Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fines for no health insurance?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fines for no health insurance?

    Yes .... its just being 'discussed'....but the whole idea of being fined for no health insurance is ludacris.........


    Fines proposed for going without health insurance


    WASHINGTON – Americans would be fined up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance under a plan that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as President Barack Obama met Democratic leaders to search for ways to salvage his health care overhaul.

    In advance of what Obama hopes will be a game-changing speech to lawmakers, the one idea that most appeals to the Democrats' liberal base lost ground in Congress. Prospects for a government-run plan to compete with private insurers sank as a leading moderate said he could no longer support the idea.

    The fast-moving developments put Obama in a box. As a candidate, he opposed fines to force individuals to buy health insurance, and he supported setting up a government insurance plan.

    Democratic leaders put on a bold front as they left the White House after their meeting with the president.

    "We're re-energized; we're ready to do health care reform," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., insisted the public plan is still politically viable. "I believe that a public option will be essential to our passing a bill in the House of Representatives," she said.

    After a month of contentious forums, Americans were seeking specifics from the president in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night. So were his fellow Democrats, divided on how best to solve the problem of the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured.

    The latest proposal: a bipartisan compromise that Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., a moderate who heads the influential Finance Committee, was trying to broker.

    Baucus, meeting with a small group of fellow senators, promoted a plan that would guarantee coverage for nearly all Americans at a cost to taxpayers of under $900 billion over 10 years.

    Some experts consider that a relative bargain because the country now spends about $2.5 trillion a year on health care. But it would require hefty fees on insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry to help pay for it.

    Just as auto coverage is now mandatory in most states, Baucus would a require that all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled. Penalties for failing to get insurance would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level — about $66,000 for a family of four — would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

    Baucus would offer tax credits to help pay premiums for households making up to three times the poverty level, and for small employers paying about average middle-class wages. People working for companies that offer coverage could avoid the fines by signing up.

    The fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.

    "Punishing families who can't afford health care to begin with just doesn't make sense," he said during his party's primaries. At the time, he proposed mandatory insurance only for children.

    White House officials have since backed away somewhat from Obama's opposition to mandated coverage for all, but there's no indication that Obama would support fines.

    One idea that Obama championed during and since the campaign — a government insurance option — appeared to be sinking fast.

    House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters a Medicare-like plan for middle-class Americans and their families isn't an essential part of legislation for him. Hoyer's comments came shortly after a key Democratic moderate said he could no longer back a bill that includes a new government plan.

    The fast-moving developments left liberals in a quandary. They've drawn a line, saying they won't vote for legislation if it doesn't include a public plan to compete with private insurance companies and force them to lower costs.

    Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who once supported a public option, said Tuesday that after hearing from constituents during the August recess, he's changed his mind.

    "If House leadership presents a final bill that contains a government-run public option, I will oppose it," Ross said.

    Obama's commitment to a public plan has been in question and lawmakers hoped his speech to Congress would make his position on that clear.

    He's called a public plan an important tool to help check the excesses of private industry. But his aides suggested on the weekend that he could sign legislation even if it does not include a public option.

    In the Senate, the public plan is not part of Baucus' proposal. He's calling for nonprofit co-ops to compete in the marketplace instead.

    An 18-page summary of the Baucus proposal was obtained by The Associated Press. The complex plan would make dozens of changes in the health care system, many of them contentious. For example, it includes new fees on insurers, drug companies, medical device manufacturers and clinical labs.

    It would require insurers to take all applicants, regardless of age or health. But smokers could be charged higher premiums. And 60-year-olds could be charged five times as much for a policy as 20-year-olds.

    People working for major employers would probably not see big changes. The plan is geared to helping those who now have the hardest time getting and keeping coverage: the self-employed and small business owners. New purchasing pools would be set up in each state, allowing them to band together and get some of the advantages big companies now have.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090908/..._care_overhaul
    'Evil always wins when Good does nothing'-Anonymous

  • #2
    It's already done in Massachusetts (Mitt Romney plan)....it's to prevent people from using the ER as their primary care.
    Molly Weasley makes Chuck Norris eat his vegetables.

    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      LOL nevermind......
      Last edited by cbr600_kitty; 09-08-2009, 06:26 PM.
      'Evil always wins when Good does nothing'-Anonymous

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by cbr600_kitty View Post
        Just as auto coverage is now mandatory in most states, Baucus would a require that all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled. Penalties for failing to get insurance would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level — about $66,000 for a family of four — would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

        It would require insurers to take all applicants, regardless of age or health. But smokers could be charged higher premiums. And 60-year-olds could be charged five times as much for a policy as 20-year-olds.
        Those worry me more than the fines. If you skate by a year you're better off with the fine.

        Comparing it to auto insurance and mandating coverage for everyone is evidence that reality is but a dim fuzzy image to them. If you own your car you can just cover liability and take the chance on collision, fire, theft, etc. Maybe they trade up every year?

