Cantor: We’ll have a preexisting conditions provision in our new health-care plan too

posted at 6:57 pm on November 30, 2010 by Allahpundit

Offered as a correction to this morning’s Headline item. Initially, the Hill reported that Cantor wanted to retain ObamaCare’s framework for preexisting conditions. Not so, as they now note in a postscript to the article: He wants to repeal the whole thing, then replace it with a GOP bill that will have its own, different preexisting conditions provision — but no individual mandate.

How that’s going to work in practice, I have no idea.

Cantor stressed that while he supports full repeal of the current law, Republicans share some of the same goals as Democrats, although they propose different ways of achieving them.

“We too don’t want to accept any insurance company’s denial of someone and coverage for that person because he or she may have pre-existing condition,” Cantor said, addressing a young woman in the audience who noted that she had a pre-existing health condition.

“And likewise we want to make sure that someone of your age has the ability to access affordable care, whether it’s under your parents plan or elsewhere,” Cantor added.

If you’re serious about covering people with preexisting conditions, you’re going to have to subsidize them one way or another. Either you do it by forcing everyone to buy insurance and use the larger premium pool to cover the costs of care for those who are sick, or you bite the bullet and treat this as what it is — welfare for the infirm, a.k.a. Medicare — and let the state pay for them, which means tax hikes to cover the cost. Both options are heresy for Republicans. In fact, so important is the mandate to paying for preexisting conditions coverage in ObamaCare that some think if the former is struck down in court, the latter will have to be tossed out with it. Ace is right that Cantor’s reassurances will make it easier politically to repeal O-Care if the opportunity arises, but what happens if the opportunity does arise and then suddenly the GOP can’t figure out a way to square the cost circle? Are we going to cut other programs to offset the costs for covering preexisting conditions? If so, which ones? He’s making some mighty expensive promises here.

Update: Philip Klein’s underwhelmed by those mighty expensive promises:

Overall, the GOP plan was not very ambitious and is not a true free market alternative. It does allow Americans to purchase insurance accross state lines, but it doesn’t remove one of the biggest barriers to the creation of a free market for health care, which is a tax code that discriminates against those who purchase insurance on their own instead of through an employer. Nor does it include any significant changes to Medicare and Medicaid.

While stopping short of forcing insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions, the plan would force states to set up “qualifying” federally-subsidized high risk pools or reinsurance programs. It would also make dependents out of everybody through the age of 25, so younger Americans can stay on their parents policies longer. Under ObamaCare, the age is 26.

By all means, the first order of business for conservatives is finding a way to repeal ObamaCare. But winning the health care debate in the long-run will require much bolder solutions than Republican leadership has embraced thus far.

Update: John McCormack of the Standard reminds me of this Capretta/Miller piece from earlier this year about how high-risk pools for those with preexisting conditions might work.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

And with Cantor rises the new Right…that of the RINOs.

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 6:59 PM

Cantor should get Mitt Romney to help him with a Republican version of ObamaCare. He is the architect of Socialized Medicine.

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 7:01 PM

So people will still be able to buy health care insurance on the way to the hospital with a costly injury?

amerpundit on November 30, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Cantor made it though 2010 – he won’t make it through 2012. He’s got a big mouth and wants to be loved by everybody. Somebody catch up with him and kick him in the ass.

suzyk on November 30, 2010 at 7:03 PM

what happens if the opportunity does arise and then suddenly the GOP can’t figure out a way to square the cost circle?

Oh oh oh, I know11!!1!!

We’ll have the CBO lie about the budget numbers, have the start date of benefits staggered from the start date of taxes to appear to be budget neutral over the first 10 years of the taxes and then call anyone who disagrees racist.

Do I win?

joeindc44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Most Republicans did say during the healthcare ‘debate’ they they supported the pre-existing conditions reform.

Go RBNY on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Are they going to have requirements to ignore pre-existing conditions for auto, house, and life insurance also?

“Hello, I’d like to insure my car against theft.”
“OK, what’s the VIN?”
“How would I know, it’s gone you idiot.”

pedestrian on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Politicians seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of insurance.

