Are you pleased with the survival of the Health Care act? Do you like being called "duped"?

[CreekDog]

Some here think that those of us who breathed a sigh of relief are "duped" by the health insurance companies.

They sometimes say that we oppose single payer.

And the list goes on.

But, speaking for myself:

1) i doubt that i could purchase health insurance if I needed to without ACA.
ACA requires insurance companies to offer insurance to any applicant.

2) if i could purchase it, there's a good chance that in some states, it could exclude my preexisting conditions
ACA requires insurance to cover preexisting conditions, where current policies are allowed to exclude them.

3) if i could qualify for it, i might not be able to afford it at all
ACA doesn't allow charging me more for my preexisting condition.
ACA doesn't allow charging more based on my gender.
ACA will provide subsidies to millions who are forced to get health care coverage through the private market, making it free for millions.
ACA does allow for different rates based on one's age-group, and there will be three age groups that pricing will be based upon --this is the only variation on community rating that will be allowed.

--------

The reality is that half our health care system is private insurance. Not sure if that will go away, or if insurance will become like a regulated utility.

I would prefer what they have in England (single payer, public model)
Or Canada (single payer, "Medicare" model, private practitioners mostly)
Or heavily regulated market systems like they have in some countries that still provide universal, low or no cost care.

ACA isn't one of those great systems, but it is many steps closer to those systems than what we have.

Further, let's just get right to it, if ACA is overturned here's what legally the insurance companies will be allowed to do:

1) half of eligible young people who were added to their parents insurance could be removed immediately. (some of them had something that didn't seem right and went to the doctor in the past month to get it checked out --without insurance, many/most of them would have ignored it and hoped for the best).

throw it out and they get thrown out of the health care system.

2) caps on insurance coverage can return. people with chronic conditions can max out their health care coverage, leaving them with zero coverage.

throw ACA out and they get thrown out of the system.

3) coverage of those with preexisting conditions will not be required and people can be excluded from insurance based on them.

throw ACA out and those people get thrown out of the system.

and there is more.

So, in conclusion, am I, is anybody enamored with the private health care system and its insurance companies? Hell no.

Far from it. In fact, knowing that they will exist, this is the first significant attempt to make them follow some rules and that's a good thing.

[freshwest]

1. Yes. No.

[zbdent]

2. I'd be more relieved if it actually forced insurance companies to honor the contracts

they entered into with the "clients" (the average joes who pray they don't get sick, but do) without dropping them once they do get sick ...

but then, when it comes to the corporatists, a contract is a holy thing ... when it favors and protects the corporation (kinda like lawyers). When it is supposed to benefit or protect the PERSON ... not so touchy-feely ...

[CreekDog]

4. then read the law

"recission" is prohibited by ACA.

if you're going to lie about ACA, then what's the point of arguing?

i expect it from Sarah Palin.

i don't expect it from my fellow DUers.

[zbdent]

14. Isn't there a statement (about war, but I believe it may apply) something like ...

"No battle plan ever survived encountering the enemy"?

We shall see if the (my) oversimplification of the idea that the insurance companies "will not be able to lawyer their way out of a contract" will withstand reality.

[CreekDog]

16. if that is true, then wouldn't we be better off with the law than without?

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. They can't do that anymore

But you knew that, right.

[SoutherDem]

3. I know what you mean.

Many people wanted "A" they got "B" but because they wanted "A" and nothing less they wanted to turn down "B".

Maybe not a great example but it is late.

I feel ACA is a good start. I feel it will be like Medicare or Civil Rights. There will be ACA 2, ACA 3, and so on. I can certainly accept ACA without any complaints at all.

[Ghost of Huey Long]

5. not for myself, but I am really happy for people who this will help

this is a life or death matter for millions of Americans

[CreekDog]

12. i agree, and in our midst, there are a few of those people that ACA will help

will it help them as much as other systems? no.

are they better off with it than without it? well, they seem to think so. should someone else decide they are better off without? no.

[mzteris]

6. I know I'm sick and damned tired of

The spamming going on with the woe is me, you all are fools, we're all doomed posts.

Hell, if I want to read that crap I'd go to FR. I tried alerting on the SPAM which it clearly is - the sh* getting posted over and over and over again - but that got shot down. Of course that was yesterday and since then HOW many more of these "concerned citizen" posts have been made?

Not positive, but I'm sure reminded of a Bach cantata . . .

[dionysus]

7. right on!

[Politicub]

8. The ACA will fuel the next boom cycle

It's a true stimulus package.

The protections that you list are the heart of the bill. We're abandoning the ER primary care system set up by Reagan and replacing it with a system oriented around wellness and preventative care. Awesome!

[kestrel91316]

11. Yes. No.

[tblue]

13. It's NOT 'REFORM'! my insurance went from $1100/mo in June to $2000 in July

for no apparent reason.

