Response to my congressman

Two months ago, I sent a note to my congressman, George Radanovich (California’s 19th Congressional District), asking him about his impending vote on the Health Care Reform bill. Today, I received a message from him. Here it is, with my response to him…

” Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I appreciate hearing your thoughts and concerns about the health care reform law.

There are serious problems with the way that our health care and health insurance system are currently operating. Many Americans unfortunately fall through the cracks of the current system and cannot get the care that they need. We must address reform from the stance of access to care. If health care were more affordable, more individuals could be insured and have access to necessary health resources.

I voted in opposition to the health care legislation and reconciliation package on March 21, 2010, to protect the American people from the damages this piece of legislation will inflict upon them and future generations. With a price tag of nearly $1.2 trillion, this bill increases premiums for millions of families by nearly $2,100 per year, forces nine million people to lose the coverage they currently have and requires more of the federal budget, nearly $390 billion between 2010 and 2019, to be directed to health care. This legislation places a huge burden on our federal debt load, our overextended government, and on taxpayers.

Furthermore, this legislation would increase federal spending on Medicaid to $434 billion while cutting $528.5 billion to the Medicare program, cutting benefits and raising premiums for seniors over the next ten years. Hidden in this bill is also the takeover of the student loan industry by the federal government as the federal government will use student loan repayments to offset $19.4 billion in costs created by this legislation. This legislation fails to address the driving forces behind health care problems in the United States and instead compounds them.

I believe there are manageable ways to reduce health care costs and expand the access to quality care mandating a government takeover of our health care system. However, I know that effective reform requires time as well as bipartisan cooperation. It is for this reason that I cosponsored House Resolution 847, expressing my belief that the content of national health care legislation should be conducted in public. Backroom deals and arm twisting are not the proper means to pass legislation that will alter one-sixth of our national economy.

While I do not support the recently passed legislation, I have been a strong supporter of reforming health care to allow individuals the freedom to choose the health care provider and insurance that meets their needs while not placing a financial and institutional burden on the federal government. It is for these reasons I supported the Republican Alternative for health care reform. In the Republican Alternative, health care premiums would be lower for families and employees of small business. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that under the Republican Alternative, premiums for millions of families would be nearly $5,000 lower than under the democrats’ plan. Additionally, patients with preexisting conditions would be guaranteed affordable coverage, even if they lose their health insurance, and are not forced to be on waiting lists or have annual or lifetime spending limits. The Republican Alternative allows for the doctor-patient relationship to remain the same, as the federal government cannot intrude on a patient’s relationship with their doctor and the rationing of care based on cost. It is common sense solutions, like those in the Republican Alternative, that are needed to effectively reform health care.

Although the first step has been taken to reform health care, much more progress needs to be made. While we disagree on the recently passed legislation I will work with my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to ensure that the effective and common sense solutions are made to our health care system. Rest assured, I will continue to fight to reform our health care system at every opportunity.

Finally, I encourage you to visit my website at www.radanovich.house.gov to get the most current information on my work in Congress. Once again, thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch.”

This is my reply to him:

Dear Congressman Radanovich,

There seems to be a deep disconnect between the reform that passed in March and some of the points you are making in your note, which I will not address today. I would rather take this opportunity to address the overarching issue of budgetary concerns, which, at the end of the day, govern even the slightest of aspects of any discussion on tax dollar allocations and passage of any reform.

Am I to gather, from your crafted message, that you are worried about the future generations’ payments of our deficit? If this is really the case, why are you opposing the HR3590 expenditure while supporting spending almost 10 times as much, of our tax dollars, to military industry welfare companies ($895B in 2010)? As you know, the US Defense budget is over 12 times the size of the next highest military budget of any other country’s! In fact, if we only spent 10 times more on Defense than any other country on earth, we could absorb the entire cost of the healthcare bill, erase that $120B/year over 10 years that seems to bother you so much: instead of $895B, spend $700B on military, $120B on health care, and use the $75B difference towards paying our National Debt!

With $700B on Defense and $120B on Health Care, we could still outspend any other country by 10 times on military gear (last year, the highest military budget outside of the US was China’s with $70B; UK, FRA, GER, RUS etc. all spent similar amounts on their defense last year), provide universal healthcare to all Americans and reduce the deficit. Is this not a good idea?

I fail to see any concrete solution, in your message, towards helping the next generation. Our CURRENT generation is still paying Reagan’s and both Bush’s debts – By the way, are you forgetting that Clinton handed a $500B surplus to GW Bush, which he squandered within his first year in office?

In summary, your message says: save 1 dollar here to save our country from bankruptcy, but spend 10 dollars over there… how is this consistent?

Best wishes,

PS: If this does not make sense to you, I would be glad to sit down with you to go over the numbers.