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.
Trump has said he would support keeping that part of ACA. Of course, God knows what he's actually going to do as opposed to what he said.
He has repeated this one recently. But whats going to end up actually happening, who knows. I think he is realizing this stuff is harder then it looks.
Trump has said he would support keeping that part of ACA. Of course, God knows what he's actually going to do as opposed to what he said.
If you keep the pre-existing condition part then you'll have to keep much of the rest of Obamacare like the mandate. Without the mandate too many will wait until they're sick or hurt to buy insurance.
If you keep the pre-existing condition part then you'll have to keep much of the rest of Obamacare like the mandate. Without the mandate too many will wait until they're sick or hurt to buy insurance.
Theres a LOT of interaction between parts of the ACA. It was believed at the time it was passed that it would have to be tweaked to keep it functioning. Most of those needed tweaks have been DOA with the House and Senate.
And suddenly the Republicans are realizing...they have it all. The house, Senate, and Presidency. And they have inherited ACA....but if they kill it....they don't have a replacement. They have NEVER had a functional replacement, what they had was a target to drum up hate against, that they kept as weak as possible.
And even they can see that the parts are all interconnected. But...its the great evil! Theyve been saying it for a long time. What do they do?
And then they ALSO have a ton of people who dont comprehend what would happen if they just made it disappear. They too have bought into the propaganda.
"Aw F.... we will just rename the thing, tweak it a bit and declare victory.... make it look like we had a replacement. How does Trumpcare sound? Always looked great on the side of casinos"
I know the repeal of Obamacare is at the top of Republicans' list come January, but I'm curious about one provision that might stick around even if the majority of the law is overturned: pre-existing conditions.
I don't know a lot about this, so just take this as one rednecks humble opinion. It would seem to me that if an insurance company didn't consider pre-existing conditions, they would wind up paying more in the long run and it would drive up everyone's premiums. If pre-existing conditions aren't considered, it's not really insurance, is it? I know they're slightly different, but you can't wait until you total your car before getting car insurance. You can't wait until your house gets flooded before getting homeowner's insurance.
When Trump and the republican congress kill Obamacare probably the first week of his presidency, they'll have a few quandries to navigate.
1. What happens to the 22 million people who only have health insurance through the ACA.
2. What about people with preexisting conditions who the insurers don't want to insure.
Kicking 22 million people off of health care is going to really set the stage for Trump's downfall. These people are his constituents. Middle and lower class working stiffs who are just scraping by and without the ACA subsidies, couldn't afford insurance.
The pre existing condition has an easy bailout for Trump and republicans. Once the unfettered free market returns to health insurance, the repubs will declare the preexisting condition coverage is mandatory for insurance providers. But since required health insurance will no longer be a mandate, the requirement to keep it affordable with subsidies will go out the window. This will allow insurers to offer insurance for preexisting conditions with an insurance pool separate from the main pool just for people with preexisting conditions. The cost will be astronomical as the only participants will be those with some preexisting condition. Remember, pregnancy is considered a preexisting condition. Also, if you're in a normal insurance pool and you get sick like diabetes, the insurance co. can send you a notice bumping you to the preexisting pool from the regular pool where your rates will go up 4-6 times what they were.
Trump can stand up and give a speech as to how he saved the preexisting condition clause from the ACA by saying that his version requires all insurers to provide coverage for those with preexisting conditions but in reality, no one will be required to purchase it and no one will, because it won't be affordable.
When Trump and the republican congress kill Obamacare probably the first week of his presidency, they'll have a few quandries to navigate.
1. What happens to the 22 million people who only have health insurance through the ACA.
2. What about people with preexisting conditions who the insurers don't want to insure.
Kicking 22 million people off of health care is going to really set the stage for Trump's downfall. These people are his constituents. Middle and lower class working stiffs who are just scraping by and without the ACA subsidies, couldn't afford insurance.
