Choose supplemental Medicare insurance carefully and save hundreds of dollars!: An article from: Women’s Health Letter
Choose supplemental Medicare insurance carefully and save hundreds of dollars!: An article from: Women’s Health Letter
This digital document is an article from Women’s Health Letter, published by Soundview Publications on July 1, 2003. The length of the article is 1017 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: Choose supplemental Medicare insurance carefully and save hundreds of dollars!
Publ
List Price: $ 5.95
Price: $ 5.95
View full post on Medicare and Medicaid Online News
Categories: Medicare Tags: article, carefully, Choose, dollars, from, Health, Hundreds, Insurance, Letter, Medicare, Save, Supplemental, Women’s
An Open Letter To President Obama on Health Care Reform and What It Means To My Family
An Open Letter To President Obama on Health Care Reform and What It Means To My Family
Mr. President:
I know that you are a very busy man so I will try to keep my questions about health care reform and the recently passed legislation as short and simple as possible.
- I could ask you why you think this is a good piece of legislation even though I truly believe that it will be a failure and will come very close to bankrupting the country. The basis for my conclusion has nothing to do with political partisanship (in fact, I have never voted for a Republican for national office in my life.) From my perspective, “Obama Care” never effectively addressed the root causes of our escalating health care costs: Americans eat too much of the wrong kinds of food, they exercise far too little, they are overweight, they smoke too much, and they are getting older. This legislation does not address these causes, it just raises taxes and moves money around within the bureaucracy. I could ask you about this but I will not.
- I could ask you why you have not stepped forward and denounced those in your party that have likened Americans like myself, i.e. those that have legitimate and honest concerns about this health care reform bill, to the racists who fought against the civil rights movement from the 1960s. I thought that we lived in a free country where citizens could freely address their elected representatives without being slurred in the most debasing way possible, just for having a different opinion. Your lack of fortitude to oppose those Democrats who frequently use the term “racist” to malign myself and those Americans expressing their honest opposition, cheapens the bravery and contributions of those from long ago that fought actual racism. I could ask you about this but I will not.
- I could ask you why you felt it necessary to pass this legislation by the back door called reconciliation. This is a major, major issue in the country that will affect every American for decades to come. Sneaking it in the back door, without using the traditional, time honored method of passing laws in his country, belittles the approach and makes it look like it was forced through without the full weight of the democratic process behind it. I could ask you about this but I will not.
Here is what I will ask you about. But first, some background facts:
- Let me reiterate that both my wife and myself have never voted for a Republican for national office in our lives.
- We both spent several decades of our lives working hard for AT&T, retiring several years ago, secure in our thinking that AT&T’s promise of health care benefits and coverage for our long years of service was a good bet.
- We both try to eat well, we exercise at our local YMCA on an almost daily basis, neither of us smoke, and we rarely drink. In other words, we take personal responsibility for our health and our health care.
One reason for our personal responsibility behavior is that we are on a high deductible insurance plan with AT&T. We are each responsible for the first ,200 of our annual health care costs before we get any insurance coverage at all. However, for this personal responsibility, we also pay nothing in annual premiums.
- During the debate leading up to the passage of health care reform, you reiterated more than once that those of us that currently had health care coverage would be able to keep it. However, in a recent article in Fortune magazine, the CEO of AT&T, Randall Stephenson, was interviewed (several pages of the article are attached). Towards the end of the interview, he was explicitly asked whether AT&T would consider dropping health care insurance coverage for its employees and retirees. His response made it clear that this was a very viable option for two reasons. First, from a business profitability perspective, under the new health care reform law, “you’re better off paying the government a fine and dropping health care coverage for your employees”, improving AT&Ts bottom line. Second, he talks about “economic gravity” which appears to be code words for “if others in his industry do it, AT&T will have no choice but to do it also.”
Thus, a few quick questions for you:
1) Were you just naive when you made the comments that we could all keep our current health care insurance, not realizing the simple fact that companies are in business to make money and if this bill makes it easier for them to make more money by not insuring their workforce, that is what they will do? Or were you being disingenuous, knowing that this would happen and deliberately misinforming the country to help get your health care reform bill passed? Naive or disingenuous, in either case you will be making millions of American voters unhappy in November and in 2012 when we are forced out of our current health care coverage and will blame you for either ignorance or arrogance in this situation.
