MSNBC: Pre-existing conditions takes effect in 2014

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Immediate for minors, but 2014 for adults.

So all the posts about how nay-sayers endanger the short-term or even medium-term health prospects of specific DUers or letter-writers or hypothetical persons with pre-existing conditions can be sat aside.

That doesn't mean the bill should not be passed. Just that that particular argument has no teeth anymore.

Uninsured folks with recently diagnosed cancer, for instance, are going to have to hope for a fortuitous five-year spontaneous remission.

One assumes that other parts of the bill must help out that class of uninsured folks in the shorter-term somehow. Right?

But as politics, since pre-exiting conditions has been a MAJOR part of public demand for--and selling of--this reform effort it is not entirely snark to say the pre-existing condition provision for adults will kick in half-way through the Romney administration.

(No link at the moment--from MSNBC break-down of key points of the compromise. Please provide additional info if available.)

[Laelth]

1. k&r for the truth, however depressing. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[xultar]

2. That shit should be immediate for everyone. There is no excuse for that shit.

[Joe Bacon]

36. If it started now, the Democrats are toast!

Just imagine if it started right now and people got soaked with higher premiums, penalties and their current benefits become taxed. You would hear a howling all over this country that would make the teabaggers shtick look like a party. The Democrats would be slaughtered at the polls in record numbers!

[xultar]

48. So we all want coverage for pre-existing conditions but no one wants to pay for it.

Nice.

[Romulox]

51. The other way to read that is that the Democrats don't have the courage of their convictions...

It's crucial to pass this legislation before Xmas, but the actual law itself can wait 4 or 5 years? :wtf:

[global1]

3. Just Like In The Credit Card Legislation - They Are Going To Give The Insurance......

companies cover for 4 years to wreck havoc on us. Look at what happened in the grace period that they gave the credit card companies.

Fool me once shame on you - fool me twice shame on me. They are making the same mistake.

[girl gone mad]

31. Also gives them 4 years to use some other piece of legislation..

to strip it out while no one is looking. Call me a cynic, but I've seen it done too many times. Remember how they reversed Glass-Steagall, for instance?

[Deja Q]

50. Assuming it's a mistake.

[freddie mertz]

4. By then the bill will have been repealed by Romney and the new Repub majorities.

I hope I'm wrong, but am probably right.

[Joe Bacon]

5. Wow, I can get screwed for 4 more years.

So nice to have diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis and know that I will be forced to continue paying for a figleaf insurance policy at loansharking rates for another four years.

Wow! then the new rules come into effect and thanks to Obama and the Gang of Five, my extortion continues--Because I'm over 50, I pay three times the base rate AND another 50% on top of that for preexisting conditions. So for every $100 I pay now, I'll fork out $450 for even less coverage. Thank you so much for bankrupting me, Mr. President. Say, why don't you just give your bosom buddy LIEberman another pat on the back from all of us who are getting screwed!

[HughMoran]

6. Press your Congressmen to fix this in conference

This is something we can accomplish with massive pressure - let's apply pressure where it is most likely to succeed.

[Armstead]

8. Nope this is the pragmatic approach...let 'em wait four years

Can't cause Big Insurance any inconvenience.

Pressure from the "little people" doesn't matter.

[HughMoran]

9. oh, snark

C'mon - we can do some good here - don't be like that.

[Armstead]

12. We...can't ...do....any...good That's the message we've been getting all week

yes it is snarky and I apologize for that.

But all week anyone who wants anything changed in the officially sanctioned bill has been labeled on DU and by the Rhambama machine as bill killers, non-compromisers, malcontents, "fringe left teabaggers" GOP supporters, etc.

So, yes, I'm feeling a little bitter at the moment.

I should add the cavaet that this discussion is based on the OP's information is being accurate. Maybe it is incorrect. Hope so.

[HughMoran]

13. But getting it changed by yelling at fellow DUers is not the way to do it

People were calling all week to get things changed - sad that we have Senators that hate their own voters - don't blame DU for that.

I heard the same info on CNN so I was also assuming it was correct. Isn't this sort of change just the kind of victory we can actually achieve? I can't see any reason that a Senator could filibuster over a few dollars (or a few billion ;) )

[Armstead]

16. I was calling Congresspeople politely asking them too

Fat lot of good that did.

(PS I did my share of yelling at DUers too....But usually only when they yelled first. Immature of me I admit, as I usually do try not to get personal about it.)

[HughMoran]

19. If every call could change the nation

wouldn't that be great? I have no expectations when I call - it's simply something I do as I know others may not and perhaps many others will be on my side and it'll sway my Congressperson. It's rarely satisfying (just like signing all those petitions and supporting MoveOn ad campaigns) but I consider it an obligation & will never be deterred - no matter how negative it is on my favorite political site.

[Armstead]

22. I have no expectatriona about my call alone but...

through polls and many other venues it is clear that the majority of Americans wanted something very different than what this bill delivered. They wanted real reform.

I don't expect them to follow my advice. We'd all be in big trouble if they did. :)

But a bill that runs so contrary to what most democrats and a large share of others wanted?

[girl gone mad]

32. Calls to congress on TARP were about 90 to 1 against.

How did that work out?

A moratorium on volunteering and donations, along with voting the bums out are about the only realistic options we have at this point.

[Politicalboi]

30. Your right

Pressure them with 2010. It could work. Threaten them with real progressives in the 2010 election.

[IndianaGreen]

10. No. According to Ben Nelson, the conference will be very limited in scope

with no material, or substantive, changes allowed.

