Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Sept. 27, 2023

Health care coverage change is concerning

As a Medicare beneficiary who has made contributions since it began in 1965, I felt secure knowing that my medical costs would be covered by paying my monthly Medicare and “medigap” supplemental policy premiums to see providers who accepted Medicare.

About a half million Americans annually seek bankruptcy protection from medical bills, but I have felt financially safe because of my coverage.

I was shocked when I recently opened a letter that stated that my primary care physician, a MarinHealth provider, was now a part of NeueHealth Advantage, a Medicare “accountable care organization.” This was not my choice. I never opted to be part of an ACO because I wanted the ability to freely choose my providers.

While the letter stated that there was “no action needed” on my part, I did some research and, since then, I feel anxious about what this new program might mean for me. I scanned the provider link in the letter and discovered that none of the specialists whom I see regularly are listed.

Recently, a congressional committee shared that Bright Health, the parent company of NeueHealth, described the Medicare fee-for-service “market” as a “$430 billion opportunity.” The fact that traditional Medicare has only a 2% overhead (no profit) and this ACO-REACH (which stands for “realizing equity, access and community health”) program I’ve been enrolled in without my permission allows up to 40% profit/overhead, deeply disturbs and concerns me.

Kudos to the California Legislature for passing Assembly Joint Resolution 4 which calls for a halt to the ACO-REACH privatization plan that puts profits above patients by turning Medicare into a profit-driven commercial enterprise. It’s a real departure from our nation’s original commitment to the health care of seniors and people with disabilities.

Let’s all be wary of this tactic and do our best to stop it.

— Ruth Carter, Marinwood

Pt. Reyes must take steps before removing elk fence

In another generation, the family farms at the Point Reyes National Seashore may be the only remaining vestiges of Marin’s historic ties to agriculture. Now, I am concerned they are under threat of extinction.

The National Park Service’s “preferred plan” for dealing with the emotion-laden issue of confining a herd of tule elk at Point Reyes is to remove the Tomales Point elk fence and free them to spread into the pastoral zone. Releasing a substantial new herd of elk to wander south onto adjacent organic dairies and ranches to compete with livestock for what, in a dry season, is very limited forage could be a death knell for the historic ranches.

The plan would replace the 1998 elk management plan. The long-term goal of the 1998 plan was to have elk “free ranging over some 18,000 acres” in the Phillip Burton Wilderness. There is abundant fresh water in the wilderness. There would be abundant forage for elk, if the land were managed.

The environmental assessment of the 1998 plan notes that “Coastal Miwok used fire … to enhance the habitat for grazing animals.” Expanding the park’s collaboration agreement with the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria to include using controlled burns in the Burton Wilderness would be an exceptional opportunity to restore a historic Native American working landscape, re-create ideal habitat for tule elk and reduce the risk of another major wildfire in the park.

— Judy Teichman, Point Reyes Station

AB 819 includes some promising changes

I am writing in regard to IJ political columnist Dick Spotswood’s recently published column about the new bill to loosen requirements on punishment for fare evaders on public transportation (“North Bay support for approved AB 819 bill seems misguided,” Sept. 20).

Perhaps, data shows that it costs less to decriminalize Bay Area Rapid Transit train gate-jumpers and using BART as a place to sleep than it is to add more costly safety personnel to give out tickets and send people to jail.

AB 819 might actually help save people and reduce tax burdens for California’s residents. Turning some trains into stationary sleeping cars, creating technical centers and places of education might change the dynamics. Passing AB 819 might be a good way to start this change and still leave some trains running.

— Eleanor Sluis, Novato

Autonomous vehicles don’t always share road

On a recent drive to San Jose via San Francisco, I had two opportunities to observe the behavior of the much talked about autonomous (aka “driverless”) cars traveling SF streets.

On Park Presidio Boulevard, in heavy stop-and-go traffic, a driver in the middle lane was trying to get to the right lane before turning. With the right turn signal on, the driver was hoping someone would allow entry to the lane. At the same time, a driverless car was trying to get to the middle lane from the right and kept turning on its signal for one or two blinks before giving up right away. Normally, the two drivers could possibly trade places, but the driverless car appears to have little empathy for the other car or its driver.

Then, at Lincoln and 19th avenues, a driverless car turned right from onto 19th southbound. It got stuck behind a bus at a stop. I was in that right lane. Seeing the bus leave, I pulled up behind the autonomous car, which proceeded to stay put for some unknown reason, blocking the lane for an entire light cycle.

I was unable to back up into traffic to get around or go forward around. My car was stuck in the crosswalk.

This was quite entertaining for the pedestrians who took pictures and laughed. I was grateful they did not hold my situation against me and just passed between the cars smiling. I even tried honking my horn to alert the driverless car to no avail (and the delight of the observers).

The lesson we discussed on the rest of the drive is that apparently the artificially intelligent software driving these cars is missing the subroutines for courtesy and human kindness.

— John Bischoff, San Rafael

Cornel West is best choice for president

As a former member of the St. Helena Unified School District Board of Education in Napa County, I endorse Cornel West for president of the United States. He’s backed by Chris Hedges, Ralph Nader’s former speech writer, former presidential candidate Jill Stein and her 2016 running mate Ajamu Baraka.

West says he will guarantee free higher education, housing and a living wage. I applaud his progressive public education agenda.

Recently, I was homeless. West says that he’ll refuse to reside in the White House until everyone who wants one gets a home. To support his domestic vision, he’ll tax Wall Street, end the wars and invest the peace dividend.

He’ll tackle climate chaos by ending oil subsidies and shifting from extraction and emission to regenerative and renewable energy. He supports the Green New Deal to wean the U.S. from fossil fuels and drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions. It will create millions of union jobs to transition into a green economy.

We’ve all seen wildfires, hurricanes, heat waves and rising sea levels shrinking coastal islands. This is a direct consequence of human industrial activity. I’m a millennial and deeply concerned about the climate crisis we’re leaving behind for younger generations.

America’s been a perilous corporate duopolistic dictatorship for decades. West says a vote for Donald Trump or President Joe Biden is a choice between a neo-fascist catastrophe (risking the onset of a second civil war) or a neo-liberal disaster (risking a third world war). Both could lead to economic ruin and a dead planet. We must mount an anti-capitalist electoral revolt, predicated on peace and truth, against the Republican and Democratic parties.

— Alex Shantz, Petaluma