Insurance Victims Tell Congress: Pass Health Care Reform Now

[ProSense]

Insurance Victims Tell Congress: Pass Health Care Reform Now

by James Parks

A panel of 24 victims of insurance industry abuse and their families told their heart-rending stories directly to members of Congress this morning and asked the lawmakers to listen to the American people and pass health care reform that works for us, not Big Insurance.

Marcelas Owens is spending his 11th birthday telling lawmakers it’s time to provide real health care to all Americans. Marcelas, who lives in Seattle, lost his mother, Tiffany, in 2007. She was too sick to work and lost her job as manager of a fast-food restaurant. She also lost her health insurance. She died of pulmonary hypertension at age 27.

Today’s forum on Capitol Hill, where Congress is debating how to fix the nation’s broken health care system, follows nationwide rallies yesterday, including one in Washington, D.C., where we told Big Insurance that blocking health care reform is a crime.

Members of Congress also heard from Leslie Boyd of Asheville, N.C., whose uninsured son died in 2008 at age 33 after a delayed diagnosis for colon cancer because he could not afford colonoscopies. Boyd’s husband also recently suffered a heart attack after his insurance company delayed approving his doctor’s request for a stress test.

more

[dkf]

1. Colonoscopy for someone that young is pretty unusual

I bet a lot of insurance companies would not pay for that. Health insurance is a joke.

[ProSense]

2. Progressives against unions and insurance company victims?

Yeah, hypocrites.

[ShortnFiery]

11. We don't know WHO's pulling the strings. I fear that the Insurance Cartel is playing ...

Kabuki Theater. ... it's WRONG to pass a shitty bill and merely *hope* that the mostly GRIDLOCKED SENATE will correct the error. I don't trust any of them.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. Unfortunately, I do not know of anything in those bills that would help either person

Young Marcelas' mother would be required to buy a health insurance policy with a high deductible so that she still couldn't afford treatments.

There is nothing in the bill that would prevent the insurance companies from denying a claim for a colonoscopy for a 33-year-old, even if the doctor suspected cancer.

DLCers pushing false hope for the desperate?

Hypocrites.

[ProSense]

4. So because you're uncertain about what is in the bill, the status quo should be retained?

Do you know the victims financial circumstances?

There is nothing in the bill that would prevent the insurance companies from denying a claim for a colonoscopy for a 33-year-old, even if the doctor suspected cancer.

DLCers pushing false hope for the desperate?

Hypocrites.

Completely and utterly disgraceful!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

6. Hey, you're the one who used the term "hypocrite" first

And where in the bill are insurance companies prevented from denying any procedure that is slightly outside the lines?

Show me. Show me the paragraph that says that insurance companies are no longer allowed to deny procedures that a doctor deems necessary.

Also, I know that fast food managers don't make a lot of money and that a high deductible could be too much for them to take.

[ProSense]

5. "DLCers pushing false hope for the desperate?" Are you refering to the AFL-CIO? n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. The AFL-CIO is swallowing two separate lines:

1. "Win one for the team that supports labor"

2. "We'll fix it later."



Based on my experience of what happens to bad bills after they're passed, "we'll fix it later" ranks right up there with "Sure, I'll respect you in the morning."

[ProSense]

8. Yeah, this is a fact:

the AFL-CIO is supporting a bill that bill that will save lives means:

1. "Win one for the team that supports labor"

2. "We'll fix it later."

Exactly what are you doing to help these victims?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. How will it save lives?

Explain to me exactly HOW specific provisions of the bill would have helped either of the people mentioned in the article.

I can explain how a single-payer or national health service system would have helped them*, but I'd be fascinated to hear the SPECIFICS of how either the Senate or the House bill would help either of these cases.

No generalities now. I want the SPECIFIC provisions that would allow a fast food manager to afford hospital treatment without a high deductible (which makes treatment unaffordable even with insurance) or that would prevent an insurance company from denying a colonoscopy that was ordered due to a doctor's suspicions of something wrong.
-----------
*In a single-payer system, medical care with no cost or a modest co-pay would be one's right as a legal resident of the country, regardless of income or ability to pay.

Ditto for a national health service system, only there would probably be no co-pay.

