8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage

Ends Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage because of your medical history.

Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses.

Ends Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms or eye and foot exams for diabetics.

Ends Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be prohibited from dropping or watering down insurance coverage for those who become seriously ill.

Ends Gender Discrimination: Insurance companies will be prohibited from charging you more because of your gender.

Ends Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.

Extends Coverage for Young Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for family coverage through the age of 26.

Guarantees Insurance Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays their premium in full. Insurance companies won’t be allowed to refuse renewal because someone became sick.

Healthy Health Care Reform Debate

Not everyone in America is involved in shouting matches regarding health care reform. Some people are actually able to discuss these issues calmly on social networking sites. Here are some excerpts from the conversation my friends and I have been having on Facebook.

John Longfield-Smith

The actual Health Care Reform Bill. Many sites are telling you what is contained in the health care reform bill, unfortunately most of what they are claiming are blatant lies. Even worse though, is that most Americans are willing to accept the prop…aganda without researching these claims for themselves. Do yourself a favor, read the document, and don’t wait for Rush, Sarah, or Shaun to tell you what to think…Read More: edlabor.house.gov
Source: edlabor.house.gov

Tue at 9:22pm · Comment · Like / Unlike · View Feedback (16)Hide Feedback (16) · Share

Aimee Van Duren

but you don’t think your sources are full of propoganda and lies? not saying you are wrong, but come on – all the sources out there have their own spins….

Tue at 11:03pm · Delete

Shaun McDonnell

they need to change the costs of the public option and involve more private industry…

Yesterday at 1:08am · Delete

Brian Pacholka

In that vein John, you shouldn’t let Keith or Rachel tell you what to think either. MSNBC has become as bad as Fox for the truth. The only option is to slog through the bill yourself and make your decision.

Yesterday at 7:30am · Delete

Michelle Longfield-Smith

I agree with one point Brian made and that is to go through the bill yourself and read it. If you go straight to the government website and read it for yourself instead of bits and pieces with spin from one side or the other you can make an informative decision on your own. It’s nice to have a healthy debate but from what I’ve seen lately on TV at these town hall meetings it’s way out of control.

Yesterday at 8:27am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Aimee – My source is the actual bill, not some site that has an agenda telling me what it says… My main reason for posting this bill is so that people can read it themselves to find out that there is no rationing planned, there are no death panels, and the aim is not to wipe out private insurance…

Yesterday at 9:11am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Shaun – I agree, to a point… I don’t understand why people are up in arms about a public option, yet have no problem with the insurance companies posting record profits year after year. This while their benefits are shrinking, yet their premiums are skyrocketing. Insurance companies are already rationing your health care. Has your company moved to a high deductible plan yet? How many of those preventative care episodes are you allowed this year, compared to what you were allowed 10 years ago?

Yesterday at 9:14am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Brian – Exactly, which is why I did not offer information from them as any sort of source. There is spin coming from all angles right now. Everyone needs to tone down the rhetoric and actually talk about what is real, and what is spin. Then we can make an informed decision…

Yesterday at 9:19am · Delete

Shaun McDonnell

Actually, my current healthcare plan is the best I’ve ever had under an employer. However, it is a rare case. I currently have no deductible and my company pays 100% of the premium.

As we both know, federal prisoners get better healthcare than ‘free’ people in the United States. So, I definitely think the reform should cover everyone.

My main concern is that a full-out public option will stifle healthcare innovation in regards to research for new drugs, etc. The only thing our government has ever done that was innovative was NASA and now they want to cut costs for that as well…. Read More

Private industry is where innovation is executed and government has no track record when it comes to this. As a matter of fact, the more government there is the less innovation.

Yesterday at 9:20am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Shaun – You work for a GREAT company! Don’t you wish you could have skipped working for a couple of other companies and saved yourself some stress?!?!

This bill is not prescribing a single payor system, which might lead to less innovation. I would not support such a system.

I will tell you this though, it is the insurance companies that are making all the money in health care right now. Not the docs or the hospitals that provide the care. I haven’t seen much innovation coming from them. Just greed, and I’m sick of it. I fully support a persons right to gain wealth, but not on the backs of others less fortunate than themselves. Do you think the former CEO of United deserved a $1.6B retirement package when over 40M American don”t have insurance? What about those AIG bonuses? Why aren’t those people in jail?…

When left totally to private enterprise, greed usually stifles innovation just as effectively…

Yesterday at 9:39am · Delete

Shaun McDonnell

Point well made and well taken. However, I am not thoroughly convinced that the eventual goal here by the government or this administration is to go to a single payor plan.

Too much power in either direction (public or private) can corrupt.

Yesterday at 9:43am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Hence the need for real discussion like this, and not shouting matches at town hall meetings… It is our duty as citizens to be informed, and demand real representation from our elected officials.

