SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:22 PM
Original message |
An Unfunded Federal Health Insurance Mandate? |
|
I work for a city here in California. Currently our bargaining unit is in negotiations with the city for the upcoming 2010/2011 contract.
We went off topic a bit and health insurance costs came into the conversation. The projection is for a 17-20% increase in cost. We have a choice of either Kaiser or Anthem.
What concerns me, and others, is the new law which allows children up to 26 yrs old to be included in their parents coverage (even if the child is married). This, coupled with the rate increase, could have far reaching affects on the already strapped city budget.
I am 100% in favor of everyone covered (Single-Payer) yet this allowing of these private insurance vultures to suck the lifeblood from us and then to throw unfunded mandates on top of it (as the 26 year old law) strikes me as insane.
While this widening of who can be under ones plan appears good on the surface there are costs when we continue to play ball with these corporate thieves. These costs will be born out in unforeseen ways. My hope is that this will not get too ugly.
---
|
dflprincess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:27 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The biggest problem is that there is nothing in insurance bail out that guarantees access to care |
|
All the bill does is require "coverage" and some will only be able to afford policies that have big out of pockets expenses that will still keep them from seeing a provider.
|
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
...when you factor in our employer's costs going through the roof it will leave nothing for us to negotiate for except trying to protect what we already have gained via wages concessions and the like, over the years.
---
|
cbayer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:30 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Isn't this mandate only on insurance companies? Is their a mandate that employers |
|
include this coverage.
Many companies offer insurance for the employee only and hold the employee responsible for the insurance costs of family, if the employee chooses that option.
One more question - Aren't most policies either for single, couple or family, without regard to the number of children? It used to be like that, but I don't know if it still is. Children and young adults are the safest risk pool, so insurance companies tend to not be adverse to having them on a policy.
|
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Employee Employee + 1 Employee + Family
Employee is covered (except copays, deductibles, prescriptions, etc..) and the +1 the employee pays partial, and the Family plan the employee pays more.
How long this will continue we don't know. Placing more Dependants on ultimately costs not only us but the city also in a big way.
I am paying about $300 per month for my wife to be on my plan (Medical only...no dental or vision).
Our dental and vision plans SUCK.
---
|
cbayer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. If those are your choices, do you anticipate that the insurance companies will charge |
|
more for the Employee + Family option because they are mandated to cover dependents longer? I am not sure that they will, but they certainly might.
Don't get me wrong. I am not at all in favor of the insurance companies holding the reins here and can't wait until they are gone (and they will be, in my lifetime I believe). I am currently uninsured and, while glad that I will have the opportunity to get some kind of coverage, loathe the thought of having to sign up with one of these companies.
|
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. That is the fear...at least for the employer portion... |
|
...but that affects us also for sure at the table.
|
JanMichael
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:47 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Thanks for the update. The bill sucked and rewards leaches. |
|
Leaches...they'll probably make a comeback based on the private market and the new healthcare bill.
Single Payer was the best option period.
|
midnight
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 08:50 PM
Response to Original message |
7. This insane bill was written by an insurance lobbyist, and was only to make |
|
sense for those who are feeding off the sick.....
|
jody
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-01-10 09:03 PM
Response to Original message |
9. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, "There's no such thing as free health care". n/t |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:39 AM
Response to Original message |