Cuts in the Medicare program? Or not?

To the editor:

In his Wednesday column on political name-calling, John L. Smith repeats what he saw in a false Mitt Romney ad. He states that "the president's Medicare revamp also makes changes to the system by borrowing $716 billion from it to help pay for the Affordable Care Act." This is false.

USA Today states that "there are no cuts in benefits and, in fact, seniors have already seen preventive services, such as annual exams and cancer screenings, with no co-pays. Instead, the ($716 billion) savings comes by decreasing provider payments."

There is a huge difference in incorrectly claiming that $716 billion was taken from Medicare to pay for the Affordable Care Act, and the fact that this money actually is to be taken from insurance companies, etc., as a way to cut costs while not cutting any Medicare services to patients.

Gary Musser

Las Vegas

Gutting Medicare?

To the editor:

In response to John L. Smith's Wednesday column:

Mr. Smith alleges that Rep. Paul Ryan's Medicare plan would require those now under the age of 55 to take a government stipend at age 65 to buy health insurance from a company.

While that may be one option, under the Ryan plan individuals would also have the option of enrolling in the same health plan that all federal government employees, including members of Congress, now have, or remaining in the traditional Medicare program.

Mr. Smith also alleges that Mr. Obama would borrow $716 billion - that's billion with a "b" - from Medicare to help pay for his Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare. I think a better word than "borrow" would be "steal" since there are no plans to ever repay it.

The American public, and particularly its seniors, needs to realize that the only presidential candidate proposing to gut Medicare is Barack Obama.

John Fridell

Henderson

Self-defense

To the editor:

Thank you for publishing Larry Elder's Thursday commentary on armed citizens defending themselves. Occurrences of successful self-defense should be making the same headlines as the tragedies. As he stated, 400,000 lives saved is an enormous number worthy of much more attention than it receives.

Those who challenge the Second Amendment should remember the lawlessness and helplessness after Hurricane Katrina. On an ordinary day, the police struggle to keep us safe. Katrina showed us the need to fend for ourselves in the face of a disaster which overwhelmed law enforcement.

Whether it is a large-scale catastrophe or a home invasion, I refuse to allow myself to be a victim. The crime in the news makes me feel more and more insecure, so the advantage of owning my own weapon and knowing how to use it helps me sleep at night.

Dolores Blain

Las Vegas