Question on pre-existing condition provision in the current health care bill

[TheCoxwain]

I think there are rules that prevent insurance companies from denying insurance for people with pre-existing conditions .. but more importantly what about the premiums?


If they jack up the premiums for a person with diabetes or cancer - then are pretty much denying them coverage by other means ..

ON EDIT:

I have not heard anyone, not even President Obama, saying that the insurance premiums for people with pre-existing condition should not be higher...

If this is not the case for private plans --then they will have an unfair advantage over the public option - as all the people with sickness will end up there ( assuming that the public option will not discriminate)

[loyalkydem]

1. money

that's why they deny people. If it affects their bottom line.

[stray cat]

2. It has to be close to the price for others - but I don't know what "close" means

[RDANGELO]

3. The only thing they can have higher primiums for is age,

according to pending legislation.

[TheCoxwain]

5. I dont think they should be allowed to price risk ...with only exception

being for those who make conscious unhealthy choices ( like smoking) - But even there - it is easier to tax cigarettes and direct that revenue towards health plans that charging the customer directly.

[lumberjack_jeff]

7. Thanks for dispelling the disinfo.

Yes, the only pricing criteria for any insurer in the exchange is age.

[grahamhgreen]

9. Do you know where that is stated in one of the bills?

[eridani]

16. Whoopie!

They won't double my premium just because I'm diabetic. They'll just say it's because I'm 62. Why in fucking hell would anybody defend this exception?

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. Yes. A diabetic 62 year old will pay the same premium as a healthy 62 year old.

What exactly did you expect?

[eridani]

18. Fuck that straight to hell. There is no reason why age should be a factor at all

The Netherlands has mandatory private insurance, and age is not considered. For 100 euros a month, there are NO copays and NO deductibles for anyone, of any age.

Being forced to pay outrageous sums for crappy coverage is unacceptable. They can make you pay 11% of your income for just the fucking premium, and on top of that there is $10,000 allowed for out of pocket expenses for a family of two.

[grahamhgreen]

8. Do you know where that is stated in one of the bills?

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. Section 113 of HR3200

Is there a reason you didn't search for it yourself?

[grahamhgreen]

13. Just to save time & thank you! It looks to me like the bill addresses the OP's concerns, IMHO.

Especially since it limits the number of allowable plans to four.

[SoCalDem]

4. There are those "buzzwords" again

"affordable"
"portable"
"non-denial for pre-existing conditions"
"accessible"


These are VAPOR-words..It all depends on WHO the "definers" are.

I'll play definer for you..

Affordable:.. I'll just say that $1000 a month is affordable..don't have it? get another job..get a better job


Portable... Your curent employer "gives" you HealthNet..he says he pays $200 a week for you, and you pay $75..now you change jobs, and the new company has Kaiser, but YOU want to keep HealthNet.. Great..DO IT, but the new employer will NOT pay the $200 a week for YOU to have your own portable insurance..It's portable but it's gonna cost YOU $275.00 a week

Non-denial...Let's say you have diabetes, heart disease & you could stand to lose a few pounds. I'm not going to "deny" you coverage, but that insurance is going to cost you $1000 a month.. Hey, I didn't "deny" you, now did I?

Accessible... Here are 10 plans to choose from.. They range all the way from $500 a month with a $5K deductible to $1500 a month with a $5K deductible..all have co-pays, all the coverages are slightly different.. hire a consultant to help you decide..

[truedelphi]

11. And, of course, all of this could be prevented by simply

Going to Universal Single Payer Health Care, but that is not the future we are looking at.

Instead we have Big Health Insurance "Providers" and Big Pharma cooking up legislation to favor their profits. With the present Administration and Congress just lapping that up.

While the RW works itself into a frenzy, not over the truly scurrilous provisions of what is going down (Though sometimes they manage to object to the 1,000 plus pages of this) but rather no, their main objection is that somewhere someone might get something for free and thus avoid dying years before the actuarial tables suggest. And this objection is presented with the same vitriol that a rabid dog might shower upon its victim right before sinking the teeth to the carotid artery, and draining the person of their life.

So this vitriol pulls more people, who are in the center and to the left, to support WHATEVER offal we are offered,because that way we will show those crazed lunies that they cannot stop the Obama Administration.

In any other society on earth this whole process would propel someone with leadership abilities to come forward and lead the citizenry out of the miasma. But here it is just business as usual.

[ipaint]

14. +1 The manufactured chaos is working for both sides.

Which together represent the medical industry first and foremost.

[truedelphi]

15. You deserve the "plus one" as It took you six words to

Say what it took me an entire screed.

"The manufactured chaos is working for both sides."

[grahamhgreen]

6. Thanks for posting that, my thoughts exactly. I am hoping it is covered in point 2 of yesterday's

post by the White Gouse:

"2. Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses."

Of course the devil is in the definition of "exorbitant". Off the top of my head, I think that should be defined to being 8% of a persons yearly compensation from any and all sources. So if you make $50K/yr it's $4,000, if you make $100,000,000/ye, it's $8,000,000. Or 8% of corporate profits for a corporation.

[Eric J in MN]

10. There is no final bill, but according this House summary of their bill...

"premiums can vary based only on age (no more than 2:1), geography and family size."

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/hr3200_summary.pdf