Printed letters, July 15, 2012
Chief Justice John Roberts handed Mitt Romney a huge gift in deciding that the individual mandate was a tax, one that is primarily paid by the middle class.
The Affordable Care Act has never seemed very affordable to ordinary people, but we were talked down to and told in time we would see it. Now President Obama is going to have to actually explain how it is going to benefit all of us, which is what he should have done in the first place.
If affordability really is the objective, he can tell us why he didn’t include tort reform, interstate insurance competition and most important, a more transparent third-party payer system where we, the consumers, know what everything costs and can help decide what is really needed. Hospitals should coordinate care and be paid according to performance rather than by their sheer number of treatments. Does the president really think big government can do a better job at controlling costs than informed consumers?
Romney has focused on promoting healthy economic growth through incentivizing investors and workers with lower taxes and less regulation. Romney should also promote his ideas for common-sense health care. If the court had booted out the mandate, we wouldn’t have such a clear choice.
A vote for Romney is now a vote against Obamacare, too. We get to make that decision, not the courts or politicians in back rooms making deals. Justice Roberts made it the choice of voters to pay more in taxes.
Big Brother now in charge of nation’s medical problems
Did anyone else wonder, as Daily Sentinel Publisher Jay Seaton led us through his convoluted path to the coveted single-payer system and discussed the Sentinel’s ability to dump Daily Sentinel employee coverage and the demise of evil insurance companies, why there was no mention of the phrase, “quality health care”?
Nor was there any mention in the other extensive coverage on July 1, although Steve ErckenBrack made a heroic attempt to assure us that, along with patient/doctor relationships, our exemplary local programs might survive unscathed among the ashes.
We have been reminded that the rest of the civilized world long ago recognized the need for universal health care. Does one also need to be reminded that the rest of the civilized world is going broke? And if their smaller, more easily managed populations are running out of “other people’s money,” how can we expect to do better?
The United States has had the best medical care in the world. The innovations, new procedures and better care, which have all have been brought into existence by free markets and the capitalistic system, will have no incentive to continue. Young people will have no motivation to enter the field.
Fifteen nonmedical people appointed by the White House will make the medical decisions for the American population. Waiting times will come into existence. Want that knee replacement? Two- to three-year wait. End of life “counseling” will replace the simple pacemaker.
But low-income people will at least not be forced to use emergency rooms. Oh wait — here in Mesa County we have long had the Marillac Clinic, heavily supported by the community. That will certainly cease to exist. Only the government should have the power to decide what’s best for the poor.
So rejoice. Big Brother has arrived to solve our medical problems.
Marks is involved in multiple court cases
I appreciate Bill Grant’s July 11 column. There were some inaccuracies within it I would like to briefly address.
Litigation regarding ballots as open records started in the city of Aspen and was filed in Pitkin County. The Jefferson County case is not settled, and the city of Aspen case may not be either.
Mesa County is not alone. We are one of many across the state engaged in a legal disagreement with Marilyn Marks. Here are a few court cases I am aware of:
✓ City of Aspen : Koch v. Brandscomb and Marks
✓ City of Aspen: Marks v. Koch
✓ Jefferson County: Anderson v. Marks
✓ Jefferson County: Marks v. Anderson
✓ Mesa County: Reiner v. Marks
✓ Mesa County: Marks v. Reiner
✓ Saguache County: Marks v. Myers
✓ Chaffee County: Reno v. Marks
✓ Denver: Marks v. Secretary of State
✓ Denver: Gessler v. McGuire and Marks
✓ Federal Level: Citizen Center (founded by Marks) v. Secretary of State, Mesa, Larimer, Jefferson, Chaffee, Eagle and Boulder Counties.
Each elected clerk and recorder has a responsibility to seek legal guidance whenever there is uncertainty of this nature. A few other clerks and I filed a petition for clarification from the courts regarding what is open to public inspection and what is not. Each case listed above is different in its specific circumstances and facts.
Unfortunately, litigation is common now when it comes to sorting out guidelines for election conduct for all citizens in our state.
As we look forward to an exciting and busy presidential election in November, keep in mind that we need help from the community to conduct it. If you are interested in working, please call 244-1662.
Mesa County Clerk and Recorder