        And if everyone is covered for everything the cost will sky rocket or the service will have to be seriously rationed. The lunatics are running the asylum.

        Comment


        • #5
          What a bunch of BS. This socialism is going to really harm those of us who have good private insurance. When I tore my left hamstring completely off the hip, I was able to get it repaired within two weeks by one of the top orthopedic surgeons in the country, a surgeon who is team doctor to a couple pro sports teams and has worked on many of the area's top athletes. The co-pay was not that much. If I had the misfortune to get injured under Dear Leader's plan, there is no way his commissars at the Soviet Ministry of Medicine would never get me in that quickly, let alone to the best doctors in the business.
          Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. - Ronald Reagan

          I don't think It'll happen in the US because we don't trust our government. We are a country of skeptics, raised by skeptics, founded by skeptics. - Amaroq

          Comment


          • #6
            Looks like a "poison pill". Baucus gets a lot of money from pharmaceutical, health care, and insurance companies who find the status quo quite profitable. Baucus just wants to scare people, and it's working.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Seventy2002 View Post
              Looks like a "poison pill". Baucus gets a lot of money from pharmaceutical, health care, and insurance companies who find the status quo quite profitable. Baucus just wants to scare people, and it's working.
              3/4 of the population are happy with their insurance so who's taken the poison pill?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ateamer View Post
                What a bunch of BS. This socialism is going to really harm those of us who have good private insurance. When I tore my left hamstring completely off the hip, I was able to get it repaired within two weeks by one of the top orthopedic surgeons in the country, a surgeon who is team doctor to a couple pro sports teams and has worked on many of the area's top athletes. The co-pay was not that much. If I had the misfortune to get injured under Dear Leader's plan, there is no way his commissars at the Soviet Ministry of Medicine would never get me in that quickly, let alone to the best doctors in the business.
                I had a similar experience with torn cartlidge in my ankle. I went to the team doctor for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays and had it repaired.
                But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

                For the intelectually challenged: If the government screws the people enough, it is the right and responsibility of the people to revolt and form a new government.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JasperST View Post
                  And if everyone is covered for everything the cost will sky rocket or the service will have to be seriously rationed. The lunatics are running the asylum.
                  So, are you saying not everyone should be able to buy insurance?

                  Has anyone really asked themselves what insurance is, and how it works? By nature it's a bit socialistic. Those of us with insurance are paying for everyone that makes use of their insurance. We are also paying in higher taxes and higher premiums when those without insurance use the ER for their primary care.

                  I had to laugh at Fox this weekend over their outrage over an Oregon woman getting denied a certain medicine for her lung cancer because she was on the state plan. How horrible the state wouldn't pay for the experimental medicine! Of course, not a peep about "why didn't she get private insurance?" (Because she couldn't afford it, and they probably would have rejected her application because she had lung cancer, and they would not have paid for the experimental treatment either.)

                  Hello?! Insurance companies have been doing that for years. You get what they decide....not what you may want, or what your doctor thinks is best...unless you want to pay for it yourself. And what they do decide often has more to do with kick-backs from pharmaceutical companies then what may be in your best interest. They also decide which doctors you get to see.

                  When my son was a month old (and he was born a month early) our insurance company dropped our pediatrician. (She probably didn't bring them enough business, since it was an old-fashioned doctor's office, not a "group") The company my Ex worked for was switching carriers, but they also didn't cover her, so we had to find a new pediatrician within a month. About the same time, my son was diagnosed with a heart murmur, and our pediatrician was worried that she she made the diagnosis before the switch, the new carrier may deny coverage to our son because it would be a "preexisting" condition.

                  Would anyone here be willing to wait a month to find out?

                  Thankfully, his was a common problem with preemies and the hole in his heart closed as he got older. The point is, we had insurance, but we could have been denied coverage.

                  The fact of the matter is medicine is no longer a pay as you need proposition, and having insurance is the gatekeeper for getting care. If people would stop getting hysterical about lies and misinformation, and start getting honest about what can often be a "racket" then we can start fixing the parts that are broken.
                  Molly Weasley makes Chuck Norris eat his vegetables.

