By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, Dec. 26, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
It's clear that the country (50 percent to 60 percent) does not like the health care law. The website has been a disaster.
Most concerning is the discovery that private data to be sent to insurance companies were either garbled in transmission or not even sent. People who thought they were registered for a plan were not.
Government has now declared exactly what must be included in policies; often, it's nonsensical.
Five million people have had their insurance canceled. The White House recently predicted that 75 million to 80 million more policies will be canceled when businesses join ObamaCare or shift the burden of health care to their employees.
Those able to register have found insurance rates have increased, sometimes by 100 percent or more. Deductibles are very high, making insurance more of a gamble than a gain for peace of mind.
Doctor shortages, including those retiring or who will refuse to provide services under some plans, have not even been addressed.
President Obama is counting on this legislation to be his signature achievement. Does he really want a “train wreck” to be his legacy?
The positives of ObamaCare should be re-enacted, as well as other reforms needed, as single pieces of legislation: the purchase of insurance across state lines, no more coverage refusals for pre-existing conditions, financial assistance for those in need, an end to frivolous medical lawsuits and coverage for children under age 26 on parents' plans.
Let's reform medical care without undermining our current system.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Saved her life
- Drought answer?
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- What competition?
- Sovereignty trampled
- Cuts worsen hunger
- Not reviled abroad
- Slavish media
- Putin for Prez II