You know what’s really strange? Insulting someone and swearing at them really makes it hard for them to hear anything else you have to say. Sharing further information with the addition of another insult really doesn’t help the situation.
In addition, you never address MD Expat in PA’s point about this not being an effective system for the situations being described on this thread.
It was the state high-risk pool that quoted my 19 year old, single, childless son $3000 a month. No subsidies. No help to manage that amount. Just pay it or you lose ‘continuous coverage’.
I will see what updates are at the RR website, but if this is his solution, it’s not a feasible one.
“You know what’s really strange? Insulting someone and swearing at them really makes it hard for them to hear anything else you have to say.”
Could be. But sometimes, the truth must be told.
It is a blatant lie to say that Gov. Romney hasn't spelled out an answer to this question.
“In addition, you never address MD Expat in PA’s point about this not being an effective system for the situations being described on this thread.”
I didn't notice such a point being made by MD Expat in PA.
“It was the state high-risk pool that quoted my 19 year old, single, childless son $3000 a month. No subsidies. No help to manage that amount. Just pay it or you lose ‘continuous coverage’.”
I'm not crazy about dealing with posters’ specific “circumstances,” since I'm never assured of getting the actual facts. Your posts about your son seem a little fuzzy.
First you say:
“If there’s a gap in my son’s insurance, the great state of Texas said that he could join the state insurance while he looked for work...
“if he paid $3000 a MONTH.”
That's interesting. I looked at Texas’ high risk pool website, and found that the maximum premium for a 19 year-old male was something over $700 per month. With an annual deductible of $1,000. For a smoker. I then looked at the rate with a $5,000 annual deductible (roughly the deductible we have on my own insurance for myself and my employees). That was $400 per month.
I'm not sure to what you're actually referring. Which might make sense, because then you respond to another post by saying:
“It was the Texas COBRA program that said that my son would have to pay $3000 a month for the program...”
COBRA is different from state-run high risk pools. I can readily believe that a COBRA policy may have run $3,000 per month. But that's not a high risk pool policy, that's an extension of a group policy after one leaves one’s job.
I've never personally seen a rate that high, but I've seen 'em at $2K or so per month. But that rate applies to everyone who uses the COBRA option, not just to folks who have pre-existing conditions. I know that the COBRA rate on my own company's policy would be nearly $2,000 per month. But that would apply to everyone who left my employ. If I opted for COBRA coverage. Which I don't.
As well, I looked at the Texas high risk pool website, and it was quite explicit that a 50% discount is offered to folks under 200% of the poverty level, and a 30% discount to folks under 300% of the poverty level.
Again, from what you posted, I'm thinking that maybe you weren't dealing with Texas’ high risk pool insurance but rather with COBRA. Which is a whole different ball of wax.
Like I said, I dislike getting into folks’ specific situations, in part because it's tough to ascertain the actual facts of their circumstances, and I have no independent knowledge by which to check what folks report.
“I will see what updates are at the RR website, but if this is his solution, it’s not a feasible one.”
If you'd have read the page, or heck, if you'd have just read what I actually POSTED on this thread, you'd note that his proposals include assistance for the uninsured, including subsidies:
“- Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies”
Finally, I'm pretty familiar with Maryland's high risk pool. Why? I live in Maryland, I work in Maryland, I own a business in Maryland. All the info I'm getting about Texas, I'm getting off the web, without any consultation with anyone who really knows the ins and outs of Texas' program. If Texas' program has inadequacies, if folks think that Texas' program doesn't do enough, then, guess what? That's a TEXAS problem, and should be addressed by the TEXAS legislature, not the federal government.
That is part of Gov. Romney's views, too, that each state should craft the solutions acceptable to the citizens of that state, that the federal government shouldn't impose a one-size-fits-all solution on the whole country.
That's called "federalism." I'd think any conservative would be in favor of that.
sitetest