Posted on 08/20/2016 10:29:09 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Health care will be on Rebecca Esparza’s mind in the voting booth this fall.
The two-time cancer survivor from Corpus Christi, Texas, says repealing the Affordable Care Act could make her uninsurable. The health law protects people with pre-existing medical conditions from being denied coverage. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
I guess being a cancer care political advocate doesn’t offer health care.Looking at her twitter account it sure offers a lot of travel. https://twitter.com/rebeccaesparza
Agreed, but just counting on a better economy seems to be a bit of hand waving.
These issues are real, affect lots of people, and unless we come up with tangible solutions we'll get things like the ACA because voters want something done. Nature abhors...
The doctor can only discount a bill for a medicare patient a one or two times. If he discounts it too many times the argument will be made that he is committing fraud by submitting a higher bill for other patients because those charges will no longer be considered usual and customary by medicare officials.
For a non medicare patient or for the remaining charges after medicare has paid their part I don’t know of any restrictions on adjusting a bill. I also don’t know if private insurance companies also have any restrictions to keep charges uniform.
You really don’t think I read the article, do you?
She had cancer two times.
Probably in her late 40’s judging by the picture in the article.
While she has a risk problem, she also has 2,000 hours each year to work.
If she needs 12 man-hours worth of surgery it really shouldn’t be a problem for her to pay for that surgery herself in an efficient system with providers who charge reasonable prices.
She might even get in six years and 12,000 hours of work before she needs that 12 hours of surgical care.
It isn’t just hand waving, it is all a piece of the picture.
Worrying the world into creating a hammock is going to militate against that piece.
Well, I read the article.
The body of the article doesn’t support the headline.
I thought that maybe you had read another article about her.
No, but I know the problem was real, whether it was her exact situation or not.
No, but I know the problem was real, whether it was her exact situation or not.
Imagine if she couldn’t get coverage.
What could she do?
She might band together with other people and move to someplace to build their own hospital and medical office building complex.
She and others might hire doctors and nurses and pay for medical/nursing school educations, to be repaid by providing care for herself and others who coughed up the tuition cash.
As for drugs, a common fund could be created. It might be spent based on what would save the most lives.
Now you’re just dancing around.
Have a good day.
>
I have mixed feelings about preexisting conditions coverage. If someone is born with some condition and then applies for insurance at 20 that is one thing. But someone who waits until they get sick at 60 and then wants to get insurance and game the system doesn’t seem fair to those who bought insurance for 40 years. Would it be fair for someone to not have auto insurance for years and years and then buy it after a crash and expect to be covered?
>
And here is why the debate is lost before one word it uttered:
It seems many are conflating ‘insurance’ w/ ‘healthcare’ (I suspect, as the Socialist want). There should be no confusing the two.
Insurance is, by definition, for the unforeseen, the accident, the *unknown*.
One wishes to argue for charity hospitals, gifting services and the like, that’s one thing. But the back-n-forth of just how much one is *entitled* to the property\time (LIFE) of another? That should be nipped in the bud from the 1st syllable.
>
Certainly the issue can be dealt with reasonably without something like ObamaCare.
>
That boat has sailed prior to my birth. The greased up skids, not even slippery slope, of Socialism over the last 100yrs. and people expect WHAT these days? Everything ‘free’ under the sun.
The ‘reasonably’, you describe, can ONLY come with the theft from another (ala ‘reasonable’ gun control, ‘reasonable’ restrictions on..., etc.).
1st, there needs to be a retraction of govt, that coincides with a return of personal responsibility. Free Markets will return the options in care to a sensible level, and restore Liberty, Freedom and Choice as well.
I just pointed out one very real situation that arose before the ACA.
Sorry it doesn't fit your narrative.
That’s just premiums
What about the deductible and the co-pay?
I read many families now pay tens of thousands for nothing except a 20% discount if and when they ever reach their deductible
That’s right. And most families I talk to don’t ever spend the deductible in a year so they are basically getting what used to be catastrophic insurance, except the premiums are much higher because it has to cover everything, whether you need it or not.
Actually you weren't and that's one of the falsehoods claimed by Obama and the Democrats and never examined by the MSM.
Pre-existing condition exclusions were prohibited for HIPAA-eligible individuals by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
The only people who have benefited from the ACA were those who had no insurance at all.
“No one can be denied life saving assistance. Those who can not afford care have always had various programs to fall back on to help them get the care they need.”
Several years ago I had an alcoholic chain smoker as a renter. She made her cash, I found out later, by selling her EBT card and selling drugs.
She had throat cancer and the taxpayers had paid for multiple operations and chemo treatment. At no time did she ever consider quitting smoking.
My thinking was why are the taxpayers paying for constant treatment if she will not do the simplest thing under her control to help herself? She was only in the house six months and I literally had to fumigate it.
When it all come crashing down then no one is going to be able to get coverage.
When govt controls healthcare, they tell you when you get treated and how! She may have cancer coverage but still be ignored for months.
Not for individual plans.
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.