I read with interest Tony Smith's letter on Feb. 12 titled "Minimal effect of mini-med waivers." He asked a great question to start - If we do not have the facts, how can we decide? He then asks, "Was the story regarding waivers reported by major news organizations?"
Would that be the same major news organizations that were instrumental in getting Obama elected by not reporting facts about him? He then asks, "Was there any merit to the union (waiver) story?" His answer is no.
But according to the government's own Health and Human Services website as of Feb. 11, 915 waivers have been issued so far (not all to unions). I dare say facts are relevant!
The point is that we have the health care bill that was rushed though Congress without proper debate and now modifications are needed. This is a great time to remind people what Nancy Pelosi said - "We need to pass this so we can see what's in it!"
The health care bill was about 2,500 pages; the U.S. Constitution is only 11 pages. We can found a country on 11 pages but need 2,500 pages on health care. Does that strike anyone as odd?
He also states that if we repeal the new health care law, the people who have these waivers might lose their insurance. If the new law had never taken effect, these people would not have to worry about losing their insurance!
Finally he cites a 1997 study (that is 14 years old!) by the World Health Organization (WHO) that ranked U.S. health care 37th out of 193 countries. The WHO is a branch of the United Nations; to say they do not have the best interests of the U.S. in mind would be an understatement. It also reminds me of the old phrase "figures lie and liars figure." With enough spin, you can make statistics say just about anything.
The majority of the people in the U.S. are not in favor of the new health care law. By working to repeal it, those politicians are doing the people's business!