Health Reform Debate

“Why Health Care Reform May Be Beyond Saving” (Opinion, Aug. 14) is right on target. Health reform, as being proposed, won’t sell because the majority sees it as taking more than it can ever give. The article’s clear logic gave me an idea worthy of consideration.

If the government believes it must provide health coverage, I propose a tax credit (not a deduction, a credit at the bottom line) equal to the amount of health insurance premium paid by any taxpayer.

Because it would cover all taxpayers, this plan would be as close to “universal” coverage as we are likely to get. Because no government bureaucracy would be involved, this plan would be cheaper than any now proposed. Because it is a tax credit, it costs nothing for the individual taxpayer; the individual who needs coverage breaks even. Because it is a break-even plan, it would need to apply only to those individuals who really need it. Those who already have coverage (government, employer, etc.) would not have to do anything. Best of all, it would leave health care with those who know something about it, and not have the government get involved.

On the negative side, this plan would only take a page or two to document, so no self-respecting representative is likely to vote for it.

JAMES R. GIFFORD

Rancho Palos Verdes

* I, age 73, join other members angry over the American Assn. of Retired Persons’ stand in favor of the Clinton health plan (Aug. 12). Seniors, whose Medicare is already 75% subsidized, want working people to give them even more, regardless of the recipient’s ability to pay. Our generation, which should be “the responsible generation,” is outdoing “the gimme generation,” at the same time it is predicted, “Entitlements Seen Taking Up Nearly All Taxes by 2012” (Aug. 9).

HOWARD C. LOCKWOOD

Lake View Terrace

* Why does the public believe more time is needed to study health needs? Why, if Hawaii’s program is so successful, do not all of the other states initiate the same program?

Why, if Medicare is such a success, does not Congress enlarge this program to include everyone? Why have not dental costs risen as rapidly as other medical costs? Why do doctors who accept Medicare-approved amounts submit bills of more than twice that amount?

Why, if certain lifestyle choices (i.e., smoking, drugs, promiscuity) are known to cause outlandish expenses, should those who act responsibly pay the same for health insurance?

There are probably 1,400 pages of whys.

PETER GARDETT

Laguna Niguel

* In February of 1989 my 7-year-old son Jonathan was diagnosed with leukemia. Within a month of his diagnosis we received notice from our insurance carrier that our entire group’s (not just our family’s) medical insurance was being canceled in 30 days. Having to handle the emotional stress and needs of my son and then being threatened with potential financial ruin at the same time were just a little hard to bear.

Since Jonathan had a “catastrophic illness” and was totally uninsurable at any cost, federal legislation called COBRA forced the insurance company to give him our policy--full coverage of $1 million for one year. However, after one year Jonathan’s coverage dropped to $100,000, lifetime. Jonathan’s premium soon jumped from $160 per month to almost $600 per month! Plus, the rest of the family had to obtain and pay for separate medical insurance .

Fortunately for us, California implemented a program paid for by tobacco and liquor taxes to provide insurance at reasonable rates for uninsurable people like Jonathan. However, the annual coverage limit is $50,000. Jonathan is doing fine, but if he falls out of remission, $50,000 wouldn’t last 30 days.

Today many people cannot change jobs because of fear of losing their medical insurance. The medical insurance industry only wants to insure healthy people. The politicians need to stop trying to be Democrats and Republicans looking at the next election and do what is good for the country by passing a comprehensive new health care plan.

RAYMOND H. MILLER

Rancho Palos Verdes

* I am delighted that the majority of Republicans in Congress are opposed to employer mandates for health insurance, as this means that we are certain to see income tax refunds to those of us who are now contributing to the 2-million-plus federal employees’ health care payments.

I only want to know just when Sens. Bob Dole and Phil Gramm and Rep. Newt Gingrich will be canceling their employer-mandated insurance policies and returning the premium to the taxpayers.

CAROL BIRKENHEAD

San Diego

* It is fascinating to me, though not surprising, that every single person I hear say that our health care system is not in crisis is a fat cat. Sen. Dole certainly never has to worry when he gets sick. I have yet to hear someone from the ranks of the middle class or below say that we have the best health care system in the world. Most of them live in abject fear of getting anything more serious than a head cold.

Marie Antoinette proclaimed, “Let them eat cake.” In our time, it is the Republicans saying, “Let them take aspirin.”

LOUIS J. CHALIF

Los Angeles