Chazz on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

So people will still be able to buy health care insurance on the way to the hospital with a costly injury?

amerpundit on November 30, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Ask the guy in Kentucky who didn’t buy fire protection and they let his house burn down, while they stood there and watched. Remember that epic thread?

SouthernGent on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

All this of course will be up for negotiation in the interest of being bipartisan and reaching across the aisle so that they don’t appear uncompromising.

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

So people will still be able to buy health care insurance on the way to the hospital with a costly injury?

amerpundit

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

LOL.

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Didn’t this get banned?

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM

It’s the we broke it we bought thing.

Screwed.

Scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:08 PM

CHANGE THE SYSTEM ENITRELY. We should not be using insurance to pay regular charges.

David Shane on November 30, 2010 at 7:08 PM

He wants to repeal the whole thing, then replace it with a GOP bill that will have its own, different preexisting conditions provision — but no individual mandate.

CRAP – Is there anyway to undo and Email?

How it will work, I don’t know either, but REPEAL IT FIRST.

Then sort it out.

Kini on November 30, 2010 at 7:08 PM

sharrukin

What are you? The thread police?

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Ask the guy in Kentucky who didn’t buy fire protection and they let his house burn down, while they stood there and watched. Remember that epic thread?

SouthernGent on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Nailed it.

Tradgedy.

Scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:09 PM

It’s always in the details.

JellyToast on November 30, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Oh mine… that was a quick correction from Cantor.

How sweet it is… “when a government fears its people – there is liberty.” At least, he has recommitted himself to full repeal – I guess a few calls promising to mount primary challenges did the trick.

Just repeal Obamacare and then address the problems with pre-existing conditions etc. in a truly open and democratic fashion. Workable solutions will be found if the interest of both the public and the insurance companies are factored in.

TheRightMan on November 30, 2010 at 7:10 PM

“We too don’t want to accept any insurance company’s denial of someone and coverage for that person because he or she may have pre-existing condition,”

Why?
If you are looking for a charitable hand out of medical care because you developed a condition without insurance, shouldn’t you ideally be honest that you are asking for charity?

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:10 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Yes, because hospitals everywhere are turning away people with serious injuries because their insurance isn’t up to snuff.

Oh, that’s right. That’s not the case. You’re just a f**king liar.

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

I don’t get what the big deal is, it’s a high risk pool. It’s not the same thing as what Obamacare has. I know when my mom got cancer my parents insurance changed.

lizzie beth on November 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:09 PM

Just wondering if you crawled out from under your rock with help or did you sneak in through the back door?

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

There is a difference IMHO between dibeetus and having been diagnosed with cancer a week ago. There’s pre-existing conditions, and then there are pre-existing conditions.

Sekhmet on November 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Just wondering if you crawled out from under your rock with help or did you sneak in through the back door?

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 7:11 PM

He snuck out of Alan Grayson’s back door.

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 7:12 PM

under the liberal plan you die because you either run into a death panel, wait 3 years to receive cancer drugs, have to wait 10 months to see a prenatal specialist, have the government decide that your types of drugs are not cost beneficial, a union thug nurse accidentally doses you with rat poison, or you die of Clostridium difficile while sitting in the hospital waiting room and the government classifies your death as being caused by old age, at 52 years old.

oh right, my examples are real whereas the standard hate filled left line of conservatives want you to dies isn’t real.

joeindc44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:12 PM

“Cantor made it though 2010 – he won’t make it through 2012. He’s got a big mouth and wants to be loved by everybody. Somebody catch up with him and kick him in the ass.”

suzyk on November 30, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Suzyk: Well said!!!!!

tomshup on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Well, repeal-and-replace is an upgraded position, but still it’s going to take some feature like a high risk pool, along the lines of what the auto insurers maintain, to make it financially feasible.

petefrt on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

So people will still be able to buy health care insurance on the way to the hospital with a costly injury?

amerpundit on November 30, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Ask the guy in Kentucky who didn’t buy fire protection and they let his house burn down, while they stood there and watched. Remember that epic thread?

