for the time the equipment was being inappropriately used? I don’t know. Do you?
Well many statements made at the supervisor’s meeting are flat out lies. These lies were either told to the supervisors who repeated them, or were being told by the Supervisors themselves knowingly. Investigation is certainly called for to find out which.
Another really interesting note – the one person who knows what is involved to keep in compliance was denied the right to be at the public Supervisors meeting on this matter. He is a San Benito taxpayer like you, but was denied attendance at this “public” meeting. Was someone afraid he would point out the lies being told? I think so.
Nina Schafer
Hollister
Socialism in disguise
I recently found some interesting information I’d like to share. According to Yahoo Answers, Norman Mattoon Thomas (1884-1968) was an American socialist, pacifist and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. Yahoo Answers notes that in a 1944 speech he said:
“The American People will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day, America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.”
Apathy and complacency will be the downfall of our great nation. Please attend the town hall meetings, call, e-mail, write, do whatever it takes to contact your representatives and let it be known you will not stand for this to happen!
Anthony Vallejo
Hollister
