Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HHS releases rules requiring pre-existing conditions coverage
The Hill ^ | 11/20/12 | Sam Baker

Posted on 11/20/2012 11:36:54 AM PST by Nachum

The Obama administration issued new rules Tuesday that require insurance companies to cover people with preexisting conditions — one of the most popular provisions of President Obama’s healthcare law. The Health and Human Services Department also began to implement other popular, but expensive, parts of the Affordable Care Act. Regulations released Tuesday will prohibit insurers from charging women a higher premium than men, and will require plans in every state to cover certain services.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2012; blog; conditions; healthcare; hhs; homosexualagenda; obamacare; preexisting; rules
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last
To: USAF80
Not only will more people getting coverage drive costs up, but, combined with docs choosing to drop out of this nightmare, there will be less docs to treat the massive increase of those "covered".

Tell your friends that you hope they enjoy the *Medicaid* they voted for.

41 posted on 11/20/2012 2:42:29 PM PST by Jane Long (Philippians 2:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah


So do these rules not apply in states that have refused to set up Obama’s exchanges?

Yes, yes this will affect all insurance companies in all states and territories in the country.

The next question to ask is if the ObamaCare waivers for 2013 will allow those who receive the waiver to waive off the Pre-X regs.

This has turned into the enslavement of able bodied working aged males. They will be doubly burdened by the normalized premiums, both by gender nuetral and age nuetral normalization.

Expect to see the numbers of uninsured younger working age men in this country to skyrocket over the next 5 years , to at least double the current levels. Paying the yearly fine will be substantially cheaper than carrying the insurance.

This is exactly what happened in Massachusetts due to RomneyCare, and it will now spread throughout the country.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2916380/posts

RomneyCare 2.0 With costs rising fast, Massachusetts moves to dictate medical care
Wall St. Journal ^ | August 5, 2012

Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2012 7:01:54 AM by grundle


42 posted on 11/20/2012 2:44:12 PM PST by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Also, I fully expect unisex rating legislation on all insurance products including life insurance nationally. Just a matter of time.

I can't wait to see the look on Sandra Fluck's face (actually, I can wait) when she finds out her insurance premiums are going to pay for me to have Viagra.

43 posted on 11/20/2012 3:06:56 PM PST by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nachum


44 posted on 11/20/2012 3:58:25 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America
The term 'insurance' is not relevant to FORCED, nationalized health care. Call them 'coverage' companies.

True. Or call them payers. The next step is single payer which is the overt goal of Obamacare. The final step is nationalized medicine since the single payer will dictate everything.

45 posted on 11/20/2012 4:15:04 PM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
This will collapse the insurers which is their goal...

Yep, and there's another goal after that.

46 posted on 11/20/2012 4:17:16 PM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I take Synthroid for a thyroid disease, and as such I take medication daily and will continue to have to do so for the rest of my life. I also need to have a blood test every so often to check those levels to make sure they’re where they need to be.


47 posted on 11/20/2012 4:17:44 PM PST by wastedyears (I don't want to live on this planet anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Screw Buckwheat’s Nazi decrees. It’s time for states to arrest federal fascist bureaucrats and send them to prison. Ninety-nine years with possibility for parole in 100 years.


48 posted on 11/20/2012 4:31:44 PM PST by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The Health and Human Services Department also began to implement other popular, but expensive, parts of the Affordable Care Act

Expensive and affordable? Only in the mind of a liberal.

49 posted on 11/20/2012 4:32:36 PM PST by South40 ("Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance." - Barack Hussein Obama - Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Are you saying that EVERYONE will have to pay this Part B coverage at $105 a month?

I don’t carry it and I know others who also don’t carry it.

Some of them are covered by the VA, so for them it is definately a coverage they don’t use.

I am healthy enough to not spend the money. I have been on Medicare for over 8 years and I haven’t used a penny of it.


50 posted on 11/20/2012 4:46:21 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: willowdean

Where is the “opt out” for the individual?


