Health Care, Reforms that begin today.

[Crabtownboy]

Changes that begin today:

1. Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny children coverage for pre-existing conditions.

2. Children of parents with insurance will be allowed to remain covered under those policies until the age of 26.

3. Insurance companies will be forbidden from terminating coverage for any other reason than customer fraud.

4. Insurance companies will no longer be able to cap the amount of benefits and treatment a person can receive in a lifetime.

5. Insurers can no longer charge customers for preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies.

6. High-risk pools are mandated to cover those who have been denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

In your opinion are these 6 changes good or bad? Why do you answer as you do?

 

[targus]

Everyone of these changes will cost more - and everyone knows it.

But the demoncrats are still threatening the health insurance companies any way.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42575.html

House Republicans slammed Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius Wednesday for “threatening” health care insurance companies who say they have to raise premiums because of the new health care law.

“The Secretary of Health and Human Services is putting out information and threatening these companies, suggesting that they do not know what their bottom line is,” Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) told reporters.

Sebelius wrote a letter to America’s Health Insurance Plans last week saying there will be “zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases” after some companies sent letters to their customers saying they are raising rates because of the health care law.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

The insurance companies are playing politics. They're raising rates before the election with the not-too-subtle message that if you want good insurance (read: want the insurance companies to make huge profits) then vote Republican.

 

[targus]

The insurance companies are playing politics. They're raising rates before the election with the not-too-subtle message that if you want good insurance (read: want the insurance companies to make huge profits) then vote Republican.

Are there any items listed in the OP that will either not raise costs or will result in lower premiums?

 

[rbell]

Remember folks, in the mind of a democrat, profit should be illegal.

 

[Crabtownboy]

The question in the OP was not would the changes raise or lower rates. Rather the question was are these changes good, medically for people, or bad?

For instance, is doing away with the pre-existing condition, as a way to deny benefits good or bad?

 

[FR7 Baptist]

Remember folks, in the mind of a democrat, profit should be illegal.

Nope. I don't want profit to be illegal. I do want a national single-payer health system to cover basic care. If you want more than that, then buy supplemental insurance.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

The question in the OP was not would the changes raise or lower rates. Rather the question was are these changes good, medically for people, or bad?

For instance, is doing away with the pre-existing condition, as a way to deny benefits good or bad?

It's good as long as there's also a mandate, which there won't be until 2014. Having this before there's a mandate will allow people to game the system by not buying insurance until someone gets sick.

 

[targus]

The question in the OP was not would the changes raise or lower rates. Rather the question was are these changes good, medically for people, or bad?

For instance, is doing away with the pre-existing condition, as a way to deny benefits good or bad?

Raising costs and raising premiums are bad.

Requiring an insurance company to accept someone with pre-existing conditions is not good because it just passes the cost on to everyone else.

An insurance company should have the option to sell such a policy or not.

In a free enterprise system an insurance company could market to this particular demographic specifically if they thought that such a market would be profitable.

 

[billwald]

>Rather the question was are these changes good, medically for people, or bad?

Bottom line is that most every person, including most every Christian, is afraid of dying. The silly saying "We can't put a price on human life" translates to "YOU can't put a price on MY life."

 

[rbell]

For all of you who wanted socialized medicine...congratulations, you got it.

Now, here's the payoff:

