• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Here is something to read

A

Anonymous

Guest
Consumer protections lost in health care debate
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 51 mins ago
WASHINGTON – It's one issue in the health care debate that nearly everyone — even the insurance lobby — seems to agree on: Better consumer protections are needed to end the nightmare of not being able to get covered for a treatable, if costly, illness.

Yet such practical considerations are being overlooked in a debate that's become a passionate argument about the government's reach and role in medical matters.

Experts say the bills before Congress include significant consumer protections that would end denial or cancellation of coverage for medical reasons, from high cholesterol to cancer.

Insurers no longer could base premiums on a person's medical history, although they still could charge more to 50-year-olds than to people in their 20s.

People buying their own policies, and those working for small businesses, would gain many of the advantages employees of Fortune 500 companies now have. That would eliminate "job lock," the fear of leaving employment that provides medical benefits.

"It would bring insurance and insurabilty standards into line with medical practice and with the way people live their lives," said Dallas Salisbury, president of the nonprofit Employee Benefit Research Institute. "When people are in the doctor's office, they're worried about that day's issue. You're not thinking, 'If I take this pill for my cholesterol, will it cause me to be denied insurance coverage in the future?'"

If President Barack Obama's effort to remake the health care system implodes, chances are slim that such protections could be enacted on their own. What consumer groups call discrimination by insurance companies, the industry sees as self-defense against people who put off getting coverage until they're seriously ill.

Major insurers will accept a rollback of the industry's restrictive practices only if they're guaranteed that all Americans would be covered — a central goal of Obama's approach and a potential financial boon to the industry.

The consumer protections are part of what Republican Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming calls the 80 percent of health care fixes that there's consensus for. Enzi is one of six members of the Senate Finance Committee who are trying work out a bipartisan solution — with no guarantee of success.

Obama may have made a critical error by not stressing the consumer aspects of the legislation, and his advisers seem to have realized it as they belatedly retooled the White House pitch in recent days.

If a bill does pass, the biggest winners are likely to be self-employed people and small-business owners and employees, who now have the most trouble getting and keeping coverage. Those working for big companies would only benefit indirectly; they'd find it easier to keep their coverage if they get laid off or leave to launch a new career.

Insurance companies could come out ahead, too.

"They'll get a big new market with millions and millions of new customers," said Gary Claxton, a health policy expert with the Kaiser Family Foundation. "Their average profit per person may not be as high, but they still should be able to earn a profit by insuring more people."

One major catch is that the consumer protections would not be available immediately. They are timed to take effect alongside government subsidies to help people buy coverage. In the House Democratic legislation, the coverage expansion would come in 2013 — after the next presidential elections. Part of the reason for the delay is to make the costs of the bill appear more manageable.

"It's a long time to wait," said John Rother, policy and strategy chief for AARP. "This is complicated stuff, but I would have personally liked to see it done in two years."

The House legislation, the Senate health committee bill and the evolving Senate Finance Committee package differ on some important specifics, but follow the same general approach.

All would set up an insurance marketplace. This exchange would be open to individuals and small businesses, and maybe big companies later on. Government subsidies would be available for low-to-middle income households. People buying health insurance through the exchange would be part of a large pool that spreads risks, giving participants leverage similar to what government employees — including lawmakers — now have.

Health plans offered through the exchange would have to meet basic standards, so it would be easier for consumers to understand what their insurance covers. To protect against catastrophic illness, there would be annual limits on out-of-pocket costs for co-payments and deductibles. Year-to-year increases in premiums would be more predictable for small companies.

Insurers could not charge more to people in poor health or to women, as they do now. But they still could charge higher premiums due to family size, geographic location and age.

The House and the Senate health committee bills would limit age-related premiums so that a 64-year-old pays no more than twice as much an 18-year-old. But Senate Finance Committee negotiators are considering allowing as much as a 5-to-1 difference, a big savings for the young but a significantly higher cost for older people who are more likely to have health problems.

The federal consumer protections would set a basic standard for the whole country, changing a situation in which state-level safeguards vary widely.
 

MsSage

Well-known member
My question and no one will answer it.....WHY THE RUSH?
How about sit down and get the REAL issue of health care and FIX them ?
Yes health care is a mess BUT it didnt happen over night and ramming a bill that is NOT even completly written YET to be passed...........
Sorry does that NOT worry anyone? THE BILL IS NOT WRITTEN
They are passing parts and sections and the house has one and the senate has another and obama has that part and...........Then they will put it together :shock: :shock: There is NO BILL
how many would approve that in thier business? NO ONE
Why are some so willing to accept a piece of legislation that will have long lasting far reaching implications to be handled so piecemeal?

Lets stop the fighting back and forth and find the REAL ISSUE at hand.
 

alice

Well-known member
MsSage said:
My question and no one will answer it.....WHY THE RUSH?
How about sit down and get the REAL issue of health care and FIX them ?
Yes health care is a mess BUT it didnt happen over night and ramming a bill that is NOT even completly written YET to be passed...........
Sorry does that NOT worry anyone? THE BILL IS NOT WRITTEN
They are passing parts and sections and the house has one and the senate has another and obama has that part and...........Then they will put it together :shock: :shock: There is NO BILL
how many would approve that in thier business? NO ONE
Why are some so willing to accept a piece of legislation that will have long lasting far reaching implications to be handled so piecemeal?

Lets stop the fighting back and forth and find the REAL ISSUE at hand.

It worries the hell outta me, Sage...and I've written my Congresspeople about it.

Alice
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
MsSage said:
My question and no one will answer it.....WHY THE RUSH?
How about sit down and get the REAL issue of health care and FIX them ?
Yes health care is a mess BUT it didnt happen over night and ramming a bill that is NOT even completly written YET to be passed...........
Sorry does that NOT worry anyone? THE BILL IS NOT WRITTEN
They are passing parts and sections and the house has one and the senate has another and obama has that part and...........Then they will put it together :shock: :shock: There is NO BILL
how many would approve that in thier business? NO ONE
Why are some so willing to accept a piece of legislation that will have long lasting far reaching implications to be handled so piecemeal?

Lets stop the fighting back and forth and find the REAL ISSUE at hand.

I think that the town hall meetings are there to explain and listen. Mob rule never changed anything. No one is listening and learning and trying to get the facts. This is only a show to get the Democrats out of office and the Republicans back in. Big industry in the background providing the capital to keep themselves in business. In a nutshell that is all this is about. Nieither one listens to the constituents and never will. No one can take themselves out of a situation without first saying what is in for me. We are all the policital pawns of the policital elite and they have mastered us and pulls our strings and we jump and yell what ever they want us to yell. In history has the ruling elite ever started a revolution I do not think so it is the working poor class that has been screwed out of everything they ever thought they had. Look up the history of Tobacco and you will find that Jefferson and Washington were very deep in debt to the English banks. Start a revolution and viola if we win we will not have to pay the debts back.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Obama wants to rush it through because it's a pig and he knows it's a pig - same as his porkulus bill. He doesn't want people to discuss or have any input.
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Personally - knowing how much money is spent in Canada with only 32 million people I can tell you that if it is not put together correctly you will go broke funding it.

At present I see this happening on the horizon

BC
 
Top