51 posted on 11/20/2012 4:47:17 PM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

In most places I have worked, that was the case anyway.

There were two rates, Single and Family.

Other wise as a single man under the age of 25, I would have paid a lot more than the single many at the age of 30.

Many companies do this to avoid law suits and to simplify everything.


52 posted on 11/20/2012 4:50:51 PM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

Find a copy of Range magazine- the Winter 2013 issue and go to page 89.

The EPA is trying to redefine ‘navigable waterway’ to cover a buffalo wallow.

For those who don’t know what that is, there are thousands of depressions in the Western plains that were buffalo wallows.

It is a slight depression, about the size of a 2 horse trailer, in which the buffalo would paw up the ground to get nice soft dust and then they would lay down & roll in the dust. That gave them a barrier against insects.

Such ‘wallows’ are all over about 16 western states.

The EPA wants to include them in ‘navigable waterways’.

They also want to include the rivelets of water which drain off your roof when snow is melting or it is raining. Another ‘navigable waterway’.

This definition change gives them a reason to come onto your private property at any time, without your permission, to make sure you are not ‘interferring’ with a navigable waterway!!!!

Were you expecting guests? Now, you can!!


53 posted on 11/20/2012 4:52:34 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

So now, a man who is not ever going to encounter pregnancy costs is paying for women’s costs for pregnancy.”””

Some companies wanted to make elderly women- well past child bearing age also pay a higher premium.

I fought with one employer that I had had a hysterectomy and since I could never have children, they had to drop my premium.

I sure had them in a tizzy. I actually found another job over the premiums I should not have had to pay.


54 posted on 11/20/2012 4:55:15 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The beginning of the end for insurers. In order to take on the increased risk of people with pre-ex ‘without’ being able to charge them higher premiums insurers will be forced to increase premiums on ‘everyone’. That will lead to healthy people opting NOT to get insurance but rather pay the small tax. If a healthy person gets sick since an insurer cant deny for pre-ex that person would just go and get insurance at that time. That means less and less healthy people insured and more and more sick people insured. Costs will be more than insurers are bringing in so they will raise premiums more and the above will continue. The death cycle will run its course until the intent of obamacare has arrived. Single payer.


55 posted on 11/20/2012 4:57:29 PM PST by joltman1974
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander

“This has turned into the enslavement of able bodied working aged males”

Extortion: My long time tagline.

And a Permanent Bailout for the 2008 losers of the “financial” paradgm.


56 posted on 11/20/2012 4:57:41 PM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

“Screw Buckwheats Nazi decrees. Its time for states to arrest federal fascist bureaucrats and send them to prison. Ninety-nine years with possibility for parole in 100 years.”

This is true. People need to carefully look up and understand the definition of Extortion.


57 posted on 11/20/2012 5:01:26 PM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: joltman1974

“The beginning of the end for insurers”

All the “insurers” in Massachusetts gone under?


58 posted on 11/20/2012 5:06:34 PM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DemforBush
What I’m wondering now is this: in cases where someone is paying premiums that exceed the cost of the Obamacare penalty, wouldn’t it make a certain sense to just drop your health coverage? Since pre-existing conditions can no longer be refused coverage, wouldn’t it make more sense to pay the penalty and then enroll in a plan if and when you get seriously ill?

I read on another forum how a guy intended to "game" the system. Now he's self employed and pays $1200 per month for his coverage. He's healthy and going to drop that, and pay the $2000 fine (or whatever it is, might be lower.) That saves him a little more than $12,000 per year to pocket and pay for what healthcare he needs. If he gets really sick, he just picks up a policy since pre-existing can't be denied.

59 posted on 11/20/2012 5:43:00 PM PST by memyselfandi59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: willowdean

“Its is becoming clear that it is over for this program”

I wish I could believe that. Let’s hope and pray you’re right.


60 posted on 11/20/2012 8:00:12 PM PST by MichaelCorleone ('We the People' can and will take this country back...starting today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson