Some comments

About the letter in the paper- the usual crap, but ok here they are so far

>>This sounds like a good charitable cause. Rather than rely on government, it would be far more worthwhile to NOT INCREASE taxes to cover this burden, but rather CUT TAXES so that individuals have more power to direct their dollars to how they want to spend them. Today, too much tax money is spent on nonessentials -- everyone's wasteful wish list. We are a society of waste because people complaint they have to pay for this or that on their own. IF YOU WANT IT, PAY FOR IT. That way people have money left at the end of the day for what THEY DETERMINE is important to them.<<

And this

>>...and the budget fails to help in many other places as well. That can be an entire issue of the Press, so everybody write in what you want the money for. I'm sorry your special interest didn't make it passed this year's cuts; maybe next time.<<

To which I replied:
Hey clueless ones! If you actually read the letter, you would see that this proposal was NOT ASKING FOR TAXES, it was asking the health insurance industry to STOP disallowing EXPENSES for their insured children. Just as well baby/child exams, immunizations and screenings were all changed from uncovered to covered, insurance companies would cover the illness but not the shot to prevent it, that changed and this provision was actually meant to REMOVE the burden from Wisconsin tax payers and start requiring insurance companies to help families. . .right now, many insurance companies are not paying for the treatment. Mine does, so my son is not a "special cause worthy of tax dollars" and if you read the letter, and had accurate information you would have seen that the letter stated I was not including my son. . . Removing this item meant two things- Insurance companies could elect to NOT cover treatment, and shifted the costs to those on the state program. . .meaning I am paying the co pay on my son, the insurance premiums, AND taxes for those who have no insurance or who have insurance that doesn't cover costs who are on the state dole. So, ignorant ones, you who blather on about taxes- HE removed direct tax relief from the budget. . .so enjoy contining to pay for those that insurance companies are allowed by state law to REFUSE to cover:) You are all idiots or confused- you whine about taxes and then are unable to comprehend the contents of a short letter outlining the lost opportunity to lower the amount of tax dollars used when insurance companies should be covering these costs. Here's my wishlist you jags 1. I want all insurance companies to pay for all costs of care, and I want them to do it now- If they refuse, I want them to offer a good reason why. . .to the state, who will then decide if the reason is good enough. Get a clue and get mad, there may be a medical condition in your future that YOUR insurance will not pay for. . .<<

Such idiots!!!

Rainmom MAD!