I am appalled at the publishing of "Where to find a haul on Halloween" (Oct. 20), which essentially advocated trick-or-treaters traveling to more bountiful neighborhoods. The beauty of Halloween is in its being a neighborhood event (one's own neighborhood), with trick-or-treaters often knowing their neighbors or getting to know them. I also think the real joy of Halloween is for the younger children who love to dress up and who are not apt to be traveling to other neighborhoods, though even respectful teenagers who get in the spirit of the holiday by wearing costumes are welcome at my door. The thought of packs of teenagers targeting specific neighborhoods feels uncomfortable to me. This is not apt to happen in my small neighborhood, since our city consists of only three blocks and has only one entrance, which is partly blocked by our volunteer fire department's fire engine and monitored by volunteers on the evening of Halloween in the spirit of keeping Halloween a safe neighborhood event.
I suspect that when the Star Tribune decided to publish the article, it did not take into consideration the potential consequences of advocating the targeting of certain neighborhoods as places to get the biggest haul. I hope that in the future, editors will consider both the positive and the negative repercussions their articles might have.
Heidi Gilbert, Medicine Lake
HEALTH INSURANCE
Longstanding practices are at the heart of our problems
While the individual health plan premium rebates proposed by Gov. Mark Dayton (front page, Oct. 28) will certainly help those who do not qualify for subsidies, they really do not get at the underlying problem in the insurance system. My spouse and I are recently retired and are participating in the individual market for the first time in 2016. Frankly, the premiums we are seeing for 2017 are still within our budget expectations. What is jarring, however, is experiencing how unstable the individual insurance market is, with insurers dropping out, reducing coverage and capping enrollments.
It would be reassuring to hear the governor and lawmakers acknowledge that the problem lies with the way the Affordable Care Act attempts to shoehorn the individual mandate for coverage into the existing model of employer-provided insurance. This is particularly hard when employer-provided insurance remains tax-advantaged relative to individually purchased insurance. The result is that few people have any incentive to adopt individual insurance either at the employer or the employee level, making for a truly odd mix of individuals and families outside the employer system.
Individually based insurance is more sensible and safe than employer-provided insurance. It covers people through job changes, self-employment and job loss caused by illness. The safeguard put in place in the ACA against being rejected based on health history, combined with the individual mandate, should allow for a stable individual insurance market. It is time to do away with the (frankly unfair) double-deductibility of employer-paid insurance premiums. Employers should not be allowed a tax deduction for insurance premiums, while employees are allowed to exclude the amount from income. If this distortion were eliminated, more working people might opt to take their income in cash and buy their own insurance, enlarging and stabilizing the individual market.
Regina Anctil, Minneapolis
• • •
Allison O'Toole, the head of MNsure, did a good job explaining the improvements brought about by her organization ("MNsure is the way to go to find affordable insurance, tax credits," Oct. 27). It is true that recent spectacular price increases affect a small proportion of MNsure subscribers. It is also true, however, that health care takes a disproportionate and growing share of our gross state product.
As O'Toole says, "premiums are set by insurance companies, not MNsure." Therein lies the rub.