In neither case would there be anyone second-guessing the doctor's decisions unless s/he suggested something really bizarre or experimental.
-----------
Come on now, ProSense, you're such a staunch advocate of this bill. Surely you know it backwards and forwards and can quote me the specific paragraph that allows fast food managers and other working class people to buy low-deductible or no-deductible insurance at an affordable price and the paragraph that forbids insurance companies to deny medically recommended procedures.

[ProSense]

13. Your cynicism is disgusting

Come on now, ProSense, you're such a staunch advocate of this bill. Surely you know it backwards and forwards and can quote me the specific paragraph that allows fast food managers and other working class people to buy low-deductible or no-deductible insurance at an affordable price and the paragraph that forbids insurance companies to deny medically recommended procedures.

Why? You'll just continue to ignore the fact that the bill subsidizes coverage, extends hardship waivers, includes catastrophic coverage, eliminates co-pays and deductibles for preventive care and covers cancer screenings 100 percent. (Want the links to how many times these have been posted?) The bill also end rescission.

‘‘SEC. 2712. PROHIBITION ON RESCISSIONS.
21 ‘‘A group health plan and a health insurance issuer
22 offering group or individual health insurance coverage
23 shall not rescind such plan or coverage with respect to an
24 enrollee once the enrollee is covered under such plan or
25 coverage involved, except that this section shall not apply
26 to a covered individual who has performed an act or prac17
O:\BAI\BAI09M01.xml S.L.C.
1 tice that constitutes fraud or makes an intentional mis2
representation of material fact as prohibited by the terms
3 of the plan or coverage. Such plan or coverage may not
4 be cancelled except with prior notice to the enrollee, and
5 only as permitted under section 2702(c) or 2742(b).

PDF

The mischaracterizations of the bill are lame and those advocating that it should be killed are despicable.

Let's say your wish comes through and the bill is killed, what comfort are the kill-the-bill advocates going to offer these victims?

[ShortnFiery]

17. Exactly. "Check's in the mail." :-) eom

[ShortnFiery]

12. Specifically the moneyed elite who have no IDEA what it's like to be part of the WORKING CLASS.

They're PLAYING desperate people with a grand con job.

They don't call it "CONFIDENCE GAMES" for nothing.

Senate to House Members: Trust us to correct the horrific errors in the HRC by reconciliation?

NO SALE! :grr:

[ProSense]

15. The unions are the "moneyed elite"? n/t

[ShortnFiery]

16. The "leaders" ... look how our democratic legislators do NOT stand up for the middle class?

They all forget where they came from IF they weren't born with a silver spoon in their corrupt mouths.

[ProSense]

19. Instead of accusing the unions of being corrupt, maybe you're wrong?

I'm interested in your characterization of these victims who support reform.

[ShortnFiery]

20. Stop the generic use of "the unions." I say there is CORRUPTION at every level ...

even within the leadership of our unions. It's not far fetched to consider that some of them have been paid off to behave like "useful idiots" and plead IGNORANCE when the WORKING people are screwed by mandates without coverage.

[bornskeptic]

21. Nonsense. Most insurance policies will pay for a colonoscopy if it is ordered by a doctor.

It would be stupid for them not to, since the cost of treating one case of colon cancer would pay for many colonoscopies. I got a mailing a couple of days ago from a local gastroenterologist recommending arranging for a colonoscopy, and declaring that no recommendation is needed and claiming that most insurance companies will cover with only an office visit copay. A colonoscopy is preventive care, and under the Senate bill, preventive care would be covered without any out-of-pocket cost.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

22. My policy doesn't pay for ANYTHING below $5000

and I have a 20% copay after that for a total out-of-pocket of $10,000.

I tried to switch to a policy from the same company that covered preventive care, and they told me I had to totally reapply, even though they had all my medical records for the past 16 years.

[ShortnFiery]

10. Whoa! I feel like we're playing the LIMBO ... how LOW can you GO? eom

[ProSense]

14. "blocking health care reform is a crime."

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly with the unions.

[ShortnFiery]

18. This Senate bill isn't "reform" but a "heist" by our "leaders" TO the Insurance Cartel

and Big Pharma.

We are being PUNKED!

[Cha]

23. Kick