View Mobile Site

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos


No matter the cost?

Posted: December 7, 2009 4:26 p.m.
Updated: December 8, 2009 4:55 a.m.
In their letters to the editor, Virginia Stewart ("Buck, I'm counting on you," Nov. 13) and Derrick Coy ("Send a message," Nov. 13) advocate Obamacare from two different angles.

Stewart has a sad story to tell about how she's unable to afford insurance and even though she says she's "not looking for a handout," she begs Howard "Buck" McKeon to pass the Democrat plan so she can have exactly that, forcing her neighbors to provide what she cannot (or will not) obtain for herself.

So much for American self-reliance and private charity, eh Stewart? Coy, on the other hand, wants things "secure and stable" with "expanded coverage," "lower costs" and a "reduced deficit," even though Obamacare will do exactly the opposite on all counts.

It will reduce competition, limit choice, impose rationing (don't kid yourself), raise costs through the roof and blow out the deficit to the tune of $1 trillion dollars, according to the Democratic Congress' own figures. Sorry, Coy, but Obamacare makes the already overbearing government control and ballooning bankruptcy of Medicare look like child's play.

What both fail to mention, however, is the fact that according to the Census, 90 percent of Americans are already covered by insurance, and polls show the vast majority of them are happy with their current situation.

So the old "please let me take your money!" and "government is efficient, cheap, and good - really!" routines are increasingly falling on deaf ears, which is probably why people like Stewart and Coy are getting louder and more determined to have their way no matter what it takes - or costs.


Commenting not available.
Commenting is not available.


Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...