| Blog | |
|
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
April 05, 2010
If you own a small business or are employed by one and have a question on how the new health care reform law will impact you, please submit your questions here!
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
March 27, 2010
Many El Pasoans who support the new health care reform law have called our office expressing frustration that their letters aren't being published in the El Paso Times. So we decided to let you post them here! Please include your name and the area of town you're writing from!
Health Care reform brings peace of mind Imagine you are lying in a hospital bed, and instead of focusing on getting better, you are scared silly because you don’t have health insurance! Imagine you really detest your present job but are afraid to look elsewhere because you fear you will not be able to get health insurance due to your pre-existing conditions! This is living a life of fear, and it’s always there in the back of your mind. Well now, thanks to the passing of health insurance reform, these fears can be replaced with hope and optimism. What a wonderful feeling! Sue Doucette TX health care challenge wasteful Legal Challenge of Health Care Overhaul Wasteful It is wasteful to spend taxpayer money challenging the landmark Patient Protection Affordable Care Act as unconstitutional. Texas Attorney General Abbott certainly knows that it is widely agreed it is constitutional and that his legal effort will fail in court. Texas faces a tough $15 billion state budget deficit (El Paso Times March 9, 2010) and it could rise if property values remain flat. The recession has reduced state tax revenues and many worthy projects will be left unfunded or inadequately funded, especially important to low and moderately low income Texans. Susceptible are mental health programs and financial aide to 11,500 low-income students. Stimulus money will soon come to an end and unless the state draws from the rainy day fund, it could result in loss of El Paso City jobs and cuts to higher education. On behalf of citizens of our state, Governor Rick Perry must oppose this wasteful use of taxpayer money and instead put it to beneficial use. Rather than playing politics with the lives and well-being of families, he must stop this legal effort that may needlessly delay and obstruct the urgent need to get Texans health care. Antonio Piña Upper Valley Reality Check on Health Care Reform Myths After the Health Care Reform Bill became law, there were predictions that some people would continue to believe the misinformation, referred to as Myths, that was spread during the long incubation period of the bill. Further proof of that is the letter from Greg Vera that appeared on 3/24/10. A reality check is in order. Myth #1: The reform is socialism/government takeover. Fact: Most additional coverage for uninsured will be from private insurance through state exchanges or subsidies that allow them to afford the policies. Insurance stocks soared when the bill passed. Myth #2: Medicare benefits will be cut or rationed to save $500 billion. Fact: The money will be cut from inefficiency and fraud and putting a freeze on exorbitant subsidies to Advantage plans. This will enable more preventive care and closing the drug donut hole. Myth #3: Everyone’s taxes will be raised. Fact: Less than 1.4% of us will see taxes go up. Those earning higher incomes will see increases of 1 to 5.4%, based on income. Myth # 4: Costs are out of control. Fact: Without reform, health care costs were becoming unsustainable. With reform, 34 million uninsured will be covered by spending 1% more than we are now. Elinor Zind Thanks Congressman Reyes for Health Care vote Voting for the Healthcare Reform Bill was courageous in a time when the voice of unreason heightened to a deafening degree, distorting and confusing the issue beyond recognition. El Pasoans needed somebody who is faithful, dependable and hard working, a stalwart Congressman like Silvestre Reyes to do the right thing. He stood with the American people; and for this, he deserves our utmost gratitude and respect. Never again will El Pasoans live in fear that their health insurance premiums will rise to an unaffordable $800 a month, like they did for my sister before becoming eligible for Medicare. Insurance companies will no longer tell parents that their newborn child, with a congenital condition, is not covered because it is a pre-existing condition. Good hard working middle class Americans will not face bankruptcy while struggling to save a beloved child, one with a dreaded disease like leukemia. These are the people your approving vote helps, Congressman Reyes. On behalf of my family, friends and neighbors whose stories are real, I thank you for a job well done and may God bless you. Antonio Piña Upper Valley Health Care Reform overdue As everyone knows El Paso is greatly challenged when it comes to the health of our citizens. We as a community struggle with high incidences of disease and have one of the highest levels of uninsured. Because of this, Congressman Reyes has long supported health care legislation that benefits El Pasoans and his recent support of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a confirmation of his concern and support for our community. What his vote means is that we, you and I, have a say in our health care. We have a platform and the security to fight back at the insurance companies who previously could drop us and cut care when they found it too costly to their bottom line. Their administrative costs, including CEO pay and lobbying, will be restricted to a narrow percentage of our premium, our money, thus more will be allocated to actual patient care. We will no longer be excluded because of preexisting conditions (26,000 in El Paso), especially despicable when it is a child. Prescriptions will be more affordable for me, a senior. We, as home owner tax payers, will find relief from the cost of paying for our uninsured neighbors who are forced to use UMC as a last resort, usually when they are already very ill. This legislation is a keeper and so is Representative Reyes. Thank you sir. Jeanette Walker West El Paso
