Posted on 05/06/2017 5:29:37 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
Health Reform: While everyone is busy picking apart the flaws of the Republican ObamaCare replacement bill, one inconvenient truth is being overlooked: ObamaCare itself has been a colossal disaster.
Remember how ObamaCare was sold to the public: If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. It will lower premiums by $2,500, increase choice and competition, make health care affordable, create jobs, cut the deficit.
None of those promises came true. In 2013, millions discovered that the "keep your plan" promise was a lie — PolitiFact gave it the "Lie of the Year" award — when they started getting cancellation notices from their insurers. The Obama administration scrambled to minimize the political fallout by letting some keep those plans.
While Obama repeatedly promised a premium cut thanks to improved efficiency in the health care system, the opposite occurred. Workplace premiums for family plans jumped 9.4% the year after ObamaCare became law, and rose $4,767 from 2009 to 2006. ObamaCare premiums are going up at double-digit rates.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Correction:
The "uninsurables" comprise only about 1% of the individual market.
I understood congress did not exempt themselves...
Am I wrong ?
And that’s why it’s not going to be passed. It’s like they didn’t learn anything from CAFE standards, always have some happy bunny crap in the first 2 years and back load the ugly stuff to the next administration. It’s like they didn’t even read the law they’re trying to repeal.
OK, let’s all make sure we understand what a “per-existing” condition is. A per-existing condition is one for which the insured first received treatment when he was not insured. He chose not to be insured and up pops his cancer diagnosis. If he had been insured, it would not have been a per-existing condition. and, virtually all employer plans assume responsibility for illnesses which were diagnosed when the prior insurance was in force.
You sure about that?
The estimates I've see of people with pre-existing conditions range from 25% to 50%. This KFF study has it at 27%.
If anything I'd expect the incidence of 'uninsurables' to be at least as high in the individual market as in the general population, simply because some of them couldn't get insurance.
You’re a liar. Lots of FReepers dismiss others as “Never Trumpers” whenever they question anything he’s said or done. These people reject any thoughtful evaluation of President Trump, demanding that they pledge total and unquestioning allegiance to him.
My “constructive criticism” to the President: Do what you promised. Repeal Obamacare. Build the wall. Cut regulation. Cut taxes. Promote energy exploration/generation. Indict Hillary. And so on.
The debate about HRP, pre-x, insurablilty apply mainly to the individual market (not employed, self-employed etc)
If anything I'd expect the incidence of 'uninsurables' to be at least as high in the individual market as in the general population
Many of those in the general population are in the workforce, and obtain benefits from the employer, pre-x and all. Large groups generally have the characteristic mandate called "guaranteed issue" they may well have most of those "pre-existing conditions" but as far as the carriers are concerned, if they are healthy enough to work, they are healthy enough to insure.
Using that same logic, those not employed, and seeking coverage in the individual market may well be uninsurable.
There's a way around this for the carriers. In Maine, we have a 12 month "preexisting condition exclusion".
Title 24-A: MAINE INSURANCE CODE
Chapter 36: CONTINUITY OF HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE
§2850-A
B. "Preexisting condition exclusion," with respect to coverage, means a limitation or exclusion of benefits relating to a condition based on the fact or perception that the condition was present, or that the person was at particularized risk of developing the condition, before the date of enrollment for coverage, whether or not any medical advice, diagnosis, care or treatment was recommended or received before that date. [2001, c. 258, Pt. E, §9 (NEW).] [ 2001, c. 258, Pt. E, §9 (RPR) .]
2. Limitation. An individual, group or blanket contract issued by an insurer may not impose a preexisting condition exclusion except as provided in this subsection. A preexisting condition exclusion may not exceed 12 months from the date of enrollment, including the waiting period, if any. For purposes of this subsection, "waiting period" includes any period between the time a substantially complete application for an individual or small group health plan is filed and the time the coverage takes effect.
__________________________________________________________________
In other words, they are insurable except for the pre-x, unless it's nothing serious, they can then be fully covered, to be decided by the carrier.
Another thing getting lost in the fray is the deliberate confusion of terms in that they are trying to cross-identify those with a minor pre-x, with those uninsurables who have an incurable or terminal illnesses.
Even so, should someone be enrolled in an HRP and later be deemed insurable (cured, condition goes away or is maintained with medication etc) they can continue to apply for regular coverage until they qualify.
Also, this whole debate pretty much applies to first time individual market applicants. Otherwise, carriers generally tend to honor each other's pre-x exclusions.
No, You're a liar.
See how that works?
I don't know a single Freeper who hasn't disagreed with the President on something, and said so.
In any event, thanks for demonstrating your knee-jerk incivility...
Sounds similar to the ERISA requirements for group plans.
Otherwise, carriers generally tend to honor each other's pre-x exclusions.
In the group market because they have to. In the individual market? No way in hell (pre-ACA).
I was being kind when I indicated you wear rose-colored glasses. In reality you are blind. Blind to Congress’ chicanery.
Everything is awesome when you’re part of the team, right?
The “team” is sandbagging Trump. People who point that out are not “never Trumppers”.
Gosh, I thought we "had to" vote for RINOs because they are "with us when it counts".
Of course, throwing a hissy fit and letting Dems win is what saddled the nation with Obamacare to begin with.
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.