2) I am 57 years old and my wife is 56 years old and if Mr. Stephenson does decide to terminate AT&T’s health care coverage for employees and retirees, where do you suggest that my wife and I get coverage? What insurance company is going to want to pick us up, and millions of other older Americans who lost their coverage, at our ages even though we are both healthy and taking personal responsibility for our continued good health?
3) If we are forced out onto the market for health care insurance coverage, our new coverage is likely going to be much more expensive. Our annual health care costs will go from a maximum of ,200 each to a minimum of several thousand dollars each. Is this how you planned to reduce health care costs for middle class America? Is so, then you need to explain the math to me. Maximum of ,200 to a minimum of several thousand dollars, does not make sense out here in the real world. How does this reduce the escalating health care costs for the 90% of Americans that already had health care insurance prior to the passage of this bill?
Thus, I am not going to ask you about why you and the rest of Congress did not address the root causes of high health care costs in your legislating process. I am not going to ask why you have sat back and been silent while those Americans with legitimate and honest dissent against this bill have been likened to racists by members of your party. I thought you represented all Americans, not just those that agreed with your policies. I will not ask you about why you did not have the courage and guts to pass this legislation the right way, through the front door like every other piece of legislation, but instead snuck it through the back door of reconciliation.
However, I will ask you or your staff to contact me and explain where and how I can get health care coverage at my age if AT&T and the rest of corporate America decides it is a better economic choice to pay a government fine than to cover their employees and retirees with health insurance. I will ask you to explain whether you were naive or disingenuous when explaining that we would be able to keep our current health insurance coverage. And finally, please explain how paying no more than ,200 a year under my current coverage (with many years paying nothing for coverage during healthy years) is a better deal then finding new coverage at my age and paying several thousand dollars a year for the privilege.
Although I have written to the White House many times, I have never received any answer to my questions on a wide variety of topics even though you promised to have the most open and responsive administration of all time. That has not happened yet. However, in this case I do require, in fact I demand specific answers to my three questions above. For your political sake I hope to receive those answers before early November and certainly before 2012.
Thank you for your time,
Walter “Bruno” Korschek
[Follow up note: a month after sending this to the White House, no answers to the questions have been received or even a simple confirmation that this letter was received has been forthcoming from the Obama adminstration.]
Walter “Bruno” Korschek is the author of the book, “Love My Country, Loathe My Government – Fifty First Steps To Restoring our Freedom and Destroying The American Political CLass,” which is available at www.loathemygovernment.com and online at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. You can join our daily dialog on freedom in America at www.loathemygovernment.blogspot.com.
Article from articlesbase.com
View full post on Social Security Network
Categories: Social Security Tags: Care, Family, Health, Letter, means, Obama, Open, President, Reform
Short Sale Hardship Letter Sample
A short sale hardship letter is the most important financial hardship letter you will ever write. Your financial life is in the banks loss mitigators control and properly writing a hardship letter for short sale is crucial.
Short Sale Hardship Letter Sample
Killer Sales Letter
75% Commissions … Earn $42++ per sale … Discover 36 Killer Sales Letter Techniques That Will Convert Prospects Like A Crazy Clockwork and Explode Profits … Guaranteed! Affiliates check out http://www.thekillersalesletter.com/affiliate-prog ram.htm!
Killer Sales Letter
Categories: Medicaid offices Tags: Killer, Letter, Sales
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide – Stop Foreclosure
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide. Brand new product in exploding stop foreclosure market. The sales page was professionally written and is converting incredibly well. Ebook, Templates, Success Stories. Affiliate support material offered.
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide – Stop Foreclosure
View full post on Social Security Network
Categories: Social Security Tags: Foreclosure, Guide, Hardship, Letter, Loan, Modification, Stop
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide – Stop Foreclosure
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide. Brand new product in exploding stop foreclosure market. The sales page was professionally written and is converting incredibly well. Ebook, Templates, Success Stories. Affiliate support material offered.
