'I'm elderly, but not forgetful'
Not so long ago, the MCAS issued a referendum seeking an additional property tax increase to go directly to the MCAS. This was also opened up to all registered voters, regardless to their owning property or not. The MCAS hired a referendum guru and all fully expected victory after the ballots were counted.
Fortunately, property owners came out and said, "No, thank you," to this offer. Donald Dulaney, the School Board President, issued a notice that he felt by saying "no," we would get the type of education that we voted for. In other words, we, the tax payers, were the cause of the educational problems.
Let it be said that the tax payers do care about the quality of education our children receive, but also say "no" to higher taxes and wasteful spending. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Dulaney lives in Porter County.
Recently I've seen where Mr. Dulaney has filed for re-election to the MCAS board. I'm elderly, but not forgetful. It amazes me how hypocritical so many seeking elected positions can be. Maybe it would serve a better purpose to elect someone else who may aid this situation rather than to continue it.
Harold J. Wolf
Vote "no" to constitutional amendment
A word of caution! Be careful when you vote for changes in the state constitution. Many times, such changes bring unintentional consequences. There’s a constitutional amendment on the 2016 ballot that is not what it seems. It contains a Trojan horse. The specific language “forever preserved” puts this right over our other existing rights. I believe this is intended, not unintentional. I will vote against this proposal, not because I oppose it, but I’m not willing to surrender any of my other rights in support of it.
Do not vote for a change you may not understand. Do not make your existing rights less equal than this proposed one. I recommend voting no on this at least until it is rewritten in a clear and proper manner, showing this is just one additional protected right, not preemptory of our other rights, and that our other rights under the constitution are not subservient to this cause.
ObamaCare premiums will skyrocket
Mark on your calendar the date: Nov. 1. That's when the new 2017 premium rates for ObamaCare are scheduled to be announced. Advanced indications point to a substantial rise in both premiums and deductibles. Needless to say, the Obama administration is not happy with the proposed hikes and is attempting to postpone their announcement until after the Nov. 8 election. The rise in rates will vary depending on market conditions in a particular geographic area.
One of the main reasons for the explosion in ObamaCare costs is a dramatic shrinkage in the pool of insurers providing health insurance coverage. For-profit insurance carriers have been hemorrhaging money with several major companies (United Health Care and Humana) opting to leave the Affordable Care program. Non-profit coops established with federal seed money and designed to increase competition and drive down insurance costs are in even worse financial shape. The vast majority of these non-profit coops are experiencing accelerating net losses. Only an infusion of more taxpayer's money is allowing them to remain afloat.
Another reason for the skyrocketing rise in ObamaCare costs is the number of young, healthy people signing up for the program is not large enough to offset the influx of older, sicker people requiring more expensive medical care. The millennial generation is strapped for cash and cannot afford the financial burden of the country's healthcare system.
Summing up: The future of the (Un)Affordable Care Act is problematic. Too many older, sick folks signing up and not enough healthy, younger people. Thus, insurance companies lost money as claims outpace premiums — insurance companies needing to turn a profit opt out of the program — reducing the size of insurance pools, reducing competition and driving up consumer insurance cost. The bottom line: Prepare to see a sizeable increase in both premiums and deductibles with more of your tax dollars earmarked to prop up a system on the verge of collapse.