SouthernGent on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

And the answer was that they should have let him pay the full cost of putting out the fire — but they never thought to have that built into their system.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Politicians seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of insurance.

Chazz on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

This.

You simply cannot have affordable car insurance if you can buy a policy after you wreck your car, ditto for health insurance.

It’s not rocket science.

Rebar on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

“We too don’t want to accept any insurance company’s denial of someone and coverage for that person because he or she may have pre-existing condition,”

Honestly, even with his “clarification”, I’m left speechless(type-less?). I can’t insure my house against a hurricane when one is within a week away from hitting (believe me, I actually tried that one). This is crazy, and Cantor has really proverbially screwed the proverbial pooch with this one. I left the door open for his “clarification”, but if this is it…

Weight of Glory on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

I wondered where Alan Grayson went.

William Amos on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

It’s my Birthday.
Everyone say Happy Birthday.

Scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

And the answer was that they should have let him pay the full cost of putting out the fire — but they never thought to have that built into their system.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Too bad we don’t have that in our health care system.

OH WAIT

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Look, people with pre-existing conditions need treatment not insurance.

Now one way to solve this is to give insurance companies tax credits for every person they help pay for treatment who otherwise wouldn’t be eligible. You could also expand that idea so that any company that doanted care to needy or “uncoverable” individuals would get a tax write off.
Its wins all around. The person gets coverage/care, the company gets a tax write-off and good PR, and libtard non-profits get starved for funds, as the money they would be getting goes to help sick people.

Iblis on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Weenie.

steebo77 on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

I wish these people would smarten up. We should not be basing our health policy on insurance of any kind. We need to cope with the actual cost of health care, not the cost or availability of health insurance. Fix the cost problem and access takes care of itself. And what is that cost problem? That individuals are insulated from the costs of procedures. So toss out the health insurance “fixes” and instead create a 401(k)-type program for tax-free health savings drawn directly from your paycheck plus a new subsidy for household medical expenses in excess of 20% of household income annually. Pay for it with general tax funds, not a specific revenue stream, as part of comprehensive tax reform. Teach people to pay for their own health care directly instead of charging everything to insurance. It would be revolutionary.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

A rather simple solution to pre-existing conditions would be to have a waiting period of, say, six months before claims could be made against it. That way, clearly terminal cases would not be draining the pool.

OldEnglish on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

No, they ask others who care to chip in and pay the cost out of their own free will. That’s the free market.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

He just can’t say “No!” right out where somebody can hear him. He can’t just look somebody in the eye and tell them that, in an adult world, it’s up to them to take care of themselves. He just MUST try to solve this poor little lamb’s problem in spite of the fact that it’s not the proper role of government, especially the most distant and arbitrary level of government, to solve the problem at all.
So much for “Fiscal” Conservatives! So much for a free America! Why our forefathers bothered to fight that stupid revolution in 1776 is beyond me.

Lew on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Its a shame we dont have a law for pre existing stupidity

William Amos on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Here is how you could do it, speaking as an insurance geek.

Permit across state line medical insurance. If somebody chooses not to purchase insurance, they need not. If they later decide to because of illness, require that the insurance companies charge them all the past premiums with interest plus a reasonable fine. Since everybody eventually needs medical care, this should be sufficient incentive to get virtually everybody insured. If a person cannot afford the past premiums plus fines, there will still be medicaid.

The premiums should not be too burdensome on a twenty-something if reasonable age-pricing is allowed and if people are allowed to purchase high-deductible major medical policies which exclude items such as drying out and chiropractics.

levi from queens on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

At least get the line straight moron—they die quickly!

Rovin on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

He snuck out of Alan Grayson’s back door.

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Sounds like it!

I wonder if this is Allah’s plan for more hits per thread?