The danger in our day and age is that even though we have the ability to be the most well informed generation in the history of our country, all the conveniences have made us lazy, to the point where we prefer to be spoon-fed our opinions.

Extremist, on both sides of the spectrum, have realized this and have taken advantage of this laziness to spread their lies.

Yesterday at 9:57am · Delete

Brian Pacholka

I just ran across a list of talking points from a place called the Liberty Counsel. It lists specific sections of the bill that they have problems with. It might be a good starting point when you are reading the actual bill to find out how your interpretation lines up. This is supposedly where Palin got her death board idea.
http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=19319

Yesterday at 10:28am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Brian – Thanks for that. That is THE list going around the conservative sites, like Freerepublic…. I like how the conservatives claim all the patriotic names for their organizations, like they are the only true Americans… but I digress…

The list is classic propaganda. It provides the reader with a supposed direct link to the data that supports their statement. The problem is that they are twisting the basic elements to fit their statement. There is an illusion of truth to each statement, if you read exactly what they outline, but the message is taken out of context, and then overstated like:
•Sec. 122, Pg. 29, Lines 4-16 – YOUR HEALTH CARE WILL BE RATIONED!

In case you didn’t realize it, your health care is already rationed, by the insurance companies. They tell you what you can and cannot have in the way of benefits. The govt. plan seeks to eliminate rationing:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/4

Yesterday at 11:21am · Delete

John Longfield-Smith

Brian – check out my newest link to politifact. It covers this list extensively. I found the link on the AARP site. I figured they would be investigating the bill rigorously and would be a good resource as to it’s feasability… http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/30/e-mail-analysis-health-bill-needs-check-/

Yesterday at 1:27pm · Delete

Isn’t it Ironic?!

A top 10 list of things that drive me crazy about my fellow Americans.

1.) Why are so many people up in arms about spending $1T over the next ten years, with the worst estimate showing that $239B will end up directly affecting the deficit, yet there has been no outcry about the $1T the war in Iraq is costing us, all of it going directly to the deficit? Think about it… Health care reform has the ability to improve the lives of over 40M Americans, while the war in Iraq has improved no-ones life.

2.) Why do the people that believe that a woman cannot be trusted to make sound decisions with her own body, believe that huge multi-national corporations, on which the fabric of the economy is woven, should not be subject to regulation?

3.) Why is it OK for the govt. to place wiretaps on American citizens, yet when they try to provide health care to those that truly need it people rail against the idea of big govt. interfering in their lives?

4.) How is a govt. that tells you who you can and cannot marry not invading our private lives?

5.) Why is it that in the states where the party of “family values” (Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas)hold court, they have the highest rates of divorce in the country, while the lands of the ungodly liberals (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont) they have the lowest. In fact, the states of the bible belt have a divorce rate that is nearly 50% higher than the national average.

6.) Why would people so firm on morals allow a man with three divorces and an addiction to pain pills (Rush Limbaugh) be their voice? Why would they be so willing to believe every word he utters?

7.) Why are the people that are calling health care reform socialism, so worried about protecting their right to receive Social Security amd Medicare?

8.) Why do so many people who were born to weath and privilege believe that those who were born much less fortunate than they are just lazy and trying to steal from them?

9.) Why is it that the people who are so sure that the govt. is lying to them about health care reform, don’t care about the lies that were told to build support for the war in Iraq?

10.) Why do some people believe that the second amendment to the Bill of Rights is absolute (the right to bear arms), but the rest of the document is negotiable?

E-mail ‘analysis’ of health bill needs a check-up

Let me reiterate for the record, I am not a liberal. I am an independent. No party tells me what to think. I make my decisions based upon research that I conduct. I do not trust any politicians, nor any of the major media outlets…

I just found this story on the St. Petersberg Times Pulitzer Prize winning site, Politifact. I was referred to it by the AARP site. It is very timely, since many of my friends and I have been having quite friendly discussions on the topic of health care reform. Two of my friends, Richard and Brian, have forwarded me this list as a means of investigating the bill.

I spent the evening last night reading through the bill myself, and debunked several of the issues raised, but quickly realized that the army of me was not equipped to fight this fight alone, so I went out in search of sources to debunk these lies, which to me seemed obvious. However, I am always ready to learn something new, and had any of these outrageous claims turned out to be true, my conservative brethren would have had a convert in the fight agains health care reform.

Fortunately, I came down on the correct side of this argument (neither the right side, nor the left). If this is what the AARP is offering as guidance to its members, then I offer it to my friends as a source they can trust.

See the original psot here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/30/e-mail-analysis-health-bill-needs-check-/

Enjoy…

By Angie Drobnic Holan
Published on Thursday, July 30th, 2009 at 5:08 p.m.

