Response To Torpy
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
With regards to Ms. Torpy’s response to my Friday letter to the editor, I had to laugh at it. Ms. Torpy, there are such things as VCRs, pencil and paper to take notes with as I watched the first hearings, high-speed Internet, with thousands of archival records, records that with a few typing strokes can be displayed on a computer screen. Records in video format can be viewed in real time, forward, backward, stop motion over and over again. In as little as 25 minutes I had all the information needed for the letter. All the information pertaining to these 1995-1998 health care hearings, even to the extent of seeing the references to the signed device agreement; plus the many health care laws. That congress passed to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud. One of these was the Medicare Advantage insurance.
You state that I know little of this industry or what these hearings have to do with today’s election. Apparently it is not me, but you, Ms. Torpy, who are the ignorant one why these hearings were held. They were held to find out why the insurance premiums were sky high, why the Medicare and the Medicaid programs were going broke, and also to get back some sort of monetary pay back to the public the billions of dollars the health care industry had over charged the insurance companies that was ultimately passed on in higher premiums. If something was not soon done no one, including manufacturing companies, would be able to afford insurance. These hearings were intended to find out the why and what could be done to stop it. The question was by what means did Congress have, short of taking this whole industry to court, to get the money to the public? In this instance a tax of some sort could do it, a tax on these device companies was the way they came up with, as well as other ways to address the other parts of the rest of the industry over charging. The Republican Congress started the cleanup but stopped short of getting a payback of this overcharging of the public. The Democrats decided to go ahead using the same bill that the Republicans had put together to get the money to the public. That, Ms. Torpy, is how these prior hearings have ended up in this election.
Ms. Torpy, I would suggest before you take a personal attack on me that you get your facts together. You stated that I hated Republicans. I find this to be offensive. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Over the years I have voted for people from both parties. But unlike you, Ms. Torpy, I vote for the person I think will do the best job of putting the people first and not the party. I have a history in the better part of my working life of representing the so-called 47 percent. What do you have, Ms. Torpy, other than to see just how many hypercritical snide cutting remarks directed to those who you disagree with?
Marvin Gunter
Warsaw, via email[[In-content Ad]]
With regards to Ms. Torpy’s response to my Friday letter to the editor, I had to laugh at it. Ms. Torpy, there are such things as VCRs, pencil and paper to take notes with as I watched the first hearings, high-speed Internet, with thousands of archival records, records that with a few typing strokes can be displayed on a computer screen. Records in video format can be viewed in real time, forward, backward, stop motion over and over again. In as little as 25 minutes I had all the information needed for the letter. All the information pertaining to these 1995-1998 health care hearings, even to the extent of seeing the references to the signed device agreement; plus the many health care laws. That congress passed to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud. One of these was the Medicare Advantage insurance.
You state that I know little of this industry or what these hearings have to do with today’s election. Apparently it is not me, but you, Ms. Torpy, who are the ignorant one why these hearings were held. They were held to find out why the insurance premiums were sky high, why the Medicare and the Medicaid programs were going broke, and also to get back some sort of monetary pay back to the public the billions of dollars the health care industry had over charged the insurance companies that was ultimately passed on in higher premiums. If something was not soon done no one, including manufacturing companies, would be able to afford insurance. These hearings were intended to find out the why and what could be done to stop it. The question was by what means did Congress have, short of taking this whole industry to court, to get the money to the public? In this instance a tax of some sort could do it, a tax on these device companies was the way they came up with, as well as other ways to address the other parts of the rest of the industry over charging. The Republican Congress started the cleanup but stopped short of getting a payback of this overcharging of the public. The Democrats decided to go ahead using the same bill that the Republicans had put together to get the money to the public. That, Ms. Torpy, is how these prior hearings have ended up in this election.
Ms. Torpy, I would suggest before you take a personal attack on me that you get your facts together. You stated that I hated Republicans. I find this to be offensive. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Over the years I have voted for people from both parties. But unlike you, Ms. Torpy, I vote for the person I think will do the best job of putting the people first and not the party. I have a history in the better part of my working life of representing the so-called 47 percent. What do you have, Ms. Torpy, other than to see just how many hypercritical snide cutting remarks directed to those who you disagree with?
Marvin Gunter
Warsaw, via email[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092