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
March 23, 2010
Following the historic passage of health care reform legislation, many El Pasoans want to know how the legislation will benefit them and when. Congressman Reyes' staff will post answers to questions about the health care reform legislation here. We look forward to hearing from you! UPDATE: The Washington Post has also created a useful tool to help individuals better understand how the new health care reform law benefits them. Click on the link below to access the Washington Post's health care reform tool. REP. REYES STAFF: Thank you for submitting your question Ms. Evans. Your Medicare and Medicaid benefits will not change. The improvements made to both programs through this bill are meant to decrease the cost of health care so that the amount you pay in premiums can decrease over time. Under Medicare Advantage, many private insurance companies have been charging seniors more for the same services they would get under regular Medicare. This is more costly for both the patient and for the government. The new health care reform law will help save the money that is subsidizing privite insurers under Medicaid Advantage and use that funding to instead improve the quality of health care for seniors. Your benefits will not decrease.
Question from Victor Vela: I have 4 kids, my wife doesn't work and I want insurance for me and my wife my kids already have insurance thru medicaid REP. REYES STAFF: Thank you for your question, Mr. Vela. If either you or your wife has been denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition, you may be eligible to access a temporary national high-risk pool that will be set up in the next 90 days. The Department of Health and Human Services will soon issue guidelines that will detail which pre-existing conditions will qualify for this temporary high-risk insurance option.
Question from Anna Marie Walsh - what affect on my TRY CARE for life? REP. REYES STAFF: Thank you for your question, Ms. Walsh. The new health care reform law will have NO AFFECT on your existing TRICARE for life benefits. Many military retirees have expressed concern that the new law will impact their existing TRICARE for life benefits, but your TRICARE plan will meet all the requirements for coverage under the law. To put to rest any doubts, the House of Representatives passed a law on Saturday, March 20 that specifically states that your TRICARE plan will meet the all the requirements for coverage under the new health care reform law. Congressman Reyes co-sponsored this legislation, and it is currently pending in the Senate.
Question from Lorenzo Archuleta: How will the health insurance reform benefit those that can't speak for themselves - the unborn children? You forgot to mention them in your statement!
Question from Monica Herman: If i refuse to purchase health insurance, who will be enforcing the policy? The IRS, local law enforcement? Fedeal? I feel if i do not want to purchase this insurance,I should not be threatened with fines or jail time. If I wanted socialized medicine, I would of stayed in gedrmany. I come to the united states because of its openness, something the obama administration does not follow. Thank you. M. Herman REP. REYES STAFF: Starting in 2014, all Americans will be required to have a health insurance policy, either through their employer, or through other programs such as Medicad and Medicare, or through a plan offered in the health insurance exchange. Beginning in 2014, individuals who do not have health insurance will be assessed a tax penalty. The amount of the tax penalty be phased in and will be determined based on your income. Exemptions will be granted for financial hardship, religious objections, American Indians (tribes have a separate health system), those without coverage for less than three months, those for whom the lowest cost plan option exceeds 8% of their income, and those with incomes below the tax filing threshold (in 2009 the threshold for taxpayers under 65 was $9,350 for singles and $18,700 for couples).
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
March 20, 2010
Tomorrow, Congressman Reyes will cast an historic vote for health insurance reform in America. This vote is particularly crucial for the El Paso community. Over 32,000,000 people in the U.S. lack basic health coverage. Texas has the most number of children and adults without basic health
insurance than any other state, with more than 6,100,000 adults and
1,400,000 children without health coverage. Over 230,000 people in El Paso alone are uninsured. With so many residents without health coverage, health insurance reform legislation will have major impact on the quality of life for so many residents.