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM

I wish these people would smarten up. We should not be basing our health policy on insurance of any kind. We need to cope with the actual cost of health care, not the cost or availability of health insurance. Fix the cost problem and access takes care of itself. And what is that cost problem? That individuals are insulated from the costs of procedures. So toss out the health insurance “fixes” and instead create a 401(k)-type program for tax-free health savings drawn directly from your paycheck plus a new subsidy for household medical expenses in excess of 20% of household income annually. Pay for it with general tax funds, not a specific revenue stream, as part of comprehensive tax reform. Teach people to pay for their own health care directly instead of charging everything to insurance. It would be revolutionary.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

That’s getting there, but we really shouldn’t need to get the federal government involved in putting yet more money into the system — we should be trying to get it out completely.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:17 PM

you know, just cause you don’t have insurance doesn’t mean you automatically die.

libs be so ignorant.

joeindc44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM

No, they ask others who care to chip in and pay the cost out of their own free will. That’s the free market.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Which is why we call this socialized medicine. The moment we pay the bills for people we destroy any incentive for them to pay it themselves.

Why work when some other stupid person will pay all the bills for you ?

The democrats dont end poverty they increase it and subsidize it. Its in their best interest to keep people poor.

William Amos on November 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM

So now the GOP are the new Tories, arguing that they can run the socialist state better than the socialists that created it.

Kafir on November 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM

“Cantor made it though 2010 – he won’t make it through 2012. He’s got a big mouth and wants to be loved by everybody. Somebody catch up with him and kick him in the ass.”

suzyk on November 30, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Agreed. Bad goof. Really bad. He lost almost all his credibility with this one.

petefrt on November 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Politicians seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of insurance.

Chazz on November 30, 2010 at 7:04 PM

No sh*t.

If I keep my house in nice up and meet building codes, new wiring, and a Good roof, should I have to pay higher premiums to supplement my dumb neighbor whose house has wiring from the 1930′s, roof caving in, and a makeshift back porch that is more deathtrap than house?

portlandon on November 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Does anyone know how to get Cantor’s email address. I’d like to give him a piece of my mind. RINO’s get out of our way.

erp on November 30, 2010 at 7:20 PM

I was diagnosed with genetic hypertension 8 years ago and I haven’t been denied coverage for it.
I don’t see why there needs to be a law to force insurance companies to do what they’re already doing.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 30, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Update: John McCormack of the Standard reminds me of this Capretta/Miller piece from earlier this year about how high-risk pools for those with preexisting conditions might work.

I’m not so sure about that. From the piece:

Across the country, state policymakers have turned to an approach that does not require a fundamental transformation of the insurance marketplace: the creation of high-risk pools. Unfortunately, these state-level efforts have not been sufficiently ambitious or adequately funded…The pools’ main shortcoming in every instance, though, is the large mismatch between the number of people who need them and the amount of money made available to subsidize them…Champions of pro-market health-care reform should therefore urge states to properly design and operate high-risk pools, and should call on the federal government to properly fund them.

None of that really sounds like a solution.

Weight of Glory on November 30, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Ever notice Fins runs when it gets tough?

Dishonest always runs.

CWforFreedom on November 30, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Permit across state line medical insurance. If somebody chooses not to purchase insurance, they need not. If they later decide to because of illness, require that the insurance companies charge them all the past premiums with interest plus a reasonable fine. Since everybody eventually needs medical care, this should be sufficient incentive to get virtually everybody insured. If a person cannot afford the past premiums plus fines, there will still be medicaid.

levi from queens on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

That doesn’t work. The only people you would have getting insurance would be those for whom the cost of their condition outweighs the back-premiums and fines. You would still have a system where “insurance” just exists as a way for sick people to take money from others by force of law.

The very first thing we should do is toss all of the state government requirements on health insurance. Then, we should get rid of employer provided insurance. Finally, we should make insurance real insurance, based on triggered contingencies.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:26 PM

It’s my Birthday.
Everyone say Happy Birthday.

Scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Hopefully, you didn’t turn 27.

Kini on November 30, 2010 at 7:28 PM

I’m still scratching my head over the massive efforts being made on behalf of this relatively small group of “pre-existing” people. Remember, the demand for this coverage turned out to be about 2% of what HHS expected.

