Improving efficiency
BCBSNC values its relationships with the State Health Plan and the State
Auditor's Office, and we believe discussions about improving efficiency within
the plan are most effective when based on accurate, current and complete
information.
JACK KENLEY
VICE PRESIDENT, SALES & MARKETING
BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF NORTH CAROLINA
Durham
Accuracy in question
"A 'backpack' hunger fight" (Sept. 24) begs one to question the accuracy of 90 percent of students at 16 schools being eligible for free or reduced lunch and 53 percent of students qualifying for the programs.
For me one or more of the following is in question: the statistical methodology is flawed; the income criteria for reduced lunch are too high; or families are not giving accurate information regarding income. Something is simply wrong with the numbers quoted.
Unemployment hovers around 10 percent, not 30 percent. The town as a whole appears prosperous. Sure there are the poor and needy, but not to the extent the article would lead one to believe — not even the 1 in 4 child being at risk of going hungry as mentioned.
Please tell me others are in disbelief.
BARBARA LINEBACK
Winston-Salem
Rollback
The emperor has no clothes. That comes to mind with the rollback of "No Child Left Behind" ("Obama offers relief on No Child," Sept. 24). All these wasted years and lost valuable time over a totally useless George W. Bush program. Only now will it be called what it was.
If only the lambasting heaped upon the program now was heaped on it earlier, think of where the education system might be. I don't like the way the show's being run now, but I really don't miss the narrow-minded way it use to be run.
CHARLES R. COLLINS
Mount Airy
Name-calling
It's sad that adults, like children, often resort to name-calling. Such was the case with Chris Fitzsimon's Sept. 18 column, "The chance to prove the bigots wrong."
Just because people oppose homosexual behavior, including same-sex marriage, doesn't mean they are bigots or hateful. Many such people, myself included, believe the Bible is the best guide for moral behavior.
Calling people who oppose homosexual behavior "bigots" disregards the fact that teachings in both the Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible condemn homosexual behavior, along with other forms of immoral behavior. Therefore, those who call people who oppose homosexual behavior "bigots" are inferring that God is also a bigot.
Furthermore, name-callers ignore biblical Scriptures that teach against speaking evil about other people. Such Scriptures include Ephesians 4:31 and Titus 3:2.
I don't doubt that the writer of the aforementioned article and others who believe as he does think their tolerance of homosexuality and other forms of immoral behavior is right and the intolerance of those who think otherwise is wrong. However, by doing so they are, in effect, saying that they aren't willing to act in accordance with God's will as expressed in the Bible. And the Bible calls this attitude "sin."
(I hope it is evident that I have avoided calling the writer of the referenced article and those who support his viewpoint names. I have tried to focus on his viewpoint and the way he expressed his disdain for people with a different viewpoint.)
HARVEY ARMOUR
Winston-Salem
Since 2008, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North
Carolina has cooperated with six audits covering every aspect of our
administration of the State Health Plan. All audits have found that we offer the
plan quality service at a reasonable cost.
BCBSNC processes thousands of claims efficiently
and accurately for state employees daily. Vendors are dedicated to identifying
incorrect and fraudulent claims. And BCBSNC's own Special
Investigation Unit identifies potential claims problems and fraudulent claim
patterns.
While the auditor's report correctly states an
audit firm identified $48.6
million in potential overpayments, the report later says the state should
expect to receive $72
million to $120
million annually in recoveries. It is impossible to achieve $72 million-$120
million in recoveries from only $48.6
million in potentially overpaid claims. In addition, it is important to note
that $48.6
million represents approximately 1 percent of all claims paid. This is
significantly better than industry standard.
Your Sept. 21 editorial, "State should renegotiate
with Blue Cross," correctly states that errors resulting in overpayments are not
always the fault of the
plan administrator. Some may be provider errors, patient errors or State
Health Plan errors. BCBSNC does not profit from the correction of these errors.
Rather there is a fee paid to vendors who specialize in investigating and
recovering those funds.
JACK KENLEY
VICE PRESIDENT, SALES & MARKETING
BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF NORTH CAROLINA
Durham
Accuracy in question
"A 'backpack' hunger fight" (Sept. 24) begs one to question the accuracy of 90 percent of students at 16 schools being eligible for free or reduced lunch and 53 percent of students qualifying for the programs.
For me one or more of the following is in question: the statistical methodology is flawed; the income criteria for reduced lunch are too high; or families are not giving accurate information regarding income. Something is simply wrong with the numbers quoted.
Unemployment hovers around 10 percent, not 30 percent. The town as a whole appears prosperous. Sure there are the poor and needy, but not to the extent the article would lead one to believe — not even the 1 in 4 child being at risk of going hungry as mentioned.
