General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenate adds penalty for going uninsured to healthcare bill
Senate Republicans on Monday released a revised version of their healthcare reform bill that adds a provision requiring consumers with a break in coverage to wait six months before buying insurance.
The Senate bill would make those who had a lapse in coverage for 63 days or more wait six months before obtaining insurance. Read the bill here.
The continuous coverage provision was noticeably omitted from the Senates draft, but aides said they were working behind the scenes to add it. The provision addresses concerns that people would only sign up for health coverage when theyre sick if insurers can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.
The addition of the six-month waiting period could make it more difficult to pass the legislation if the Senate parliamentarian rules the provision violates the complex budget reconciliation rules. Republican leadership was working over the weekend to make sure the provision complies with the rules and can be included.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/339488-senate-adds-penalty-for-going-uninsured-to-healthcare-bill
The penalty sounds about as effective as a guard dog with no teeth.
hatrack
(59,587 posts)Win-Win-Win, if you're a Republican - and it could apply to thousands and thousands of people every year.
IADEMO2004
(5,555 posts)Freethinker65
(10,023 posts)haele
(12,659 posts)Will never be able to opt back in unless they suddenly get a windfall or somehow join the rich f**er's club.
Also means that people within the median to lower wage level of income whose employers will now drop health insurance as a company benefit because it's too f'n expensive won't be able to buy access to health care for themselves or their dependents - because it's too f'n expensive for a family of 4 if they make under six figures - and that's with no student loans clogging up their finances.
Oh, sure... it's going to be federal budget neutral enough for those tax cuts.
But for every one family that gets more than $5K of tax cuts, I'd lowball an estimate of fifty families (and individuals) are going to lose the ability to purchase health insurance and will be "making too much" for any sort of subsidy that could help them afford health care in general. And that's an estimate I'm trying to keep somewhat real, without going into hyperbole.
If my company drops health insurance, I and my family are screwed. What's the estimated premium for a just over median income family plan with two "high risk" (including one disabled) members, again?
$20 - $25K a year - just with the premium, with a $15K deductible?
That's close to half our annual net income - just for the health insurance premium and deductible. Oh, yes I get it, it's our fault - we both should have refused to get born because of the genetic issues our parents left us, or refused to work physically demanding jobs that broke parts of our bodies - just like all those conservative think tank bros who came from the lucky vagina club and didn't have to work very hard most of their lives, because being clever is enough to make one rich, don'tcha know?
Haele
Tom Rinaldo
(22,913 posts)Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)It is bad when there is a government tax penalty if someone doesn't have insurance, but when a punishment is done by the insurance companies themselves, it is completely fine.