Dee2008 on November 30, 2010 at 7:28 PM

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:17 PM

I think we should have a safety net, just a more market-driven one involving things like vouchers. We have programs for the old and the very young. All we need now is a program for the very sick and that takes care of our most vulnerable populations.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:29 PM

These aren’t real Conservatives here. You cannot mandate pre-existing conditions without an individual mandate.

Pre-existing conditions (many of them) were handled under Bill Clinton’s HIPPA act. The pre-existing issue isn’t as bad as it’s claimed to be.

These guys don’t get it. We really need to send Palin up there to show them how.

HondaV65 on November 30, 2010 at 7:29 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

ObamaCare slashes Medicare by $500 billion. Do you honestly believe that won’t kill any defenseless seniors?

Chuck Schick on November 30, 2010 at 7:29 PM

People want to compare health insurance to other types of insurance like houses or cars but it’s a bad analogy.

You have a very good chance of never needing to make a claim on your car or house insurance but you can’t say that about health insurance because sooner or later everyone is going to get sick.

Say you develop diabetes and you are laid off of your job good luck finding coverage with that preexisting condition after the COBRA runs out.

KF Peters on November 30, 2010 at 7:31 PM

Here’s a thought… insurance company can’t deny you for a pre-existing condition, but they can charge you extra for it!!

I know that’s a really far out concept, but hey…

Life is not fair. Slippery slope to making health care a “right”, which will lead to lower quality care and involuntary servitude at some point.

ButterflyDragon on November 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM

I think we should have a safety net, just a more market-driven one involving things like vouchers. We have programs for the old and the very young. All we need now is a program for the very sick and that takes care of our most vulnerable populations.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:29 PM

That’s just it: the safety net is us, not the government. It should be purely voluntary, not derived from taxes.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM

Insurance protects someone from unknown risks.

A pre-existing condition, by definition, is not an unknown.

There are ‘high-risk’ insurance pools out there for people with pre-existing conditions that account for the fact that they are more likely to need certain types of care and price the premiums accordingly.

There are insurance companies that will insure the person but not anything relating to the pre-existing condition.

Both of these options are honest about the costs involved and require no government intervention.

The reason the government is getting involved is that people with pre-existing conditions want to be able to pay the same rates as everyone else. The only way to do this is to have the healthy subsidize the unhealthy.

If we lived in an honest world, the politicians would at least have the decency to label it and discuss it as forced ‘charity’ rather than some right that evil insurance companies are refusing to provide.

JadeNYU on November 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM

KF Peters on November 30, 2010 at 7:31 PM

Decouple insurance from your job. Presto-changeo no problem.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:35 PM

I agree with Rush Limbaugh, who repeated what Cantor said and simply said he wants to turn off the mike and the lights, shut the door, and go home. They heard nothing in November.

Marcus on November 30, 2010 at 7:36 PM

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM

No, I’m not that libertarian. I believe in minimal government safety nets. I just want them to be somewhat market-driven.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:36 PM

The GOP: Learning nothing from the last election since 1854.

Bishop on November 30, 2010 at 7:37 PM

And remember, this was such a crisis that required buying off various senators when 83% of people were happy with their coverage.

joeindc44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:38 PM

People want to compare health insurance to other types of insurance like houses or cars but it’s a bad analogy.

You have a very good chance of never needing to make a claim on your car or house insurance but you can’t say that about health insurance because sooner or later everyone is going to get sick.

Say you develop diabetes and you are laid off of your job good luck finding coverage with that preexisting condition after the COBRA runs out.

KF Peters on November 30, 2010 at 7:31 PM

Which is why health insurance needs to be for individuals (not employer care) and contingency based — like betting against your health. Heck, we should probably be looking at a model where your parents pay into the system for you against future possible illness.
Really, we need to stop looking at health insurance as a money machine service, and start looking at it as covering our bets.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:40 PM

No, I’m not that libertarian. I believe in minimal government safety nets. I just want them to be somewhat market-driven.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:36 PM

Why?

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:40 PM

High deductibles- either required, or encouraged via a steep premium curve…?

Seth Halpern on November 30, 2010 at 7:41 PM

If we lived in an honest world, the politicians would at least have the decency to label it and discuss it as forced ‘charity’ rather than some right that evil insurance companies are refusing to provide.

