|
Post by jeffolie on Dec 11, 2009 9:59:46 GMT -6
WASHINGTON – A loophole in the Senate health care bill would let insurers place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses such as cancer, prompting a rebuke from patient advocates. The legislation that originally passed the Senate health committee last summer would have banned such limits, but a tweak to that provision weakened it in the bill now moving toward a Senate vote. As currently written, the Senate Democratic health care bill would permit insurance companies to place annual limits on the dollar value of medical care, as long as those limits are not "unreasonable." The bill does not define what level of limits would be allowable, delegating that task to administration officials. Adding to the puzzle, the new language was quietly tucked away in a clause in the bill still captioned "No lifetime or annual limits." But Finan said the change in the Senate bill essentially invalidates the legislation's ban on lifetime limits. "If you can have annual limits, saying there's no lifetime limits becomes meaningless," he said. A patient battling aggressive disease in its later stages could conceivably exhaust insurance benefits in the course of a year. news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091211/ap_on_go_co/us_health_overhaul_senate_loophole;_ylt=AlL249AsMJMqmFvHiZbocLPVJRIF;_ylu=X3oDMTMzYml1anBoBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMjExL3VzX2hlYWx0aF9vdmVyaGF1bF9zZW5hdGVfbG9vcGhvbGUEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2hlYWx0aGNhcmVsbw--
|
|
|
Post by judes on Dec 12, 2009 13:06:11 GMT -6
This so called health care bill will be utterly worthless and only make things worse without a public option to hold costs down, with these criminal lifetime and annual maximums and with forced mandates making criminals out of those who can neither afford it or afford to be without it. Anyone who thinks our current Corporate run health insurance system is so wonderful is going to be in for a big awakening when they lose their corporate provided benefits.
At the corporation I am "lucky" to still be employed with although at reduced hours and pay, the health care premiums are going up almost 100% this year. A decent plan for a family of four used to cost the employee about $185.00 out of pocket every month in addition to certain copays and coinsurance costs. Now the same plan will cost the employee roughly $350.00 every month. This is a huge jump!!
I love how before the economy showed signs of stress everyone claimed real wages were really rising because of all the increase in benefits, well where are all the people to calculate the fall in real wages due to lost benefits with increasing cost to employees? And here's another real dandy. The company will no longer allow employees to cover their spouses on their company provided health plan if that spouse has an option to get health care through their own employer. It doesn't matter if it is the shittiest plan out there or even if the plan is only offered at FULL cost to the employee, if it is available to them they will not be allowed to be covered as a dependent on the employees plan!! I work with a guy who's wife works part time at Walmart, and because Walmart offers a shitty plan at pretty much full cost to her, she will not be able to be covered on his plan now. It will cost more for her to pay into this plan for health insurance than what she earns so she is forced to quit her job or not have health insurance.
And if that is not bad enough the company said it will do routine audits to make sure no one is covering an ineligible spouse under the new rules and if found to be doing so can be cause for termination of employment. Mark my words folks things are going to get much much worse as all our elected officials are totally beholden to the Wall street crooks that keep them fat and happy.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Dec 12, 2009 13:55:00 GMT -6
I love how before the economy showed signs of stress everyone claimed real wages were really rising because of all the increase in benefits, well where are all the people to calculate the fall in real wages due to lost benefits with increasing cost to employees? Excellent point, Judes. That would explain why Government publication of hourly & weekly wages hasn't fallen that much. Employers have cut out payment of health insurance benefits, without cutting it out of the wages & compensation reported. Apparently the current Corporatophilic plan be proposed by our Senate Benedict Arnolds contains a Medicare buy-in for those between 55-64. The entire cost will be paid by the enrollees. Hence, this shouldn't cost the Government or the taxpayers a dime. If that's the case, then why not extend this optional buy-in to everyone??? If it's 100% paid for by the enrollees themselves, it again won't cost the Government or taxpayers a dime. What legitimate reason is there for everyone not being allowed to enroll. The current, public-option less proposal allows enrollment in Medicare for those between 55 & 64--only if they pay 100% of the premium cost. If it costs taxpayers $0.00 for the new 55-64 population, why would cost anymore to allow everyone else to enroll? These are rhetorical questions, of course. The answer is that it would reduce the number of taxpayer-funded Corporate welfare dollars going into the pockets of private health insurance mobsters.
|
|