So NO! I AM NOT HAPPY WITH THIS 'REFORM' BILL. Can we please not call it what it is not?

Premiums are skyrocketing now BECAUSE of this bill in preparation for 'reform' to be mandated by this legislation in the future.

FAIL.

Okay, I am honest person. ACA is much better than nothing for many people. But it is far from perfect and it is far from 'REFORM'! It's NOT REFORM. It's 'MODIFICATION'!

And right now, I need relief from price gouging, which would be outlawed if insurance was truly REFORMED.

[dflprincess]

15. I'd be happier if it actually mandated access to health care instead of the

purchase of health insurance from the same old crooks.

As it is, many people will wind up paying a premium for for a product with out of pocket expenses that are so high they still won't be able to see a doctor.

[Populist_Prole]

17. I'm pleased because the GOP is having a fit. Happiest I've been politically in years

I wish I could give a less petty sounding reply....NOT!

In any case, it's a big improvement over the status quo.

[TrollBuster9090]

18. Regardless of what's in the law, it's ALWAYS a victory when Democrats pound a fencepole into the

ground and say "no, THIS is as far to the right as we're going to let you pull the Overton Window." We're done arguing on Sunday Morning talk shows, done talking, and done advertising, and we're actually going to DO something that's in the interests of the country.

Yes, this was a Republican proposal from 1993, but the Republicans have run to the right since then, and for the most part, the silly Democratic party has CHASED them. Just putting a POLICY DOWN in a position that is to the LEFT of the CURRENT Republican position is a HUGE VICTORY.

We've accomplished something. We've laid a FOUNDATION that we can start building TO THE LEFT of. And when I say 'to the left of,' I'm painfully aware of the fact that we're still far to the right of center. But it's a START.

You can't do everything in one step. Not with the kind of opposition Democrats are currently facing.

This has to be done in STEPS.

Here are the NEXT STEPS as I see them:

1. The State HC Exchanges have to be set up. Several Republican Governors have made a show of saying they're not going to set them up. BEAUTIFUL! THANKS! Because if the a state government will not set up the exchange, the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is supposed to set it up. So...the Feds set up identical exchanges in all the states that refuse to do it. COMBINE them into a SINGLE EXCHANGE. That's the next step. Then, once everybody notices that the single, large FEDERAL exchange offers cheaper policies than the individual state policies (due to volume)...everybody will want to combine the exchanges into one big, national exchange.

2. Once the national exchange is established, combine all federal HC programs into one (Veterans, COBRA, SCHIP, Medicaid, Medicare) which will, again, offer the cheapest policy because a) it doesn't have to make a profit, and b) it can negotiate the lowest drug prices due to volume.

3. Once everybody sees how cheap the Federal program is, they'll DEMAND access to it. "It's not FAIR that only federal govt. employees get acces to that gold-plated program! What about the rest of us?" So...OBLIGE them! Put the combined federal HC plan on the combined Federal Exchange. BINGO! That's THE PUBLIC OPTION.

4. Eventually, the Public Option gives way to SINGLE PAYER.

[Zalatix]

19. Wait, who the hell has ever said you oppose single-payer? I don't see that.

The ACA is 99.99% miracle and 0.01% crap. The crap is the individual mandate.

I'm sure there are some people here who want to throw out the whole ACA... and I suppose someone must have accused you of opposing single-payer. But all of that is crazy talk.

It has NOTHING to do with the fact that the individual mandate is a cancerous blemish on an otherwise GREAT LAW.

[avebury]

20. Yes and No.

While I would prefer single payer, at least it is a start. I work for a state agency and I saw some fellow employees go ballistic over the ruling. As I watched their rants (they were totally against and one railed about how constitutional it was and went on to rant about taxes being flat out unconstitutional and that there should be a revolution):

1. I looked at one lady and thought, if she did not work for the state and have the benefit of a decent health insurance she probably could not get insurance (she has cancer).
2. To the lady who ranted on taxes being unconstitutional I wanted to ask her if she is willing to give up her salary because her salary is paid by taxes. I also wanted to ask her how long it would take her to find a decent job with good insurance if she didn't have her state job. She also gets the benefit of financial aid for classes related to her job which is making it possible for to work on her college degree without having to incur college debt.
3. The only comment I made was that there will not be a revolution. If there was not one after the 2000 Supreme Court decision on the Presidential election there is not going to be one now. There is too much dumbing down of the education process and society in general, people are way to focused on idiotic reality shows, and they want to be able to buy way too much crap for as little as much money as possible. As long as the masses are pacified they aren't going to revolt. One of the ladies replied that she did agree with me on that point.

It is so irritating that people don't think the process through and don't understand that they are only cutting their own throats so to speak.