I admit I voted for President Obama. I still believe he was the right choice.
However, I am very frustrated with our government. I was recently hospitalized with a major concussion and spent two days in the hospital. My bills added up to just over $8,000. I have over $1,000 in bills already. I canceled my insurance four months ago because I couldn’t afford it.
When we were beaten to death this last election, one thing was always on my mind ” health care.
I take care of myself. I hike Red Mountain daily, drink plenty of juices, eat very nutritional foods, and never get sick. I never once thought I could get a concussion sledding. I never once thought it could cost me $8,000.
I applied for financial aid, and they say they will decide if I can pay anywhere from 16 to 80 percent. To me, 16 percent is a lot.
The U.S. spends $2.4 trillion a year on health care, more than any other country. Where does it go? They say it goes for tests and procedures, rather than prevention and treatment, and now that we’ve elected Obama we hear about the economy constantly. Why isn’t anyone asking or reporting on the free health care? I know it’s going to cost trillions, but at least the money will go for something good. And it’s something we all want.
I’m sick and tired of our government bailing out companies like AIG with our money. We bailed this company out, and they think it’s OK to give out $165 million dollars in bonuses?
Then I’m sipping on coffee and watching the news do a piece on Obama’s $7,000 swing set and I can’t help to wonder, when did the world start forgetting what it’s like to be poor? Do I ever see a story on the news about the homeless? Of course not! Nobody wants to see that. We all want to know about Obama’s dog and swing set though.
God bless America … literally.
Mr. Moolick’s Monday letter gives his opinion of results without any reason why he thinks they will happen if the 1872 Mining Law is revised or rescinded. This law was written in the 19th century to help settle the West and provide opportunities for settlers. It had a similar purpose to the Homestead Act, which is now a thing of the past. The Mining Law has resulted in a lot of abuses unrelated to mining, and created a disproportionate number of superfund sites on mining claims, some of them of recent origin. An example is the cyanide heap-leaching gold recovery operation in the Animas River drainage by a Canadian company, which is now bankrupt. I suggest the need for a change in this law is overdue and apparent.
The effects of this change can eliminate the permission to conduct hard-rock mining operations on public lands with minimal oversight by the federal government.
The 1872 Mining Act applied mainly to hard-rock minerals. Coal, sand and gravel, and oil and gas were not subject to this law. Their extraction is provided by permits from the responsible federal agency. This seems to work fairly well. If a change in this law is enacted, there is reason to believe similar procedures would then apply to the minerals covered in the 1872 law.
I don’t see why this change would eliminate hard-rock mining, as current legislation has not eliminated coal mining, oil and gas drilling, and sand and gravel removal from federal lands. However, the proposed bill, HR699, does seem unnecessarily complex and difficult to administer.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User