Does anybody on the right rely on the ACA for their insurance?

not against pre-existing conditions

also your insurance company gets lots of info, when I cut my finger and went to the hospital, the insurance company later called me to verify it was not business related due to the explanation I gave the doctor - they get lots of details

 

That's because the protect act was bullshit.

it would allow insurance companies to sell insurance plans that do not cover pre-existing conditions. Junk plans that barely offer any coverage except for emergencies.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/edi...ll-preexisting-conditions-20190412-story.html

 

Yes it did have protection for pre-existing condictions
https://khn.org/news/did-the-aca-cr...ion-protections-for-people-in-employer-plans/

"
What we found out is what few people realize: Protections for preexisting conditions for most people with job-based insurance predated the ACA by more than a decade.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, is best known for its provisions regarding medical privacy and patient access to their medical records. But the principal purpose of the law was to put an end to what was known as “job lock.” That happened when people with preexisting health conditions were afraid to leave one job with insurance for another job with insurance because the new insurance would not cover their condition, or would impose long waiting periods."

I think your post highlights a great issue concerning our nation today....many folks fall for the fearmonger ing and propaganda from the left and simply do not know or understand the facts

 

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/s4506/text

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Pre-Existing Conditions Protection Act of 2020.

2.
Pre-existing condition protections

A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage may not impose any pre-existing condition exclusion with respect to such plan or coverage, factor health status into premiums or charges, exclude benefits relating to pre-existing conditions from coverage, or otherwise exclude benefits, set limits, or increase charges based on any pre-existing condition or health status.

 

yes, job based, you're correct there

though some places used to have everyone do things like rotate doing cart pickup to try to out the less healthy ones

"Wal-Mart Memo Suggests Ways to Cut Employee Benefit Costs " 2005

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/business/26walmart.ready.html?pagewanted=all

"to discourage unhealthy job applicants, Ms. Chambers suggests that Wal-Mart arrange for "all jobs to include some physical activity (e.g., all cashiers do some cart-gathering).""

 

I have adressed this notion in another post.... here is the relevant portion...

-There was the rare situation in a SMALL group plan where a person could have a short period of pre existing exclusion, that period was very limited, and that situation only involved a few states, as most states did not allow this exclusion based on the 1997 HIPAA which was called the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Almost all of us know no one that had this happen to them. When thinking of everyone I know including their familiy's and all of the illnesses that accompanies that many people, I never once came across one person I know of personally that had a family member that was either dropped, or refused coverage due to a pre existing condition. I bet you havent either, or if you have maybe one or two people. To listen to the left, they bogusly pretend like it was rampant or even the norm, and it most certainly was not. Yes you can find horror stories, but no it was not a common occurrence. The left demagogues the hell out of those relatively few horror stories.

-Additionally....if a Medicare advantage plan does not allow a new enrollee to have pre existing conditions, then they could have simply enrolled in traditional Medicare. This is not the emergency that the left makes it out to be. Nobody is crying a tear for someone that has to use Traditional Medicare instead of a private Medicare Advantage plan.

 

https://www.chieftain.com/story/new...uld-affect-pre-existing-conditions/113679414/


If the ACA is overturned, Gardner’s bill — if passed — would preserve some protections for people with preexisting conditions, Levitt said. But it wouldn’t come close to replicating the total coverage protections and benefits that the ACA provides, which come at the cost of more expensive insurance plans for many people.



in other words, this flimsy bill is bullshit.

 

-You may not go around asking about peoples health insurance, but you know if your friend (or coworker,classmate, neighbor etc.) has a father (or cousin, spouse,friend etc) who came down with cancer lacked insurance and the subsequent ability to pay for that care. Speaking for myself, I also work in Medical Sales, so I have personally had this type of conversation with medical professionals that deliver care, far more than most. What you are discussing happened VERY infrequently. It most certainly was not anywhere close to being the norm prior to ACA.

-Nonsense, not one time have I ever even been asked about pre existing conditions for any health plan to which I have enrolled, which over the years has been quite a few. This is because I have always enrolled in group plans. An individual plan or perhaps a tiny group plan is admittedly a different animal, and within that is the crux of the pre existing condition situation. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1997 (H.I.P.A.A) took care of the lions share of the problem with pre existing conditions. If an individual consistently had health insurance, they were not allowed to be excluded in most states, and in the few where they could, that time was limited to a very short amount of time. A few people fell through the cracks and there were admittedly some rare horror stories, but those were the exception rather than the rule. In the context of the person to whom I was speaking who claimed that every person with a pre existing condition only have healthcare because of the ACA, they were dead wrong, which when it comes down to it, is the actual topic to which you jumped in.

 

I am fine with Trump not having anything. I was perfectly happy with my pre government fu**s everything up ACA plan. I will happy go back to my old plan and old premium.