Here's an editorial that appeared in the Courier-Journal: The president, in a strong appeal to Congress, spoke of the need for national health care reform: “Comprehensive health insurance is an idea whose time has come in America,” he said. “There has long been a need to assure every American financial access to high quality health care. As medical costs go up, that need grows more pressing. Now, for the first time, we have not just the need but the will to get this job done. There is widespread support in the Congress and in the nation for some form of comprehensive health insurance. … Let us act sensibly. And let us act now … to assure all Americans financial access to high quality medical care.”
No, that was not a message from President Obama. Those were the words of President Richard M. Nixon, in 1974, three years after he first proposed a comprehensive national health insurance plan to expand coverage and to combat rising costs. Mr. Nixon's words are worth recalling as the U.S. House nears a historic vote that would finally enact health care reform. First, in the face of today's unyielding Republican opposition to Mr. Obama's proposal, it serves as a reminder that over the years, reform in various forms has been a goal of many Republicans as well as of Democrats. Second, it debunks a preposterous defense from the Republican bunker — that reform is being “rushed” through Congress. Rushed? Health care reform had been pushed, albeit unsuccessfully, by presidents and in Congress for a quarter of a century before Mr. Nixon took up the cause. Rushed? The Obama administration dropped its plan to enact health reform quickly in its first few months in office, while public opinion overwhelmingly supported the idea. Instead, it in effect allowed a year to pass for study and discussion — an opportunity that Republicans and the tea party malcontents used not to debate constructively or to seek compromise, but to resort to demagoguery. The President has delivered several messages to Congress, met with Republican leaders and rank-and-file members and taken his program to the country, emphasizing in each case the depth of the weaknesses of the nation's health care system and explaining the remedies he proposes. Instead of engaging in that discussion, Republicans, in the words of Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, chose to view a potential defeat of health care reform as a “Waterloo” for the President — in short, an opportunity not to serve the country, but to seek partisan victory. The need now is not for more talk; there is little left to say. It is not the time to heed Republican calls for “incremental change.” That wouldn't get the job done, and in any case it is insincere. The GOP had eight years to propose and enact health care reform through incremental change, and it did nothing. This is the time to act — to extend coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans, to curb insurance industry abuses that deny coverage or raise rates based on pre-existing conditions and to begin slowing the escalation in health costs. After decades of missed opportunities, the chance for reform is at hand. If the Democratic congressional majority acts in the national interest, it will seize the moment. And, yes, this is the change we have been waiting for.
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
January 20, 2010
On Tuesday, Texas Governor Rick Perry followed through on his promise to reject over $750 million in federal funds designated for Texas public schools. The State of Texas did not submit an application to compete for the funding by the January 19th deadline. The funding was part of the U.S. Department of Education’s “Race to the Top,” a competitive grant program designed to encourage and reward States that are working to improve public education.
Posted by
Alexandra Sifuentes
on
October 25, 2009
By Reed Abelson / New York Times
As Congress nears votes on legislation that would overhaul the health care system, many small businesses say they are facing the steepest rise in insurance premiums they have seen in recent years. Insurance brokers and benefits consultants say their small business clients are seeing premiums go up an average of about 15 percent for the coming year — double the rate of last year’s increases. That would mean an annual premium that was $4,500 per employee in 2008 and $4,800 this year would rise to $5,500 in 2010. The higher premiums at least partly reflect the inexorable rise of medical costs, which is forcing Medicare to raise premiums, too. Health insurance bills are also rising for big employers, but because they have more negotiating clout, their increases are generally not as steep. Higher medical costs aside, some experts say they think the insurance industry, under pressure from Wall Street, is raising premiums to get ahead of any legislative changes that might reduce their profits. The increases come at a politically fraught time for the insurers, as they try to fight off the creation of a government-run competitor and as they push their case that they have a central role to play in controlling the nation’s health care costs. President Obama, in his Saturday radio address, said the Democrats’ health insurance overhaul would help small businesses and stimulate the economy by providing relief from “the crushing costs of health care — costs that have forced too many small businesses to cut benefits, shed jobs, or shut their doors for good.” The insurance industry has already been under sharp attack by Democratic lawmakers who favor creating a government-run insurance plan that would compete with