LIne Item, Yay or Nay

[Ban Hammer 14,668]

I tried making a poll, but apparently the kinks haven't been worked out yet, so I'll just list the various parts of the health care bill as bullet points, and anyone replying can copy and paste the bullet points along with their 'yays' and 'nays'.

..........................................

Line Item, Yay or Nay - which of the following do you approve or disapprove of in the final health care bill that passed?

(apologies for the extra bullets...the editor doesn't allow me to adjust line spacing)

• Would expand coverage to 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured.
• Individuals and families who make between 100 percent - 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and want to purchase their own health insurance on an exchange are eligible for subsidies. They cannot be eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and cannot be covered by an employer. Eligible buyers receive premium credits and there is a cap for how much they have to contribute to their premiums on a sliding scale.
• Closes the Medicare prescription drug "donut hole" by 2020. Seniors who hit the donut hole by 2010 will receive a $250 rebate.
• Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap will receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs.
• Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap will receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs. The bill also includes $500 billion in Medicare cuts over the next decade.
• Six months after enactment, insurance companies could no longer denying children coverage based on a preexisting condition.
• Starting in 2014, insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions.
• Insurance companies must allow children to stay on their parent's insurance plans until age 26th.
• No federal funds can be used to pay for abortions except in the case of rape, incest or health of the mother.
• 
  
• Illegal immigrants will not be allowed to buy health insurance in the exchanges -- even if they pay completely with their own money.
• Technically, there is no employer mandate. Employers with more than 50 employees must provide health insurance or pay a fine of $2000 per worker each year if any worker receives federal subsidies to purchase health insurance. Fines applied to entire number of employees minus some allowances.
• In 2014, everyone must purchase health insurance or face a $695 annual fine. There are some exceptions for low-income people.
• Expands Medicaid to include 133 percent of federal poverty level which is $29,327 for a family of four.
• Illegal immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid.

at least it specifically excludes illegals.

i'd not complain if it included free birth control nationwide - to complement the abortion ban.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

I understand how it works completely and if those policies are expensive (just like any policy is actually) then you've got to ask yourself why.

It's not the insurance, it's the cost of health care.

Until actual COST is addressed, it's not right what the government is doing to the insurance industry.

If health care was done properly and didn't have so much red-tape in it, costs would be down and most would be able to afford basic care. Unfortunately that red tape is all over the place with federal laws, rulings by the FDA, and then individual state laws on top of that.

You forgot profit.

Many of your posts indicate that you think it's a piece of cake to get decent insurance if you look hard enough. On the individual market, it isn't. And, as mentioned, some people are not eligible for any policy and get rejected by insurer after insurer. Many are dropped from their plans because they've made too many claims (for covered, necessary services). Do you not know anyone who has been through this?

And could you be more specific about the government regulations that are responsible for, say, a pharmaceutical company charging $500 a pill? Because I hear this argument a lot from right-leaning people, but no one has really explained how it's the government's fault that health care is so expensive. I tend to think it has more to do with profit.

Anyone care to comment on yesterday's heathcare stocks?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

"32 million" has been acknowledged to include illegal immigrants which are not (supposedly) covered so therefore theplan does not cover 32 million people (10% of the population) but more like 5% of the population.

Who acknowledged that? Boehner or McCnnell? Would be nice if you could produce a source for this claim. There are currently about 50MM people w/o coverage - trend rising. That includes the illegal population. When coverage is extended to an addtitional 32MM, it will leave, by 2014 when this becomes effective, a bit over 20MM w/o coverage. Your illegal population is part of that latter number.

[_Simpson_ 250]

You forgot profit.

Many of your posts indicate that you think it's a piece of cake to get decent insurance if you look hard enough. On the individual market, it isn't. And, as mentioned, some people are not eligible for any policy and get rejected by insurer after insurer. Many are dropped from their plans because they've made too many claims (for covered, necessary services). Do you not know anyone who has been through this?

And could you be more specific about the government regulations that are responsible for, say, a pharmaceutical company charging $500 a pill? Because I hear this argument a lot from right-leaning people, but no one has really explained how it's the government's fault that health care is so expensive. I tend to think it has more to do with profit.

Anyone care to comment on yesterday's heathcare stocks?

There is the countless malpractice suits that drive up cost of insurance. I say that in legal terms we need to say you cant sue over stupid shite, basically you have to show some serious negligence. I think that would help a lot.

Edited March 23, 2010 by _Simpson_

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There is the countless malpractice suits that drive up cost of insurance. I say that in legal terms we need to say you cant sue over stupid shite, basically you have to show some serious negligence. I think that would help a lot.

Medical malpractice makes up a fraction of a percent of the health care system cost. It's not the silver bullet to fixing the rising cost as some would make you believe. Attacking the fee-for-service scheme which rewards quantity over quality, on the other hand, would be a promising approach. Last I looked, the bill provides for pilot projects in that direction.

[Leafgal 3]

Paul, I get the impression that you don't have an understanding of how the individual health insurance market works. People with a long list of conditions and former conditions (such as cancer) are considered uninsurable, and it's nearly impossible for them to get meaningful coverage. Some states have high-risk pools, but these policies tend to be extremely expensive. Several of your posts have suggested that you're not considering this in your argument. You might also be surprised at the seemingly innocuous conditions that would put one into a high-risk (i.e., uninsurable) category.

