Letters to the Editor

They're all read by someone on staff. An intern, a low-level staffer, even actual editors. I just saw a Letter to the Editor in the Centre Daily Times [from State College] that caught my eye:

* * * * *

Democratic alternative to Casey

A recent Centre Daily Times story reported on Bob Casey's campaign appearance in State College to woo Democrats' support for his run for Rick Santorum's Senate seat in 2006.

The reporter correctly observed that listeners found Casey's position on Iraq too weak.

When I asked him, Casey said it was necessary to "ask the hard questions." In his talk, he advocated body armor for our troops and training for Iraqis, but never did he call for withdrawing the troops or ending the war.

A member of the audience from the business community said of the speech, "More of the same -- see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." The audience member pointed out that every American household pays, so far, $1,800 per year for this war.

Casey may be the pick of the Democratic Party bosses, but unless he can advocate an end to the war, unless he can transcend the national Democratic Party's mealy-mouthed blither about lowering health-care costs and advocate affordable health insurance for all, unless he can support the rights of workers, he's just another hack. His party doesn't matter.

Another audience member mentioned Chuck Pennacchio, who is also running for the Democratic nomination and does advocate ending the war and universal health insurance.

Anyone who advocates these two measures has my vote. Anyone who does not does not deserve to be nominated as a Democrat and does not deserve to ask for our support.

Paul Durrenberger
State College

* * * * *

Right on. Although I believe that Chuck Pennacchio is for single payer healthcare and not universal health insurance. From the wiki on universal healthcare, single payer entails

... where basic services are provided by private doctors, with the entire fee paid for by the government (a single payer) at the same rate. Other areas of health care, such as dentistry and optometry, are wholly private. [Canada]

And universal healthcare being one that the government picks up the tab for everything. Most industrialized nations have this, but at the cost of primarily higher taxes — I'm totally for this.

Dr. Pennacchio on the issues and specifically, healthcare. He's even prepared a one sheet on getting out of Iraq.

Comments

[Liz]

Universal Health Care means everyone is covered. Single payer is when basic care is paid for by the government. In other words, Medicare for everyone. Supplemental insurance is available from private insurers. Right now we have a backwards version of this. State governments pick up the tab when the uninsured wind up in the hospital, and instead of paying for a doctor's visit and an anti-biotic, we pay for a week in the hospital with pneumonia. Also under the present fully privitized system, we cost contain by limiting the end users access to care, not by telling hospitals that they can't charge $4.00 for an aspirin. Medicare cost contains providers, pays promptly and provides a defined set of services. It's cheaper than letting people get sick; it's cheaper than having duplicative payers; it's cheaper than having every company that offers health benefits maintaining staff to deal with administering those benefits.