Posted on 12/24/2010 9:55:11 AM PST by Libloather
Obamacare falls to critical condition
Cal Thomas
Los Angeles Times Syndicate
Published: Friday, December 17, 2010 11:15 AM MST
**SNIP**
In a statement shortly after the ruling, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) got to the heart of what bothers most opponents of ACA: “Obamacare’s ‘individual mandate’ always rested on the absurd premise that the Commerce Clause empowered the federal government to regulate Americans’ decisions not to engage in commercial activity. Adoption of such an argument would have vested the federal government with the power to regulate virtually every aspect of Americans’ lives...”
King is correct. If the federal government can get away with ordering individuals to buy health insurance based on interstate commerce laws, it could order us to submit to any other practice it deems for our good based on similar misinterpretations of the Constitution.
Should Judge Hudson’s ruling be upheld on appeal, a significant corner will have been turned in the Left’s march toward a socialist state. Polls, as reflected in last month’s election, show that a majority of the public has grown tired of ceding too much power to government, no matter which party runs it. Growing numbers of us have awakened to the misappropriation of funds we taxpayers have given Washington. It is time not only to stop them, but to begin reversing the process with legislative sunset laws, periodic reauthorization of all government programs and agencies, a reform of the tax code and lower tax rates that will return power to the people where it belongs.
(Excerpt) Read more at trivalleycentral.com ...
IT DOESN’T NEED REFORM!
Can you hear us yet or must we shout louder?
There has never been an insurance contract of any kind that extended beyond one year. Some are renewable, some are not.
Do a search for the American Society of Actuaries and ask as many as you can contact if your wished-for scheme would ever work without government mandates, tax grabs and total governmental intervention and you will learn the truthful answers to the questions you asked.
Caution... You must be able to handle the actuarial truth, however.
Unfortunately, a few rotten apple companies have toyed with their policyholders over the wordings in their policies. This more than anything else has given rise to all this unnecessary controversy!!!
True. You have to be very careful which insurance company you choose. And even then, they can change over the course of a lifetime, as new managers rise to the top.
I am fortunate enough to have a university-backed insurer. They are less likely to play those sort of cheating games, because they don’t just risk offending some individual they don’t want on their roster anyway, they risk offending the whole university and all of its insurance holders. That would be a big loss for them.
The same would tend to be true of a health policy sponsored by a large corporation, provided that the corporation was decently run.
Less leverage for an individual, unfortunately. But word does get around, and there are some insurers I wouldn’t touch with a ten foot pole.
They will create a “pool” for those turned down for pre-ex. The ins co’s will shuffle off all the undesirable risks to the government.
btt
You realize that health insurance companies are risk pools with the risk of the insured in the pool spread out amongst those in the pool via premiums, correct?
So are you advocating 'weeding out' the sick who've paid their premiums year after year to lower your premium?
Talk about death panels ....
If I've paid my premiums year over year to my insurance company and I get sick, I expect coverage. That's in the contract. Of course if I were not paying my premiums I'd expect to get screwed.
Correction: GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE is based on Risk Pooling.
Really? I have a 20 year Term Life insurance contract that says otherwise.
It most certainly does! Start with Tort Reform and end the medical malpractice lawsuit abuse which is the #1 driver rising health care costs. You and I see that in our premiums increasing every year.
Title I of HIPAA prohibits pre’existing conditions for group policies for longer than 12 months. Additionally, they regulate what can be determined “pre-existing” conditions.
So what’s the inexpensive answer? More groups/pools not much taxpayer burden in that. And probably doesn’t even need Congressrats involved. A bonus.
A pre-existing condition cannot be “insured” because it has already happened and trying to do something like that will bankrupt the system and drive it to a government solution (which will be far worse in terms of quality of care and ultimately due to rationing)
People get sick and die. We are not going to stop that. A free market solution means the most people will get the best care. Just like it has meant that the most people will rise in their economic standing and create the envy of th world when it comes to standard of living and individual wealth.
That is really what this debate is about. The socialists and marxists wanting to foist control on the economy and destroy the free market.
Agreed. Merry Christmas.
Health, based again on a one person contract can change to a lifetime of expensive and on-going treatments that can arise out of MULTIPLE causes. The one person, if part of a large group can spread this far different risk, but only a little depending on the size of the group.
Other than those two differing actuarial assumptions, and you are having a tantrum over emotional and anecdotal feelings about how you'd wish things to be. That would not be reality!!!
However,the Republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity!
What? Pre-existing conditions are insured every day across America and you all act like that's the #1 thing bankrupting the system when it's not. Lawsuits and medical malpractice suits are. So stop with this nonsense of "weeding out" the sick so your premiums can be lower. The net effect of your solution will be pennies on the dollar whereas fixing the system by enacting tort reform ending lawsuit abuse and multi-million dollar settlements which is the real cause of escalating health care costs is the real answer.
In the spirit of the day, wishing you and yours a very Merry Christmas!
Ahh, which means let the rest die even though they could continue to live productive, taxpaying lives if they got the care they paid for. Is that your position?
Talk about death panels, eh? Will you be sitting on one?
“IT DOESN’T NEED REFORM!
It most certainly does! Start with Tort Reform and end the medical malpractice lawsuit abuse which is the #1 driver rising health care costs. You and I see that in our premiums increasing every year.”
Yeah. No. I meant health care reform, not legal reform.
You were the one who made the statement that NO INSURANCE CONTRACT OF ANY KIND extends beyond one year, and you've been proven wrong. So now that you've been proven wrong, why should I bother responding to the rest of your falsehoods?
and you are having a tantrum over emotional and anecdotal feelings about how you'd wish things to be. That would not be reality!!!
Once again, I stated FACTS, who's having the emotional tantrum using the multiple exclamation points above as if shouting is going to make your point? The fact is, you can't find a single error in my post, period. What I stated happens every day.
Again, the fact is health insurance is based on risk pooling. The bigger the pool (as you correctly stated) the more that risk is dispersed. The smaller the pool, the more that risk is felt via higher premiums for those in smaller pools.
Rather than rely on Capitalism to solve the problem, YOUR and others solution is to "weed out" anyone who's done the right thing by carrying insurance in the first place, from any "pool" you yourself are a member of, so as to lower your own premium.
Based on that, I'd wager you support Obama's Death Panels 100% if I were a betting man.
Here's my fix: If you don't like the fact that you're in the same risk pool with someone who has a pre-existing condition, how about you go start your own health insurance pool with a bunch of 100% healty people who've never had a pre-existing condition or disqualifier? You'd best check their families and their family histories too before you let them into your pool lest any family history or predispositions drive your costs up.
If anyone wants to live in a "perfect world" it's you. For your own sake, you should mark your posts on this thread and pray every day you or one of your family members never gets sick lest you suffer the same fate you're condemning anyone with a pre-existing condition - no matter how minor in your replies above.
If that means making the high-risk insurance pool a permanent provision, then that IS free market reform.
You don't think Health Care needs tort reform? We don't need to reform the system from frivolous lawsuits?
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.