Posted on 10/30/2013 11:14:14 AM PDT by GraceG
Okay the "Dim wit Dims" have been using "Pre-Existing conditions" as their main "Tour de force" argument for WHY we supposedly need health care reform.
Suppose we accept this argument as valid, I know I am going off on a crazy socialist tangent here, but assume we actually want to solve the problem using the socialist "We know better than thou" tool box...
Why is god's heaven would you need to write a bazilluion pages of regulation to even solve this issue?
They could easily "solve" this issue by writing a law that is a few sentences long.
Something Like this:
"You cannot charge more than double for policy that covers a preexisting condition than the compariable policy that doesn't have it."
Basically if an isurance policy costs 200 bucks a month and you have a whole slew of preexisting conditions the insurance company cannot charge more than 400 for you for the same policy it would give to a normal healthy human being.
Exen though you applied a multiplier effect to it the isurance companies can still compete with each other, ie.. you can still use the free market and the state recognized the importance of insurance companies needing to control the risks included in their policies. Heck you could even set the Multiplier at 1.5X for peopel with genetic pre-existing conditions and 2X for people who are smokers or over weight etc... If you wanted to be a little control freak like moochelle and "nudge" people to "being more healthy"...
But of course the progressive aim is a "single payer" system which is a misnomer as we will ALL pay dearly through the nose until we feel all the pain. So would they want to "fix" the pre-existing condition issue using somewhat common sense (even if it is from the skewed progressive perspective)? NO, they are control freaks who want to collapse everything so they can re-make and re-mould another part of the world to their heart's desire.
I think their lack of comming up with a solution like I have outlined above which is simple and probably FAR more effective than the tangled mess which is Obama care is Proof Positive they are not in power to actually HELP people, but they are in power to HELP TEMSELVES to more power and control.
But this is just as controlling as the “progresive control freak agenda.” Depending on the type of pre-existing condition, insuring someone with a pre-existing condition may expose the insurance company to much more than twice the risk of insuring a comparable person without the same pre-existing condition. Why is it the government’s role to tell any company what the may or may not charge for a product?
Interesting idea. But as Rush pointed out, coverage for preexisting conditions is not insurance, it’s another entitlement program. Congress may as well just have expanded Medicaid for the highest-risk patients, without touching the private insurance market.
Then, to resolve the other minor issues with (what used to be) the best healthcare system in the world, they could have gone ahead with HSAs, portability, interstate sales, tort reform, etc. as smaller bills.
Anytime the Central Government tries to do anything ‘comprehensive’, it’s just a power grab. They don’t care if it actually works or not.
But this is just as controlling as the “progresive control freak agenda.” Depending on the type of pre-existing condition, insuring someone with a pre-existing condition may expose the insurance company to much more than twice the risk of insuring a comparable person without the same pre-existing condition. Why is it the government’s role to tell any company what the may or may not charge for a product?
Agree 100000%, I was using it as an example on how they progressives don’t even want attempt to fix a supposed “problem” using their own damned tool box.
Progressive Control Freaks thrive in an environment of Eternaly Manufactured Crisis....
We all have pre-existing conditions, it is just that some poor souls know what theirs is. If it is too prohibitive to spread that risk around, then the feds should help the states set up funds just for that. I think most states already had plans for pre-existing condition folks anyway, but it did cost something, nothing is free.
Like you, I’m not advocating this, but the solution to having millions of uninsured people is equally simple. Write a bill such as the following: “Anyone who does not have health insurance can receive Medicaid.”
Obviously, like all leftist policies, it would not work and would lead to unintended consequences, but at least there could be an honest debate about it in Congress and among the general population, and no more “we have to pass it to see what’s in it”.
Point made well....
Both parties...especially the Multi National Corps. that bankroll both...want Single Payer Socialized Medicine. This is the ultimate goal
Note that Multi National Corps never complain of Socialized Medicine in Europe or other Western nations....less of a burden on them
Always be leery of anyone who supports Free Trade Globalism...because with Globalism there is always Socialism
It has already been fixed. In auto insurance, it is called the “assigned risk pool.”
And I can fix the problem in three months.
1. Repeal Obozo care.
2. Call a meeting of all the current health insurance companies.
3. Tell them that they have 90 days to set up the equivalent to an assigned risk pool amongst themselves.....
.... or I’ll Congress work on the problem.
