The Top Ten Immediate Benefits You'll Get When Health Care Reform Passes

[babylonsister]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-john-b-larson/he-top-ten-immediate-bene_b_501748.html


Rep. John B. Larson
Chairman of the Democratic Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives
Posted: March 16, 2010 07:50 PM



As soon as health care passes, the American people will see immediate benefits. The legislation will:

* Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

* Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

* Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

* Lower seniors prescription drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole;

* Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

* Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

* Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26;

* Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

* Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

* Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs.

By enacting these provisions right away, and others over time, we will be able to lower costs for everyone and give all Americans and small businesses more control over their health care choices.

Edit to add link to where this info came from:

http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill46.pdf

[mdmc]

1. thanks for the link and info

reading it now..

[my2sense]

2. This needs to be on the front page of every web site, newspaper and M$M

broadcast.

[LibDemAlways]

17. The Headlines will actually read:

"Insurance Company Stocks Soar" and "Insurance Mandate Angers Consumers"

Count on it.

[apocalypsehow]

3. You should crosspost this in GD! Kick, Rec.

:thumbsup:

[babylonsister]

7. I did, thanks. nt

[abluelady]

4. A Post The Other Day

said that we would not get insurance with pre-existing conditions for four years. This says "immediate" access for uninsured Americans...Wondering which is correct?

[babylonsister]

12. I added a link in the OP, but you can read about it here:

http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill46.pdf

[frazzled]

14. It's not a contradiction

People will immediately get access to a high-risk pool if they are not insurable right now. The exchanges on which they will be able get regular insurance won't be up and running for several years. This is an emergency measure to offer high-risk insurance to people until the exchanges for individual-market insurance are active.

I hope that makes sense. It will take some time to get the exchanges running (though I wish it were less than 4 years).

[abluelady]

15. So, If We Lose Our Jobs

and try to buy our own policies in 2011, we're shit out of luck?

[babylonsister]

19. "a 'hardship' exemption for people who cannot afford insurance"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7941563

[abluelady]

21. This Doesn't Address Pre-existing Conditions

I can "afford" reasonable health care insurance. I have been denied for a pre-existing condition. I am now on my husband's plan. If he loses his job, does this mean I can get health insurance even with a pre-existing condition with a subsidy?

[babylonsister]

23. You didn't mention pre-existing conditions.

Go to the .pdf in the OP; there's more info there.

[tiptoe]

33. Access to Affordable Coverage for the Uninsured with Pre-existing Conditions

No Pre-existing Coverage Exclusions for Children
v/  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act eliminates pre-existing condition exclusions for all Americans beginning in 2014, when the Exchanges are operational. Recognizing the special vulnerability of children, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act prohibits health insurers from excluding coverage of pre-existing conditions for children, effective six months after enactment and applying to all new plans.

Access to Affordable Coverage for the Uninsured with Pre-existing Conditions
v/  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will provide $5 billion in immediate federal support for a new program to provide affordable coverage to uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions. This provision is effective 90 days after enactment, and coverage under this program will continue until new Exchanges are operational in 2014.


http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill46.pdf

 

[Cha]

5. I know where I'm a gonna cross post it..thanks

babylonsistah!

Edit..or just post it.:)

[Duchess]

6. Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26

Really? 26 seems a little old to still be a dependent or a child.

The rest seems reasonable.

[rhett o rick]

9. That's the point. If they still are dependent at 26 they need help. nm

[Duchess]

18. Why stop at 26?

Why not say children are dependents until the parents die? If they need help at 26 is it reasonable to assume they will need help at 27? 28? 30? 40?

How does this help the 26 year old? Will they somehow have lower rates if they are under their parents plan? Does it mean they don't have to find their own plan until they are 27? I'm not trying to argue I just think the age seems arbitrary and I don't understand how they would benefit.

[rhett o rick]

22. Of course the age is arbitrary. Why 21 to drink and not 20 or 22?

Why 65 for Medicare not 55? Why 55 mph? These are limits made by subjective decisions. In some cases children should be able to be covered by parents health insurance for their life. I have a good friend that has a daughter that is not capable of living on her own and holding a job that would provide health insurance. Of course single payer would eliminate that problem.

[bergie321]

13. It's Probably

For students who get post-graduate degrees (doctors, lawyers, PHDs, etc)

[rhett o rick]

8. Ok, ok, I am in. But as soon as it passes, I am pushing for Medicare for all.

So there.

[babylonsister]

10. Ha! Good for you, and I'll join you!

:thumbsup:

[provis99]

11. this bill is the substitute for Medicare for all.

give up your pipe dreams, already.

[rhett o rick]

25. I will agree this is a poor substitute for real health care reform, but I will not

give up fighting.