JadeNYU on November 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM

This.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:42 PM

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 7:40 PM

I believe in forced charity, to some extent. Depending on others to be charitable is risky. In down economies the money may disappear.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:44 PM

I’ve been without health insurance for several years now (and soon will be a proud member of the criminal class I suppose). The last time I tried to buy catastrophic coverage the paperwork was impossible to fill out accurately as they wanted the dates and results of every doctor visit for the last 10 years.

So I self-insure. People do this all the time in other insurance areas such as home insurance (no mortgage), comprehensive auto coverage (no lien), or even life insurance. Now, if you like to smoke in bed, are a crappy driver, and like playing russian roulette as a stress reliever then not carrying insurance seems like a pretty dumb idea. Yet our leaders are now so intent on everyone being risk free that you MUST protect yourself via insurance or be fined for not doing so.

BTW, I negotiated a cash deal with my primary doctor which is quite affordable, though it is a hoot watching the front office people trying to figure out how to charge me correctly on the day of service. I do still wish I had catastrophic coverage; but those plans are soon to be illegal anyhow.

GnuBreed on November 30, 2010 at 7:44 PM

most innovative health system in the world, doing the best efforts to cover people who are too poor or stupid or lazy or unlucky to have good coverage with a gov’t safety blanket for the old and poor got shoved aside for a lefty pipedream that has failed to work

joeindc44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:44 PM

levi from queens on November 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Since you’re a self-described insurance geek, then answer this question: What provisions would be made to make coverage affordable for those who have a preexisting condition (let’s say a herniated disc), they have exhausted COBRA benefits, remain unemployed or only work part-time, but need to purchase an individual insurance plan? Irrespective of which state they purchase the plan from, wouldn’t the high-risk insurance premium costs be prohibitive for them?

anXdem on November 30, 2010 at 7:46 PM

BTW, I negotiated a cash deal with my primary doctor which is quite affordable.

GnuBreed on November 30, 2010 at 7:44 PM

This is what everbody should be doing, to the point that docs should post an uninsured price list. If we have to have federal mandates that’s one I can get behind.

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:46 PM

Why does it have to be either subsidized or forced purchase? Why not just do what many states have, which is a high risk pool? Make them pay more if they want their condition covered, or if their pre-existing condition isn’t too terrible just have the write out coverage of problems related to that condition if at all possible (say cover the costs of all prescriptions except the one you have to take currently). Life isn’t fair if you didn’t cover yourself for your problems others shouldn’t be expected to pick up your slack.

clement on November 30, 2010 at 7:48 PM

As has been said before…This isn’t ‘insurance’…it’s ‘Welfare’….

BigWyo on November 30, 2010 at 7:51 PM

This story is being back-peddled now. From The Hill:

Editor’s note: This article was changed at 1:57 p.m.. The Hill incorrectly reported in the initial version that Cantor wants to keep certain provisions of the healthcare law intact. The article was revised to emphasize that Cantor and House Republicans are pursuing a full repeal of healthcare reform while addressing issues in the law, such as pre-existing conditions and allowing young people to stay on their parents’ insurance plan, in their replacement bill. Both provisions are in current law, but Republicans would deal with them differently than Democrats did in the bill that passed earlier this year.

Along with the story that Christine O’Donnell allegedly was supporting Hillary Clinton for president, when what she said was:

“Hillary Clinton for president?…You’re going to vote for Hillary Clinton,” he murmured after O’Donnell urged a 2012 run. Stephanopoulos’ hopes were dashed, however, after the former Delaware Senate candidate explained her reasoning: “…Anybody is better than Obama.” (O’Donnell also called for Clinton to “take out” Obama in the primary.)

there seems to be a lot of media spin that republicans are compromising. This is lame-stream media trying to drive the message.

scrubjay on November 30, 2010 at 7:54 PM

clement on November 30, 2010 at 7:48 PM

High-risk pools are great but it still leaves the problem of how to pay for really expensive procedures. One type of cancer treatment costs around $100K a year. Do we tell people they simply can’t have it if they can’t raise that money?