Loan Modification Hardship Letter Guide – Stop Foreclosure
Categories: Medicaid qualification Tags: Foreclosure, Guide, Hardship, Letter, Loan, Modification, Stop
An Open Letter to John Cornyn and the Congress
Ah, yes, John!
“I believe for every drop of rain that falls a flower grows
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night a candle glows
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come to show the way
I believe above a storm the smallest prayer can still be heard
I believe that someone in the great somewhere hears every word
I believe, I believe.”
Yet beliefs, as yours are, are far more often erroneous than right.
You write,
“I believe our top priority should be to lower the cost of health care, without reducing quality or access to care.”
No, John, the top priority should be to lower the cost of health care and improve quality and increase access. Maintaining what we’ve already got won’t help.
You write,
“I believe we can lower the cost of health care without giving Washington more control over the decisions of doctors and patients.”
But, John, what control has Washington had over the decisions of doctors and patients? Private insurers are notorious for exercising that kind of control, not the government. All the government has had control of is reimbursement to providers, and reimbursement is not a medical decision.
You criticize Kennedy’s bill, perhaps rightly so, but your points don’t make the case.
You write,
“First, Senator Kennedy’s bill will cost at least $1 trillion over the next ten years – and that’s just the beginning. . . . The taxpayers’ $1 trillion does not include the cost of increasing eligibility for Medicaid for people up to 50 percent above the poverty line.”
But, John, what are the CBO’s assumptions? We know that currently, Americans pay more than twice as much per capita for healthcare than the populations of other developed counties and not only are fewer people covered but the quality of care is lower. If other countries can provide universal coverage for half as much as we spend, why can’t we simply divert what is currently being spent into one fund and cover everybody? It wouldn’t cost an additional cent. Certainly we ought to be able to provide universal care for twice as much money as other nations spend to provide it. If they can do it, why can’t we?
You write,
“Second, Senator Kennedy’s bill includes a government-run health care plan that will force at least 15 million people to lose their current private health insurance. The Congressional Budget Office recognizes that no current provider can long compete against a government that calls the balls and strikes even as it takes the field. According to the independent Lewin Group, a government plan could eventually take away current health benefits from 119 million Americans, and force 130 million Americans into a Washington-run health care plan.”
So what, John, they would still have coverage, wouldn’t they?
You write,
“Third, a new Washington-run plan will increase the cost of private insurance. “Cost-shifting” occurs when a health care provider accepts low government reimbursement rates, but only if it can charge extra to those with private insurance. This cost-shifting acts like a hidden tax on millions of American families and small businesses. One respected actuary estimates that cost-shifting increases the average American family’s health care premium by more than 10 percent, or more than $1,500. Adding another new government health care plan on top of Medicare and Medicaid will only increase this cost.”
But, John, taking private insurance out of the picture makes “cost shifting” impossible.
You write,
“Fourth, a new Washington-run plan would lead to government rationing of health care. Just look at the results in Canada. Thousands of our friends to the north come to the United States every year for life-saving surgeries, after their government has told them they’ll just have to wait. Various studies suggest that Canadians, especially the poor, are less healthy under socialized medicine than those in our own country. More and more Canadians want to reduce the role of government and expand private options for health care, even as elites in Washington want to move America in the opposite direction.”
Oh, John, this is pure propaganda! First, you are misusing the word “ration.” Look it up! When things are rationed, everyone who needs them gets a share; nobody goes without. Second, “thousands . . . come to the United States . . . for life-saving surgeries, after their government has told them they’ll just have to wait.” That, John,, is a bald faced lie. Canadians do often have to wait for elective surgeries, but not life-threatening ones. But you fail to mention the thousands of Americans who are going to Latin America and even Asia for procedures that are unaffordable in America. And third, your use of “various studies” is nothing but a dodge or perhaps an Edsel. People who don’t cite studies are scoundrels. Studies are not created equal. Some are good; some are bad, and one can select just the ones that support his/her beliefs while ignoring the others.