[AzDar]

7. KILL THE BILL. It's a fucking Frankenstein's monster...

[beachmom]

43. Yeah, that's the spirit!! Let's NEVER get rid of pre-existing condition.

[PA Democrat]

11. So people with preexisting conditions will be forced to buy insurance

that won't cover their illness? Please tell me this is a joke.

[dave29]

26. There will be an interem mechanism by which people who are denied

coverage due to pre-existing conditions can find affordable insurance that WILL cover them until the provision kicks in. You are not screwed.

[BzaDem]

28. The mandate doesn't take effect until 2014 either. n/t

[Ilsa]

14. Goddammit. What a bunch of thieving crap. Assholes in Washington.

I know so many of them are great people, but there is no excuse for the good ones bailing on this provision.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Wasn't there an immediate high-risk pool to be set up and funded

for these folks, or am I mistaken? I remember reading that it was perhaps not funded enough to take it to 2014.

[Joe Bacon]

18. Oh you'll get a "High Risk Pool"!

But before you get to jump in it. LIEberman hits you over the head with a pipe, puts you in a box and pours the cement.

[kestrel91316]

17. So, I still won't be able to get insurance for 5 more years in spite of the MANDATE.

Because the last time I tried to get it, I got denied, not because I actually HAVE a preexisting condition (I am in perfect health) but because it had been so long since I last saw a doctor that the insurance co assumed I was flat out lying about my health status.

[Orangepeel]

21. I'm not sure, but it looks like the mandate becomes effective in 2017

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/19/816680/-BREAKING:-Important-Changes-in-Health-Care-Managers-Amendment

At least, that's my third hand interpretation of it.

[kestrel91316]

25. Well, at least that solves the immediate conflict of a mandate

plus exclusion/denial for pre-existing conditions.

How, exactly, are people with pre-existing contidions going to get coverage in the meantime??

[Garam_Masala]

47. In the meantime most of them will die

and that will reduce premiums for the rest in 2014-2017 period.

[BklnDem75]

20. Here's a link

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/11/what_happens_before_2014.html

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. thanks

[madmx19790]

24. we get to suffer for 4 more years. awesome

[MessiahRp]

27. So let me guess.. Pre-existing bans don't take effect until 2014, but mandates are immediate?

Either way this is such complete bullshit.

Rp

[BzaDem]

29. Nope. Mandates don't take effect until 2014. n/t

[ProSense]

33. "Starting immediately children cannot be denied health coverage due to pre-existing conditions."

Some aspect go into effect immediately.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

37. Hence the first line of the OP: "Immediate for minors, but 2014 for adults."

[Bluenorthwest]

34. So plenty more dying to get done!

And years to rip this crap to shreds and make the Insurance Company goons unwelcome in society. No one is going to put up with this.

[Unvanguard]

35. That rule, like the other ones restricting insurance company discretion, has to go with the mandate.

So it will be timed with it.

Want to make it happen earlier? Push for the mandate to be earlier. Somehow I don't think that will be too popular.

[eomer]

38. There appears to be an interim solution in the Senate bill.

People with pre-existing conditions who are uninsured will be able to buy insurance without regard to those pre-existing conditions and will pay standard premium rates, not rates that are increased due to their medical condition.

The government will fund the excess cost caused by the medical condition of the insureds. The bill funds $5 billion to start with to cover the excess and says that more funds will be provided if and when necessary.

This interim solution will be available starting not later than 90 days from enactment of the bill and continues until 1/1/2014 when the permanent solution kicks in.

All of this is based on my reading of Section 1101 in this version of the Senate bill:
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf

Caveats:

• I don't know whether the bill version I'm looking at is up to date with all changes the Senate may have made.
  
• I'm opposed to this bill. But I believe our opposition should be fact-based and from what I can tell the OP appears to be a mistaken conclusion.
  
  

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

39. Correct.. page 41

This is why I believe there is now a moral imperative to pass this bill on behalf of these people.

We can still demand reforms and people will. Mobs may. It will all rise and fall on the "affordibility" issue.

[bvar22]

40. By 2014, the Republicans will OWN the Senate, and maybe the White House.

Those "regulations" will be quickly eliminated, loopholed, or simply not enforced.

We WILL be left with unregulated Mandatory Health Insurance and NO possibility of ANY Public Option or true reform for another generation.

Only The Democrats can establish a system based on the MANDATORY purchase of Health Insurance with the IRS as the collection agency.
The Republicans could have NEVER gotten away with THAT.

However, The Republicans (if not the DLC "Democrats") will quickly deregulate it and reduce subsidies because of "fiscal concerns".

[RBInMaine]

41. And with no bill they would NEVER take effect. So there.

[ClarkUSA]

42. Timelines change once the bill is passed and Congress start tweaking it every year.

With landmark legislation, nothing is written in stone.

[Mass]

44. High risk pool will be created right now for people who cannot get insurance.

The law says it has to be affordable, whatever that means.

This said,I agree. It should have been NOW.

See post #39 for link

[DailyGrind51]

45. Oh, I'm sure that tumor won't metastasize until then, right?

[TheKentuckian]

46. What is the lame ass excuse for this not going into effect immediately?

This whole thing blows big chunks.

[Deja Q]

49. Pro-life, my ass

My ass is more pro-life.

[shadesofgray]

52. It'll NEVER take effect. N-E-V-E-R.

[Generator]

53. Yes because their politcal career is more important than people's

lives. 2010 or Obama's 2012. It always is. So if someone can explain why politicians aren't the scum of the earth-I'd like to know. They are supposed to work for us. All the work for is themselves.