What it boils down to is that I’m going to be forced to buy junk insurance to provide a guaranteed market for the insurance companies.

Maybe that’s why Nancy Pelosi said public option was second best after single payer?

And it’s a bailout because it guarantees the insurance companies a market, and nails their business model of denying health care for profit into place. Does this help?

So, unless the PO that was passed out of committee yesterday is different from the one described in the bill currently posted on the committee’s website, the PO in this bill is not “strong.” This isn’t even a weak PO. It’s a PO that probably won’t even get off the ground in most states.

Without a powerful PO, this bill is just an insurance industry bailout.

Kip Sullivan

What about all the people that use holistic and nurse practitioners, chiropractors, etc. that aren’t covered by ins. companies, and everyone that is opposed to conventional medicine for religious or personal reasons?

I feel my freedom slipping away when I hear that I will be penalized and forced to pay for other peoples inefficient 10 minute doctor visits and medicine cabinets full of pills while then not being able to afford my own choice of healthcare that ins. companies do not cover. When I do need conventional medicine for trauma, etc. I pay out of pocket. How is this mooching off of anyone else? I don’t understand.

(a) ACCESS TO COVERAGE.—In accordance with this 15
section, all individuals are eligible to obtain coverage 16
through enrollment in an Exchange-participating health 17
benefits plan offered through the Health Insurance Ex-18
change unless such individuals are enrolled in another 19
qualified health benefits plan or other acceptable coverage. 20

So, let’s say I’m on the individual market and have health insurance now. I could cancel my coverage and then I would fit the definition for acceptance into the Exchange, as I wouldn’t have other coverage. So anyone on the individual market would be eligible.

The big question here is the employer market. Right now it’s set at firms with less than 10 employees to start, with larger firms opening up at the discretion of HHS. That could change. It started at 10 employees in HELP, and now it’s at 25, which makes a huuuuge difference in terms of numbers of people who have access. But if we’re talking individuals, the House bill has them in the Exchange as soon as the Exchange is open.

The key to what is being proposed — and what is making all the stakeholders (not including you and me) slobber and drool — is the mandate to purchase, with penalties for holding out for a rational and decent public plan. In other words, you don’t get that option. You either get or have health insurance from the extortionist/insurance companies or you are penalized.

This should make the extortionists shut up for a while. At least there’s that.

Yes, this is “better than nothing” — like Medicare Part D — and it is an enormous payoff to the extortionists (like Medicare Part D) and most people will grumble and go along with it — because things could be worse.

But it’s hard to see why any progressive would promote something like this as a decent and rational way to provide everyone with health care coverage at reasonable (and controllable) costs. It’s not.

The real reason for the four year delay is to get everyone (or nearly everyone) signed up to a private plan first, then make it “unreasonable” for them to switch to a public plan when it is finally available — if it ever is.

That said, individuals without other coverage is all individuals. If they wanted to join the exchange, all they would have to do is end their current coverage, and then they’re individuals without other coverage, right?

are you asking or do you know?

in MA, i read that at one time (i don’t know if this is still the case), in order to get covered under the state subsidized plan (2006 reform) an individual had to prove 2 months of non-coverage and then could still have application rejected if for some reason did not meet other criteria.

if something like that (having to forego coverage for some period of time) is not the case, i have no idea why the language of the bill reads as it does. see sec. 202 from pages 73, 74:

SEC. 202. EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS AND EMPLOY-SEC. 202. EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS AND EMPLOY-13
ERS. 14
(a) ACCESS TO COVERAGE.—In accordance with this 15
section, all individuals are eligible to obtain coverage 16
through enrollment in an Exchange-participating health 17
benefits plan offered through the Health Insurance Ex-18
change unless such individuals are enrolled in another 19
qualified health benefits plan or other acceptable coverage. 20
(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this division: 21
(1) EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL.—The 22
term ‘‘Exchange-eligible individual’’ means an indi-23
vidual who is eligible under this section to be en-24
rolled through the Health Insurance Exchange in an 25

74
Exchange-participating health benefits plan and, 1
with respect to family coverage, includes dependents 2
of such individual. 3
(2) EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE EMPLOYER.—The 4
term ‘‘Exchange-eligible employer’’ means an em-5
ployer that is eligible under this section to enroll 6
through the Health Insurance Exchange employees 7
of the employer (and their dependents) in Exchange- 8
eligible health benefits plans. 9
(3) EMPLOYMENT-RELATED DEFINITIONS.— 10
The terms ‘‘employer’’, ‘‘employee’’, ‘‘full-time em-11
ployee’’, and ‘‘part-time employee’’ have the mean-12
ings given such terms by the Commissioner for pur-13
poses of this division. 14
(c) TRANSITION.—Individuals and employers shall 15
only be eligible to enroll or participate in the Health Insur-16
ance Exchange in accordance with the following transition 17
schedule: 18
(1) FIRSTYEAR.—In Y1 (as defined in section 19
100(c))— 20
(A) individuals described in subsection 21
(d)(1), including individuals described in para-22
graphs (3) and (4) of subsection (d); and 23
(B) smallest employers described in sub-24
section (e)(1). 25

in any event there are other important issues, so i’m going to read more. but my earlier point still stands:

this bill does not seem to qualify as “available nationwide on day one.”

That said, individuals without other coverage is all individuals. If they wanted to join the exchange, all they would have to do is end their current coverage, and then they’re individuals without other coverage, right?