I’m pretty sure this guy doesn’t get it. Its not just about being covered with a pre-existing condition, but not being priced out of buying the fucking insurance to begin with. If he can guarantee that, then I’d listen to what he had to say. So far there are no commitments to keeping costs down for the consumer who has a pre-existing condition…or anyone else for that matter, which the Affordable Care Act does. So fuck you, Mr. Republican. Keep trying…I’m sure you’ll bamboozle the constituents that got you elected once again with this paltry effort. That seems to be about the only thing these Pukes are good at every couple of years anyway.
Exactly my thoughts too…
Not good enough. They are just trying to calm the masses.
Being forced into high priced, high risk pool, insurance is not free market choice that they claim to all love.
I don’t give a flying rat’s pink patoot what the fuck they do at this point. They just better be left to do it BY THEMSELVES and to own the fucking outfall.
The GOP approach is all theater, and their Healthcare Plan? “I don’t know, it’s a mystery”
“No longer able to deny coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions, Oregon’s seven largest insurers reportedly lost $171 million during 2015,” the website reads.
As opposed to people dying because they are denied coverage.
A bill to cover preexisting conditions is worthless to the 20+ million losing heath insurance. What an idiot.
“We’re saying that we will have a system in place that makes sure that people with pre-existing conditions continue to get coverage, there are lots of options of how you do that, you’ll see some of that.”
He continued, “My personal favorite way of doing it is simply to raise their premiums commensurately with the anticipated increased costs of their treatment. Another way is to place fiscally sound caps on their lifetime benefits. I would suggest that $10,000 sounds reasonable.”
Let me guess, re-establish high risk pools?
Been there, done that. Unaffordable.
Their supporters don’t give a shit about those people.
Exactly. They were a good start twenty years ago, and they did help to fill a little bit of the gap, but they are woefully inadequate due to their limited actual benefits, very limited lifetime caps, usually very high yearly deductibles, high co-pays (folks who are diabetic, have cancer or HIV-positive, say, can have numerous physician visits in a short length of time, sometimes bare or nonexistent medication benefits, not to mention high premiums. Additionally, the yearly maximums are often met in the first six months of the year, leaving catastrophic results the remaining. You are so right – been there, done that. Not in any way an improvement on the benefits of the ACA.
The only pre-existing conditions they’ll cover will be erectile dysfunction and baldness.
Well, that will take care of Cheeto Donnie…
No. No. No. They are just trying to get Democrats “out a a big jam. Big jam.” And selflessly putting themselves “at risk, to a certain extent because we’re taking it off their platter.”
There is simply no substitute for alternative competence.™
So, is “reaffirming R’s commitment” to coverage the same thing as requiring insurance companies to cover at realistic rates?" Why do I doubt it?
“We’re saying that we will have a system in place that makes sure that people with pre-existing conditions continue to get coverage, there are lots of options of how you do that, you’ll see some of that.” Right, so which “option” have you chosen?
If that’s true, then the logical step is universal health care.
Because health care is a fundamental right, not a privilege, and it’s well past time that was understood by Republicans.
You can’t claim to be “pro-life”, then deny people health care.
there are lots of options of how you do that, you’ll see some of that
I can think of three:
- High risk pools – they will have to be heavily subsidized by CMMS in order to be affordable. The annual and lifetime limits will have to be greatly increased.
- Community rating plus Universal coverage mandates – the ACA.
- Single payer
I wasn’t aware that three constituted lots of ways, but maybe I’m missing one.
Details will include so many “ifs” that this will be meaningless.
They are trying to confuse people to give the illusion of a “plan.”
B.S.
Just tell your rat GOP rep that he’s OUT in 2018.