They hit the ’send’ button; we check the facts!
It may be the longest chain e-mail we’ve ever received. A page-by-page analysis of the House health care bill argues that reform will end the health care system as we know it: “Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! … Page 42: The ‘Health Choices Commissioner’ will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. … Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.”

Most of what the e-mail says is wrong. In fact, it’s a clearinghouse of bad information circulating around the Web about proposed health care changes, so we thought it would be helpful to address a bunch of its claims.

To check this e-mail, we read the health care bill ourselves. Yes, it’s over 1,000 pages long, but that’s not as long as you might think: The document has large margins, so the text only takes up about one third of each page.

We also read the bill’s legislative summary, a report published by the House that explains the bill in greater detail.

Finally, we consulted with Jennifer Tolbert, an independent health care analyst at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan foundation that studies health care reform. Tolbert has read and analyzed all the major health proposals, including those of the Republicans, and the foundation provides point-by-point analyses of the plans on its Web site.

We’re hardened, battle-scarred fact-checkers, so false claims in e-mails don’t really surprise us anymore. But we sent Tolbert a copy of the latest from our in-box, and she was none too pleased.

“It’s awful,” she said. “It’s flat-out, blatant lies. It’s unbelievable to me how they can claim to reference the legislation and then make claims that are blatantly false.”

The claim that the bill provides free health care for illegal immigrants is particularly egregious, Tolbert said. “No one’s provided with free health care. That’s ridiculous,” she said.

We looked for promises of free health care for immigrants and found nothing. So we’ve rated this claim Pants on Fire!

Another claim that’s Pants on Fire! is the following: “Page 42: The ‘Health Choices Commissioner’ will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.”

To explain this one, we will start with an explanation of the overall bill, which was unveiled July 14, 2009. The bill envisions that everyone will be required to have health insurance. People who get health insurance through work satisfy this requirement right off the bat.

People who don’t get insurance through work or other groups will go to the health care exchange; it’s designed to help people who have to go off on their own to buy health insurance, and for small businesses with few employees. The reason for the exchange is that the government wants to regulate insurers to make sure that health plans clearly explain what they offer, can’t refuse people for pre-existing conditions, and must offer basic levels of service.

“This is designed to protect consumers from plans that have outrageous cost-sharing or really limited benefits,” Tolbert said. “It’s to ensure that they’re actually getting coverage and not a junk policy.”

A key point here is that employer-provided insurance is already subject to this kind of regulation. Employer-provided insurance has to meet certain requirements to win its tax-exempt status.

That’s why, if you get insurance through work, you’re not asked about pre-existing conditions, and you pay the same rate as all of your fellow co-workers.

The bill says that a Health Choices commissioner will run the exchange, and that he or she will make sure that insurers are offering basic benefits and adhering to the regulations. Individuals then choose their own plan from offerings on the exchange. The health commissioner does not “decide health benefits for you.” To the extent that insurance plans have to meet basic requirements, those instructions are ultimately coming from Congress. The commissioner executes the rules.

One of the few claims from the e-mail that is truthful is the statement that “All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.” This was confirmed by our reading of the legislation, and Tolbert agreed with the statement as well. The legislation intends to more closely regulate health insurance, so it requires plans to follow the rules if they want to sell insurance through the exchange. We rated the statement True .

The e-mail includes almost 50 claims about the health care bill in its original form. (The bill is still in Congress, so it’s expected to change as members negotiate for votes.) We’ve ruled on the first 15 claims below. We wanted to publish our initial findings promptly, and we’re still deciding whether we should proceed with checking all the claims after finding so many problems with the first batch. We’ll make our decision based on reader feedback, so e-mail us your thoughts at truthometer@politifact.com or message us via Twitter @politifact .

The e-mail begins, “Subject: A few highlights from the first 500 pages of the Healthcare bill in congress. Contact your Representatives and let them know how you feel about this. We, as a country, cannot afford another 1000 page bill to go through congress without being read. Another 500 pages to go. I have highlighted a few of the items that are down right unconstitutional.” Below are the e-mail’s assertions, followed by our findings.

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! False: Section 113 of the bill requires the Health Choices commissioner to conduct a study to make sure health reform does not unintentionally create incentives for businesses to self-insure or create adverse selection in the risk pools of insured plans. There is no mandated audit.

• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! False: Section 122 outlines broad categories of benefits that must be included in an essential benefits package. It prohibits cost-sharing for preventive care and limits annual out-of-pocket spending to $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family, indexed for inflation. It says nothing about rationing or limiting treatment.

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process) Barely True: Section 123 establishes a Health Benefits Advisory Committee that makes recommendations on what types of health insurance coverage will be defined as basic, enhanced or premium. The committee will be chaired by the surgeon general, with members appointed by the president, the comptroller general, and representatives of federal agencies. This committee makes recommendations on insurance regulations, so in that sense it does set standards for benefits. But it does not make decisions about treatments for individuals.

• Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None. Pants on Fire!: Section 142 outlines the duties of the Health Choices commissioner, who is charged with regulating insurers. The commissioner should seek insurers to offer different types of insurance, including basic, enhanced and premium. Individuals will be able to choose among competing insurers who are regulated via the exchange.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services. Pants on Fire! Section 152 includes a generic nondiscrimination clause, which says insurers may not discriminate with regard to “personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.” It says nothing about “non-US citizens” or immigrants, legal or otherwise. In fact, the legislation specifically states that undocumented aliens will not be eligible for credits to help them buy health insurance, in Section 246 on page 143.

• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. Barely True: Section 163 sets out goals for electronic health records. It says one goal should be real-time confirmation of which services a person qualifies for and how much they will have to pay. That could be achieved by machine-readable beneficiary cards, according to the legislative language. But the legislation does not require the cards.

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. Barely True: Section 163 sets out goals for electronic health records. One of the goals is to include features that “enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation” between payment and billing. The legislative summary says the intent in the section is “to adopt standards for typical transactions” between insurance companies and health care providers. The legislation generically describes typical electronic banking transactions and does not outline any special access privileges.

• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) . Pants on Fire! Section 164 creates a temporary reinsurance program to help employers or employee associations pay for coverage for workers ages 55 to 64. It does not mention labor unions or community organizer groups, though presumably they could qualify for subsidies like any other employee association that previously offered health insurance. The section’s point, however, is to offer subsidies to employer-based insurance programs, not unions or community organizers.

• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. True. Private health care plans must conform to government rules to participate in the exchange, and this page begins an explanation of exchange rules. However, the requirement that insurance companies must conform to is also presented much earlier in the bill. We spotted an earlier reference on page 15, Section 101.

• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans) . Mostly True. Section 203 sets rules saying that plans must offer basic plans before they can offer plans with extra benefits. These extra benefits are defined as enhanced plans and premium plans. (The unstated assumption here is that enhanced and premium plans will be more profitable for the insurance companies.) But this isn’t the page number that requires health plans to participate in the exchange. Technically speaking, private insurance plans are not required to participate. Rather, only insurance sold on the exchange will satisfy the mandate that people have health insurance. In effect, private health plans that want to sell to individuals will have to sell through the exchange, under the terms of the bill.

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens. Half True. Section 204 outlines more regulations for health insurance plans in the exchange. One of the requirements is that they provide “culturally and linguistically appropriate communication and health services.” Another part of the bill mentions that this includes “effective methods for communicating in plain language.” There is no mention of citizenship status.

• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan. False. Section 205 says the Health Choices commissioner is charged with publicizing the options on the health care exchange. The legislation says the commissioner “may work with other appropriate entities to facilitate the dissemination of information.” The bill does not mention ACORN or Americorps. The bill also says that the commissioner must publicize the “Exchange-participating health benefits plan options,” which would include private insurance plans.

• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter. False. This page describes people who would qualify for Medicaid, a government insurance program for people with very low incomes. It says that individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid only if they have “not elected to enroll in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.” So the auto-enrollment only happens if they have not chosen another plan.

• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed. Barely True. Section 223 discusses how the government will pay doctors under the public option health insurance; they will pay 5 percent more than Medicare pays. It’s true that this section does not set out any sort of judicial review, but it specifically states that health care providers do not have to accept patients under the public option. The bill also says that the Health Choices commissioner has the authority “to correct for payments that are excessive or deficient,” taking into account “amounts paid for similar health care providers and services under other Exchange-participating health benefits plans.” There may be a broader case to be made that the government can outcompete private insurers through the public option, but this section of the plan doesn’t have to do with lawsuits or judicial review.

• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages. Barely True. Section 225 discusses payments for physicians who choose to accept the public option insurance. Again, there may be a broader case to be made that the government can outcompete private insurers through the public option, but this section of the plan only applies to payments to doctors for patients who are part of the public option. The government does not set wages for doctors because doctors are free to decline to see the patients.

Finally, a few words about the e-mail’s origins. It appears that someone out there based it on the work of Peter Fleckenstein, who publishes commentary on the Twitter messaging service under the name Fleckman . (Some of the e-mails we receive credit him, but many do not.) Fleckenstein strongly opposes the Democratic health plan and labels most of his posts #tcot , which stands for “top conservatives on Twitter.” Fleckenstein has also posted the analysis at his blog, Common Sense from a Common Man . Many of the e-mails we received have made changes to Fleckenstein’s original tweets, and the e-mail we’ve checked here has made changes as well.

An American Conservative Blog Post

I got this in an email today, and had to share it. It was originally posted on “AmericaBlog”.

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.

After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.

On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal’s inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.

And then I log on to the internet — which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration — and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can’t do anything right.