private insurers. Without that competition, proponents say, insurers will continue to price coverage beyond the reach of many Americans. Small businesses, which employ about 40 percent of the private labor force, are a big constituency for both parties. The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, said the sharp rise in premiums for small businesses offered the latest evidence that Congress must act swiftly on health care legislation. “This underlines the urgent need for health insurance reform, including a public option,” she said in an interview. “We need to have competition for the insurance companies to keep premiums down.” Insurers say there is no need for a government-run insurance plan and argue that their health plans are already responsible for many of the initiatives, like programs to coordinate care for chronic conditions, that ultimately lower costs. Insurers’ “profits are not responsible for increased health care costs,” said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for the industry’s trade group, America’s Health Insurance Plans. Like the insurers, Republican lawmakers, who portray themselves as champions of small business, argue that the proposed legislation would raise premiums across the board because sick people would be more likely to enroll than healthy people. They also say the taxes and other ways of paying for the program would be passed on to employers in higher premiums, only making matters worse for small businesses. The Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said in a response to the president’s radio address, “We can’t support a bill that will raise premiums.” The big insurance companies declined to comment. With negotiations over next year’s premiums still under way, data on rate increases are mostly anecdotal. Formal surveys have not yet been completed by the health benefits consultants who track the figures. And in some parts of the country, experts say rates are not overly high. But benefits consultants say there is no doubt that premiums are soaring for many small businesses. Edward Kaplan, a consultant with the Segal Company, said his clients were seeing renewals for coverage at prices 15 to 23 percent higher this year. Last year, he said, they typically faced increases of 7 to 12 percent. The brokers and consultants say the price jumps seem hard to justify. “Frankly, I’m mystified by the size of the increases,” said one broker, Charles J. Newman, who works with small employers in the New York area. Some say the threat of an overhaul may be at least part of the reason. Joshua Miley, a consultant with HighRoads, which analyzes benefit information for employers, said the “undercurrent of health reform is driving part of the renewal increases.” HighRoads projects that premiums will rise 14.4 percent for an individual in a health maintenance organization plan at a typical small employer. There is no question that insurers are under pressure from Wall Street. In recent years, insurers were often not quick enough to raise their premiums well above the rising cost of medical care. But they have heard from angry investors disappointed by the companies’ earnings. “There’s no one out there who hasn’t had to do a mea culpa to Wall Street,” said Sheryl Skolnick, an analyst for Pali Capital who follows the companies. While the industry is particularly vulnerable now in Washington, she said, “it seems like they’re more afraid of Wall Street.” Michael A. Turpin, a former senior executive for UnitedHealth, the insurer, and now a top official at USI Holdings, an insurance brokerage firm, said insurers were now “under so much pressure to post earnings, they’re going to make hay while the sun is shining.” Along with many Republican lawmakers, the insurers say the current Congressional proposals do too little to address the underlying reasons for high premiums — the unabated rise in medical costs and effects of a weak economy. Hospitals, for example, have been treating greater numbers of people who have lost their jobs and their insurance, and they are passing along some of those costs by charging higher prices to private insurers. The industry also points to low government payments to hospitals and doctors, which insurers say result in higher prices for employer-based coverage to make up for the shortfall. In an analysis released two weeks ago by America’s Health Insurance Plans, insurers said premiums would rise even faster under the legislation under study in Congress — an assessment fiercely disputed by Democratic Congressional leaders and some health care economists but shared by many Republicans. Small businesses, besides having less negotiating leverage than big employers, tend to pay more for the same coverage because they cannot spread the cost of expensive medical conditions or hospitalizations over large numbers of workers. Premiums can be especially high if they have sick or older workers. Owners of small companies say the lack of options is why they have been paying increasingly higher premiums for less and less coverage — this year perhaps more than ever. In August, when Walter Rowen, who owns Susquehanna Glass in Columbia, Pa., sought to renew his company’s coverage for two dozen employees, he said his insurer demanded a 160 percent rate increase. Mr. Rowen said he was told his work force was “getting too old and very expensive.” Mr. Rowen said his insurance broker found that any other health plan was likely to charge 30 to 50 percent more than he paid last year. He chose a less generous plan from a different carrier for 44 percent more. David M. Herszenhorn contributed reporting.
