In response to John Nahas’ (12/21) response to my opinion letter of 12/14, I would like to note the following facts:
1. With respect to both Dr. Morris and Mr. Nahas; I have never met Dr. Morris or Mr. Nahas.
2. I am a registered Democrat
3. I am a former health insurance agent and quite well aware of the “Affordable Healthcare Act” known as “Obamacare”
A. The cut, according to Senator Gillibrand’s office and a medical doctor quite familiar with “Obamacare” is, indeed, $2 billion dollars.
B. In order to reduce unnecessary charges etc – the way to do that is simply not pay them. Medicare can do this quite well because there are times that they don’t even pay necessary charges which causes secondary insurance companies to also refuse to pay these charges. The reason being that Medicare primary seniors are bound by medicare decisions because their secondary companies follow medicare’s decisions when determining their claim’s benefits.
Also, if you want to prevent fraud, you set up safeguards and prosecute offenders, which do not require cuts to Medicare, but instead more efficient use of funds. I saw this as a former government administrator and investigator, which I have also been employed as in my employment careers.
I respect Mr. Nahas’ opinion, but I question his facts and judgment.
Morton Perlman
Great Neck
