looking for specifics in the bad health care bill

ok, we hear all the talking heads on the conservative side of politics saying how bad this health care bill is and is going to be for America.

and I happen to agree, however…

I need line by line as to what is truly bad in this passed bill.

I need evidence, not hearsay or hypothesizing or generalities.

I have heard for months now how bad this bill is, and again, I agree, but what are the facts?

I don’t have time to read 2500 pages of lawyer speak but i know there are those who have and can quote line and verse of what is exactly wrong with this bill.

anyone have a source?

Thanks.

It would probably be wise to wait until the reconciliation bill is passed as there are going to be changes to the bill signed into law today.

The law signed today is the senate HC bill. The reconciliation bill will make changes to the senate bill but is in the senate right now.

Want to see how fast an account can get locked? Thin ice, we’re on it.

With Social Security recalling its 2.5 trillion in I.O.U’s and the treasury already upside down, this bill will tack on an initial $954 billion. In ten years it is estimated to actually be 1.5 trillion. That alone is more bad than necessary.
A poll taken today showed 79% thought there is now a possibility of financial failure in the country. It seems very possible at this juncture.

is there an official source I can quote this from?

Thanks.

why? I’m not defaming anyone or using profanity or inciting anyone.

I am just looking for facts, not rhetoric.

is that a bad thing?:confused:

It was in the news a few days ago.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10100624

We won’t know the exact specifics till the final bill is published after the Senate goes through it’s reconciliation. There are a couple ofthings that bother me but they are more ideological things than specifics. Till the final bill gets disected.

$940 billion in extra spending whne we are already in debt up to our eyeballs. Kind of like seeing you Visa mazes out and instead of stopping the spending you start using the American Express card.

No clear cut Constitutional basis for mandating health insurance on the masses under penalty of fine.

Currently the fine is smaller than most policy prices which means people can and will simply pay the fine and move on.

Acceptance of pre existing conditions is not all together a bad thing, but coupled with the small fines it makes it possible for people to wait tillthey are diagnosed with cancer HIV… To take on a policy. Theoretically people could play the system such that they buy policies when they need them and then cancel them when they are done with treatment. If that kind of loophole stays put it will bankrupt insurance companies pretty quick. Same goes for employers. If the decide that their fines are less than the cost of the policies and admin headaches associated with them then you will see them take the less costly route and play the sytem to max their profit margins.

The final rub will come after the specifics are finalized and we have had a chance to read all 2000+ pages of legaleese.

so far the only good thing I have seen is that the insurance companies can not deny you for a pre-existing condition. Uncle had cancer. lost his job, couldnt get insured because of his pre existing condition… and the man has money so its not like he couldnt afford the insurance

And not allowing insurance companies these exclusions or the ability to price according to risk will raise everyone else’s rates. People vilify insurance companies and all they do is pool and process transactions. Premiums coming in have to exceed claims going out. More claims equals higher prices.

We allow insurance companies to price for risk with auto, fire, renter’s, liability, life, and every other kind of insurance. That is how insurance works. Anything else and the company will fail. That’s why this bill is a Trojan horse to get to a single payer system.

If your uncle lost his job, he was eligible for Cobra coverage with zero pre-existing conditions. Did he exercise the option?

i thought this was a good explanation

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/capitalhill.htm

By David Hogberg Posted 03/21/2010 03:24 PM ET

If some reports are to be believed, the Democrats will pass the Senate health care bill with some reconciliation changes later today. Thus, it is worthwhile to take a comprehensive look at the freedoms we will lose.

Of course, the bill is supposed to provide us with security. But it will result in skyrocketing insurance costs and physicians leaving the field in droves, making it harder to afford and find medical care. We may be about to live Benjamin Franklin’s adage, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”

The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.

  1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

  2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

  3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

  4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

  5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

  6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.
    You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).

  7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d)(1)(A))

  8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).

  9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

  10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).

  11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))

  12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A)).

  13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).

  14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)

  15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).

  16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).
    The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).

  17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)

  18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).

  19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).
    That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).

  20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

We’ve been around this same block before, and quite honestly the original tone of your post smells like a long line in the North Atlantic. This response isn’t doing much to alleviate the odor.

I’m just making you, and others, aware that this site isn’t like others, and we have a much lower threshold for the BS.


We’re
looking for trolls. We’re exceptionally good at spotting them.