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
October 12, 2009
The Brookings Institution
Audrey Singer, Senior Fellow, Metropolitan Policy Program Andrew Reamer, Fellow, Metropolitan Policy Program Preparations for April’s 2010 Census are well underway. The federal government’s largest ever peacetime operation, the 23rd decennial headcount is a tightly choreographed effort involving years of planning, $14 billion and 700,000 staff. After some fits and starts, the Census Bureau is ready to deliver an accurate census. However, an appropriations amendment just introduced by Sens. David Vitter (R-LA) and Robert Bennett (R-UT) could derail that outcome. The Senators want to bar the Census Bureau from conducting the census unless it adds questions on each person’s citizenship and immigration status. It’s difficult to overstate the importance of the 2010 Census. Census results will drive congressional and Electoral College apportionment; legislative redistricting; voting and civil rights enforcement; the annual distribution of $500 billion in federal funds to U.S. communities; the siting of roads, health centers, and schools; response to disasters; and the location and hiring decisions of millions of businesses from mom-and-pop to Wal-Mart. The census aims to count everyone, regardless of citizenship and immigration status. The amendment’s sponsors complain that the current approach to congressional apportionment is skewed because unauthorized immigrants are included. They want the census to identify the unauthorized in order to exclude them from the apportionment process. But they are ignoring the Constitution itself. It requires a count of all “persons” residing in the United States, not just citizens or legal residents. The framers intended the census to be an inclusive count and so avoided the term “citizen” used elsewhere throughout the Constitution. Additionally, the Census Bureau doesn’t ask about a person’s legal status to avoid intimidating immigrants, authorized and unauthorized, from participating in the census. While Census Bureau employees are held to strict standards of confidentiality, under threat of criminal penalty, many immigrants may still be reluctant. Charged with getting a full count of the U.S. population, the Census Bureau can’t afford additional risk that a significant number of people will not fill out the form. In a country of 308 million people, getting a complete headcount is a gargantuan undertaking even when the number of questions (now ten) is small. Add a bitter politicized environment around immigration and it’s understandable why many immigrants, even those legally present, may not want to stand up to be counted. In addition to compromising census accuracy, the Vitter-Bennett amendment would wreak havoc with census timing and cost. Due to additional needs for testing, printing, and training, changing the census questionnaire would delay the census well beyond the congressionally mandated date of April 1, 2010. This, in turn, would postpone the Census Bureau delivery of population figures to states for apportionment and redistricting beyond April 1, 2011, as required by law. Ironically, in their fervor to deny congressional representation to non-citizens, Senators Vitter and Bennett would disrupt the entire apportionment process. Then there is the added cost to taxpayers. Extending and remaking the massive census operation over many months will create, in the words of Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittee chair, a “financial challenge that borders on . . . a nightmare.” The Vitter-Bennett amendment would waste hundreds of millions of dollars already spent on testing, printing, training, and advertising and require spending hundreds of millions more. Barring a constitutional amendment to alter practices in place since 1790, if Sens. Vitter and Bennett wanted to add new census questions, they should have said so in 2007—when the Census Bureau, as required by law, gave Congress the opportunity to review the questionnaire. Congress put this review process in place precisely to avoid the disastrous consequences of the eleventh-hour changes now being proposed. The Vitter-Bennett attempt to remake the census less than six months before Census Day might have one positive impact. It provides Congress with further incentive to undertake major reform to the nation’s immigration policy. Congress should do so without the collateral damage of a delayed, less accurate, more costly census.
Posted by
Alexandra Sifuentes
on
October 06, 2009
In the October issue of the AARP Bulletin, a number of experts go on the record in support of the reforms to Medicare included in America’s Affordable Health Choices Act and decry attempts to scare seniors in an effort to derail insurance reform.
