The solution is for government to do less. There would be no need to "soak the rich" or "burden the middle class" if Americans would divest themselves of the notion that government is supposed to solve every problem. The role of government, as the founders clearly understood, is to protect individual rights — period.
Chuck Butler, Sewell
Obama has no plan for second term
Although President Obama touts "shared sacrifice" as the only fair way to cure our economic woes, the "class warfare-soak the rich" theme is the only message we hear from his negative campaign. Instead of how, during the next four years, he will fix the things he hasn't fixed during his first term, all we hear is that Mitt Romney and all "rich" people are so evil you'd have to be nuts to vote for them. We Americans certainly wouldn't want a rich person like those Republican extremists Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, or John Kerry to occupy the Oval Office. Better to reelect Barack Obama, that champion of the poor.
Jack Penders, Media
Financial penalty vs. tax
The difference between a financial penalty that might potentially cost a transgressor a fee of, say, $2,000 and a tax that costs $2,000, if you are subject to paying it, escapes me ("House approves health-law appeal," Thursday). It is a semantic difference without a real distinction. The effect on one's wallet is the same. Of course, the political foes of President Obama will try to tarnish him for raising taxes, even if the "tax" will apply to the extremely few households that can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it.
To Mitt Romney and Republican pundits I say, get real, this is a nonissue. Much more important, regarding the mantra "repeal and replace," I ask, replace with what?
Ken Derow, Wallingford
Nothing affordable about health care
I run a small engineering firm with about 20 employees. Before this year, the firm paid the full health-care premium for employees and their families. However with a 33 percent increase in our premium rates starting July 1, we have been forced to ask our employees to contribute. They now pay up 10 percent of their own and children's premiums, and 25 percent of a spouse's. On Jan. 1, those percentages will double, bringing the firm's premium costs roughly to last year's levels.
Our monthly premium costs since 2006 have more than doubled and the health-care law appears to be further accelerating the trend. In 2012, health-care costs will reach 175 percent of our monthly rent and are second only to the payroll itself. The impact of the Affordable Care Act on small businesses seems to be a mixed bag, with some people arguing rates will decrease and others the opposite. For this small business, the case is closed. Simply naming it the "Affordable Care Act" doesn't mean it will achieve affordable care.
Theodore J. DelGaizo, Downingtown, email@example.com