GOP Medicare Rescue Plan

Re “Republicans Outline Medicare Rescue Plan,” Sept. 15:

Medicare would not need rescuing if the Republicans would drop their plan to give a $245-billion tax cut to the rich at the expense of Medicare recipients. Should the Republican plan prevail, senior citizens will pay substantially more for Medicare benefits, and their choice of doctors and hospitals will be severely limited.

A decision on what to do with Medicare is to be made in less than one month, with only one day of hearings by the legislators before a final vote is taken--scarcely enough time to study the plan thoroughly before voting on it.

And let us not forget, at our expense, those voting to “gut” Medicare will themselves be unaffected by the vote, as they receive free medical care.

JEAN TRACY

Oceanside

*

* I see that the Republican Party wants to increase Medicare payments of people on Social Security to $90 a month by the year 2002. That certainly would wipe out any and all cost-of-living raises given Social Security recipients in the last few years.

I suppose the congressmen would still get their medical care paid for by taxes paid by the very people they are asking to pay more for their own medical care.

I believe one way to help a lot of this money-shortage situation is to start taxing the wealthy churches (they are sticking their noses into politics these days, so they should start paying for it).

I think it’s time to review tax exemptions for churches anyway.

HAROLD E. WELLS

North Hills

*

* On Jan. 3, 1992, at age 65, my Medicare Part B premiums were $31.80 per month. To and including Jan. 3, 1995, I have had three increases (about $5 each) to raise my premium to $46.10 per month.

If nothing is done, and continuing at this rate for the next seven years, I would expect seven more $5 increases to raise the premium to about $81.10 per month in January, 2002. The GOP plan calls for $90 in 2002.

What in the world are Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles), Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) and the rest of the Democratic sheep bleating about? I would note, the Clinton plan calls for $83 per month.

FRANK A. ANDERSON

Irvine

*

* We are very supportive of your editorial, “Don’t Rush Medicare Overhaul Debate” (Sept. 20). In 1981 when there was a hue and cry about the financial condition of Social Security the problem was turned over to a prestigious National Commission on Social Security Reform. On its recommendations Social Security was guaranteed for 50 years in the future.

A bipartisan commission on Medicare reform with a composition similar to the one on Social Security could be set up and recommendations could be made which would permit legislation to be enacted by early 1997.

The current proposals for program cuts and increased premiums are not a cure. The funds will not go into the trust funds, but into the general fund to be used for a tax cut for the affluent. Low-income elderly will have to choose between going hungry or seeking medical attention.

MAX TURCHEN, Chair

Congress of California Seniors

Los Angeles