REFORMS WILL STRENGTHEN MEDICARE (Excerpts from the AARP Article): “Experts who have studied the proposals now being debated generally say the changes actually aim to strengthen Medicare and improve beneficiaries’ care and access to physicians… “All the reform proposals so far include around $500 billion in savings carved from future growth in Medicare spending over a 10-year period. Although that sounds like a huge sum, it’s actually only a small fraction of the $6.4 trillion expected to be spent on Medicare from 2009 to 2019. Still, where will the money come from? “The savings are expected to be achieved mainly by: reducing fraud and waste more aggressively; reducing government subsidies to private Medicare Advantage plans; paying doctors more for practices that improve quality of care and save money; and paying providers (notably hospitals and home health agencies) a little less of an increase each year in an effort to gradually trim the rate at which Medicare costs climb over time – aka ‘bending the cost curve.’” EXPERTS AGREE: “Medicare beneficiaries are the most satisfied of any Americans with their health coverage, so it’s natural for them to worry about any changes that might alter it, especially when they’re being lied to in a deliberate attempt to make them feel anxious.” – Jonathan Oberlander, professor of social medicine and health policy at University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and a historian of Medicare “It’s not about saving money itself. It’s about making the program better…These steps are win-win. It’s not about squeezing money out of Medicare and putting it somewhere else in health care reform. It’s about changing the way we pay so that we all [government and beneficiaries] get more for the dollars we spend.” – Mark McClellan, Engelberg Center for Health Reform at Brookings Institution and former head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under President George W. Bush “Gradually eliminating these excess payments will permit good plans to continue and put pressure on others to offer better value to their enrollees… That’s what fair competition is supposed to do.” – John Rother, AARP executive vice president of policy
Posted by
Vincent M. Perez
on
September 24, 2009
The City Council on Tuesday weighed in on another national controversy, this time passing a nonbinding resolution supporting health-care overhaul.
The resolution, sponsored by Rep. Susie Byrd, calls for creating an affordable health-care option for people without insurance. It also calls for allowing individuals to keep their existing insurance if they're happy with it. "We often weigh in on federal matters, particularly those that impact our community," Byrd said Wednesday in an interview. "We've taken a position on comprehensive immigration reform, the border wall and the drug war." The council voted 8-0 at the end of a five-hour meeting Tuesday to support Byrd's resolution calling on Congress and President Obama to enact health-care reform. There was no debate. Byrd said she attended the recent Labor Day breakfast at which U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, spoke in favor of Obama's efforts to reform the nation's health-care system. "I realized after hearing him speak so passionately that we had yet to weigh in on the issue," Byrd said. More than 46 million Americans, including 232,000 El Pasoans, don't have health insurance, said Vincent Perez, Reyes' press secretary. In the past 10 years, Perez said, El Paso taxpayers have spent $400 million in property taxes to pay for health care for people who can't afford it and who get services at University Medical Center, formerly Tho mason Hospital. "This is a problem that costs those who have health insurance and those who don't," Perez said. Michael Moore, chairman of the El Paso County Republican Party, said his big concern is the cost of health-care reform. "Who's going to pay for it?" he said. "You can only steal from the rich so much. Eventually, all of us will pay for it. We'll pay for it with less care, longer waits and more taxes." Moore said any health-care reform package needs to include tort reform. "If there is medical malpractice, that needs to be paid for," he said. "But it's not a lottery win." The El Paso County Commissioners Court also voted unanimously Monday to support a similar resolution that was sponsored by Commissioner Veronica Escobar. "Even our Republican, Dan Haggerty, signed on," Escobar said. The county resolution added a line asking that any health-care reform be deficit-neutral, meaning that cuts in spending would have to be made elsewhere in the federal budget, Escobar said. "Local property taxpayers shoulder the burden of funding the uninsured and we do it through the most expensive way there is -- the emergency room," Escobar said. Private hospitals and nonprofit groups are also feeling the pinch and pass along higher health-care costs to people who have insurance, she said. David Burge may be reached at dburge@elpasotimes.com; 546-6126.
Posted by
Alexandra Sifuentes
on
September 22, 2009
RISING COSTS |
|
QUICK LINKS
REYES REPORTS SIGN UP
CONNECT ONLINE
SEARCH BLOG
By Most Recent
- Health Care Reform Questions and Answers for Small Businesses in El Paso
- Letters submitted to the El Paso Times on Health Care Reform
- HOW WILL HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM BENEFIT ME? SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS HERE!
By Title
By Year
By Issue
WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE
2433 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
T (202) 225-4831
F (202) 225-2016 EL PASO OFFICE
310 North Mesa, Suite 400
El Paso, TX 79901
T (915) 534-4400
F (915) 534-7426
2433 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
T (202) 225-4831
F (202) 225-2016 EL PASO OFFICE
310 North Mesa, Suite 400
El Paso, TX 79901
T (915) 534-4400
F (915) 534-7426
