HCR Passes

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Jazzman

Requires all insurance plans to cover maternity and child care up to age 21.

Requiring insurance to do this and that and the other thing is the reason insurance costs of gotten so out of hand.....what ever happened to just letting people purchase what they wanted or needed and not being forced to buy insurance for things they don't want? I am sure that childless couple down the street are thrilled that they have pay into the same pool that covers this

Prevents insurance companies from requiring co-payments for preventive care, including well baby and child care.

See above comments.

Establishes that the maximum annual deductible is $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family.

Why 5 and 10? why not 4 and 11, or 3 and 6? Why not 12 and 17?

Establishes both an internal grievance process for when an insurance company denies a claim, as well as independent board outside the insurance company that someone can appeal to.

I've got no problem with this.

Establishes that all insurance plans must be written in "plain language," must contain details about the coverage, and must provide notice before changing a person's coverage.

That's rich coming from the same people who just voted for 2700 pages of lawyerese....very rich indeed

Establishes whistleblower protections for health insurance company employees who report violations to the federal government.

I thought we already had this but if not why not a law that protects whistleblowers for all industries? Do health insurance companies need more whistleblower protections than, lets say, chemical companies

Amends the Health Service Act to prevent rescission and guarantee that people may renew their health insurance, even if they become ill.

Seems fair I guess.

Eliminates yearly and annual caps, which frequently cause those suffering from chronic illnesses to lose their private insurance and resort to public programs, costing the system billions in the process.

So, um, these "billions" won't happen now....or will the ~evil~ insurance companies have to pay the "billions" instead? Seems to me insurance companies might have a hard time staying in business......which, if this does force them out of business then ...um, who will step in to pay for ..........oh, I get it!

Eliminates pre-existing clauses, thereby guaranteeing access to care for those in most need of it.

See above.

How do these things limit or take away our freedom and destroy America?

No mention of the whole you "must" have insurance or be fined portion of the bill........interesting omission given the above question.

I cannot see how they do, and I thank God that enough of our Congressmembers had the courage and good sense to fight the good fight and establish these rights.

Do you really think these sleazeballs were fighting "the good fight"?

[Alex]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

I am sure that childless couple down the street are thrilled that they have pay into the same pool that covers this

Yes, I'm fine with it.

Thanks for your concern though.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Alex

Yes, I'm fine with it.

Thanks for your concern though.

Ditto.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Requiring insurance to do this and that and the other thing is the reason insurance costs of gotten so out of hand.....

Hardly. A broken prescription medication system, and an insurance model tied tightly to employment are far greater contributors to the cost of insurance.

what ever happened to just letting people purchase what they wanted or needed and not being forced to buy insurance for things they don't want? I am sure that childless couple down the street are thrilled that they have pay into the same pool that covers this

As much as the car-less couple is thrilled that streets are paved, people whose homes have never caught on fire are thrilled that there's a fire department, and people who have never faced an enemy soldier are thrilled we have a well trained military.

And nevermind, that childless couple down the street is already paying, in the form of emergency room care that those without insurance are forced to resort to, and most of the time end up not paying the bulk of the cost. That tab has (rightly) been picked up by the tax payer all this time, and at a premium rate. This begins the process of actually planning for and controlling those costs, making sure fewer people need expensive emergency services, and that money has been collected to cover those that do.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Hardly. A broken prescription medication system, and an insurance model tied tightly to employment are far greater contributors to the cost of insurance.

On your later point I would have to agree.

As much as the car-less couple is thrilled that streets are paved, people whose homes have never caught on fire are thrilled that there's a fire department, and people who have never faced an enemy soldier are thrilled we have a well trained military.

Surely you see why your later two examples don't work?

This begins the process of actually planning for and controlling those costs, making sure fewer people need expensive emergency services, and that money has been collected to cover those that do.

I hope your are right...........I really do.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I found it different because yours implied I wanted to puke because others might get cared for. The other two were things like "I hope maalox is covered for you tummy". Good natured vs. accusatory.

You can haz bucket. I think it may be a stoned bucket.

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Surely you see why your later two examples don't work?

I'm dense. What is the difference between a childless person paying for another child's medical care and the person's whose house never burned down paying for the fire department? Or the childless person paying for the local schools?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Surely you see why your later two examples don't work?

? Please enlighten me. If you're going to say that not having a neighborhood burn down, or not having a foreign nation invade benefits everyone, while having paved roads only benefits those with cars and ensuring access to maternity care for everyone benefits only those with children, I'll have to respectfully disagree. I could vow to never enter a road-based vehicle again for the rest of my life and I would still benefit from the portion of my tax $ that is spent on road maintenance. From the goods and services I use that rely directly on our roads for transportation, to simply the fact that nearly everyone else who goes to work to produce the goods and services that benefit me, whether I own a car or not is irrelevant. Likewise, ensuring that families are able to give their children the best shot possible at being healthy members of our society and not risk bankruptcy for the simplest of medical needs benefits you, me, and everyone. A healthy society is a productive society.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

? Please enlighten me. If you're going to say that not having a neighborhood burn down, or not having a foreign nation invade benefits everyone, while having paved roads only benefits those with cars and ensuring access to maternity care for everyone benefits only those with children, I'll have to respectfully disagree. I could vow to never enter a road-based vehicle again for the rest of my life and I would still benefit from the portion of my tax $ that is spent on road maintenance. From the goods and services I use that rely directly on our roads for transportation, to simply the fact that nearly everyone else who goes to work to produce the goods and services that benefit me, whether I own a car or not is irrelevant. Likewise, ensuring that families are able to give their children the best shot possible at being healthy members of our society and not risk bankruptcy for the simplest of medical needs benefits you, me, and everyone. A healthy society is a productive society.

Yeah, your right, all three of your examples were Oranges. It's just that the first one looked like, upon initial reading, it might be an apple.

[Morrigoon]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

And nevermind, that childless couple down the street is already paying, in the form of emergency room care that those without insurance are forced to resort to, and most of the time end up not paying the bulk of the cost. That tab has (rightly) been picked up by the tax payer all this time, and at a premium rate. This begins the process of actually planning for and controlling those costs, making sure fewer people need expensive emergency services, and that money has been collected to cover those that do.

You know who's losing money in that process? The lawyers and bill collectors who were middlemen in that process. WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE ATTORNEYS????