 

well it's likely not a great idea to hire someone that is unhealthy to begin with.....amazing they had to write that memo

 

well if someone is healthy enough to be a cashier, elderly maybe, but not enough to pick up carts, that seems like discrimination to me

they admitted in the memo that this was only done to keep medical benefit costs down - universal healthcare could eliminate the need to discriminate like this

having your insurance tied to a job, means if you are fired, you have no insurance and can be denied or charged an arm and a leg to get it if you have pre-existing conditions - a public option should be avail for people to choose

 

oh so people with diabetes or asthma or depression or Crohn's dont have a right to make a living?

 

and they'd potentially get the job....standing there all day, and having to pick up groceries and check out bags of dog food etc is quite the physical acts.

Sure, they don't want to pay for medical bills and keep cost down...that benefits all the people that work there and are on their plan

Not really....an employer would never want to hire a sick person....there is cost associated with training, as well as cost related to simply hiring the person....if the person is sickly they aren't a great investment

 

Not at all...people with those illnesses can live a fine and healthy productive life....and engage in physical activity.

 

Why is it that liberals seem to think the government is the answer to everything? Government by its very nature is wasteful and heavy with fraud. Look at any government program and any agency and finding fraud and waste is easily done. The government should be thought if as a necessary evil and your reliance on it should be kept to a minimum.

 

I was never refused healthcare when I could not afford the premiums of Obamacare all while one of my employees got his Obamacare subsidized and could not find anything his "insurance" would cover. We paid exactly the same thing to go to the doctor because his deductible was so high and his policy did not cover anything. Had something major happened, he would have been better off than me. But just general stuff, he was paying far more than me out of pocket all things considered. I also looked in to getting Obamacare for my wife (T1 diabetic) and the premiums and deductibles would have cost more than just paying for everything out of pocket. Our dear leader Obama made my wife pay a fine for not having his insurance when she was exactly the kind of person his policy should have helped.

The pre-existing condition thing is here to stay regardless of the ACA. The only people talking about that going away are the left, Trump has repeatedly claimed he supports insuring those with pre-existing conditions.

 

well, in my state yes pre-existing conditions will be covered.

in right-wing ignorant selfish states, people are gonna get ****ed

 

According to who? I am genuinely curious. Has anyone on the right said pre-existing conditions would not be covered under a new plan?

 

Trump said he would protect pre existing conditions. But can you point to the plan that actually states that?

 

You may be happy but about 20 million people won't be.
So my advice to Trump.
Go for it.

With millions already turning in ballots ahead of November 3, a poll from West Health-Gallup finds that a majority of Americans trust former vice president Joe Biden to lead the US health care system over President Donald Trump.

More than half (52%) of the respondents said they trusted Biden, the Democrat, more, while 39% say they trust Trump,
https://www.ajmc.com/view/more-amer...lth-care-system-west-health-gallup-poll-finds

 

Correct. That's why the term "Insurance" no longer describes what is being sold.

I am self employed. My wife and 5 kids had great insurance before Obamacare. I lost my plan, our doctors, and my cost jumped to $24K per year for the same plan welfare recipients get free.

 

That Medicare for all must be looking pretty good to you.

 

First of all not one Republican anywhere has said he would eliminate pre ex coverage, not one, but that defeats the lie so democrats just keep repeating it.

Does anyone on the right have a choice? The ACA was forced upon us. If you work for a company under 100 employees you are compelled to have the ACA if you buy insurance on your own you are compelled to have ACA, you do not have a choice. 34 states had guarantee issue plans prior to obamcare, at a third of the premiums. 8 more were about to pass laws eliminating Pre ex, the last 8 states just needed to step up. Lies lies, lies, is all Obamacare was built on. There were 31 million uninsured, of which 18 to 20 million were young males that CHOSE to be uninsured. The REAL number was 11 to 14 million, so what does that ass Obama do, blow up the entire system, when a simple 2% premium load would have set up an uninsurable pool for all 50 states. Guess what, there are still 31 million uninsureds, and really, 80 million underinsureds because Obamacare requires huge out of pocket costs. people that have the ACA cannot afford to see a doctor. Typical out of pocket max was 3500 pre Obama, not it is 8100. Thank you democrats for making it affordable. Idiots.

Instead we get triple premiums, triple out of pocket costs, less Rx coverage, and shrinking doctor networks. Yay, success.

 

Human suffering and untimely death does not look good to me. Americans are not fat and sick due to a pharma product deficiency.

My plan is much better. I go to the farmers market and buy locally grown organic produce, stay active, and see a doctor once every 2 years for a physical. I did break a bone while snowboarding and my insurance took care of it. Sadly, I am forced to poison my fellow man through taxation so that pharm companies can enjoy record profits.

 

So why are you spending $24k a year?