It sounds like there isn't going to be a ban on dropping policyholders for pre-existing conditions.

[Shagbark Hickory]

None of the usual talking heads (dean, wiener, etc) have mentioned this in a while so I supposed it's out.
If we weren't going to have a public option, this really was the second most important item.

I'd also like to know if there will be a mandate. That would be the third most important item IMO.

Has anyone heard? I watched CSPAN briefly during lunch yesterday and Baucus was listing the benefits of the compromise but I don't recollect these two items.

[AlinPA]

1. I doubt it would have been dropped without a lot of news. That's a big deal. I have no

proof but I would say it's still in the bill.

[Shagbark Hickory]

2. I think it's been replaced with this "Ins cos must spend 90% of revenues on healthcare".

Obviously that's real easy to get around. Make everyone in the firm a medical assistant. Problem solved.

[Cant trust em]

3. It hasn't been talked about because it's the public option that's the hot news.

This has rarely been part of the overall debate because it seems like most people are on board with this.

[CTyankee]

4. I heard Howard Dean on Tweety and he said nothing about this. I doubt this seriously.

I really wish people would do just a LITTLE research before posting alarums on DU. So often I get all charged up with an alarmist post only to find out it is not true. We need to not spread unfounded rumors and get everybody riled up before the facts have been checked.

Please, folks...

[Shagbark Hickory]

8. Thats exactly my point. Dean & Co always list all the wonderful things the compromise is going to do

And he mentioned a lot of things. But he didn't mention this.

[CTyankee]

11. But why would he do that? I don't understand. Howard Dean has been a strong proponent

of public health care for many years. Why would he go on Tweety and not mention it? It makes no sense to me, unless you think he is part of a conspiracy to undermine health care reform in favor of the health care or drug instustry?

[Shagbark Hickory]

12. Everyone has their price. I used to cheer on Dean and supported his brief run for pres but...

After listening to him CAREFULLY throughout this healthcare ordeal, I really don't believe a word out of his mouth anymore. Even though he's not in the public sector, he's a textbook politician. He'll smile and tell you what you want to hear and convince you that while you're not going to get what you want or need, what your getting will be great anyway.

He'd be great at telling people they've got some terminal illness.

I remember when he used to say "we don't need 60 votes". Remember that?

[CTyankee]

13. OK. Well, if this is what he is doing, it's a big disgrace.

At this point, I don't agree.

We'll see...

[Shagbark Hickory]

14. Don't take my word for it. He's on TV a lot... Enough for you to listen and make up your own mind.

n/t

[CTyankee]

16. I do watch his appearances on TV but I am not watching TV constantly so

I could have missed something. However, that remark about not needing 60 votes was a while back. Things change when the shape and details of the health care reform bill churn their way thru the legislative process. If you set one of his statements in stone it can just be irrelevant at some point. What was then and there may not be here and now, so circumstances alter cases. I don't read anything particularly noxious in what I've heard him say recently. I confess to having only limited exposure to his views, but there is not a helluva lot of time alloted on these TV spots, such as Tweety's show. Therefore, I will have to piece together what he is saying over a period of time before saying "Oh, the guy sold out!"

We'll see...

[kestrel91316]

5. How does denial of insurance for pre-existing conditions mesh with

mandatory coverage?????????????????????

[Shagbark Hickory]

9. I don't know that they mesh but...

If you force people to get insurance then you you do two things. You unite a big part of the country that doesn't want to be forced to buy insurance, much less private insurance. That's a lot of mad people that may not vote for you.

The other thing you do is put a lot of faith that the private companies are going to get the costs under control. Without a mandate, it will be clear that congress has lost faith in their own bill.

[ipaint]

6. Good question.

Someone snuck in a loophole to allow $$caps on coverage pay outs.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iY4N1OnmEl-p6kEdB_ROs6toazbQD9CH3T100

Why not a loophole for pre-existing conditions.

The industry successfully killed any and all competition, why not work on the weak regulations in the bill. More than likely the industry will succeed.

[TorchTheWitch]

7. it wouldn't matter anyway

Without a ban on raising the premiums on people with pre-existing conditions to the point where they can't afford to keep the policy having the ban on dropping people with pre-existing conditions wouldn't have made any difference. We all know that if the insurance companies couldn't outright drop you they'd raise the premium until you had to drop it yourself. The end result is the same.

[Shagbark Hickory]

10. Right but now they're saying there will be subsidies. So if they do jack up premiums...

at least the premiums will be paid for.

(provided the chinese ATM card still works)

[TorchTheWitch]

17. and the insurance company would just jack the rate past that

In what universe to subsidies pay for an entire premium unless you have no income or are the poorest of the poor? And these magical subsidies come from the taxes of the people... all this would do is let the insurance companies dump the sick people onto the goverment and collect astronomically high premiums from people that are healthy.

No wonder the insurance companies are loving this shit. Well, of course they're loving it - they're writing it.

[shadesofgray]

15. Wouldn't surprise me.