Opinion: GOP’s Obamacare repeal puts the responsibility for providing care where it belongs: the states

To the editor: Despite containing unfavorable statutes including mandates and taxes on innovation, passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010 was probably due to a favorable message of “access,” which it provided at an unsustainable cost. Republicans need to improve their messaging and make the fight not against “sick Americans,” but against the lack of responsibility on the part of states. (“House sets up risky vote on GOP’s Obamacare repeal,” May 4)

The current divide in healthcare policy occupies the spectrum between universal healthcare or not, when it should be federal versus state. Conservatives should not deny liberals the freedom to pursue their utopia, but it should be at the financial risk of their own communities.

State responsibility is the inarguable medium, as no one loses the opportunity to live and die on their own terms.

The current GOP bill asks states to do their job and provides an excess of funding through a new Patient and State Stability Fund so that states such as California can care for high-risk patients.

Michael Kendall, Azusa

..

To the editor: Finally, as a nation, we seem to agree on one thing: that whatever takes Obamacare’s place, something should. Healthcare for everyone in this country is an absolute necessity, and the current law is only the first step, not the last.

The most obvious next move is to eliminate the middleman. Right now, we pay private insurers to cover millions of low-income people who can’t afford the premiums on their own. That means that we not only pay insurance companies for the actual cost of healthcare, but also their profits and their risk reserves.

This does not make sense, especially since we already have a Medicare system that could be expanded to do the job. We could be collecting the premiums from all those healthy people who are now required to have health insurance.

Our government could have a lot more money coming in to pay for healthcare and a whole lot less to pay out. People would still have the option to use private health insurance if they can afford it. It’s a win-win deal.

Paying for private insurance companies’ profits with our tax dollars is grotesque.

L.J. Jesten, Auburn, Calif.

..

To the editor: Does the Affordable Care Act need strengthening? Certainly. This monumental achievement had never been done before in our history as a nation. President Obama knew that it would take a decade for it to run on all cylinders, but that it also needed bipartisan support and fixes; that never happened.

So here we are. The solution now is really clear: Keep the current healthcare law intact, but change the name. Simply call it Trumpcare.

The president would be pleased to see his brand extended further into our lives.

Diane Welch, Cypress

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook