" You could live a lot of places in the Bay Area for instance, make $65,000, and still not be able to afford health insurance. There are plenty of other places across the country where that is also possible.

What I believe Ms. Lopez Eastlick is trying to say is that 23 million uninsured is ok, while 46 million uninsured is a problem. There's a number (I'm assuming only conservatives know what this number is) that serves as the tipping point. Apparently it's ok if you are part of this number of uninsured as long as there aren't too many others like you. For instance, 50 million uninsured is a bad thing, we need to get that fixed, but 20 million uninsured is good. Isn't it nice to know your life is worthless if you are one of the few who are uninsured? "

" I dont have health insurance, its not exactly affordable, but i could pay for it if I made drastic cuts to my lifestyle. But i'm not going to do that. I don't smoke, dont drink, exercise daily, and eat healthy nearly all the time. If more Americans lived this way then we could have a universal health care system. We could have one and it would hardly be used if Americans simply took care of themselves. Instead to many people simply don't take care of themselves and are tax dollars shouldn't foot the bill for this, its unfourtante for all the people who could truly use health care for some freak diseases or cancers. But theres to many people who have Diabetes because they didn't take care of themselves. I know some people can't help having diabestes, but theres millions that couldv'e but this just let themselves go. "

" Two things about this letter:

1) It's rather short on facts. Who is Dr. O'Niel? Who does she work for now? When did she do this study? On what data? Etc...


2) Is Kristen Eastlick a regular reader of the Napa Valley Register? If not, why send a letter to the editor?

Seems rather fishy to me. "

" A 62 yr. old relative of mine, who has never been sick a day in his life, is paying $700.00 mo. for Kaiser Health Ins., just because of his age. Unfortunately, he lost his job a few months ago and must cancel his health insurance in two months, since his savings will be depleted. He is working at odds and ends jobs but nothing that will cover his health insurance. His situation is more common than uncommon.

We want health insurance for all, including a Public Option. Humanity should never be a political issue. "

" tiredofcomplainingnapkins
Do you also avoid accidents, falling, and natural disasters?
Do you have a good genetic background so you know you don't have genetically caused high chloresterol?
Does the last person who touched the handle of your cart at the supermarket have the flu?
Do you have a machine at home where you can check for glaucoma?
Do you check yourself for breast cancer/prostate cancer whichever applies?
Did your parents have diabetes? There is a genetic cause for this too.
Do you have children who need yearly check-ups and vaccines? They have accidents too.
One catastropic health episode could ruin your financial life. Be careful...

Krusty: Your irony is chilling. "

" krusty and alu:
So then it is OK to run legitimate businesses out of business, tie up our doctors and hospitals with extreme red tape, establish central control over every citizen through government health care records, and finish off our country's economic strength (already weakened by Obama's takeover of banking, insurance and the auto industry) by adding trillions to our defict - when in fact access to health care can be fixed with intelligent legislation and around $25B?

Why is government takeover of our health care the only option for you people? What is it about the government that gives you the warm and fuzzies? No, insurance companies don't give me the warm and fuzzies but health care access can be fixed without endangering our economy and giving the government a blank check to look into every aspect of our lives and decide who lives or dies, and what care should they get along the way. It's a fraud to go around saying that government takeover is the only civilized way to do it. The civilized way to do it is with intelligent legislation. And now that I've said that, I realize "intelligent legislation" is an oxymoron as far as Congress (and the California Assembly) is concerned.

More and bigger government is not the correct answer. It never was and never will be, and you believers in big government controlling your lives ought to be careful what you wish for because it's not going to turn well for anyone.

Remember, government doesn't care about YOU - it only cares about staying in power by CONTROLLING you. "

" so here are some figures that make life interesting..

* The Census Bureau estimates that 45.7 million lacked health insurance at any given time in 2007. But fewer lacked coverage for the full year, and more did without for one or more months during the year. All three numbers are likely to be higher for 2008 due to massive job losses.

* Twenty-six percent of the uninsured are eligible for some form of public coverage but do not make use of it, according to The National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation. This is sometimes, but not always, a matter of choice.

* Twenty-one percent of the uninsured are immigrants, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. But that figure includes both those who are here legally and those who are not. The number of illegal immigrants who are included in the official statistics is unknown.

* Twenty percent of the uninsured have family incomes of greater than $75,000 per year, according to the Census Bureau. But this does not necessarily mean they have access to insurance. Even higher-income jobs don’t always offer employer-sponsored insurance, and not everyone who wants private insurance is able to get it.

