Letter to the Editor

April 23, 2010

Maybe David Limbaugh should write
a column attacking the insurance companies

To the editor:

On Wednesday, April 14, on page A4 of The Herald-Mail, there was a column by David Limbaugh ("Costs, taxes just two more reasons to fear Obamacare"). He was objecting to the recently passed health care legislation.

He seems to have two major objections to the recently passed health care legislation. The first objection is that he feels it will cost too much. His second objection is that the government will start making people's health care decisions. In particular, Limbaugh interprets someone else as saying:

"... Obama's bureaucrats will start denying payments for treatments and procedures that they deem unwarranted. That is, they'll start dictating care decisions ... and they'll ration and pay only for that which they approve. So even if there is some savings here ... they will be achieved at the cost of patient and physician choice and the quality of care."


Limbaugh finishes his piece by saying, "But costs and taxes aren't even the main reasons to fear Obama care. Try the evaporation of our personal liberties."

At the same time, my wife received a letter from a local health care provider. This letter told her that she should have a "... normal interview follow-up ..." mammogram and explained that "... mammography is the best single method available to detect breast cancer ..."

At the bottom of the letter from this health care provider was the following statement, "Although the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute and the American College of Radiology recommend annual routine screening mammograms for women beginning at age 40, some insurance carriers do not reimburse for this examination. Please check with your insurance company."

I am confused. Limbaugh's position seems to be that the health care legislation will mean that my wife will have bureaucrats coming between herself and her medical provider. The letter from the local health care provider tells my wife that, depending on which insurance she has, private insurance company bureaucrats might already be coming between my wife and her health care provider.

Would it be safe to assume that in the near future, Limbaugh will write an editorial attacking the insurance companies for coming between people and their medical providers and thereby evaporating their personal liberties?

Another alternative is that Limbaugh believes that if the federal government and private industry do exactly the same thing, it is an evil socialist plot if it is done by the government, but no objection should be raised if the exact same thing is done by private enterprise.

Russell Williams

The Herald-Mail Articles