Printed letters, September 09, 2010
Repeal Obamacare, a financial disaster
Dr. Michael Pramenko takes issue with those who call for the repeal of Obamacare in his Sept. 3 column. If it was about health care, as stated, instead of growing the size of the federal government, he might be right.
If our legislators knew what was in the bill before they passed it, I might agree with him. If it would save money as we were told it would by supporters (Democrats only) then perhaps I’d side with him. However, the Congressional Budget Office has said it won’t, it’s going to cost more than advertised.
As it is, I cannot support Obamacare. It should be denounced and shelved as a colossal mistake.
If, as stated, Obamacare is about health care, then why does the bill provide for more than 16,000 new IRS agents? And, what does a health care bill have to do with the government taking over the student loan program?
Why follow Nancy Pelosi over a cliff with her shouting, “We have to pass this bill to find out what is in it”? She has no clue about what is in Obamacare. Should we blindly support that decision-making process?
Finally, with respect to the money- saving aspects of Obamacare, the CBO stated before the bill was signed into law that it would save health care money. That was meaningless because the bill was changed, then signed into law.
After the signing, the CBO stated that it would not save money but cost more than we were told. That was the meaningful conclusion, what should be the guide as to whether we should support the bill for cost-savings reasons. As an aside, ask yourself if you can think of any federal bill that actually cost what it was supposed to? I can’t. They always cost more.
Obamacare should be stopped by first kicking out of office anyone who voted for it, then defunding it, and finally repealing it. It is a disaster.
RICK L. COLEMAN
Wagner’s comments on Buescher’s loss are flawed
Regarding Rick Wagner’s Sept. 2 column, his comments on Bernie Buescher’s loss to Laura Bradford two years ago are flawed. Buescher was to be the House speaker and had been on the Joint Budget Committee. This represents significant clout for western Colorado. What this could have meant to the people of the Western Slope, we’ll never know. It’s fair to say it would have exceeded anything Bradford has done.
Wagner has repeatedly placed political victory ahead of the people. He has used his position to fan the flames of a division fire that is devastating our country.
Radical, right-wing Republicans have made it clear that if not successful in November, they will reduce our system of government to ashes. This is nothing short of political terrorism. Americans will not be extorted.
Republicans had years to prepare for the governor’s race. Many Democrats were resigned to losing that race. Now, a month after the primary, and two months before elections, Republicans still don’t have a viable candidate. Yet they insist they are the only ones capable of governing. Anybody seen Dick Wadhams lately?
JOHN A IJAMS
Rowland’s support switch means more Maes’ votes
Janet Rowland has spoken. She’s had to make tough decisions in her political role. She is going to vote for third-party candidate Tom Tancredo for governor. Will wonders never cease?
One wonders what good old Tom has promised her for her endorsement. The fact that Dan Maes doesn’t owe anyone anything says something about him. One wonders what he did to good old Janet that would make her switch her affiliation in this particular instance.
Whatever it is, good for Dan, because it will mean more votes for him. Seems most people in Mesa County have figured Janet out by now. Do the exact opposite of what she says. Go Dan!
SANDY GAGNE Grand Junction