To the editor,
Scott Hamre was spot on in his recent letter raising some real dollars and “sense” issues regarding “Medicare for All.” Medical Coverage having become one of our most controversial campaign issues, it is truly important that “alternative facts” and fear not become the yardsticks by which it is measured.
Medicare and Private Insurance can work hand in hand.
Fact: the Affordable Care Act is neither “perfect,” nor a complete failure.
It is, rather, a work in progress with room for improvement: in other words—salvageable.
This past year, while confronting unexpected health issues, Medicare and my supplementary health insurance plan—in combination—became “literal” life savers. For those not in the position of having both forms of coverage, however, the ACA can be a lifesaver too by providing, among other things, coverage for pre-existing conditions. Having options with respect to health care makes perfect sense; gutting an existing program does not.
Many of the ACA’s struggles are the result of the continued attempts to dismantle it by cutting some of its safeguards. Had the mandate (meaning more people enrolled) remained in effect, we would now have a much more efficient plan.
Instead, the attempts to sabotage the ACA altogether have provided us with not only fewer participants, but higher costs.
But by far the worst threats against the plan have been through the spread of false information and the fear of impending Socialism. Programs like Medicare and Social Security are now threatened; and what of Veteran’s Benefits?
Where do they fall in the Socialism argument? Why is there not similar outrage over other mandates — like auto insurance?
Is insuring your car more important than protecting your health? I’m for medical “care” for all—as a right, not a privilege—and that includes the right to choose the type of coverage.
Now to another factor in the debate: as it seems we’re destined to have an Octogenarian in the White House (Trump — the youngest, at 74 — has vowed not to leave) why not choose one pledged to offer us healthcare options; or the one most respected internationally — who knows the difference between an enemy and an ally; or, perhaps, the only “centrist” running — the one experienced in working across the aisle.
Thankfully, they are all one and the same.
It’s time to heal wounds and mend fences; not build barricades against our allies.
Mary Shea, Banning