Reagan reduced highest tax rate to 28%

Re: "Reagan's real record on tax increases," From Readers, April 26

WMAL radio host Chris Plante is fond of saying that the most insidious power of the media is "the power to ignore." James Witte does just that in his recent letter, which proposes to examine Ronald Reagan's tax-cutting record. He concludes that "Reagan was actually charging more in taxes than Obama."

Witte accomplishes this magical sleight of hand by comparing the tax rates after the 1982 tax cuts to the current rates of today.And he is right, as far as he goes.

Apparently Reagan didn't win re-election in 1984, because Witte conveniently ignores the tax reform of 1986, which reduced the highest tax rate from 50 percent to 28 percent.It is very easy to win an argument when you ignore any inconvenient facts that are contrary to the point you're trying to make.

If Republicans introduced the exact same tax plan passed under Reagan in 1986, I very much doubt they would hear people screaming about tax increases.But Witte has a great future in left-wing journalism if he so chooses.

Robert Gellert

Glen Burnie

Our industry is part of the solution, not the problem

Re: "Drug shortages? Look to the middleman," April 21

Peter Pitts' op-ed on the issue of drug shortages was misinformed and misleading. Health care group purchasing organizations, which negotiate the price of drugs on behalf of hospitals and other health care providers, have been widely identified by the government, industry and independent observers as part of the solution to drug shortages.So it is hard to understand how Pitts could possibly place the problem at the feet of organizations that are instrumental in assisting hospitals and patients obtain the products they require.

GPOs regularly adjust the pricing of contracts based on market conditions such as manufacturing capacity, raw material availability and competitive suppliers. They manage thousands of price changes annually, including terminations of these agreements.

But GPOs do not actually take possession of, nor do they have any role in, the actual manufacturing of these medications. In fact, GPOs only receive fees if the drugs purchased by the hospital are from the contracts they've negotiated. No drugs purchased, no fees. And the worse the drug shortage, the lower the fees.

An Avalere Health analysis found that GPOs play a vital role in assisting hospitals to limit the impact of drug shortages and to ensure the least possible disruption to patient care by prompt and safe migration to alternative products. We also sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius outlining the steps our industry is taking to help further mitigate drug shortages.

GPOs support a variety of proposed solutions to the drug shortage problem, including legislative proposals and private-sector efforts like the Generic Pharmaceutical Association's Accelerated Recovery Initiative. We are working hand in hand with our hospital partners to help manage the supply of scarce drugs and reduce the impact of shortages and have every incentive to ensure that patients have access to these lifesaving drugs.

Curtis Rooney

President,

Healthcare Supply Chain Association

Washington

Obamas' vacations, fundraising trips deserve scrutiny

While the actions of the General Services Administration and the Secret Service have received the most media attention, and justifiably so, the sight of President Obama campaigning at our expense under the guise of official business should have received equal notice.

Add to this the frequent vacations taken by the president and first lady. Their partial payment for these trips is only the tip of the iceberg compared with their cost to taxpayers.Although widely practiced, feeding at the government trough is still wrong.

Nelson Marans

Silver Spring