To the Editor:
Re “Fierce Critic of Health Care Law Said to Be Pick for Health Dept.” (front page, Nov. 29):
Representative Tom Price, an orthopedic surgeon from Georgia, is expected to be nominated as secretary of health and human services. You note that in the 2009 debate over the Affordable Care Act, Dr. Price called the federal government “stifling and oppressive.”
It is true that the act does establish requirements for health insurers. Among other things, insurers cannot deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions or charge them more than others, and they may not establish annual or lifetime limits.
While Dr. Price may consider those “stifling and oppressive,” most Americans would choose the Affordable Care Act’s protections over the conditions that existed before the law’s passage.
Dr. Price’s “most frequent objection to the law is that it interferes with the ability of patients and doctors to make medical decisions.” Yet there is absolutely no evidence of that.
We may not agree on policy preferences, but if we could at least begin the policy discussion from a foundation of fact, that would be a small amount of progress.
STEPHEN M. DAVIDSON
Boston
The writer is a professor at the Questrom School of Business, Boston University, and the author of “A New Era in U.S. Health Care: Critical Next Steps Under the Affordable Care Act.”
Note from KBJ: ObamaCare was a big lie. Remember Jonathan Gruber? Remember Barack Obama saying that if you like your doctor (or health-care plan), you can keep your doctor (or health-care plan)? Remember Obama saying that your health-care costs would decrease by $2,500? Remember Nancy Pelosi saying that the law had to be passed before we would know what's in it? Say goodbye to ObamaCare, Stephen M. Davidson. Say hello to competitive health-care markets.