You write,
“Fifth, a new government plan would replicate the model of Medicare and Medicaid, which illustrate everything that can go wrong with Washington-run health care. Costs for both plans have exploded. Low reimbursement rates force many providers out of the system, and many patients to long waiting lines. Taxpayers pay up to $90 billion a year in fraudulent and wasteful medical bills, about two-thirds of that in the Medicare program alone.”
Well, John, maybe true, maybe not. But the Congress wrote the Medicare and Medicaid plans. If they don’t work well, it’s your fault. Yes, the costs “have exploded.” So have the costs of private plans. And if those private plans were abolished, the providers would be unable to leave the system unless they stopped practicing altogether. And if there is fraud and waste in the system, it can only be because the Congress created programs with many loopholes and enforcement failures. Again, John, it is not the programs that are at fault, it is the Congress who created them without adequate safeguards. That’s you, John!
You write,
“The Kennedy Bill has other provisions that would increase Washington’s control of our health care system – including new punitive tax increases. If a family doesn’t have a Washington-regulated health care plan, they would pay a new tax. If a small business owner doesn’t offer a Washington-regulated plan for every employee, then she would pay a new tax. These tax increases are designed not to raise revenue to pay for health care, but to punish families and businesses that step out of line.”
Oh, John! Your claim that the increases are designed to punish is pure presumption. What evidence can you cite? Anyhow, John, someone needs to be punished for the creation of this abominable system.
You write,
“There are alternatives to a Washington takeover of the health care system, and the best of them will give patients more control over their care. Innovators in both government and the private sector have learned that empowering patients as consumers can lower costs. They’ve learned that the right incentives can encourage patients to make healthier choices, and providers to compete for their business. These are the ideas that can drive successful reform of our health care system.”
Pure bull, John. What patient has ever had control over his/her own healthcare? The physician he/she goes to has the control. When a physician diagnoses a patient’s problem, the patient is not given a menu of options. The physician doesn’t say, “I can sell you this treatment for x dollars, or this treatment for y dollars, or this treatment for z dollars.” A physician’s office is not a retail store. And what empowering practices have been learned that can lower costs? If they have been learned and can lower costs, why haven’t they? And how can medical providers compete for the business of patients? How can the model used by cosmetic surgeons be adapted to real medical problems? A patient suffering a heart attack doesn’t have the luxury of being able to shop around.
You write,
“Health care reform can be successful if we take the time to get it right. . . . when Congress acts too quickly, it often delivers bad policy. . . . Washington elites want to dictate to the American people the future of health care, but I believe the best solutions will come when Washington begins to listen.”
Well, John, finally you’ve gotten something right. The Congress, of which you are a part, is made up of a bunch of Keystone Kops legislators who haven’t gotten anything right for decades. And although you believe (here we go again) that Washington (deceased) needs to listen, the question is to whom? And those “Washington elites,” who are they? Are you one of them?
Senator Kennedy’s bill is not a solution to the problem, because the problem with the American healthcare system is private insurance. It sucks an enormous amount of money out of the system without providing a worthless cent’s amount of healthcare. What medical procedure does an insurance company provide for the money it takes in? Not even an aspirin tablet! All private insurance does is collect money, skim a portion off the top, and pay the providers from what is left. The insurance industry is a worthless middle man, getting paid for nothing. And that, John, is the industry whose services you seek to preserve.
If private insurance companies had any interest or desire to provide Americans with a high-quality healthcare system, they have had half a century to do it and haven’t. Private industry has no interest in solving social problems. Never has, never will have. It’s only interest is profit. And profit buys no medicine, John, none whatsoever. So, John, if you truly want health care reform to be successful, stand up, and for once in your life, do the right thing. Your only job is to provide the American people with high-quality healthcare, not to preserve an industry’s profits. You are a representative of people, John, not of business, that is, unless you’re just a scoundrel.
©2009 John Kozy
Retired professor of philosophy and logic who blogs on social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the U.S. Army during the Korean War, he spent 20 years as a university professor and another 20 years working as a writer for various private companies. He?s an active blogger. His pieces can be found on http://www.jkozy.com/.