Please tell me others are in disbelief.
BARBARA LINEBACK
Winston-Salem
Rollback
The emperor has no clothes. That comes to mind with the rollback of "No Child Left Behind" ("Obama offers relief on No Child," Sept. 24). All these wasted years and lost valuable time over a totally useless George W. Bush program. Only now will it be called what it was.
If only the lambasting heaped upon the program now was heaped on it earlier, think of where the education system might be. I don't like the way the show's being run now, but I really don't miss the narrow-minded way it use to be run.
CHARLES R. COLLINS
Mount Airy
Name-calling
It's sad that adults, like children, often resort to name-calling. Such was the case with Chris Fitzsimon's Sept. 18 column, "The chance to prove the bigots wrong."
Just because people oppose homosexual behavior, including same-sex marriage, doesn't mean they are bigots or hateful. Many such people, myself included, believe the Bible is the best guide for moral behavior.
Calling people who oppose homosexual behavior "bigots" disregards the fact that teachings in both the Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible condemn homosexual behavior, along with other forms of immoral behavior. Therefore, those who call people who oppose homosexual behavior "bigots" are inferring that God is also a bigot.
Furthermore, name-callers ignore biblical Scriptures that teach against speaking evil about other people. Such Scriptures include Ephesians 4:31 and Titus 3:2.
I don't doubt that the writer of the aforementioned article and others who believe as he does think their tolerance of homosexuality and other forms of immoral behavior is right and the intolerance of those who think otherwise is wrong. However, by doing so they are, in effect, saying that they aren't willing to act in accordance with God's will as expressed in the Bible. And the Bible calls this attitude "sin."
(I hope it is evident that I have avoided calling the writer of the referenced article and those who support his viewpoint names. I have tried to focus on his viewpoint and the way he expressed his disdain for people with a different viewpoint.)
HARVEY ARMOUR
Winston-Salem
While we're waiting for the daily LTE's to be posted, and to test out IE today, I'd like to ask something I've been thinking about for awhile. How is it that O.T. can remove his own posts? Just wondering, 'cause there have been some times when even after utilizing the preview/edit options I realize there are some things I wish I had not posted and would like to go back and remove.
ReplyDelete(Nope, IE still not working.).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteat the bottom of your own posts at the end of the date/time stamp is a trash can, just click on it to remove a post.
ReplyDeleteI'm using IE is this comes through.
Good AM, LaSombra!
ReplyDeleteI removed the above post myself. Click the trashcan symbol next to the post's timestamp, and you will taken to a screen that allows you to delete your post, then return to the page.
Good AM, Bob! Yep, it posted fine.
ReplyDeleteNo trashcan appears; I must be posting in a manner different from others. It took me awhile to learn how to post anyway. Oh well, I've always been a work in progress anyway.
ReplyDelete(IE not working for me; could possibly be operator error.)
LTE1: I know nothing of this issue, so cannot opine whether this advertisement is correct.
ReplyDeleteLTE2: The teachers at Mrs. Stab's school will disagree with this LTE. The number of hungry kids is disproportionate to other stats. There are a significant number of students at that school for whom school meals are all the feeding they receive. And there are a number of other schools with even more depressed families than hers.
LTE3: Teachers generally have disliked NCLB. Dumping it will help, but teachers need other help, most notably by eliminating most of the time-wasting meetings they must attend, enforcing real discipline (it is now fanatically politically correct, courtesy of idiot Walter Marshall), and eliminating redundant record keeping.
LTE4: Sorry, I'll stick with "bigot."
The trashcan (also resembles a fire hydrant) should be immediately to the right of the "AM" or "PM" in the time stamp.
ReplyDeleteI, too, will be a work in progress until I become a work in decomposition.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWW reports via email that nothing is showing up when he posts via IE.
ReplyDeleteBob, I received the email on your now-removed post.
Harvey Armour: No you're not bigots, you're just intolerant of anyone that doesn't fit into your scheme of things. No you're not terrorists, you just think that anyone who doesn't accept your beliefs are going to burn in Hell for eternity. What could be more terrorizing than the thought of burning for eternity? I don't give in to terrorists who wear bombs or spew them.
ReplyDeleteMost everyone I know and am related to are Christians. I'm so thankful that they are caring, loving, accepting, people and nothing like you.
Excellent LTE Mr. Armour.....Hee Hee...you gotta love it.
ReplyDeleteTest, test.
ReplyDeleteTo disagree is not to hate. People can, and ought to, be able to hold diametrically positions without ascribing motives to those positions that, almost always, there is no evidence to support.