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:54 PM

As has been said before…This isn’t ‘insurance’…it’s ‘Welfare’….

BigWyo on November 30, 2010 at 7:51 PM

You speak wisdom my friend!..:)

Dire Straits on November 30, 2010 at 7:56 PM

No. Under the conservative plan they die. That’s free market medicine for ya.

Grow Fins on November 30, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Grayson, you magnificent bastard! I knew there was a reason the voters of your district shit-canned you!

gryphon202 on November 30, 2010 at 7:57 PM

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Charity organizations usally fill the gaps on the really expensive surgery procedures..Not all but most!..:)

Dire Straits on November 30, 2010 at 7:59 PM

Grayson, you magnificent bastard! I knew there was a reason the voters of your district shit-canned you!

gryphon202 on November 30, 2010 at 7:57 PM

+1..I was waiting for someone to point that out!..:)

Dire Straits on November 30, 2010 at 8:01 PM

Nobody knows how to deal with healthcare. The current system sucks. ObamaCare sucks. RomneyCare sucks.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 8:02 PM

We didn’t vote them into office to replace Obamacare. We voted them in to get rid of Obamacare. They need to lift the restrictions in place that prevents people from buying insurance from other states and that will be the solution to all the problems. Let the free market work and get the government out of the way.

mizflame98 on November 30, 2010 at 8:02 PM

There are different kinds of pre-existing conditions. For chronic conditions that are, in aggregate, relatively rare, a voucher for coverage might be workable. It could not cover the whole cost (or else you get into moral hazard situations) and it has to be integrated into the insurance system.

If we went to the Fair Tax, the voucher money might come out of the funds allocated for the prebate, thus providing a balance of interested between the givers and the takers.

For pre-existing conditions that are likely to require costly care, a once-in-a-lifetime voucher contributing, say, 40% of the costs might work.

But what we need most of all is to separate insurance, which protects against risk, from “health care” which includes predictable costs like mammograms and colonoscopies. If we want to subsidize them, we can (though I argue against it) but we must, at all costs, stop confusing insurance with care cost coverage. And I urge everyone to bombard any politician who engages in the confusion with the truth, no matter which side of the aisle he sleeps on.

njcommuter on November 30, 2010 at 8:06 PM

He snuck out of Alan Grayson’s back door side.

MadisonConservative on November 30, 2010 at 7:12 PM

Fixed

mizflame98 on November 30, 2010 at 8:08 PM

High-risk pools are great but it still leaves the problem of how to pay for really expensive procedures. One type of cancer treatment costs around $100K a year. Do we tell people they simply can’t have it if they can’t raise that money?

alwaysfiredup on November 30, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Really expensive treatments are for people with a lot of resources. If people are really upset about such “what do we tell them” situations, then they should set up charities to donate to.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 8:09 PM

scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Happy birthday, hon. :)

DrMagnolias on November 30, 2010 at 8:12 PM

Nobody knows how to deal with healthcare. The current system sucks. ObamaCare sucks. RomneyCare sucks.

therightwinger on November 30, 2010 at 8:02 PM

Thread winner.

There ARE no easy answers to this mess.

Dark-Star on November 30, 2010 at 8:13 PM

There ARE no easy answers to this mess.

Dark-Star on November 30, 2010 at 8:13 PM

But there are hard ones.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Answer: “We [Republicans] too don’t want to accept any insurance company’s denial of someone and coverage for that person because he or she may have pre-existing condition.”

Question: Why don’t all conservatives register as Republicans?

Ira on November 30, 2010 at 8:18 PM

It’s my Birthday.
Everyone say Happy Birthday.

Scoreboard44 on November 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

For anybody this needy.
Happy birthday, may this day, and year be filled with joy.

Slowburn on November 30, 2010 at 8:18 PM

But there are hard ones.

Count to 10 on November 30, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Indeedy-do.

Dark-Star on November 30, 2010 at 8:20 PM

Oh, and happy B-day Scoreboard44! 8)

Dark-Star on November 30, 2010 at 8:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2