Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Health care reform would help consumers too

Health care reform is about more than helping the uninsured. President Obama is on the road today talking about reform and how it will help consumers. These are the highlights:
  • No Denials for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurers would be banned from refusing coverage based on medical history.

  • No Huge Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurers would be bound by annual caps on charges for out-of-pocket expenses

  • Preventive Care: Insurers would be required to cover checkups and tests like mammograms or diabetes screenings.

  • No Drops in Coverage for Major Illnesses: Companies would be barred dropping or diluting coverage for those who become seriously ill.

  • No Gender Disparities: Companies could not charge differently based on gender.

  • No Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage.

  • Expanded Coverage for Young Adults: Family plans would cover people through age 26.

  • Renewal Guarantees: If premiums are paid, policies have to be renewed even if new illnesses emerge.
  • Obama calls these "health insurance consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and insurance companies are held accountable."

    In my case, "no denials for pre-existing conditions" hits a nerve. My husband works in the auto industry and his employment is tenuous, along with his health insurance. If he loses that, it's scary to think we might not be able to get new coverage, particularly at our ages. We're too young for Medicare, but old enough that problems like high blood pressure and arthritis are starting to pop up.

    Reform can't happen soon enough in my opinion.


    T. Clear said...
    This comment has been removed by the author.
    K. said...

    Sounds good to me. Too bad it means killing old people.

    abi said...

    Obama is making some of the same mistakes the Clintons did on health care. Huge costs? Public option? Co-ops? What the hell is all that? It's becoming confusing as hell for people to follow.

    IMO, it would have been much simpler (and less expensive), to simply say that we're going to expand Medicare to everyone - period.

    Instead, if we implement anything, we're likely to implement what Massachusetts has, which is much more expensive than we were told it would be - but that's ok, because it maintains insurance/pharma industry profits while forcing hundreds of thousands to buy their products.

    K, screw the old people. Oh, wait - that's me. Never mind... ;-)

    Kathy said...

    K, killing old people would save taxpayers money. Get with the program! ;-)

    Abi, I'm glad you're confused too. I thought it was just me.

    I'm also so disgusted with Washington on this whole matter that I could just scream. Just once I wish they'd do something for the good of the people instead of kowtowing to industry interests. Very frustrating.

    Anonymous said...
    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.