Posted on 11/30/2010 9:56:46 AM PST by roses of sharon
House Majority Leader-designate Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Monday that Republicans will not be seeking to completely scrap the healthcare reform law.
Cantor said there are certain elements of current law that will be included in the GOP plan, which he said will move simultaneously with a repeal measure through the House.
Provisions that Republicans will seek to retain include the barring of insurance companies from refusing coverage to patients with a pre-existing condition and allowing young people to stay on their parents' insurance plans until age 26.
Speaking to more than 100 students at a town hall event at American University in Washington. D.C., Cantor responded to a question from a young woman who suffered from a chronic health condition by telling her, "We want to keep the pre-existing condition clause."
Cantor also told the woman that under the GOP plan, she should be able stay either "on a parent's health insurance" or be offered "another, equally affordable solution.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
>Can you explain how covering pre-existing conditions is good and a money saving idea? I don’t see it.
If I may venture an answer; it will encourage more [complete] truthfulness on applications and, if nothing else, increase the ‘resolution’ & degree-of-confidence of the insurance company’s statistics.
RE: “As someone who has been in the health insurance business for 30+ years the pre-ex clause and allowing kids to stay on their parents plan are good measures.”
AND............
“Then you do not know beans about insurance. Insurance is for future events—not pre-exising conditions. If you make insurance companies take people with pre-existing conditions, that is no longer insurance and lots of folks will just not get insurance until they have to get insurnace (i.e., they get sick and have a pre-exising condition).”
****************
I agree with YOU! Newbie “clagwell” isn’t impressing me with his knowledge of health insurance, despite his claim of 30 years of experience. I worked for Blue Cross for many years myself, much of the time in Legal —
I’ve seen it all —
Allowing pre-existing conditions and allowing ‘kids’ (HA!) to stay on parent’s policy until age 26 are NOT good ideas!
I can find some choice of words on hand for the new Speaker... but I’ve got to restrain myself or JimRob will really ban me this time!
Rest assured, you’re not the only one who’s offended!
Based upon your $600 month premium sounds like you are not Medicare eligble as of yet. Why not increase your deductible to say $10,000 and self fund the small stuff?? That way you are still covered for the catastrophic stuff.
That makes it even more fun to ask you. Plus some questions are just rhetorical for entertainment purposes, that one was.
No Comment.... LOL
Some of us warned about that.
The ruling oligarchy doesn’t give an aged cowpie about the voters.
Most “useless eaters”/voters have been scheduled for extermination anyway.
As I said it is a very complicated problem. Yes PE will cost more but I also said we need to get more of the younger healthier people on the negate the effects. Right now we are going through "adverse selection"-as the rates increase each year the younger healthier people drop off. I admit I have not been able to fully expand into each area but I'm answering the phones at the same time.
Oh and one thing I have learned 29 years and 364 days ago is never believe what an insurance company says as gospel.
So much for the the revolution.
There never was one. And I’m neither angry, upset nor disappointed.
I had a feeling since Election Day next year would be business as usual. Its not like I was expecting the GOP to be principled.
“I can’t speak to his views, I can take a message”
This is what EVERY office is saying. Every last damn one.
Tort reform would help health care costs a lot.
That being said, I support a total recall of the health care bill.
Start over. If there’s anything good in it, propose a bill to address that.
This needs to be done piece meal so that it isn’t so cumbersome, sweeping, full of unintended consequences and just a disaster.
Little confused about your non-profit thing.
Isn’t that what business are for? To make profit?
We need to watch all current legislators closely and let those who are squishy know that they won’t get a pass in two years.
I withdrew from the arena twenty years ago realizing big government was inevitable particularly since the fix was in. The Tea Party movement really got me energized again. I am disappointed.
Medicare and Medicaid should be phased out over a 3-5 year period so that recipients can make other arrangements.
Employers should quit providing insurance coverage.
Individuals should be encouraged to purchase their own high deductible catastrophic coverage and should pay for ordinary medical care themselves.
The result will be lower health care costs (because consumers will be more intimately connected to costs) and more competitive companies (because they will be free of increasingly burdensome health care insurance).
RE: “Based upon your $600 month premium sounds like you are not Medicare eligble as of yet. Why not increase your deductible to say $10,000 and self fund the small stuff?? That way you are still covered for the catastrophic stuff.”
*************
This is California. I have talked to multiple brokers and companies themselves and found nothing with a deductible above $7,500. Plus, no matter what, age alone means ultra high premiums. And there is no ability to purchase across state lines. Only Medi-Cal would work for me and I have to much money. The state ‘high risk’ pool ( I take cholesterol drug and that alone puts me in high risk) has a very long ‘wait list.’ Neighbor’s daughter is 25 and gets once-a-year cold sore on lip and SHE was rejected outright for her own policy ). CA is a TOUGH state to deal with, unless one is a vagrant or welfare queen — they get fabulous healthcare.
Most health and life insurance carriers were non profit before the mid to late 90's. Yes, they made a profit(and they wanted to) but the profit was kept it in house. What did they do with this profit? They paid claims or when healthcare cost went up say 10% they only had their policy holders have a 8% increase because they used the profits to help offset the increase or they just kept it for a rainy day.
When they went "For Profit" via a NYSE stock exchange, much of the profits they make now have to pay off shareholders each quarter via dividends-the shareholders expect a check each quarter of course. This was fine when the stock market was going up and up every year but it has been a failure when the market declined or stayed stagnant.
When the market declines the shareholders still expect their divedned check so if the money is not there the insurers increase their premiums or decrease their level of care or both.
End it, don’t mend it!
So it’s a complicated problem, as you keep repeating.
Apparently a genius like you can understand it-—why not edify us all?
Here’s simplicity for you: LIFE IS NOT FAIR. THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH. SOME PEOPLE, INCLUDING BABIES, DEVELOP TERMINAL ILLNESSES. AND SOME PEOPLE ARE INDUSTRIOUS ENOUGH, AND AT TIMES FORTUNATE ENOUGH, TO HANDLE THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITIES. TOO MANY AREN’T!
Now if you want to whimper and moan about complications and other abstruse concepts that the rest of us can’t grasp, write a damn book about it and spare us the time of thinking about reading your pablum here.
The rest of us understand and want to face the fact that life can be difficult and choices have to be made. If THAT little concept is beyond you, maybe you ought to quit the insurance business and run for congress.
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.