* Forty percent of the uninsured are young, according to KFF (kasier family foundation). But speculation that they pass up insurance because of their good health is unjustified. KFF reports that many young people lack insurance because it’s not available to them, and people who turn down available insurance tend to be in worse health, not better, according to the Institute of Medicine


factcheck.org "

" Very..very good letter....not to mention every public option to date, throughout New England states and Virginia, hasn't reduced or even controlled healthcare costs....real costs doubled and tripled once 'government management' gets their meat hooks on it.

Reader...your relative can buy Medicare or Medical.... but I'd warn whoever that Medicare is a scam for long term care and will result in the estate repaying all the costs so they‘d be better of using a credit line or any of dozens of supplement programs...less than Kaiser for sure. Besides the fact… the reason your relative was to paying $700.00 to Kaiser is directly because private healthcare providers are subsiding the mismanagement of the existing public option... That’s what happens when government restricts markets, mandates ridiculous coverage and then misspends current healthcare budgets pandering to liberal special interest groups. The perfect storm of incompetence…

There are any number of effective and proven solutions reducing healthcare costs while retaining our outstanding, world leading, healthcare system…but as long as liberals are beholden to the American Trial Lawyers Association they’re will be no ‘reform’….just more of what created this mess. "

" That's not a new study, and it was sponsored by the "Employment Policies Institute", a Rick Berman front group (remember Rick Berman, who has front groups against anything having to do with consumer rights, minimum wage, environmental protection, and has been part of the tea party anti-health care movement, dot, dot, dot).
(for more info see http://www.bermanexposed.org/)

Sounds like another mass-distribution of PR against Obama health care reform. "

" to alucawanza,
I think you missed my point,

I'm saying we can't have universal health care because to many people don't take care of themselves. They could avoid a lot of the health related problems if they just took care of themselves. All those issues you named is a perfect example of what universal health care could and should cover, unfourtantly all the other problems that could be avoided by simply taking care of ones health make it impossible to have a universal health care system. 50% of Americans are considered overweight, thats just insane, and I'm sure 45% of those could avoid that. To many people smoke, drink, do drugs, don't exercise, eat bad foods, dont sleep enough, people shouldnt be bailed out for there bad decisions. Unfourtantly these people hurt everybody else by making it to expensive for universal health care "

" so give us sOme specifics on how you would deal with health care reform ppf? How would you fix it?..or is it not broken? "

" tiredofcomplainingnapkins
I think you missed my point....However, do you think people who make poor choices should be denied health care?

How about a good health education component? One could say that smoking, drinking, doing drugs, eating "bad" foods, and eating too much are severe health issues that need to be addressed. Some would say it isn't insane but instead emotional health issues that need intervention by the medical community.

I appreciate the fact that you take good care of yourself. You still need yearly physicals and wellness checks. It's "insane" not to do this. "

" To alucawanza,
You say people "NEED" yearly physicalls and wellness checks, and its "insane" not to do this. My grandpa never went to a doctor in his life and he lived till he was 86 years old. To me thats a good long life. Human beings have been around thousands of years without doctors or hospitals. I think healthcare would be great for freak unseen incidents. But if some kid breaks his arm skateboarding, or someone gets lung canacer from smoking, or diabetes from poor diet and health care then these people made their own bed and have to lay in it, I don't want to see these people helped. "

" and show us the cause and effect between the two, tiredof. Your grandfather sounds like one of those very lucky healthy people.....but for the vast majority, the things alu spoke will not only increase their life span but also the quality of the lives ( and if that kid who breaks his arm skateboarding was yours, you wouldn't want him or her helped?) "

" Wow! Who thought that the right would advocate for the "nanny state". "

" To raven,

If i had a kid and didn't have insurance I would forbid him to ride a skateboard. And if he broke my rules and he does brake his arm and he had to go to the hospital, then he will be mowing a lot of lawns and any other job until he paid me back in full. If you want to do something that could hurt you and you don't have insurance and you do it anyways, then you should have to pay for it. Just because someone is poor doesn't give them the right to steal. Don't see how this is much different. And im just making the point of no health insurance for people who PUT THEMSELVES in situations that could cause someone to have to seek medical attention, like smoking, drinking, poor diet and no exercise, and participating in dangerous situations, like sky diving, or other exteme behavior "

" and the cause and effect of the lack of checkups and your grandpa health?..or rather, his life span?


and what about people who climb rocks, tiredof....or watch TV till late hours possibly affecting their visions...or ride their bicycle...you want them to carry their insurance cards? What about walking down the streets - insurance for to protect against tripping over a broke sidewalk?...

Where does it end tiredof...you want everyone in padded rooms with no sharp corners unless they have adequate insurance? and who decides what is extreme? Someone trained for years in skydiving si a different hazard than someone making their first jump? so again who decides what is extreme? "