Get it right.
And I've seen the best of what the captains of Wall Street can do. Trust them? No.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks at the podium about the stimulus package while flanked by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) (L) Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) (2nd-L) and other members of Congress during news conference February 4, 2009 in Washington, DC. Senate Republicans say they are alarmed by President Obama's stimulus package worth nearly $900 billion dollars, which will be voted on later in the week. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images) Tom Price;Jim DeMint;Lindsey Graham
(February 4, 2009 - Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images North America)
Section 2701 simply states that insurers no longer can write policies based on a citizen's health status. Basically, the insurer and their wellness will be blind to insurance companies in any pool one enters to get health insurance. The likelihood of having a maximum deductible and high premiums is again reduced by that aspect of the new law.
So when citizens seek health insurance the underwriters to the policy CANNOT ask about pre-existing conditions even for the purpose of setting rates. The cost will be and should be based upon the number of people within that pool and the 'likelihood' of 'risk' to 'cost.'
THEY CAN'T EVEN ASK !!!!!!!!!!
The argument against that is stated as, if a young person wants health insurance and has no pre-existing condition they can't get the best rate available. It doesn't matter, because, as soon as that young person has 'SOMETHING, ANYTHING' go wrong their likelihood of keeping a lower cost policy will be gone. It isn't as though there is security in that point of view, there isn't. Even car accident or ski accident or appendectomy will cause an increase. The only security citizens have is to allow them to set rates based upon 'statistics' of 'occurrence.'
A pool of people will have a 'certain' ability to 'incur' an incident that will cost a health insurer expense. If you are that person and you are not in a pool to the insurer and blind to your risk, regardless of you age, you won't be able to get health insurance and your life is basically ruined.
Why put the people that occur 'expense' at greater risk than those that do? As citizens we are suppose to be equal in our understanding to our rights and Lady Justice is blind to many things except unlawful acts when all is considered. This law is absolutely the way it is suppose to be. By being part of a pool, the citizens are improving all their quality of life and longevity.
The rest of the law reads like this and takes into account age and difference in 'risk' to that age:
(ii) vary on the basis of age by a factor of not greater than 4 to 1; and
(iii) be established at a standard rate for a standard population; and
(D) meets any other requirements determined appropriate by the Secretary.
Youth will get a better rate than those in the pool that are older. At the same time, they also receive protection from not ever having health care again the rest of their lives.
I'll continue this later.
Senate passes reconciliation bill (click title to entry - thank you)
By Matthew DoBias
On 56-43 vote, the Senate cleared a set of amendments to a comprehensive package of health reforms signed into law earlier this week by President Barack Obama.
The bill now goes back to the House for final passage later this evening....
continued...
Section 2701 simply states that insurers no longer can write policies based on a citizen's health status. Basically, the insurer and their wellness will be blind to insurance companies in any pool one enters to get health insurance. The likelihood of having a maximum deductible and high premiums is again reduced by that aspect of the new law.
So when citizens seek health insurance the underwriters to the policy CANNOT ask about pre-existing conditions even for the purpose of setting rates. The cost will be and should be based upon the number of people within that pool and the 'likelihood' of 'risk' to 'cost.'
THEY CAN'T EVEN ASK !!!!!!!!!!
The argument against that is stated as, if a young person wants health insurance and has no pre-existing condition they can't get the best rate available. It doesn't matter, because, as soon as that young person has 'SOMETHING, ANYTHING' go wrong their likelihood of keeping a lower cost policy will be gone. It isn't as though there is security in that point of view, there isn't. Even car accident or ski accident or appendectomy will cause an increase. The only security citizens have is to allow them to set rates based upon 'statistics' of 'occurrence.'
A pool of people will have a 'certain' ability to 'incur' an incident that will cost a health insurer expense. If you are that person and you are not in a pool to the insurer and blind to your risk, regardless of you age, you won't be able to get health insurance and your life is basically ruined.
Why put the people that occur 'expense' at greater risk than those that do? As citizens we are suppose to be equal in our understanding to our rights and Lady Justice is blind to many things except unlawful acts when all is considered. This law is absolutely the way it is suppose to be. By being part of a pool, the citizens are improving all their quality of life and longevity.
The rest of the law reads like this and takes into account age and difference in 'risk' to that age:
(ii) vary on the basis of age by a factor of not greater than 4 to 1; and
(iii) be established at a standard rate for a standard population; and
(D) meets any other requirements determined appropriate by the Secretary.
Youth will get a better rate than those in the pool that are older. At the same time, they also receive protection from not ever having health care again the rest of their lives.
I'll continue this later.
Senate passes reconciliation bill (click title to entry - thank you)
By Matthew DoBiasPosted: March 25, 2010 - 2:15 pm ET
The bill now goes back to the House for final passage later this evening....
continued...
