Send e-mail to email@example.com (no attached files, please, which can contain viruses); fax to 770-532-0457; or mail to The Times, P.O. Box 838, Gainesville, GA 30503. Include full name, hometown and phone number for confirmation. They should be limited to one topic on issues of public interest and may be edited for content and length (limit of 500 words). Letters forwarded from other sources or those involving personal, business or legal disputes, poetry, expressions of faith or memorial tributes may be rejected. You may be limited to one letter per month, two on a single topic. Submitted items may be published in print, electronic or other forms. Letters, columns and cartoons express the opinions of the authors and not of The Times editorial board.
I could not let Harold Lott’s recent editorial go by without a response. I guess I’m one of those intolerant, closed-minded folks who let emotion carry me along.4 I discovered this when I read his claim that I, as a listener to talk radio, am "not motivated nor able to think deeply about the issues" involved in health care.
He suggests that he ought to examine himself closely. I am very angry that Mr. Lott attempts to pass off people like me as lazy ignoramuses, while he offers no positive argument in favor of the bill he supports, but merely trashes Republicans. Perhaps he is unmotivated to examine the issue carefully, choosing instead to bask in his emotional rejection of a different mindset.
I will grant that some opponents of the health care "reform" bill seem to be creating havoc for the cameras, but the concerns are real, not manufactured. It’s a fact that President Barack Obama, as an Illinois state senator, kept adding mandates to what insurance companies had to cover. That ideology will not cut costs.
It’s a fact that if you tax something, you get less of it, and if you subsidize something, you get more of it. Those people who think that regulating (taxing) doctor pay and subsidizing more treatments will cut costs, much less lead to better care, are the irrational ones. The opponents are the ones who are reading the bill, no easy feat, and are taking specific terminology to task.
It’s a fact that the two most famous government-run social programs, Social Security and Medicare, are unsustainable due to unfunded liabilities. Mr. Lott refers to the "tired, worn-out excuse" that the Democratic plan will create government control of health care. Yet, Democratic leaders like Barney Frank and President Obama himself have supported that very thing.
I’ve studied economics, and I’ve read the Constitution. Mr. Lott’s editorial makes me wonder if he has done either.