Unhappy with health care act


You described both sides of Obamacare in your Sunday article ("Close encounters with Obamacare") via Mr. Knapp's and Mr. Burton's experiences, but I believe your subhead, "State enrolls 2,264,"was misleading. It implied 2,264 paying customers, but later you amplify: 1,977 enrolled in Medicaid but only 287 bought private plans. Two hundred eighty-seven is a dismal number for something allegedly so wanted and needed by so many. Yes, more of our low-income neighbors will be covered, and others will get tax credits, but did we really need Obamacare to do this? Why not just give the uninsured, or under-insured, direct subsidies and let everyone else choose what they want? Why politicize one-sixth of our economy? Why impoverish Medicare in the process? Why guarantee a taxpayer bailout for insurance companies if not enough paying customers sign up? Why require costly coverage that not everyone needs (maternity, newborn and pediatric services)? Why put your family's medical fate in the hands of an unelected Independent Payment Advisory Board whose job is holding down costs, not improving health? The "inaccurate" promises of the president, the many exemptions he has already (or will soon) grant, and the inept launch of the Obamacare website are only the tip of the iceberg in this disastrous law.

Binnie Perper


Bellingham Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service