Letters - Wednesday

HELPING SENIORS

Letter contained information not supported by facts

Being an advocate for seniors in our community for more than 20 years, I found the letter from Jan Ingram-Smith to be misleading (“Not all medigap plans are good deals for seniors,” Letters , Nov. 24). The use of the word “medigap” in describing any Medicare Advantage Plan, is like comparing apples to oranges. Those are two very different types of coverage.

It’s important to note that the open enrollment for those same Medicare Advantage Plans does not end Dec. 31 but continues through March 31. The enrollment period now in progress that does end Dec. 31 is for the Medicare Part D Prescription plans, which also leaves open the opportunity for those on certain plans to make changes that will be effective Jan. 1.

I also found the statement that those plans can cost seniors “tens of thousands of dollars if you get sick,” simply another sales scare tactic. Many of the available Medicare Advantage Plans include a maximum out-of-pocket to avoid just such a situation. Those plans may not work for everyone, but in many cases, it has been a stopgap to bankruptcy for those on limited incomes. Those who are well informed and know how their health care coverage works are seldom dissatisfied with their choice.

I encourage all people on Medicare to revisit their health insurance annually to be informed of changes in coverage or cost. I also encourage all to utilize the free counseling services provided in all 50 states by the State Health Insurance Counseling Program. They do not sell or endorse any companies and are truly consumer advocates for people on Medicare.

Lisa Hietala

Founder and executive director

Senior Insurance Assistance, Inc.

Colorado Springs

BAD BOYS

Criminals must toe the line to stay out of jail

I’m not an attorney like William M. Schoewe, but I will say I disagree with him on every point but one he made in his Nov. 30 letter (“County’s policies ensure jail crowding”). He asked why judges increase bond amounts when the jail is almost near capacity. I didn’t realize the capacity of a jail had anything to do with the danger a criminal posed to society. I’m elated the bond amounts have been increased, and glad these people are not roaming the streets.

If someone is assigned to a community corrections facility, that assignment comes with responsibility, including the responsibility to be where you are supposed to be, when you are suppose to be there. If they cannot take that simple level of responsibility, an escape charge is justified, in my book.

As for the overcrowded jails, here I will agree; our community should stop complaining when criminals are out on the street when there is no room to house them, if we as citizens will not support building and operating new jails. Next time there is a crime committed by a bonded criminal, before asking why he is out, ask yourself how you voted the last time there was an election requesting funds for jail construction.

Jim Balcerovich

Colorado Springs

MESSY JOB

Editorial off base in blaming shooters for trash

The Gazette’s Nov. 24 Our View, “Shooting range needn’t be so trashy,” almost got it right. Gun owners are charged a 10 percent federal tax on every bullet and gun they buy; this tax is 11 percent on handguns. Part of this money is supposed to be used to develop and maintain designated shooting ranges. No other group that uses the national forest pays such a tax.

The editorial stated that because the shooters at Rampart Range were not charged a fee, “Therein lies the problem.” The real problem is that The Gazette did not do its research about what gun owners are really paying to use the range. The federal government is not using our tax money for the intended purpose.

Jill Pasco

Colorado Springs

ARRESTING DEVELOPMENT

Bumper stickers a plea to stop misguided growth

I confess. I’m the “self-righteous snob preaching about overpopulation from the back of their gas-guzzling truck.” I was outed by a letter in The Gazette taking offense at bumper-stickers about overpopulation on my SUV (“Lower carbon footprint before limiting population,” Nov. 29).

I apologize for my imperfection. I understand how hypocritical that appears. I should tread more lightly on the planet. I thank Ashley Samelson for caring enough about environmental sustainability to write.

Contrary to the implications of her letter, I’m not against reproductive rights; I favor full knowledge of population’s impacts as people make their own decisions about family size. I advocate ending dependence on rising population for economic vitality.

My “No Vacancy” bumper sticker is a plea to stop wasting millions of dollars on misguided economic development to entice more people to move here. Water to fuel continued population growth can come only at the expense of agriculture, river ecosystems and drought reserves.

Samelson is right; I should give up not only my SUV, but any powered vehicle; I should trade my house for a tent; give up vacation travel in favor of carbon-neutral imaginary trips, and retire at sunset rather than use electricity for the luxury of light. This is where we’re heading. If we ignore the impacts of increasing population, that day will come. I hope we can adopt a realistic approach about the limits of our resources before it comes to that.

So, while I recycle, turn out the lights, and drive as few miles as possible in that SUV, I could do more. I may trade my clothes dryer for a clothes line. Should I trade in that SUV for a compact hybrid? You bet. But if we can’t break the habit of growth addiction, we’ll have to give up a lot more than SUVs.

Dave Gardner

Founder, SaveTheSprings

Colorado Springs