Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here is the State of Florida's children's care for those who do not have health insurance. It costs about $15-$20 a month. Also, those who are not insurable through other plans that have to be purchased on the market, and not provided through your employer, can buy this.
I am sure Florida is not the only one to provide this type of coverage.
Iowa has a similar program called Hawk-I (Healthy And Well Kids in Iowa) that provides insurance for children of families who are slightly above the Medicaid line. Cost runs from free to $20 a month depending on income. The guidelines are pretty generous, I think a family can make upwards of $50K (which is a solid living wage in most of Iowa) and still qualify.
The thing is, the state is broke but I have never heard one word from anyone suggesting the program be cut in the slightest so it must be pretty efficient. I've often wondered what it would cost to extend it to adults. Probably quite a bit, I imagine, as Iowa isn't really very healthy overall.
I am just looking forward to Romney taking office and repealing this health care TAX! A tax on the backs of the middle class.
Normally, unless you are King Obama, Presidents cannot repeal laws. That requires an act of Congress. Congress creates, and repeals, all laws. However, Presidents do have the power to veto any bill enacted by Congress. Therefore, it would certainly be easier for a GOP controlled Congress to repeal "ObamaCare" knowing that the bill will not be vetoed. Since the Supreme Court has held "ObamaCare" constitutional only if it was a "tax" and not a "penalty," Congress only needs 50% + 1 vote to enact a repeal. There can be no filibuster by the Democrats.
why are these items such horrible unacceptable ideas:
1. Dropping you after you have hit your "lifetime limit" on claims.
2. Prevent them from denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Which should make all ya'll rednecks happy seeing as how ya'll like to smoke and chew tobaccy. This is cool since something like....oh, I dunno, lupus, is not caused by lifestyle choices, yet those with lupus are charged out the anus if they can get coverage at all. By the way, this where the Mandate comes in.
3. Charging you fees for "administrative" this and that. They will now have to divulge what and why you are buying charged.
4. Charging co-pays or other charge for preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.).
5. Denying claims without justification. Insurance companies are now required to go through an appeals process.
6. Dropping you when you get sick.
I agree, these items all needed to be addressed and corrected. I would be 100% behind a measure that mandated these items.
What I don't agree with is pretty much everything else in the bill.
Get your facts straight and stop spreading misinformation.
There is no "government panel." You will have private health insurance provided by a private insurance company. Whatever the terms of that policy hold will be the terms governing your coverage.
It's astounding that the right-wing is still pushing the "Death Panel" myth that's been completely debunked.
In June of 2009 Obama made references to such a body or bureaucrats (let's call it a "committee"), and repeated that in several versions of the scenario in his subsequent public appearances. Remember his reference to giving a pill to a paient of a certain age instead of implanting a needed pacemaker. Palin was colorful and bold in calling it a 'death panel'. My dad was in good health at 92, and his primary care physician recommended a needed hip replacement. He got it, and at 101 he is still fairly healthy and happy. I don't know if he would have gotten the replacement under Obamacare. Instead, he'd be taking handfuls of pain pills daily.
All along, the public has been hearing the President say that we will have an omnipotent panel, acting according to specific criteria and having never laid eyes on the patient, that will tell a doctor whether he/she can offer a particular therapy to a particular patient – or whether, instead, to offer a pain pill.
Insurance companies do this kind of decision makaing also, especially when it comes to experimental treatments, but you have the option of self pay should you want to go ahead. Not so under Obamacare. Also, you can sue an insurance company and have hopes of winning. You can't fight (e.g. sue) the government with any realistic hope of success. Furthermore, private health insurers who are not forced out of business by Obamacare will have to comply with certain government "guidelines". Unfortunately, many of them will be forced out of business just by the nature of the (government) beast.
If Obama is asked if you signed the largest "tax increase" in history. What will Obama say than? Since Obama originally said this wasn't a "tax?"
That "largest tax increase in history" thing was a quote from Rush Limbaugh that was totally discredited. You can easily look it up on the fact check websites. One particular site gave him a Pants On Fire for that comment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