» Obamacare won't decrease health care costs for the government. According to Medicare's actuary, it will increase costs. The same is likely to happen for privately funded health care.
» As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama's promise that it wouldn't. This means that tax dollars will be used to pay for a procedure millions of Americans across the political spectrum view as immoral. Supposedly, the Department of Health and Human Services will bar abortion coverage with new regulations but these will likely be tied up for years in litigation, and in the end may not survive the court challenge.
» Obamacare won't allow employees or most small businesses to keep the coverage they have and like. By Obama's estimates, as many as 69 percent of employees, 80 percent of small businesses, and 64 percent of large businesses will be forced to change coverage, probably to more expensive plans.
» Obamacare will increase insurance premiums -- in some places, it already has. Insurers, suddenly forced to cover clients' children until age 26, have little choice but to raise premiums, and they attribute to Obamacare's mandates a 1 to 9 percent increase. Obama's only method of preventing massive rate increases so far has been to threaten insurers.
» Obamacare will force seasonal employers -- especially the ski and amusement park industries -- to pay huge fines, cut hours, or lay off employees.
» Obamacare forces states to guarantee not only payment but also treatment for indigent Medicaid patients. With many doctors now refusing to take Medicaid (because they lose money doing so), cash-strapped states could be sued and ordered to increase reimbursement rates beyond their means.
» Obamacare imposes a huge nonmedical tax compliance burden on small business. It will require them to mail IRS 1099 tax forms to every vendor from whom they make purchases of more than $600 in a year, with duplicate forms going to the Internal Revenue Service. Like so much else in the 2,500-page bill, our senators and representatives were apparently unaware of this when they passed the measure.
» Obamacare allows the IRS to confiscate part or all of your tax refund if you do not purchase a qualified insurance plan. The bill funds 16,000 new IRS agents to make sure Americans stay in line.


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...s-thought-960772-103571664.html#ixzz10Nvk7s3a​

 

[Don]

In your opinion are these 6 changes good or bad? Why do you answer as you do?

Where's the part that says the insurance company *must* accept whoever applies to them?

So those that don't have existing coverage -- can be denied for any reason, as long as it's not one of those listed?

And the policy can cost whatever the company decides? I don't see a cap or limit on policy cost.

So - without that information, I think it's a good idea. But just like the rest of Obama's presidency, implementation is extremely problematic; in other words, strategic vision is meeting operational reality....

 

[carpro]

So - without that information, I think it's a good idea. But just like the rest of Obama's presidency, implementation is extremely problematic; in other words, strategic vision is meeting operational reality....

Two of the main reasons that it is hard to implement is that it is a bad plan that hurts more people than it helps and there is no money to pay for it.

 

[Jedi Knight]

So when does it become Law saying you must have healthcare or be fined?

 

[carpro]

So when does it become Law saying you must have healthcare or be fined?

They're having trouble with that one in court. It will one day end up in the laps of the Supreme Court.

So it may never go into effect. If it doesn't, the entire house of cards known as obamacare, built on lies, dishonesty and deception may never go into effect.

 

[Don]

BUT - he's able to point at it and tell the public, "look what we did for you, but those other 'bad politicians' took it way."

And unfortunately, a large amount will nod their heads and say, "thank you, Mr. President."

 

[carpro]

BUT - he's able to point at it and tell the public, "look what we did for you, but those other 'bad politicians' took it way."

And unfortunately, a large amount will nod their heads and say, "thank you, Mr. President."

There is no cure for stupid.

It's not covered by Obamacare, either. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[rbell]

They're having trouble with that one in court. It will one day end up in the laps of the Supreme Court.

So it may never go into effect. If it doesn't, the entire house of cards known as obamacare, built on lies, dishonesty and deception may never go into effect.

If Obama gets another term, then there's likely no way it won't be law of the land.

Because it's unlikely that all of the conservative justices would sit through a second Obama term.

He already has 4 votes bought and paid for. He only needs one more.

 

[HankD]

Changes that begin today:



In your opinion are these 6 changes good or bad? Why do you answer as you do?

Both, you later qualified your question with the word "medically".

Good - in that the insurance companies have indeed been abusive and have left people out in the rain to die when they needed help the most.

Bad - in that we were sold a bill of goods. I know that it is not yet fully apparent. The "left out in the rain to die" part has now been (or will be) transfered to a governmental agency (name yet unrevealed) which will decide who gets what treatment via the Ezekiel Emanual (Rahm's brother and soon to be medical Czar, currently a medical adviser to the president) disertations of selective medical treatment.

Why would we think that the government would be more fair than the insurance companies seeing the power they presently wield over the people.

We, the non-elite elderly, should do the patriotic thing and quietly "pass away" - comfortably of course, with a government supplied morphine drip.


HankD