[LibDemAlways]

16. I wouldn't count on it. The second Obama's signature goes on it the lawsuits

are going to begin. This thing will be tied up in the courts for a long time. Who knows what provisions will remain when the dust settles.

[OhioBlue]

24. Once Obama signs it - it becomes law

the Republicans may file law suits... which may be tied up in the courts for a long time.. but that won't prevent the signed bill from becoming law.

[LibDemAlways]

27. Just saying that it will be the subject of many legal challenges and

judges will have the final word.

[rhett o rick]

26. What are you talking about. Are you suggesting that lawsuits will prevent this

bill from being enacted?

[Cleobulus]

20. I would take advantage of the high risk pool if I knew the costs involved.

What are the costs?

[jobwithout]

28. Top 10 benefits you don't get.

1. Cradle to Grave health care
2. A true competitor to "for profit" insurers.
3. Guaranteed protection against bankruptcy caused by health care cost
4. A level playing filed between all classes of persons.
5. Access to medical care for all persons residing in the country (Immigrants)
6. Protection of reproductive rights
7. Mandated treatment of every health care issue ( morality clause for practitioners, pharmacists etc...)
8. Banning of pre-existing conditions from day one of law signed in
9. Retroactive application of rules to existing plans (ie...preventive care, enrollment of children until 26.....how many business are going to dump their old plan and get a new one?)
10. Single payer

[angrychair]

29. my POV on this:

those that are against the passage of this bill are focused on the fact that they will not have the ability to pay, based on income and co-pays or both. Strangely, they fail to acknowledge that they likely currently have nothing at all or very poor coverage. Second, they fail to acknowledge that preventive care (i.e. check-ups and normal visits) are either free or the price of an office visit ($25 or whatever it may be). Preventive care will save more lives than doing and having nothing at all. I fail to understand the "all or nothing" focus of those that oppose the current effort. First, NOTHING in real life works like that. In real life you have to take the im-perfect and make it work. You aim high and take the best you can, which hopefully is somewhere in the middle or better if your lucky. Second, bills or laws are RARELY the final say on an issue. Equal rights for people of color and women and those with disabilities were not perfect when they were first written or when they became law. They were worked and re-worked over the years, ALWAYS a little better than the last. WHY WHY WHY do you think the re thugs fight so hard to prevent the bill even coming up for a vote?? Because once it becomes law-it is law-and there is NO take back. Second, the bill, even once it becomes law IS NEVER the final destination, it is only the first step of the journey. Relax, take a deep breath and SUPPORT THE HCR bill and keep fighting for your cause for better, cheaper universal health care. I and many others will be right there with you every step of the way.

[dflprincess]

34. "Preventive care will save more lives "

not if you can't afford the follow up care that preventative tests may indicate you need.

[rhett o rick]

32. What are you somekindof socialist?

:sarcasm:

[samplegirl]

30. Thank you for posting

so many people uninformed.

K&R

[Vinnie From Indy]

31. Silly Rabbits!

As sure the sun rises in the East, health insurance companies have already devised DOZENS of strategies to work around most of these provisions if they interfere with maximizing profit. I am actually quite shocked that many folks believe that health insurance companies will play nice and cooperate.

[babylonsister]

35. So let's just do nothing. Sounds like a plan. A bad plan, but a plan. nt

[tiptoe]

36. attempts by insurance cos to obviate intent of provisions will be basis for serious reform later...

Kaiser Permanente voluntarily implemented Vitamin D Status testing for its members as part of standard medical checkups.

Other health plans lacking the infrastructure and expenses of Kaiser's end-to-end health care plan's services want legislation de-obligating them from re-imbursing the cost of Vitamin D testing (unless the plan-member has been diagnosed with vitamin d deficiency-- catch 22!!).

Kaiser Health Plan volunteers the test and supplement program because it has a bottom-line interest in preventing disease amongst its members, as per the study done for Western Europe a year ago. See:

Estimated Benefit of Increased Vitamin D Status In Reducing the Economic Burden of Disease in Western Europe

and

Noteworthy News — Proposed Restrictions on Vitamin D Testing

Kaiser Health Plan business interests meld with those of its members' health interests -- at least with regard to Disease Incidence Prevention.
Other (anti-)health insurance plans apparently can't steer themselves to a position of longer-term disease prevention for their members; they have only the typical short-term, business-crap perspectives, opting to reduce short-term, immediate expenses as priority over members' long-term health interest. They behave as if parasitical corporate-fence operations instead of "health" businesses.

A single-payer or public option should be founded on National Vitamin D testing and supplementation: the Return-on-investment is 19-to-1 (as well as, btw, enhancing health of humans through boosting of the innate immune system in the process).

A vitamin D Status test is the most fundamental medical test any hospital/health plan should cover: AFAIK, only Kaiser is volunteering it (as of last summer) and only because it's expected to help their bottom line...in the LONG run.