Letters to the Editor

Jay Matzke’s so-called “Medi-Facts” are distortions that don’t stand up to serious examination (Gothenburg Times, 7/28). Matzke is misinformed that proposed changes to Medicare won’t affect current beneficiaries.

Like the balanced budget measures in Congress, the CAP Act in the U.S. Senate would set an arbitrary federal spending limit triggering across-the-board cuts. One study by the Lewin Group found that the CAP Act would reduce Social Security benefits by 19% by 2021 and increase out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries by $391 per year. Cuts would go even deeper under a balanced budget amendment.

He also asserts that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) worsens Medicare’s finances by taking $500 million out of the program. It does just the opposite by reducing bloated subsidies to private Medicare Advantage plans and changing how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals to reward quality of care rather than volume. Medicare’s Board of Trustees determined that these changes and others will extend the solvency of the Medicare Part A trust fund from 2017 to 2029.

Finally, Matzke refers to a purported “bribe” in the ACA. In fact, that provision prevents Nebraska and all other states from paying a larger share of the cost of the expanded Medicaid program. Medicaid expansion will provide coverage for more low-income Nebraskans and reduce the amount of uncompensated care that drives up costs for everyone with health insurance.

It’s time to cut the spin and have an honest conversation about strengthening Medicare for today’s seniors and future generations. Without the benefits of Medicare, millions of disabled and older Americans would not have affordable, accessible health care that covers their basic needs.

Bravo Jay Matzke (07-27 letter). How refreshing to read about Obamacare, from a medical professional’s standpoint. Since Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan was introduced, Democrats have been accusing Republicans of trying to destroy Medicare (pushing granny off a cliff in her wheelchair).

I would like to make one correction to Dr. Matzke’s letter. Democrats took $500 billion (not $500 million) from Medicare to fund Obamacare, so the CBO could give it a passing grade. Ironically, Republicans are the ones introducing legislation—making tough decisions to save the future of entitlements, while Democrats are in total opposition.

In the past, Sen. Ben Nelson has had the luxury of voting against his own party when his vote didn’t matter. Now that the radical programs of Obama require every single vote for passage, Nelson has voted for every America killing bill coming down the pike. He had a chance to be a hero and shine the light of freedom on our state. Instead, he gave Nebraska a black eye, as shady back-room deals will forever be referenced as a “cornhusker kickback.” Thanks Ben.

“Nothing in my (7-27-11) letter implied that I was for or against the funding (to Egypt),” according to Neil Davis. “ ... it only reinforces my point that, as perhaps the weakest president we have ever had, Obama didn’t want that fight and cut funding for the people of Egypt. I was under the impression that Democrats are the party of the people,” he also wrote. That sounds to me like he was upset with Obama for cutting funding to Egypt.

Davis also wrote that I was attempting to downplay Bush’s success (USAID/Egypt). The fact is that the democracy and governance programs were not working and Bush, himself, started reducing aid to Egypt and Obama continued.

I don’t understand Neil’s statement that Obama desires to give money to his terrorist buddies. I’ve never heard about any such thing from any reliable news source. Obama did, however, order the Seals to take out the worst of the terrorists, Osama bin Laden, which had been one of his goals all along.

I think the two parties need to quit slinging mud and come together for the good of the country. Obviously, gridlock is not a good thing.

It’s a good thing Penny Fattig was not in charge of deciphering hieroglyphics in the Egyptian pyramids (07-20-11 letter). Perhaps she has her “Captain Midnight” secret decoder ring on the dyslexia setting.

She wrote that I believe Obama is a weak leader because he cut back on funding for the Egyptian people. It’s the other way around. Even though he holds the most powerful office on earth, all of his decisions are born out of weakness. The exception being his forceful usurpation of our freedoms.

She also wrote that I obviously feel Obama should not have reduced funding to the Egyptian people. I was only reporting the cause and effect of his action. I’ll repeat, nothing in my letter implied that I was for or against the funding.

Then she wrote that maybe I believe we should have helped to keep a corrupt dictator in power. I gave Hosni Mubarak low marks on humanitarianism toward his people and wrote “at least there was peace. But, there was also corruption and suffering.” Penny wrote “...if you can call corruption and allowing abuse of his own people peace.” Huh? The peace I referred to, was between Egypt and Israel. Which is worse, having hungry people or making them casualties of war?

In an attempt to downplay Bush’s success, Penny wrote, Freedom House ratings showed Egypt in the “not free” category. Should we be surprised at this, while they were receiving 80% of their funding from the same U.S. government that was going around the Egyptian regime? That would be like a cancer research scientist saying, don’t give me anymore government grants, there is no cure.

Penny’s goal seems to be to show hypocrisy on my part (and tea partiers)—approving funding foreign ventures and opposing entitlements in our own country. Thirty years ago, someone had to make a decision about how to keep the peace between Egypt and Israel. The government didn’t ask me if we should start sending them money. If they had, I would have at least wanted the money to have tight restrictions on it’s use. What I think about the whole mess isn’t going to change a thing. The main problem arose from lack of follow-up (so there would be neither hunger nor war). Now I oppose Obama’s desire to give that money to his terrorist buddies. I’ve had enough of this subject. I think I’ll look up the definitions of socialism and entitlement in one of my favorite books (the dictionary).

The $2 billion per year we’ve been giving Egypt? Thanks to Barry’s spending, our debt is rising the same amount every 12 hours.

Neil A. Davis, Gothenburg