Letters to the Editors

Why discourage marriage with our tax laws?

© St. Petersburg Times, published July 28, 2000

So President Clinton is going to veto the marriage-tax penalty relief bill because it benefits the rich. Let's see if he's correct about that. A young lady of my acquaintance, with one child, and her husband each earned approximately $16,000 in 1998. Their tax bill for that year was $2,520. In 1999, this couple divorced. Their earnings were essentially the same but the total tax they paid that year was $942. As singles, they qualified for $8,600 of standard deductions versus $7,100 as married. What is more important, one of them became eligible for the earned income tax credit, which was not available to them as a family.

Now maybe some high-income individuals with non-employed spouses may realize a small gain if this tax is repealed, but I can guarantee you that that gain will not be nearly as important to them as this $1,600 is to this (ex)couple.

I have counseled other young couples about the economic consequences of marrying versus staying unmarried. They have uniformly opted to stay unmarried -- even with children.

We have finally, as a society, started to understand the tremendous advantages that accrue to the children of two-parent households, both financial and emotional. Why would we have any law on the books that discourages marriage?

As for President Clinton's objection to this tax cut, I can only surmise that it is because, as a Democrat, he is against all tax cuts.
-- James D. Origer, Palm Harbor

Tax proposal goes too far

Re: Senate passes tax cut, end to marriage penalty, July 19.

This bill goes far beyond "removing the marriage penalty." It cuts the taxes for all joint filers, including couples with only one breadwinner. It deserves a veto.

A fair tax law would be one that allows married couples the option of filing jointly or as singles, but with no other changes to the tax law. This would end the marriage penalty, but would not give any other tax breaks.
-- Jack Gregg, Largo

Health care before tax cuts

How naive do the Republicans think we are? They're throwing a meatless bone to a hungry dog. Keep the taxes as they are, but give us universal health coverage. The money they propose to save us cannot compare with what we pay for health insurance and prescription drugs.

Please, give us what all Americans deserve when it comes to health coverage -- peace of mind.
-- Paula Xenakis, Holiday

GOP victory is costing us

Re: HMOs.

A few years ago Hillary Clinton tried to get affordable health care for all Americans. But the Republicans fought her and won. Now with the HMOs moving out, we are paying the price.

Any Republicans who are losing their HMO have only themselves to blame. I hope at election time, people will change the Congress and Senate.
-- Horace Hall, Brooksville

Drug companies have upper hand

Re: Drugmakers keeping generics off shelves, July 24.

This is not surprising! Hytrin was $32 for 30 tablets only two years ago. Then the generic came out and the Hytrin brand went to $58 dollers for 30 and the generic was more than $40 for 30!

It is easy to see what will happen when Medicare starts to "help" with drug bills. The drug companies are in complete control. In addition, very few seniors will benefit from the plans now proposed. All they will do is raise the bills for all of us.
-- Betty Lou Reinhart, Sun City Center

How to help seniors with medical costs

If Congress really wanted to do something to relieve the medical burden of the elderly, there is a rather simple solution.

1. Rescind the 71/2 percent restriction on the income tax forms and allow people over 65 to deduct all their medical expenses.

2. Rescind the tax on Social Security, which now can apply to 85 percent of Social Security payments. None of the recipients of Social Security ever dreamed that they would be required to pay taxes on this money after retirement.

3. Records indicate that almost four out of five elderly people are expected to require some type of assisted living arrangements as they grow older. Many become destitute because of huge medical bills and end up on Medicaid. Long-term care insurance is very expensive. If premiums could all be deducted on the income tax forms, it would encourage many elderly to buy this type insurance. Those who would buy the long-term care insurance would not require Medicaid, thus saving the government money.
-- J.W. Sharkey, Tarpon Springs

AHCA committed to quality health care

Over the past two weeks, the St. Petersburg Times has written several articles concerning the Agency for Health Care Administration and two procurement efforts with which the agency has been involved.

One of these efforts was to contract for peer review services for our Medicaid program. The contract was valued at $24-million and was designed to track the effectiveness of spending federal and state dollars for the program. The other effort involved the purchase of a piece of computer equipment valued at approximately $900,000.

The articles and subsequent editorials have implied that both contracts were improperly influenced and tainted by lobbyist intervention.