ReplyDeleteand people should be able to disagree without being intolerant. Bigotry: noun, plural -ries. 1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
ReplyDeleteHarvery Armour: "I don't doubt that the writer of the aforementioned article and others who believe as he does think their tolerance of homosexuality and other forms of immoral behavior is right and the intolerance of those who think otherwise is wrong."
Harvey says he is intolerant of those who think otherwise and that's the definition of bigotry.
Good afternoon folks!
ReplyDeleteLTE 1: Damage control attempt. I'm curious about how $48.6M in overpayments should result in $72M - $120M in recoveries myself. That's a lot of interest.
LTE 2: Interesting, I recently read an article about people being encouraged to write in and question school lunch poverty claims and lo and behold we have this LTE. Well, Ms. Lineback, that 10% figure is the official total with the denominator being only those still officially looking for a job and is for the entire area. The actual UR is closer to 15 - 18%. For minority groups which feed the high pct free lunch schools, the UR does approach 30%. That also does not include those employed at min wage jobs which are all the less educated can find these days. Nothing wrong with the quoted numbers.
LTE 3: To be fair, it was a joint effort with Ted Kennedy instead of a W. solo. NCLB is a classic case of good intentions, but poorly funded and poorly thought out.
LTE 4: Bigot: "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. from Old French" free dictionary
I find theological arguments to be rather useless, but I suggest Mr. Armour read all 4 Gospels and pay particular attention to what Jesus had to say about people regarded as "sinners" and those who condemned them as "sinners" rather than taking individual quotes from Paul who some have suggested protested "too much".
Re: browsers - Unless you're running an operating system from the previous century (i.e. before XP), you shouldn't have anny conflicts with your browser. The conflicts mainly occur between the browser version you're running and the web site you're attempting to access. Web developers, being geeks / nerds, really love utilizing the latest technologies when they become available, so if you're running an older version of a browser, you may have difficulties with sites that use the latest technologies. If you're running IE, you can check your version by clicking on the Help menu at the top of your browser then clicking About Internet Explorer. Your browser's security settings can also affect your ability to fully utilize a web site. Those are found under the Tools / Internet Options menu.
ReplyDelete"To disagree is not to hate." - That's quite true, but there is a big difference between having a difference of opinion and seeking to make sure a group of people feel unwelcome, have second class status as citizens and feel shame for simply being who they are.
ReplyDeleteWell said dotnet, as always.
ReplyDeleteHello, dotnet, Bo, Arthur!
ReplyDeleteDisagreement may be based on racism, bigotry, hatread, as suggested by various caffeinated LTE writers. Indeed, some people do not like President Obama because he is black. Others weigh in against illegal immigrants because they are sort of a "free shot" for racists. Of course, they style their comments as being based upon what those immigrants supposedly cost them as taxpayers.
Other bigots dehumanize people because of those whom they love or to whom they are attracted.
There can indeed be honest disagreement, as in my disagreement with various Obama policies. I'm happy that we are mature enough to have ignored color in electing our President. If Cain, who is not my first choice, should by some amazing developments attain the office, fine with me.
Sometimes disagreement can be honestly based but inapplicable to the argument, as with religious injunctions against homosexuality, for example. Yes, the Bible says one thing or another, but the Bill of Rights and the USSC say that we do not base our laws and governance on the pronouncement of religious texts. In the Bible's case, some of those pronouncements are contradictory, or, in the NT, nonexistent.
Staballoy, as usual, well said. However, what I see primarily from the left (I almost wish this tendency were more evenly divided by party, but it is not.) is any expression by someone of a belief, analysis or policy that fails to agree with the "progressive" position is not merely wrong, but hateful, stupid and intolerant, even when there is no indication of any kind as to the motivation of the one taking the position. To far too many on the left, to disagree IS to hate, and hate is returned in kind.
ReplyDeleteI'll also have to differ on us having "ignored color" in electing our President. Color was not ignored. Many who had never voted before voted in 2008 precisely BECAUSE of the color of the democrat candidate. Meanwhile, on the right, there was no racist response voting against Obama, as those on the left might like to say. Very arguably, color was taken into account AGAINST McCain (a pretty poor choice of GOP candidate, for whom I voted while holding my nose). There is little more to explain 95% voting for Obama from the black community-- which, by the way, was and is their absolute right.
On the hot-button issue of homosexuality and government policy, I hesitate to comment. I'll only say that the Bible is often embraced by one side or the other on a number of issues. Even democrats, nearly always ready to reject the Bible, it seems, leave their disdain for God aside when urging us to care for "the least of these" and when arguing against the death penalty. All other tenets of the Christian faith are ignored, of course.
Bo: IMO, my observation of the "right" is the tendency to express OPINIONS as ABSOLUTE TRUTHS.