The pre existing condition has an easy bailout for Trump and republicans. Once the unfettered free market returns to health insurance, the repubs will declare the preexisting condition coverage is mandatory for insurance providers. But since required health insurance will no longer be a mandate, the requirement to keep it affordable with subsidies will go out the window. This will allow insurers to offer insurance for preexisting conditions with an insurance pool separate from the main pool just for people with preexisting conditions. The cost will be astronomical as the only participants will be those with some preexisting condition. Remember, pregnancy is considered a preexisting condition. Also, if you're in a normal insurance pool and you get sick like diabetes, the insurance co. can send you a notice bumping you to the preexisting pool from the regular pool where your rates will go up 4-6 times what they were.
Trump can stand up and give a speech as to how he saved the preexisting condition clause from the ACA by saying that his version requires all insurers to provide coverage for those with preexisting conditions but in reality, no one will be required to purchase it and no one will, because it won't be affordable.
Kind of like it is now,Unaffordable.
Many now are taking the fine (TAX) because they cannot afford their new policies. If they become ill they can just jump on the ACA and be covered so they're basically screwing the ones now who can afford to pay for it. People are getting double and triple digit increases this year and there's no way anyone can afford those increases.
Mine went from $293 to $680 please tell me how this is affordable? My new policy is NON ACA compliant and cost me only $144/month but will not cover pre-existing conditions. There needs to be some compromise between the two that people will be able to afford and that will give them coverage they can actually use. The only speculation I've heard so far is that Trump was going to keep the pre-existing conditions and still allow kids to be covered until 26. Until they draw up the final draft for this lets not start ASSuming what he will or won't do. One thing's for sure I would guarantee they actually read the bill before they pass it unlike Pelosi and the rest of the liberals.
I know the repeal of Obamacare is at the top of Republicans' list come January, but I'm curious about one provision that might stick around even if the majority of the law is overturned: pre-existing conditions.
I don't know a lot about this, so just take this as one rednecks humble opinion. It would seem to me that if an insurance company didn't consider pre-existing conditions, they would wind up paying more in the long run and it would drive up everyone's premiums. If pre-existing conditions aren't considered, it's not really insurance, is it? I know they're slightly different, but you can't wait until you total your car before getting car insurance. You can't wait until your house gets flooded before getting homeowner's insurance.
Am I thinking about this right?
So this is a tough one for me as someone who leans right. It is true that technically as a business, providing "insurance" after the thing being insured needs the insurance claim doesn't make sense. However there's a difference between a messed up pool table in a flooded basement and a sick child.
Here's a couple of real life examples...
My best friend's daughter while in college applied for insurance but was turned down because she had eczema of all things! Obamacare came along and it let her get on her parent's insurance. Once she graduated and turned 26, she needed to get on the exchange. She was also starting her career and gravitated to freelancing (marketing and technical writing) instead of working for a company. During all this early career exploration, it was discovered she had chronic leukemia. Hers is a type that is survivable, but she will need treatment and medication to maintain her health for the rest of her life. Needless to say, she and her family are very thankful for Obamacare, and I doubt any parent wouldn't be. You can imagine how terrified she is with the possibility of being cut off from her medical treatment. She's terrified!
I even had my own frustrating experience when my husband was laid off from work about 12 years ago. We went on Cobra which cost us 800 bucks a month that was just killing us finacially. I looked into Blue Cross for a basic plan, and it would have been half the price, and they even said it was okay that I had mild asthma. Unfortunately, I had recently been through a bad flare up due to a particularly nasty virus and was prescribed Prednizone. It was this drug that disqualified me. It's a trigger for severe asthma even if in my case it was an isolated event.
So it's a puzzle, and the perception of conservatives not caring if people die is a real perspective. If a solid alternative that made sense and had some compassion, that would go a long way.
Another thought... many conservatives are entrepreneurs, and admire self employment, innovation and starting up new businesses. But many talented people have been forced to settle for working for someone else because "insurance!" and I think that's unfortunate.
So I'm really hoping there can be some real brainstorming about solutions... especially for the pre-existing conditions issues.
Saying that, this is where having an unsecured border is a problem in my view if we DID have any sort of "free" healthcare, because of the attraction is presents, but that of course is another subject.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
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.
Should pre-existing conditions be considered?