                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by willowdared View Post
                    So, are you saying not everyone should be able to buy insurance?
                    Many (most?) choose not to, like me when I was young and dumb and didn't have anything to lose. But if someone is impoverished the get on Medicaid. Maybe not the best treatment available but the price is right.
                    Has anyone really asked themselves what insurance is, and how it works? By nature it's a bit socialistic. Those of us with insurance are paying for everyone that makes use of their insurance. We are also paying in higher taxes and higher premiums when those without insurance use the ER for their primary care.
                    The difference is it's voluntary and with less government interference the more than can access the risks and offer lower premiums. Insurance is about pooling risks but that's not socialism. You also have options in most companies for various plans, including the amount of risk you're willing to assume, financially and otherwise.
                    I had to laugh at Fox this weekend over their outrage over an Oregon woman getting denied a certain medicine for her lung cancer because she was on the state plan. How horrible the state wouldn't pay for the experimental medicine! Of course, not a peep about "why didn't she get private insurance?" (Because she couldn't afford it, and they probably would have rejected her application because she had lung cancer, and they would not have paid for the experimental treatment either.)
                    I didn't see it but it sounds like the point was that government care wasn't so hot. Sure, if you try to get insurance once to come down with a costly disease you get denied, otherwise the others' premiums skyrocket.
                    Hello?! Insurance companies have been doing that for years. You get what they decide....not what you may want, or what your doctor thinks is best...unless you want to pay for it yourself. And what they do decide often has more to do with kick-backs from pharmaceutical companies then what may be in your best interest. They also decide which doctors you get to see.
                    Depends on your plan too. If you want the best plan possible you can pay for it. BTW you can ask for a generic prescription.
                    When my son was a month old (and he was born a month early) our insurance company dropped our pediatrician. (She probably didn't bring them enough business, since it was an old-fashioned doctor's office, not a "group") The company my Ex worked for was switching carriers, but they also didn't cover her, so we had to find a new pediatrician within a month. About the same time, my son was diagnosed with a heart murmur, and our pediatrician was worried that she she made the diagnosis before the switch, the new carrier may deny coverage to our son because it would be a "preexisting" condition.

                    Would anyone here be willing to wait a month to find out?

                    Thankfully, his was a common problem with preemies and the hole in his heart closed as he got older. The point is, we had insurance, but we could have been denied coverage.
                    You lost me. You're saying they had no other pediatricians? You could have been denied coverage seeking ANOTHER insurer right?
                    The fact of the matter is medicine is no longer a pay as you need proposition, and having insurance is the gatekeeper for getting care. If people would stop getting hysterical about lies and misinformation, and start getting honest about what can often be a "racket" then we can start fixing the parts that are broken.
                    We can all agree on that but some of us see government involvement as the problem not the solution.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by JasperST View Post
                      And if everyone is covered for everything the cost will sky rocket or the service will have to be seriously rationed.
                      Everybody won't be covered for everything. Do you seriously think public option insurance would pay for hair transplants and boob jobs? There will be co-pays and deductibles.

                      Skyrocking costs? People with insurance go to their doctor for $150; people without insurance go to the emergency room and send the $1500 bill to the taxpayers. Insurance is all about economy of scale.

                      I've always insured my cars, even when it wasn't mandatory. When it did become mandatory, my insurance bill did not skyrocket nor did autobody shops start rationing their services.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've always insured my cars, even when it wasn't mandatory. When it did become mandatory, my insurance bill did not skyrocket nor did autobody shops start rationing their services.
                        You could also buy your car insurance from anyone you wished to get the best rates but that's no so with health insurance because of GOVERNMENT REGULATION.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Munlaw
                          Here in Ontario, it's a ticketable offence for an employer to fail to contribute to the Public Health Care plan...Technically speaking, a Police Officer or a Ministry of Health Official could write the ticket...

                          http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ocj/e...chedule4-1.pdf
                          Out of curiosity, what is your take on the Canadian health care system? I'd like to get the opinion of an actual Canadian, and not the opinion of some media outlet/personality with an agenda.

                          On a side note, I'd just like say how awesome Ontario was when I spent about every weekend there, when I was 19 and 20 years old, boozing it up.
                          Last edited by eaglegrad; 09-09-2009, 03:52 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Seventy2002 View Post
                            Everybody won't be covered for everything. Do you seriously think public option insurance would pay for hair transplants and boob jobs? There will be co-pays and deductibles.

                            Skyrocking costs? People with insurance go to their doctor for $150; people without insurance go to the emergency room and send the $1500 bill to the taxpayers. Insurance is all about economy of scale.

                            I've always insured my cars, even when it wasn't mandatory. When it did become mandatory, my insurance bill did not skyrocket nor did autobody shops start rationing their services.
                            The issue is health care, not cosmetic care. Reforms absolutely should start with people who can afford insurance but choose not to and get treated. As far as I'm aware they do go after those types and take them to court if need be.

                            If they can't afford insurance, how is enrolling them into a program going to lower costs if it costs $1,500 for treatment and we pick up the tab either way?

                            I imagine autobody shops grew if more people used them, no need to ration anything but none of them would survive if the government made insurance companies fix the uninsured
                            car after the accident. Who would bother with premiums?

                            The analogy would be having government auto insurance, we all pay the same amount, good drivers, bad drivers, drunk drivers, sports cars/bikes, big rigs, etc. What would that do to your rates?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              A lot of the problem with our health care debate is we don't trust our government. Do your politicians have the same health care as you do or do they exempt themselves like our politicians do?

                              Then we have them write over 1000 pages and don't read it and when asked about it they call you a mob. There is also the idea that it has to passed in short order but won't take effect for several years. None of it makes sense and they wonder why we don't trust them.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4710 users online. 257 members and 4453 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on Yesterday.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X