ReplyDelete*** LaSombra ***
Pope Bo VI has spoken ex cathedra. Democrats can't be good Christians.
ReplyDeleteWell, you gotta admit that Lawyer Bo provides entertainment. He rails against "name calling", then makes this extraordinarily bigoted statement:
ReplyDelete"...democrats, nearly always ready to reject the Bible..."
Really, Lawyer Bo? Then how would you explain the FACT (that is a REAL FACT, as opposed to Bo's imaginary "facts"), that the percentage of Democrats who are christians is virtually the same as the percentage of Republicans who are christians?
In the current US Senate, a little over 85%, both Democrats and Republicans, belong to christian sects. The second largest group is Jewish, their numbers way out of proportion to their presence in the general populace. The one group NOT represented at all in the Senate is those who classify their religion as "none, atheist, agnostic", even though that group comprises about 16% of the US population according to the latest national study.
Truth is, none of the above is relevant when it comes to civil law, local, state or national.
ReplyDeleteThe Constitution, and the enormous body of law known as Constitutional law, makes one thing quite clear.
No religion, whether it be Hebrew, New Testament (whatever that is), Muslim, Catholic, Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, Confucian, Mormon, Shinto, Zoroastrian, Wiccan, Satanic, Bubba's Sunday Morning Drinking, Shooting and Golf Club, ad nauseum, may be favored by any law passed at any level, local, state or national.
Looking for a simple answer, well there it is.
Anonymous, we all express our opinions as truths. Both sides. Who would express an opinion he thought was false?
ReplyDeleteArthur, you prove the point about insults and name calling.
OT, fair statement about my exaggeration about Democrats and religion. You are right, I was wrong. Still, those who call upon us to adopt some values of Christ aren't willing to buy the whole concept, just the parts they like.
Bo: The RIGHT more than others, IMO.
ReplyDelete*** LaSombra ***
Good evening, folks!
ReplyDeleteBo, interesting response. Yes, a lot a folks voted for President Obama because he is black, and yes, many African-Americans were mobilized to vote for him because he is an African-American. Blacks were once slaves here in the land of the free. After Emancipation, it took a century and acts of Congress to give blacks access to the social/political/economic mainstream of this country. So, I see where having an African-American Prez might well be a point of pride for blacks. And let's face it, unlike buffoons like Jackson and Sharpton, the Prez is a pretty good role model.
But, even though the African-American vote was indeed monolithic and mobilized, President Obama would still just be a Senator from Illinois had lots of whites voted for him. I know a retired civil servant who refers to "darkies" and now "that darkie in the White House," but cheerfully reports that he voted for Obama, and will vote for him again. And for others, it wasn't a matter of black or white. He was new, not-George-Bush, not-a-Clinton, promising, young, well-spoken, etc. For me, he was organized labor's dream, thus my nightmare. Had the Dems run Hillary, I'd have said the same.
As for assertions of hate and racism, yes, I agree that we see "Racism!" screamed all too frequently when anti-"progressive" positions are taken; or "anti-worker" when anti-union positions are taken (sorry, I am a worker, can't really be anti); or "hater" when "racist" doesn't work. Unfortunately, sometimes the epithets are correct, as there are indeed racists, oppressive employers, and haters among us . . . all across the spectrum.
Bo, the Bible does get cherrypicked, as you say, both Old and New Testament. Indeed, there are "cafeteria Christians" who aren't even Christians.
ReplyDeleteBo, same for the christian side. Those who profess that the bible, especially the OT, is "the inspired word of god" cannot then cherry pick that inspired word for stuff that only lines up with their own prejudices, but must live by ALL of the words. Since they reject Leviticus and Eccelsiastes and much else, they are mere hypocrites.
ReplyDeleteOf course, all that is just theology. I long ago left divinity school for greener pastures of reason and logic. My only interest in any of this is that any laws favoring any religion be expunged from the books, and that any new laws of such nature be prevented from enactment.
"Who would express an opinion he thought was false?"
ReplyDeleteOops, almost overlooked this one. Who? Way too many who see a personal advantage in doing so. That ranges from the con men who work the downtown transit center right on up to the highest offices in the land.
A good worst example: Colin Powell, who carried an "opinion" to the United Nations about Saddam Hussein that he KNEW was a lie, because Dick Cheney forced him to. I think that Powell is, at heart, a good man, but he will have to live the rest of his life knowing that his false opinion led to the deaths of thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqui citizens. And for what?
Want more examples? Take a look at the Republican candidates for POTUS, 2012. Is Ricky Perry as stupid as he seems to be, or is he simply expressing an "opinion" in hopes of getting elected?