November 27, 2009

Letters to the Editor

Submit a letter to the editor electronically | For our letter writing policy, click here

House’s health care reform bill still leaves a lot to be desired, reader says

This letter is in response to the story “Cardinal praises vote for health care reform with federal ban on abortion funding” in the Nov. 13 issue of The Criterion.

Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, seems very happy that abortions are excluded from this plan.

How do he and the other bishops feel about certain other portions of this House of Representatives reform bill, namely:

  • $500 billion to be taken from Medicare to help keep it deficit neutral;
  • A committee to determine the health care a person/family should have;
  • A fine and/or jail time if you decide to not have what the committee determines;
  • A tax on items such as pacemakers, prostheses, electric wheelchairs (to keep things deficit neutral);
  • An increase in already existing taxes and some new taxes, again, to keep things deficit neutral.

Planned Parenthood was a large contributor to President Barack Obama’s campaign, and they will not be forgotten.

Did you notice the silence from pro-choice groups when this (Stupak) amendment was added? That should tell you something. Any bill reaching the president’s desk will cover abortion.

Many of us were pleased that the House bill does not cover people who are in the country illegally.

The bishops speak of the “right” to health care. Please explain.

My first reaction is, “Everyone talks about rights; who is talking about responsibilities?”

And I don’t mean the responsibility of those who have to give up to those who don’t. I mean the responsibility of those ignoring valid laws and expecting to have their demands met by a country other than their own.

We need to get back to the basics of God’s law, especially the one I am fond of quoting: “Render, therefore, to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Mt 22:21).

We all need to respect each other—we for them trying to better their lives and they for us, our country and what we hold dear.

Has anyone considered the constitutionality of these bills?

- Barbara L. Maness, Vevay

Local site Links: