Comments about ‘Letters: Red healthcare’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Oct. 22 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

The red states were caught up in the tea party's plan for the great budget uprising and replacement of Obama that failed.

Semi-Strong
Louisville, KY

Reference the rollout of the ACA, in states (like Kentucky and Washington) where it as planned for and a state website used, the rollout has been without much issue.

Semi-Strong
Louisville, KY

Sorry, should have said "was planned for"

Sal
Provo, UT

". . .a benefit offered to Americans on the federal dime." Spoken like a true liberal who thinks government assistance is free.

Yes, if you want a bankrupt state like California or New York vote for Democrats, not Republicans.

chilly
Salt Lake City, UT

"If you don’t vote, it might behoove you to get informed this time. If you tend to vote for everything with an (R) behind it, stop voting against your own self-interest."

Sherrie is encouraging even more of us to vote for politicians who will continue to run up debt so that we can have the things we desire, now. Thus far, we've "voted for" 17 trillion dollars in debt and over 100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities (money we're committed to spend, the source for which we haven't a clue). These are dollars that we are essentially stealing from future generations by voting FOR our "own self-interest".

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Oh, too funny!
Sherrie, you highlight all the people who are unable to get insurance under the horrible legislation known as obamacare and you blame the party who had no input into it and did not vote for it. It appears from those comments that you may the one who is uninformed.

If obamacare is so wonderful, why does it leave so many people out? Blame those who wrote it, not those who had nothing to do with it.

It is obamacare that leaves out the most vulnerable among us. The GOP had nothing to do with obamacare, other than to get rid of it.

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

Sorry, chilly, but voting for Republicans will ensure more debt. Democrats actually want to increase revenues to help pay for government spending, which is about where it was during the Reagan years, as a percentage of GDP (even with all those nasty entitlements Republicans vilify but secretly love). It's revenues that have fallen off the cliff, thanks largely to the Bush tax cuts. Because of their compact with Saint Grover, Republicans will never vote to raise taxes. They will also refuse to make significant cuts to government spending, because their constituents will not allow it. This has been the Republican modus operandi since Reagan. Cut taxes but don't cut spending. This is the recipe for growing debt, and it has been the GOP that has peddled this recipe for decades now. Time to see the truth.

Irony Guy
Bountiful, Utah

The rollout in blue states has gone quite well. WA and OR people are pleased. I have family in Seattle who much prefer ACA over the ridiculous hoops they had to jump thru with their former insurer.

chilly
Salt Lake City, UT

Kent, The Democrats you speak of must live in another universe. They certainly aren't our Democrats. Ours constantly push for higher taxes, ceaselessly invent new and "better" social programs and excel at creating greater dependency. Most of our Republicans, wanting to be popular too, don't want to be outdone and are not much better at governing than the Dems. The result for us is a slide toward mediocrity and poverty achieved by other countries of the present and past who have clung to Utopian dreams.

jsf
Centerville, UT

"much prefer ACA over the ridiculous hoops they had to jump thru with their former insurer."

ACA neither provides insurance nor health benefits, all insurance required by mandate of the ACA is through existing big corporation insurers.

RedShirtMIT
Cambridge, MA

To "Sherrie" you should realize that the expansion of Medicaid came with strings attached. The biggest was that the Feds would boost funding for a few years, then the states had to take over funding and maintain the new levels. Do you think it is wise to raise taxes on people that already feel overtaxed?

one old man
Ogden, UT

Oh, too very serious!
Sherrie, you point out all the people who are unable to get insurance under the horrible legislation known as the old insurance free enterprise for big profit mess and you blame the party who had fought like mad to keep it did not vote for it. It appears from those comments that you may the one who is better informed than most others in these two states.

If "free enterprise health care" is so wonderful, why does it leave so many people out? Blame those who wrote it, not those who tried to fix it by writing the ACA.

It is the insurance industry that leaves out the most vulnerable among us. The GOP had nothing to do with obamacare, other than to make it necessary lest too many Americans be driven into bankruptcy.

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Sal: You have to try to stay more on top of the news. California is now running a budget surplus AND with a Democrat in the State House. Best look for another example of fiscal irresponsibility, it is possible to see the light. So I encourage Utah to follow the lead of California and set up a State Insurance exchange and accept the expansion of Medicaid.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Who would demand that government provide "personal welfare"? There is no "personal welfare" in the Constitution. One swing vote, John Roberts, cannot declare that the Constitution is null and void because he prefers to listen to the powers in Washington rather than to abide by his duty to uphold the Constitution.

No one in America has the right to demand that someone else pay for his/her health care. The Constitution does not allow that option. Obama knows that. Reid knows that. They don't care. Those who listen to them don't care. All of them put personal preference above personal responsibility.

No insurance company is duty bound to offer anyone a health-insurance policy. They are duty bound to pay for all things covered under the policy for those that they have chosen to insure. Obama would have us believe that he can force a company to give away its assets. He knows better. We should know better. Shame on us if we let Obama define "freedom" when what he really means is subjugation by the government.

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

As usual Mike R. ignores the obvious in search of a partisan slant on any issue. "He would have us believe he can force a company to give away its assets." Sounds like the insurance industry is hanging on by a thread, right? Well not exactly.

Insurance companies are among the biggest supporters of the ACA. How could that be when he is trying to force them do what they don't want to do? They support it because along with lots of sick folks who will cost them money comes large numbers of young healthy people, previously uninsured. What could be better than record profits that the Insurers have racked up lately?? More and bigger profits from the millions of previously uninsured who now will be paying premiums. Shame on Mike if he can't craft a better slippery slope argument than the one above.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

Re: Mike Richards "No insurance company is duty bound to offer anyone a health-insurance policy." Moreover, no health care will be provided to anyone unless a profit is made. If no profit is made - die already. AND that is what is wrong with private sector health care. Only socialized medicine can meet the public health needs of the American people.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments