General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPriebus doubts states will choose to charge sicker people more
WASHINGTON White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said Sunday he doubts states will take the option of letting insurance companies to charge sicker people more if the GOP health care bill the House narrowly passed Thursday becomes law.
It doesnt affect anyone with continuous coverage, even if a governor which Im not sure thats ever going to happen takes the waiver option, Priebus said on Fox News Sunday.
The bill, which now moves to the Senate, would let states seek waivers from the federal government to allow insurers to base premiums on a persons health status a practice that was prohibited by the Affordable Care Act.
The higher price could be charged to people who buy coverage on the health exchanges set up by the ACA, instead of getting it through an employer or a government program like Medicare and Medicaid. It would apply for one year for people who were purchasing insurance after a lapse in coverage. And it would lower premiums for healthier people.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/priebus-doubts-states-will-choose-to-charge-sicker-people-more/ar-BBAQFue?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=edgsp
KentuckyWoman
(6,685 posts)"It will lower premiums for healthier people "
#1 Bullshit.
#2 Birth is a pre-existing condition.
#3 This shit was planned before the ink was even dry on ACA.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Phoenix61
(17,006 posts)Lying sack of shit. They are playing hot potato with people's lives. Fuckers!
Who would have thought that states would refuse the Medicare expansion? But once that become an optional rather than a mandatory feature of the Affordable Care Act (thanks to the Republicans' relentless pursuit of their case all the way to the Supreme Court), a whole bunch of states chose to kill their own citizens rather than accept e-e-e-e-e-evil federal government money. And which states were those? Take a wild guess, but here are some examples: Texas, Idaho, Alabama, and Mississippi.
Preibus being extremely disingenuous here, but his health insurance will remain intact, so what does he care?
Docreed2003
(16,862 posts)2naSalit
(86,646 posts)chief of staff, why the hell is he on the teevee talking policy?
He left his job where he had a minimal role in discussing policy, now he has a job where that activity is not part of his job description. Correct me if that's not the case.
duncang
(1,907 posts)The WH can't stuff anymore stupid between their ears. They talk in public and prove you wrong.
dalton99a
(81,515 posts)rickford66
(5,524 posts)Obama got hammered because of the glitches on the site and the administration spent a lot of manpower to fix it, with NO help from the GOP. And now they're going to use it? I'd force them to build a new one and sit back and watch the fun.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)MedusaX
(1,129 posts)For Age based increases beyond the bill's allowable 5x rate increase ....
since that will apply to every person beyond a specific age even with continuous coverage in place..
And states can use the waivers to attract insurance providers with the possibility of huge rate increases..
Besides....
the only way for states to gain access to the federally allocated funds earmarked specifically for 'increasing affordability'
is through waiver based programs ...
with no designated minimum % of funds which must be used to provide direct subsidies to individuals
Plus....
there will always be the possibility that people will have a lapse in coverage...
which would lead to "Pre-existing" classification upon returning to the marketplace ......
Governors & state legislators will do whatever it takes to appeal to the industry in order to maximize campaign contributions ......
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)Pretty pointless to put it in the bill if you don't expect anyone to use it. Unless you were just trying to get the asshole vote of course.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,023 posts)Bingo