Re "Critics reject claims of GOP health proposals," Nov. 20
The Times' analysis of Rudolph W. Giuliani's healthcare plan is too simplistic. The Times asks how an American diagnosed with cancer will afford health insurance under his plan. By bringing fairness to the tax code, Giuliani's reforms would allow Americans to own their insurance and carry it with them as they change jobs or take time off to deal with an illness. Recognizing the ingenuity of the states, Giuliani also proposes giving states the flexibility to solve problems tailored to their residents. And for citizens who live in states incapable of providing these affordable choices, interstate insurance markets would allow them to shop elsewhere. Unlike many other presidential candidates, Giuliani understands that government is not the solution to our healthcare challenges.
Scott W. Atlas
Stanford, Calif.
The writer, a health policy advisor to the Giuliani campaign, is a professor at the Stanford University School of Medicine.
--
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson and Giuliani, three cancer-surviving presidential candidates, should submit applications for individual health insurance policies under assumed names to multiple carriers. Most likely they would be unable to purchase policies at any price. If they do qualify, the cost would be prohibitive for any middle-income person. Or, if they are accepted with pre-existing condition exclusions, they would not have coverage for the very condition that puts their health at risk. Until we come to view healthcare as a basic right -- like education -- that is worth guaranteeing for all, there will be no meaningful healthcare reform.
Margaret Winter
Redlands
--
Forty-seven million Americans currently live without health insurance, one unwelcome diagnosis away from possible bankruptcy, often choosing between taking medication and going to bed on an empty stomach.
How can the U.S. be satisfied with this status quo? How can politicians oppose the implementation of a universal healthcare system on the grounds of fiscal and governmental restraint while simultaneously dumping billions of dollars into the war on terrorism? Perhaps all the movement needs is a new name. The "war on sickness," perhaps?
Citizens of countries with universal healthcare programs are living significantly longer and healthier lives than the typical American. They cannot fathom why the American government refuses to cover all of its citizens despite having the ability to do so.
