Letter to the editor: Attack on president’s health care act misses markAfter reading Susan Richardson’s letter in the July 18 Bulletin I finally snapped.
After reading Susan Richardson’s letter in the July 18 Bulletin I finally snapped. She makes a number of outlandish statements about the Affordable Care Act, such as when it’s implemented we’ll have fewer doctors and poorer quality health care. Of course she offers no facts to support anything she says.
She begins by stating William Mayo said “the best interest of the patient is the only interest being considered” and then goes on to say “this is a definition of health care … that will be lost under Obamacare.” How does this even relate to the Affordable Care Act? You have to have access to health care to be a patient. There is no question millions of Americans don’t have such access. It would seem part of the point is to allow them an opportunity to become patients.
Ms. Richardson then points out U.S. Rep. Tom Price’s “five basic principles for good health care.” She then lists six words after which she makes a brief statement. After “affordability” she says: “throughout history, nationalized industries have become less efficient, less effective, and have generated huge losses. Inefficiencies and losses generate more regulation.” OK, so how does that relate to the Affordable Care Act or affordable health care?
Like all those of Ms. Richardson’s ilk, she offers no viable alternative to the health care act. Just get rid of it and things will be wonderful.
The Affordable Care Act is a step in the right direction. If I discover there are some things about the act I don’t like, I still won’t be in favor of throwing out the baby with the bath water. Perhaps Ms. Richardson should give the whole thing a chance. It would certainly give her more time to check her facts and formulate coherent opinions.
Diana Eggert - Woodbury