When allegations surfaced about improprieties of the Medicaid contract, I ordered all activities ceased and the process begun again to make absolutely sure that there were no questions about the propriety of the process.

In the case of the computer equipment, the purchase was done legally, according to the state contract, and the equipment is installed and functioning to our satisfaction. In fact, this particular piece of equipment will save this agency several hundred thousand dollars over the next four years. It will enable AHCA to continue to upgrade its electronic systems so that it may keep track of the large database used to support its Medicaid program, managed care report cards and various quality measurement projects.

It is important to note that I have had my inspector general and our legal team conduct a thorough review of these matters. They conducted extensive interviews with agency employees and reviewed documents associated with them. No illegal activities of any employee of our agency have been found with regard to either of these contracts.

Both incidences have prompted this agency to adopt new purchasing procedures similar to those adopted by the governor's office, including receiving three price quotes on large purchases, even if all candidates are covered under the state contract.

My agency and this administration are committed to making sure Floridians receive accessible, affordable, quality health care. As such, we are also committed to watching that each tax dollar is spent wisely and that no undue influence is given in the process of determining how those dollars are spent.

If I find, or otherwise learn, that anyone at the agency has acted improperly or illegally, then I will take every action available under the law to see that those who are in violation will be prosecuted or removed from this agency.

In the meantime, I would hope the media would focus their considerable efforts on matters that truly affect each Floridian's health care and future.
-- Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr., secretary, State of Florida Agency for Health Care Administration

Where was black recognition?

Re: Honored diplomat felt racism at home, by Bill Maxwell, July 19.

As one who remembers Dr. Ralph Bunche with great respect and appreciation and one who is also familiar with Bill Maxwell's bent, it was with both anticipation and some apprehension that I began to read this column. It did not take long to see Maxwell, as he so often does, veer to some racist incident that disparages America.

Dr. Ralph Bunche represented the United States at the United Nations with integrity and distinction and skillfully mediated seemingly unresolvable international disputes. In recognition of his outstanding service, as noted in the column, President Harry Truman presented Dr. Bunche with an Outstanding Citizenship Award in 1949 and was later honored as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1950.

In true Maxwellian fashion, he could not resist ending his column on a negative note by stating that Ralph Bunche's accomplishments were not fully appreciated by a nation that measured him by the color of his skin.

Admittedly and to our shame, Dr. Bunche suffered from racism. What has baffled me over these many years is why members of the black communities have not, to my knowledge, availed themselves of many opportunities to honor or memorialize his name. So, since Bill Maxwell has seen fit to remind us that Dr. Bunche was not fully appreciated in America because of the color of his skin, I beg him to explain why the black communities have failed to honor or memorialize the name of this outstanding American?
-- Mario Battista, Port Richey

Seeking a more humane city

Re: Revolution in the Challenge Zone.

I did not enjoy Bill Maxwell's July 26 column. I feel satire is completely inappropriate for this topic. Maxwell satirized the anger and unfocused rage of the marchers.

As for the white community, I think white people need to have more anger and rage about the conditions of the black communities in this country. Personally, I have a stake in the outcome of the march on St. Petersburg City Hall. I want to live in a city where black people aren't killed by the police. The current rate at which the police are murdering black people nationwide is absurd.

I will be marching to support the black community's leadership toward a city that is humane. Far from the foolishness that Maxwell described, the people who organized this march demonstrate political maturity. I will be proud to be part of that on Saturday.
-- Stephanie Midler, St. Petersburg

Children need parents' control

Re: Student gunned down at nightclub, July 21.

My heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of Kevin Alexander Hayes, the gifted young man tragically and senselessly shot down in the streets of downtown Tampa. I agree with Valarie Hayes in her statement that guns should be removed from the streets; however, I must add something more: Remove your children from the streets as well!

Please tell me -- just what was a 16-year-old doing at an adult nightclub after 3 a.m.? The fake I.D. in his pocket explains the how, but not the why.

Parents, if you want to keep your children safe, you must have a measure of control over them. You cannot be their friend, "driving them to clubs" and allowing them to stay out all night just because they "like" it. It is our responsibility to protect them from the outside influences, and this can only be done right from the beginning and with constant, loving discipline.

My heart aches for your loss and for our loss of this young person.
-- Pamela S. Askew, Tampa

Share your opinions

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.
--

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.