That's right. If you currently have it you can keep it...but no one can ever get a new private policy again. Eventually, when the current generation dies off or becomes covered by a government plan there will no longer be anyone covered by private insurance
(
Read more... )
Reply
What part of "the individual insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1" isn't clear?
Insurance companies can not accept anyone if the first date of coverage would be on or after this bill takes effect.
You seem to have missed the part where I posted the URL for the article text....
Reply
As in,
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering (grandfathered health insurance coverage) does not enroll any individual in (grandfathered health insurance coverage) if the first effective date of (The Changed) (grandfathered health insurance coverage) is on or after the first day of Y1.
Insurance companies can not Enroll anyone new into the Grandfathered health insurance coverage plan if the first date of that coverage would be on or after this bill takes effect. Or they would have to change the plan to fit under the Bill's requirements ( ... )
Reply
My grasp of the English language is reasonably good and my take on the sections being debated is that if you have insurance, great, you can keep it (hope you can hang on to it) but if you don't currently have insurance or lose your insurance after this bill passes you will not have any options. You will have to take the Government Health Insurance, whether or not you want that plan.
Personally, that scares the bejeebers out of me. One more thing for the government to control.
Reply
It does require new Private Health Insurance to participate in an Exchange - along with the public option. It does NOT make Private Health Insurance Illegal nor unavailable by any means.
Sec. 102 (c)
(1) IN GENERAL- Individual health insurance coverage that is not grandfathered health insurance coverage under subsection (a) may only be offered on or after the first day of Y1 as an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.
Again, Private Health Insurance plans are required to be a Part of the Exchange - in addition to the public OPTION.
Not arguing on any other point of the bill, just the FACT that it does not in any way make Private Insurance Illegal.
Reply
Your optimism is unsettling. This country is full of suckers that give the government way too much credit.
Reply
I am saying that the original article stating that the bill H.R. 3200 makes Private Health Insurance illegal, supporting it's claim by quoting the section defining what is considered a Grandfathered Coverage, is wrong.
That is a single, solid statement of Fact.
I find it greatly disturbing and telling that people are so programmed by right-wing pundits to swallow their word as gospel that they are unwilling to even admit that one article is clearly wrong in it's interpretation of a bill.
You are slaves. If you can't go against your masters on a single point of Fact, you are total slaves to your corporate masters.
You can't manage a "yeah, okay, that article is wrong, but I still don't like the supposed reform in the bill." ??
Reply
Reply
I don't mind anyone opposing the bill for good reasons, but I object to lies and falsehoods.
The provision cited could not ever in any way remove any access to private options. Period. Fact.
I'm not saying I am above anyone or trying to castigate anyone. I am not even saying the bill as a whole would not ultimately lead to Private Insurance being edged out. I just pointed out one wrong interpretation of one subsection of the bill.
H.R. 3200 does not in any way make Private Health Insurance Illegal.
It MAY lead to Private Insurance companies closing their doors rather than be responsible and ethical or participate in the Exchange. Neither I nor You know for sure about that.
What I am positive about, is that H.R. 3200 does NOT in any way make Private Health Insurance Illegal.
That is my ONLY stance. It is a Fact.
H.R. 676 DOES. H.R. 3200 does NOT.
Calling me names will never change the Truth.
Reply
Either way, the bill is not something I want to see passed. I am not a advocate of the Federal Government "taking care" of the private citizen, even as a puppet master.
tanstaafl.
Reply
Leave a comment