I've been self-employed for about a third of my working life, so I know what a nightmare the individual market is, and I'm basically healthy. This bill will do a lot to help self-employed people and small business owners get decent coverage for themselves and their families. I agree that the bill is nowhere near perfect, but it's a good start.

And charitable donations to fund a high-risk pool? Are you joking?

Very well said.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Medical malpractice makes up a fraction of a percent of the health care system cost. It's not the silver bullet to fixing the rising cost as some would make you believe. Attacking the fee-for-service scheme which rewards quantity over quality, on the other hand, would be a promising approach. Last I looked, the bill provides for pilot projects in that direction.

Doctors pay astronomical prices for there insurance. They are many reasons for the high cost of healthcare and there is no silver bullet.

[Ali G. 37]

And could you be more specific about the government regulations that are responsible for, say, a pharmaceutical company charging $500 a pill? Because I hear this argument a lot from right-leaning people, but no one has really explained how it's the government's fault that health care is so expensive. I tend to think it has more to do with profit.

I did enjoy the $140 charged for a single Tylenol capsule I saw the other day. Paul seems to assume government is the issue, when in reality government regulation and legislation is why such shenanigans don't occur in other developed countries.

[Ali G. 37]

Medical malpractice makes up a fraction of a percent of the health care system cost. It's not the silver bullet to fixing the rising cost as some would make you believe. Attacking the fee-for-service scheme which rewards quantity over quality, on the other hand, would be a promising approach. Last I looked, the bill provides for pilot projects in that direction.

That is not exactly true. While $200K may be chump change for a hospital or insurance company but for an individual doctor, a $200K malpractice policy is a massive cost.

For universal coverage to work, two things must happen.

1. Malpractice lawsuits need to reformed. No more multi-million dollar payouts for things that would be thrown out of court abroad.

2. Illegal aliens must not be covered or must be required to pay for their coverage outright. Yes that includes them using the emergency room.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You forgot profit.

Many of your posts indicate that you think it's a piece of cake to get decent insurance if you look hard enough. On the individual market, it isn't. And, as mentioned, some people are not eligible for any policy and get rejected by insurer after insurer. Many are dropped from their plans because they've made too many claims (for covered, necessary services). Do you not know anyone who has been through this?

And could you be more specific about the government regulations that are responsible for, say, a pharmaceutical company charging $500 a pill? Because I hear this argument a lot from right-leaning people, but no one has really explained how it's the government's fault that health care is so expensive. I tend to think it has more to do with profit.

Anyone care to comment on yesterday's heathcare stocks?

That pill is $500 because the government allows big pharma to have a monopoly protected from foreign companies and then at the same time mandates that the $500 pill be used instead of the $30 pill because the $30 pill has a 1% high risk on side effects... You'd be surprised at how many times this happens and it's really a poor part of our system.

Though, as with anything part of the problem is politicians who easily fall prey to the lobbyists.

There again, this is not a problem of 'insurance' coverage. It's a problem of the market being overly controlled.

[CDAgirlMI 51]

2. Illegal aliens must not be covered or must be required to pay for their coverage outright. Yes that includes them using the emergency room.

I don't know anyone who would disagree with that.

[SMR 368]

I have been thinking about this bill and particularly the economic ramifications of requiring those with pre-existing conditions to be covered. Now, I haven't read the bill, but my understanding is that there is essentially no regulation on the premiums charged those with pre-existing conditions. The only requirement is that they can't be denied coverage.

Comparing this to any other industry, when companies bid on something, if they don't think they can be competitive, they simply don't bid. If you force them to bid, they have the option to bid something ridiculously high. Why can't that happen here?

I will sell health insurance to anyone who wants it, as long as I get to set the rates. I will even insure cars that have already been totaled. What good is this going to do for those with pre-existing conditions? Now, instead of not being able to buy health insurance, it will just cost $1Million a month. That's change you can believe in.

[SMR 368]

I don't know anyone who would disagree with that.

Really? So if an illegal alien can't pay for health care up front, they should simply be turned away at the emergency room? Now, I can support that type of thing, but do you really think no one would disagree?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I have been thinking about this bill and particularly the economic ramifications of requiring those with pre-existing conditions to be covered. Now, I haven't read the bill, but my understanding is that there is essentially no regulation on the premiums charged those with pre-existing conditions. The only requirement is that they can't be denied coverage.

Comparing this to any other industry, when companies bid on something, if they don't think they can be competitive, they simply don't bid. If you force them to bid, they have the option to bid something ridiculously high. Why can't that happen here?

I will sell health insurance to anyone who wants it, as long as I get to set the rates. I will even insure cars that have already been totaled. What good is this going to do for those with pre-existing conditions? Now, instead of not being able to buy health insurance, it will just cost $1Million a month. That's change you can believe in.

To answer shortly, the bill mandates that you cannot be charged more due to your conditions/other factors. It has to be equal... In essense, everyone's premiums have to go up if yours does.

(I wonder if this applies to smokers now too.....)

[CDAgirlMI 51]

Really? So if an illegal alien can't pay for health care up front, they should simply be turned away at the emergency room? Now, I can support that type of thing, but do you really think no one would disagree?

I'd like to see someone who would pay for an illegal's health care.

I think (at least hope) this web site would be the wrong place.