The GOP promise of low premiums ignores an immutable fact: We all get old and sick.

Opinion: The GOP promise of low premiums ignores an immutable fact: We all get old and sick.

A patient is seen in 2012 being pushed into an x-ray room at the University of Miami Hospital's Emergency Department.

May 10, 2017 9:20 AM PT

To the editor: The bedrock position taken by conservative Republicans that the “healthy young” should not be required to pay for medical insurance is both absurd and a fraud. (“GOP senators can cut Obamacare taxes or preserve coverage for millions — but probably not both,” May 9)

Sooner or later, all of us will require medical attention, often on short notice. Therefore, it is not asking too much that all Americans support a medical system that will be there when we need it.

An even larger point is that our citizens constitute this country’s most important economic asset. Keeping them healthy is not an “entitlement” program; rather, it’s a fundamental part of a strong infrastructure every bit as important as maintaining as our roads and airports.

A healthy population with access to affordable medical care will more than pay for its cost by optimizing our workforce and improving our productivity. It will also enhance entrepreneurship by eliminating a key barrier to leaving dead-end jobs.

Ralph Cohen, Irvine

To the editor: The Senate has convened a working group of 13 white men to craft healthcare policy for all Americans. The group has defended its lack of diversity by decrying “identity politics.”

But criticism of the group’s homogeneity isn’t political correctness run amok; it is about the fact that there are real differences in health needs linked to gender, race and sexual orientation.

The U.S. has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among developed nations, and it’s rising. Chronic health problems such as asthma and hypertension are more prevalent in nonwhite populations. Gender identity and sexual minority populations experience higher rates of anxiety and depression.

These differences and others are significant, and the group that may be deciding what constitutes “essential” healthcare should include more diverse perspectives.

Kelly Dalton, San Diego

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook