Posted on 03/23/2010 2:09:54 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
"There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things," the Texas Republican said. "Now we are not interested in repealing that. And that is frankly a distraction."
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
Since when did it become commie babbling to help someone in need?
You people haven’t learned anything. This bill will not be repealed. That “teach the RINOs a lesson” thing has worked out really well, hasn’t it?
November elections don't mean squat....we are now gonna have Socialized Medicine, all the Illegal criminal invaders will become instant citizens (20+ million more on the "free" medical care bandwagon), and more and more government run business.
It ain't gonna be changed via the ballot box at ALL.....COUNT ON IT!
“There needs to be some provision to ensure everyone can buy insurance if they choose to and to ensure they can keep that insurance even if they get sick”
You are right, and the provision is not new or not the law already in all states, except for the matter of babies with known conditions.
To explain, these people believe one can just lay around, get sick, then get affordable insurance. That is not only true, Obamacare specifically demands that most everybody purchased insurance from the get-go.
They are trying to reach for something, anything, that they can cast this bill as not a creation of industry but an imposition on it. They are having a crisis of faith of sorts.
Check out the chat boxes at National Review. Their lunacy is getting funny. They believe government is the antithesis of big business, not its co-conspirator.
This new socialized healthcare law will not be repealed. Ever.
This new law provides - or so it says - healthcare to some individuals who do not have it, and will subsidize insurance premiums for those who cannot afford to pay retail.
Yes.....these are handouts/welfare/social justice payments (you pick the term).
Point is....if ever these (insert your term here) are threatened, the party doing the threatening will hear no end to "sob stories" about how they are killing grandma/grandpa/mom/dad/son/daughter, etc. Also, assume that all these folks now have their healthcare at the taxpayers (as yet unborn taxpayers) expense by 2012. Just take a wild guess as for whom they will vote. Duuhhh, right?
Trust me on this....it will never be repealed. Any more than SS, Medicare, or Medicaide will.
Forget conservative principles. How about even understanding the basic idea of "insurance"?
Then WE can vote to repeal them from office! THROW ALL OF THE BUMS OUT OF OFFICE IN NOV.!!!
if you want to use federal agents to hold me at gunpoint because I refuse to “help someone in need” (i.e., an illegal alien union worker who has diabetes because he is 300 pounds overweight),then suggest you go to Dailykos.com, where your thinking is more welcome
Correct.
Corker said they need to "punch big holes" in this bill and not necessarily run on repealing the whole thing.
Yes, full repeal can happen over time, but just take huge bites out of for now IMO.
Just about the only thing I’ve heard that is in this law that I agree with is that Insurance compainies can no longer drop you for getting sick. I wasn’t even aware that sort of evil existed. That being said, I’d STILL have the whole law repealed and address the problems in the health insurance industry one at a time.
You're not wrong. But, there are political considerations here. You can take a principled stand as say you don't want such regulation. But, that would put you in the minority. Some of the same polling that shows Obamacare as unpopular, also shows the reform of pre-existing condition prohibition VERY popular.
If the GOP says that want to repeal it all and wants no insurance reform, while it might be very popular with the minority (relative to the general electorate) conservative base, such a stand would be HIGHLY unpopular with the general electorate, all but guaranteeing all of Obamacare would stick around.
If the Republicans want to repeal any of this, they're going to have to pick their battles.
>> Cornyn is from Texas? Ick.
Yeah, I’m ashamed to admit it.
I like my representative (John Carter).
But I wouldn’t give you a nickel for either of our two senators. Both of them SUCK.
When it comes to senators, and pretty much nothing else :-), I’m jealous of Oklahoma.
“To explain, these people believe one can just lay around, get sick, then get affordable insurance. That is not only true, Obamacare specifically demands that most everybody purchased insurance from the get-go.”
I meant that is NOT true.
People cannot lay around and wait until they get sick. And Insurance cos can charge what they want.
The Pre-Existing coverage matter was just Obama BS taking credit for something already existing.
No, what you are talking about is an issue that should have been dealt with a long time ago, no doubt. No one here is saying “Screw ‘em, tough luck”. What we are saying is that a lot of people are completely clueless on how insurance rates are calculated. They are just flung out of the air, there is a an entire industry that uses acturial tables to calculate RISK. When you don’t have any idea what can be thrown at you to insure, you have no risk assessment ability and therefore will have insurance companies bankrupting left and right because either they charge too much and don’t get the business... or they charge too little and have more claims paid out than brought in.
Think of it like auto insurance. There are companies out there whose rates are based on taking the very best drivers. If they were all of a sudden forced to take those with 4 accidents and two DUI’s, do you think they would last long with the lower premiums they charge?
Now there are companies who do take higher risk drivers, but their rates reflect the increased potential of claim payout.
Then there are those drivers that either have a very exotic car or such a bad record that only the state insurance pool will allow them a policy. Their rates are also increased, but they still have an ability to attempt to calculate the risk and set the rates.
When you open up the door for all pre-existing conditions, you are basically telling an insurance company to drive blind and hope for the best. And in the end, you will have a lot of PEOPLE, the same people who want coverage and you feel sorry for, left hanging with NO ONE TO PAY THEIR DOCTOR BILLS because the company went belly up in the middle of their policy term.
Cornyn is just one voice - he needs to change his views or be defeated at the next primary.
No Republican should be supported unless he runs on a platform of repealing obammycare.
Palin/Coburn 2012
You are correct philosophically that a ban on preexisting conditions would hurt insurance companies and likely raise rates as well.
More practically, however....I just hate that insurance companies can reject people for preexisting conditions.
It just seems wrong that Joe Bob, who lost his job and couldn’t even afford COBRA for a few months ends up screwed because he has a preexisting condition. He then has to wait a full year at his new job before he gets covered.
And heaven help the self-employed people. They have no rights under current law....they are just out of luck entirely.
My wife had had kidney stones in the past, and we had to get a temporary individual policy last year. They covered her but forced us to sign an exclusion for the kidney stones. No thanks.
I think it’s wrong on ethical grounds.
If you have a car wreck, your rates may go up a little bit, but you don’t lose coverage.
It astonishes me that you can keep coverage after wrecking your car but if you get sick and lose coverage or have to go on the individual market, you can not just pay higher rates but also lose coverage for conditions you have had claims paid out for in the past.
That is NOT consistent, and how ironic that auto insurance is more forgiving.
Argh!!! Good grief! Is it not enough we must defend ourselves from the DemocRATS, but watch our backs lest RINO’s put their daggers in them??
I am from Texas and I DETEST, LOATHE and DESPISE both Cornyn and Hutchison.
>> Trust me on this....it will never be repealed.
There will come a day — mark my words — when we simply WILL NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD THESE EXPENSIVE PROGRAMS.
What then, FRiend? I think new arrangements will be made. Or they will be repealed, in effect. Call it what you will.
“but ultimately there needs to be some way for people with pre-existing conditions to purchase insurance at a reasonable price”
There is a way, I’m sure, but only the free market could ever come up with it. However, no, there doesn’t need to be a way. We have to stop looking at things from the perspective that either everyone has to live a happy life of technicolor lollipops, or the federal government must take over.
“Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”
But the bill cannot possibly be “good” with a ban on dropping people for preexisting conditions. Aside from the mandate on individuals to purchase insurance, the preexisitng conditions part is the absolute WORST part of the bill.
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.