Today's Paper Search Latest stories Listen Drivetime Mahatma Traffic Weather Newsletters Most commented Obits Puzzles + Games Archive

Truth about my votes

In a letter to the editor, my opponent has again mischaracterized my record and position on health-care policy. Let me be clear: I support and have always supported protecting health insurance coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. To characterize that I have "voted dozens of times to ... make care much more expensive or remove it entirely from hundreds of thousands of Arkansans" is grossly misleading and inaccurate.

The American Health Care Act, which we passed in the House of Representatives last year with my vote, protected health insurance coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. This bill would now be law if it hadn't failed in the Senate by one vote.

Since its passage, Obamacare has driven up the cost of health care and the cost of health insurance premiums, all while eliminating coverage options for many Arkansans--meaning that if you like your health insurance, no, in fact you can't keep it, because it is so expensive.

Here's the truth about my health-care voting record: I have voted to give everyone access to affordable health insurance; I voted to put health decisions back in the hands of patients and their doctors; I voted for a federal pre-existing conditions policy to improve availability and cost of health care; I voted for states to have more freedom to structure their Medicaid plans to take care of their most vulnerable; I voted to allow insurance companies to sell across state lines to give consumers more choice; I voted to help small businesses band together to create insurance plans; and I voted for the Right to Try Act to give terminally ill individuals and their families a chance.

I believe this is the best approach to give all Arkansans better, more affordable coverage.

I remain committed to working with my colleagues in Congress to lower cost, increase choice and competition, and provide access to affordable health care for all Arkansas and Americans.


Little Rock

U.S. Rep. French Hill represents Arkansas' 2nd District.

Regrettable lost lives

Tuesday's article regarding gun control is very troubling to me. I am very glad I do not live in Sen. Trent Garner's district. I am glad to be part of his "faulty" logic to deter gun ownership. It is people who kill with guns, not guns. Guns are an object that need an entity to make them work. That entity is a human with a finger able to pull the trigger. It is so sad that the comment is made about someone having to explain this. Whoever elected these yahoos to represent Arkansas should re-examine their choices.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but isn't the purpose of gun control to save lives? I believe the people arguing the "unconstitutionality" of such a measure just want their guns, to have them easily accessible for a "so-called" emergency, and just plain want the weapon at their beck and call. In my opinion, this thinking leads to regrettable harm and death. We are not talking about hunting issues here, but human lives.


Little Rock

Not part of problem

Protecting the water, air and wild places that we all need is going to require well-informed, scientifically sound discussion. Comparing two million gallons of factory-produced hog manure to wild deer poop is not well-informed or scientifically sound.

The hog manure is the residue left over from feeding thousands of tons of imported nutrients. Nutrients trucked into the Ozarks as concentrated swine feed, eaten by the hogs and then spread onto fields as manure. All the polluting nutrients in the hog manure are new to the ecosystem, brought in from somewhere else. All the deer poop, squirrel poop, etc., is just the result of wildlife eating the acorns, roots and grass that are already present in the Ozark ecosystem.

The pollution of the Buffalo River is the result of nutrients imported from outside the Ozarks. Wild animals are not importing anything. Wildlife is not part of the pollution problem.



Not good for nation

It really irritates me every time I hear someone defending Trump's actions by saying "the American people elected Trump knowing what kind of person he is and what he said he would do."

Well, I am one of the 54 percent of the American people who did not vote for Trump (I did not vote for Clinton either) precisely because I knew what kind of person he is. By a quirk of the electoral college system he was elected without the majority of the popular vote. I believe many voted for him because they did not want Hillary.

The far right and far left are not good for our country. We need quality candidates for all political offices who are willing to compromise on important issues.



Of partisan delusion

I have had the pleasure to live in Florida, Arkansas, New Mexico, California and Ohio. I have heard the use of the words monkey wrench and monkey bread. But with all my travels, I have never had the displeasure of hearing "monkey it up."

Ron DeSantis said those nasty words for a reason.

Shame on you, LaVerne Welcher, for making your ear deaf to racism in the name of political expediency. Please reflect on the original statement by DeSantis. Would you or anyone you know have used "monkey it up" as a synonym of "foul up," "mess up," or "screw up"?



Editorial on 09/14/2018

Print Headline: Letters


Sponsor Content

You must be signed in to post comments


  • 23cal
    September 14, 2018 at 7:09 a.m.

    Elaine Burks says, "It is people who kill with guns, not guns. Guns are an object that need an entity to make them work."
    People without guns don't shoot anyone, either. Guns are indeed an "object that need an entity to make them work"; take away the entity and no one get shot.
    I like guns, but this argument is just silly, and altogether too widespread.
    French Hill misleads purposely, which is the worst kind of lie. the American Health Care Act, would allow states to charge anything they want for people with a gap of 63 days in their insurance coverage. It would also allow insurers to stop covering certain services, even for people with continuous coverage. An estimated 23 percent of people who had a gap in their insurance coverage in 2015 also had a preexisting condition. AHCA doesn't cover preexisting conditions for people who don't have unlimited financial resources.

  • BoudinMan
    September 14, 2018 at 8:03 a.m.

    Frenchie knows, as does his orange hero, that anything he claims will be swallowed whole by the 30 per centers who support them, with that figure increasing here in AR. So, he pretends to be concerned about health care for the middle class, but only if he can benefit the health insurance companies. That is his true concern. I will ask again, what has Frenchie done for the benefit of the middle class Arkansan? Medicare for all!

  • condoleezza
    September 14, 2018 at 9:06 a.m.

    Cheap healthcare does not translate into good healthcare, as a Lot of people are discovering since Trump took office. French Hill is cog in Trump's wheel.

  • GeneralMac
    September 14, 2018 at 9:22 a.m.

    Clarke Tucker/Nancy Pelosi

  • RBear
    September 14, 2018 at 11:35 a.m.

    And we see French Hill actually trying to make a point, but failing. Let's take one statement he made that is more rhetoric than fact. "Since its passage, Obamacare has driven up the cost of health care and the cost of health insurance premiums, all while eliminating coverage options for many Arkansans ..."
    The facts are that recent numbers published by CMS and many states showed that healthcare costs and insurance premiums had actually started to stabilize as the marketplace stabilized, even with some of the uncertainty created by the AHCA. Several carriers have also decided to re-enter the marketplace, providing consumers with more choices in healthcare coverage and creating the competition Obama said would happen.
    So, while Hill attempts to make a point he actually lies again and again. As 23cal pointed out, the AHCA removed certain protections for consumers who have preexisting conditions. It's just more of the lies Hill is trying to spread in his attempt to retain his seat. Hill has discovered the false statements attempting to link Tucker with Pelosi are not working and is having to try other false methods to hang on to his parties in DC.

  • JakeTidmore
    September 14, 2018 at 4:51 p.m.

    GenMuck/Jim Crow

  • RBear
    September 14, 2018 at 6:08 p.m.

    If Hill wants to respond to Tucker on this issue, why not debate him? I mean, many of us have pointed out the fallacies with Hill's letter and how he misleads in his position. The best way to set the record straight with Tucker would be a face to face debate with Tucker. Hill could also challenge Tucker on his points about Pelosi and bring it out in the open.
    Oh, that's right. Hill can't speak without someone writing the points for him. He can only do a presser with INVITED press to avoid having to answer ad hoc questions. I'm beginning to wonder if Hill wrote this letter himself or if his staff had to write it for him.

    September 14, 2018 at 10:59 p.m.

    Fr. Tribou would be ashamed of French.