This is the brief letter I sent my Senators (Ted Cruz and John Cornyn) regarding repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Hi Senator Cornyn.
I am a resident of Texas and an active voter. I’m writing to urge you not to repeal the ACA before it is replaced with a health care program that is affordable to Americans and does not discriminate based on preexisting conditions. I understand that you are pro-life so I ask you to please consider the hundreds of thousands who died because they were uninsurable in the decade before the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Please know that I will not vote for anyone who allows pre-existing conditions to be used as an excuse to prevent people from obtaining the health care they need. Thank you for your attention on this matter.
This is the answer I received from Senator Cornyn (I did not receive a reply from Senator Cruz but please note that I did not request an answer from either senator. I assume then that it is Cornyn’s habit to reply to all emails)
I’m going to try to make sense of this politispeak. Any parts of the Senator’s reply that cause me concern are highlighted in red. My comments are in blue.
Dear Mrs. Craig:
Thank you for contacting me with your suggestions regarding health care reform. I recognize the time and effort you are dedicating to actively participate in the democratic process, and I appreciate that you and other concerned citizens have provided me the benefit of your comments on this matter.
The existing American health care system faces a myriad of complex challenges. The 2010 passage of sweeping health care reform continues to holds dramatic implications for our health care system and for all 300 million Americans.
I often hear the frustration of many Texans struggling to meet their health care needs in the existing system, and I understand the importance of implementing common-sense reforms that achieve results. This is a vague sentence. What does common-sense reforms entail? What type of results are you talking about here, Senator? According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), if current laws remain in place, spending on the major mandatory health care programs would grow from 5.5 percent of Gross Domestic Product today to about 8.9 percent in 2046 and would continue to increase thereafter. Additionally, the Medicare trustees most recently reported that the Medicare program’s unfunded liability—benefits Washington has promised but lacks a plan to pay for—is more than $3.6 trillion and growing. There is no question that meaningful health care reform is needed. So far, sir, the only reforms you’ve addressed are cost. No mention of making sure people can obtain health care regardless of preexisting conditions. No mention of making sure people have a system of health care in place if they are to lose their current health care. No mention of tackling the prohibitive cost of health care for individuals as was experienced in the decade prior to implementation of the ACA.
I support realistic reforms that lower health care costs I’m all for lower health costs but wonder how this would be achieved, address entitlement spending My read here: you, sir, wish to get rid of programs like medicaid, medicare, (and social security) and any form of government-assisted health care. And if my read is correct, you want health care to be paid thoroughly out of pocket (which, due to the exorbitant cost of health care, will bankrupt most sick people and their families) or to have the system return to the days of relying on insurance companies to cover some of the cost of health care (which, as has been abundantly and repeatedly shown, insurance companies are in it for profit and deny coverage at every chance and put obstacles such as preexisting conditions in place as excuses not to pay. That [insurance] system failed us, we the people, spectacularly and was the reason the ACA was a welcome relief and a life saver for millions of Americans), and increase access to affordable health coverage Increase access across the board? Or only for those who have decent insurance through their companies? What about the self-employed? What about for those whose companies don’t provide insurance? What about for the poor? Again, this is a vague and therefore almost meaningless statement. The right kind of reform will emphasize individual choice and allow patients, their families, and their doctors—not government bureaucrats—to make their own health care decisions. Does this include the decision to obtain health care without going bankrupt? Does this include the decision not to die if one has a preexisting condition(s) and insurance companies turn them away? You, sir, never addressed this concern of mine (and millions of my fellow Americans).
I am always appreciative when Texans take the time to reach out and share their concerns. Which you did not address. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
United States Senator
So this is the type of letter some of my fellow Americans may also be receiving in answer to their concerns. I don’t know about you, but my fears were in no way alleviated by this letter from the person who is supposed to represent me and my concerns.
Comments are turned off.
But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.