Stefanik’s health bills fall short
To the editor:
Re: Joe LoTemplio’s recent article on the Affordable Care Act
Mr. LoTemplio’s recent article regarding some bills that Congresswoman Stefanik is “co-sponsoring” is basically just repeating information her office has put out. The bills might be looked at as attempting to put out a forest fire with a 5-pound fire extinguisher — or, if you rather, using Band-Aids to close up after major heart surgery.
An important fact we have to keep in mind in the health care debate is that many, if not most, of our elected representatives in Congress are controlled by money. They need massive amounts of money to win elections, and that is their first objective, to get re-elected. Much of the money comes from insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists. No surprise! They give and they expect a return on their investment.
As I do more research about health care in America, I am drawn to one conclusion: a single payer, Medicare-for-all system. Critics refer to this as “socialized medicine.” If you look at the concept objectively, there are obvious benefits.
1. It would cost families and businesses less. No insurance premiums. No co-pays. No deductibles. As a nonprofit, eliminate millions of dollars in administrative waste.
2. Paid for by taxes. Fairly distributed across all income levels. EVERYONE pays their fair share.
3. Provides tremendous bargaining power to reduce drug costs. Cost containment.
4. Universal coverage.
5. Full range of benefits.
6. One network — choose any doctor and hospital.
7. Improved preventive care.
HR 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, is what Congresswoman Stefanik ought to support. Insurance companies will fight it with obscene amounts of money paid to “our” congressmen and -women. Big pharma will donate more than ever to prevent passage of the bill.
Who’s left to fight for HR 676? That’s right — all the rest of us little guys.
Rod Johnson
Lake Luzerne