"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
You might be supprised at the IQ's of certain people. What is your IQ? I
am
just shy of getting into the club.
The club of folks with triple-digit IQs, Bertie? No surprise. Too rigid
for reality.
I really wonder about your intellect...you think medical savings plans
are the answer for the 43 million Americans without health insurance?
Nope. I looked into them when I was renewing my health insurance policy for
my employees. My current policy's premiums went up 40%. I was willing to
contribute the money I'd save on premiums with a high deductible plan to
each employee's HSA, and then they could kick in whatever they wanted. It
made sense except for one thing. By definition, HSA high deductible plans
*cannot* have prescription drug coverage, and they can't have physician
office visit co-pays. I had one employee who would have gotten slammed
because of the high cost of her meds. I would have broken out about even
(based on last year's health claims for my family) because my kids make a
lot of trips to the pediatrician and only have to pay $15 with our current
plan. It would have saved some money for the other employees, but not
enough to punish the one who's on a lot of expensive Rx.
Yeah, some of them might be able to save, what, $20 a week? Priced any
serious prescriptions lately?
The best cure for right-wing smug****s like you is to have to experience
some of life's financial angst.
Now there's just another example of the mean-spirited nature of your
side...and an example of your socialistic spirit. "Equal suffering for
all".
You want to know how to get more people insured with health insurance? Get
Congress to pass Association Health Plans. Bush mentioned them in his
speech (not exactly by name though) when he said:
"In a new term, we must allow small firms to join together to purchase
insurance at the discounts available to big companies. "
Currently, the McCarron-Ferguson Act exempts insurance companies from being
regulated by the Federal Government. Insurance is regulated by each state,
and, consequently, the insurance companies cherry-pick the states which are
most profitable to them. States like Florida (which has an aging
population, and a lot of expensive state-mandated laws for insurance
companies) have ridiculously high premiums...or very few insurance companies
which are even willing to do business here. If I were a big corporation
with workers in many states, or a union, or the federal government, I could
negotiate rates under a plan in a state with more favorable insurance laws,
and a younger and healthier population. Small businesses can't do that.
AHP's would allow them to. There are a few groups who obviously oppose it:
1) congressmen from states which already have cheaper premiums
2) any group which already can buy insurance across state lines (unions,
corporations, the federal government)
3) insurance companies
4) insurance agents
The reason that groups 1 and 2 oppose them is because they know that if
rates fall for small businesses in one state(Florida, or NJ, or NY, or CA),
then they're going to have to go up a little in another state if the
insurance company wants its profits to remain the same or increase
The reason that groups 3 and 4 oppose them is because they know that
anything that increases the other side's negotiating power will ultimately
drive their profits down.
Bush came out strongly in his first term in favor of AHP's. He still
supports them, but realistically knows that he's going to have a hard time
convincing Congressmen from states with low rates, and Congressmen from
states with big insurance companies headquartered there, to vote for them.
I think he's only mentioning HSA's because he realistically doesn't think
that in today's political climate AHP's have much of a chance.
However, should he win reelection in November, he'll be in a lot better
position to brow-beat the opponents to pass AHP's...especially leading up to
the mid-term elections.
|