I would expect them to have a solution at least 30 days early.
It has already been fixed. In auto insurance, it is called the “assigned risk pool.”
And I can fix the problem in three months.
1. Repeal Obozo care.
2. Call a meeting of all the current health insurance companies.
3. Tell them that they have 90 days to set up the equivalent to an assigned risk pool amongst themselves.....
.... or I’ll Congress work on the problem.
I would expect them to have a solution at least 30 days early.
May not work as nicely as you surmise a lot of insurance multinationals WANT obamacare...
One of the alternatives that was offered to ease the burden of “pre-existing” conditions was to NOT demand that all insurers cover all pre-existing conditions for everyone that walks in the door for a policy, but that insurers instead pay into an insurance pool, a sort of underwriting pool, like unemployment insurance, to cover “pre-existing” conditions when and if they come up.
That can be done at a much lower cost - and less impact on policy prices, than blanket mandatory “pre-existing conditions” coverage on every policy.
The biggst cause of the pre-existing conditions issue is the fact that the policy belongs to/is the policy of your employer or union, not you and thus you lose protection of your pre-existing conditions when you are unable to take your policy with you, to your next employment.
For that we do not need a government single-payer system but a change in how employers spend that portion of compensation that goes to health insurance benefits, from paying for health insurance plans of their own, to paying the same level of compensation they have been willing to pay for that as direct payment to an employee’s own privately held and chosen health insurance policy - one they will take them with them, and by keeping it and taking it with they will avoid the pre-existing issues condition; it will be the same plan, with the next employer, that they have already been paying into.
We could have gone out and paid for all the care of those with pre-existing conditions, and bought policies for all without insurance, for a fraction of the cost of Obamacare.
Pre-existing insurance existed before 0bamacare. It was just very expensive, and you got put into a "high risk" pool for a year. After the year waiting period, you would be placed on the company's policy (and rated) like everyone else.
Except for the increased cost, pre-existing conditions WERE covered.
How do I know? I have purchased group health insurance for both public and private corporations.
5.56mm
A better way to fix it would have been if the gov't encourage people who've been denied insurance d/t preexisting issues to enrol with the gov't, then have insurers take from that pool a percentage of those in it equal to the percents of insurred they have in those areas and give them tax incentives and stipends to provide them insurance. Then the insurers can try to maximize their care at a minimum of cost using case managers and in network physicians who specialize in that care. Every year the insurred could decide to stay with the insurer or go to another insurance company and if the insurred don't like the way things are handled they could complain to the network administrators (the gov't).
It is quite obvious that like most “solutions” sponsored by the left Obamacare has abolutely nothing to do with the aims they have stated. It is like the minimum wage law, if they truly believed that it worked they wouldn’t quibble about whether it should be $7.25 or 9 or even 10 an hour they would make it at least $100. an hour. In fact the only reason not to specify infinity would be that you have to name a real world figure so that it is theoretically possible to obey the law. Or if they really believed in it they could just say that the wage for one hour of work of any kind must equal the price of a new F-150 four wheel drive truck or something similar.
“Congress may as well just have expanded Medicaid for the highest-risk patients, without touching the private insurance market.”
This was exactly what I thought should’ve happened.
For example: My son was diagnosed at age 10 with T-1 diabetes. Until 18, he was covered by our insurance (21 if he went to college).
If they had a high-risk pool that he could actually afford ($200-300 a month, with 80/20 copay and a $1000 deductible to encourage him not to abuse the system) he would’ve been fine as a young adult, trying to become established. After that, he does what everyone else does and tries to find an employer who’d take him on.
They didn’t have to overhaul everything, but just find a place for these people in the existing system.
They’re liberals — by definition, they don’t care about others.
Preexisting conditions is what breaks the insurance model and leads to a personal mandate.
Dont forget that uninsured can get free emergency treatment so that is the other big popular mandate problem, either hospitals or taxpayers or both pay for that.
A mandated policy to buy coverage for that is in order.
Tell the faggots who pass on aids to pay the medical for their partners. Period!!
This whole issue really pi$$es me off. I paid into health insurance for years with no claims for the express purpose of having a good solid policy for when I do have a major health issue.
Well I do have one now and I’ll probably end up losing my current policy due to this trainwreck called Obamacare. GRRRRR!
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.