Posted on 10/17/2010 4:43:48 PM PDT by epithermal
OLYMPIA, Wash. – Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler ordered Regence BlueShield this morning to stop illegally denying insurance to children, effective immediately.
“Regence is in clear violation of state law that prohibits insurers from denying insurance to people on the basis of age,” said Kreidler. “I was shocked and deeply disappointed when Regence announced its decision last week to stop selling insurance to kids.”
The Affordable Care Act requires all health plans to cover kids with pre-existing conditions. However, to accommodate the insurance industry’s concerns that people would only enroll their children when they became sick, the federal government let states create a special open enrollment period.
Kreidler issued an emergency rule creating a special enrollment period from Nov. 1-Dec. 15. During this time, anyone looking for an individual health plan for their families or just their children can enroll their kids without having to take a health screen.
(Excerpt) Read more at insurance.wa.gov ...
Another out of control public servant. Welcome to fascism.
Kreidler is a democratic party hack to the nth degree.
FTA: “I was shocked and deeply disappointed when Regence announced its decision last week to stop selling insurance to kids.”
Insurance policies are contracts. Kids cannot enter into a valid and binding contract.
If the Government can just go about ordering the citizenry at will to whatever is pop-culture de’jour or expedient; well then they should be putting it in specific and separate legislation to address condition and make it real. Other than that the insurance companies should just refuse and let the neo-fascists take them to court.
Frack Obammunism and those that support it! Real Revolutions begin when Government is the tyrant.
Why gee, no wonder my health plan jumped 35% in price in one month. That is insanity. Had to take a $5000 deductable just to get something I can afford.
Do any of the idiotic people who voted for Obamacare realize that the increase in my policy means less money to spend on consumer goods?
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
(Washington resident living/working in Australia)
It’s really time to start resetting governments all over at every level.
That’s not a valid argument. The kids’ parents are entering into a contract with another party to provide insurance for the child.
I understand your idea but the parents of the kid are allowed to buy a policy for their child (if one is available).
The thing that would be more appropriate to focus on is that the state is forcing one party (the insurance company) to enter into a contract it does not want to be in (ie having to sell insurance polcies for kids with pre-existing conditions). Contract law is void if one party is coerced/under duress to be a part of a contract it wants no part of.
Obamacare is a total complete disaster. It is like ordering your Home Insurance Company to give Fire Insurance to everyone after the house burns down.
So I guess this means we can start ignoring the signs on restaurants that say ‘no shirt, no service’? Since it’s clear from this that businesses are no longer allows to set restrictions on their services.
The speaker didn’t say the parents bought the policies. He said the policies were sold TO kids, not sold FOR them. That was the sole focus of my post. Thus, it is quite a valid argument.
I know contract law. I deal with it all day every day.
From what I read in the story they were talking about parents buying policies for their kids:
“Kreidler issued an emergency rule creating a special enrollment period from Nov. 1-Dec. 15. During this time, anyone looking for an individual health plan for their families or just their children can enroll their kids without having to take a health screen.”
The kids aren’t buying the policies themselves, it is clear they are talking about the kids’ parents buying the policies.
From the article: “I was shocked and deeply disappointed when Regence announced its decision last week to stop selling insurance to kids.”
Sounds like he’s talking about...well, selling insurance TO KIDS.
My prior posting where they talk about selling to parents puts this in context. Obviously people under 18 can’t enter into legal contracts, this cannot be what they mean by it. “To kids” has to mean “To the parents of kids”. And the prior couple sentences I highlighted from the article confirm that point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.