The only thing that bothers me about the health care bill
is not having finite numerical figures on what is going to be deemed "affordable" health insurance. Because I've read about how it should put a stop to companies being able to deny insurance to people with pre-existing conditions, which is good. I've also heard that people who elect to not have insurance will have to pay a fee that should be capped at around 10% of their annual salary, which is fine. But what I have not heard is if insurance companies are that are forced to not deny benefits, outright, will be able to say, "Alright, we'll cover you, people with asthma/hypothyroidism/diabetes/cancer/AIDS/whatever, but it's going to cost you more than your rent or mortgage does." I have not heard much about a cap on that. Because if there isn't one, that leaves people like me not even right back where we started from, but even worse off. Because now we will be legally required to pay for health insurance, even if it is astronomically expensive, even if we really try hard to never go to the doctor. Either that or pay 10% of our annual salaries on top of any emergency care that might come up.
I know the promise has been made that premiums will become more affordable, but I want to see numbers. I want to know what, specifically, "affordable" is supposed to be. Because if "affordable" means I have to be on Will's work insurance plan,* which to insure both of us would cost approximately 33% more than our mortgage payment per month, I am, effectively, screwed. And I feel bad for saying this, because I've been a Democrat and a bleeding-heart liberal for as long as I can remember (you should've seen our kindergarten presidential election in 1988; picture a bony 5-year-old standing up on the table yelling to her classmates below, "But think about civil rights! George Bush voted against civil rights! He voted for black people to have to sit in the back of the bus!" because all the kids were coloring in the elephant on their ballots, as it was markedly cuter than the donkey). This bleeding-heart liberal really wanted a public option, I guess.
* To put it in perspective, to insure Will alone is fairly reasonable, but adding me to the policy more than quadruples the premium. I'm not sure if the health care bill is directly going to address this. I sure hope it does.
I know the promise has been made that premiums will become more affordable, but I want to see numbers. I want to know what, specifically, "affordable" is supposed to be. Because if "affordable" means I have to be on Will's work insurance plan,* which to insure both of us would cost approximately 33% more than our mortgage payment per month, I am, effectively, screwed. And I feel bad for saying this, because I've been a Democrat and a bleeding-heart liberal for as long as I can remember (you should've seen our kindergarten presidential election in 1988; picture a bony 5-year-old standing up on the table yelling to her classmates below, "But think about civil rights! George Bush voted against civil rights! He voted for black people to have to sit in the back of the bus!" because all the kids were coloring in the elephant on their ballots, as it was markedly cuter than the donkey). This bleeding-heart liberal really wanted a public option, I guess.
* To put it in perspective, to insure Will alone is fairly reasonable, but adding me to the policy more than quadruples the premium. I'm not sure if the health care bill is directly going to address this. I sure hope it does.