If you are positively affected by the HRC bill, post here.

[redwitch]

If it helps you I would like to know. Thanks!

[lapfog_1]

1. Well, I did eat some bad sushi the other night.

I needed to empty my stomach... so I read this:

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/managers-amendment.pdf

and that made me :puke:

Does that count?

[redwitch]

3. LOL

Sure it does! I hate food poisoning, only got sick from it once and it wasn't serious thank goodness.

On a serious note, damn.

[Wardoc]

15. LOL

[MineralMan]

2. It will permit my wife to shop for less expensive coverage

once the preexisting condition part kicks in. Also, our household income may well be low enough for her to qualify for Minnesota's Minncare (Medicaid). The cap on premiums based on income will certainly apply, when it takes effect.

I will be 65 next year, and will go on Medicare, so it will have little to no effect on me.

[redwitch]

9. Yay. positive news!

I am glad it will help your wife.

[Sebastian Doyle]

4. It definitely helps me!

....because I'm Stephen Hemsley, CEO of United Health Care.

Now I can buy that 13th mansion in the Cayman Islands !

[redwitch]

6. Thank goodness Steve!

I was worried about that mansion going to some less deserving CEO.

[lapfog_1]

29. You won't be buying that 13th mansion in the Cayman Islands!!!

Because Al Franken is convinced that he's limited your profits to 15%.

You'll be buying THE CAYMAN ISLANDS!!!

Because limiting profit margins does NOT limit profits. At all. Period.

For a complete explanation (with a little math) see my post here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7286575&mesg_id=7286655

And, to see what kind of profits this bill is going to limit the industry to (with a little more math) see my post here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=81665&mesg_id=81709


Gee, if I promise to buy your insurance with all of my remaining money (possibly throwing in some government subsidies), will you let me visit your island, get a beach chair that faces west (so I can see a sunset), and just DIE right there (I'll bring a few pills)??? Pretty please?

[snagglepuss]

31. BINGO nt

[LynneSin]

5. It won't help me but it will help my nephew

He's a great kid who is out of high school and trying to figure out what to do with his life. He has 3 part-time jobs and he's going to try to get back to school if only for 1-2 classes a semester. There is no way he could afford health insurance like this. HCR will allow him to go back on his parents plans for another 6 years. Sure his parents will have to pay a bit more and he is going to help with the cost. However, it is much more affordable this route then buying on his own.

I also know several seniors who hope they fix that damn doughnut hole. It's killing them with their medicare prescription plan. Maybe we gave-in to the health insurance companies but we will force big pharma to negotiate prices.

[redwitch]

8. I am glad for your nephew.

Our guys are on our plan until 25. Or at least they are until January, the new cheaper plan we will have may not be so good for them.

[Skidmore]

7. There is no "bill" yet,

and won't be until the Senate and House versions go through reconciliation, and any number of changes could be made. There is still work to be done. We do not know what will be in the final version to say how we will be individually affected. I'm hoping that some of the more positive portions of the House bill will be retained and some of the more negative aspects of the Senate bill will be ditched. Then I hope that next session, we get back to the drawing board and make corrections. I'd like to see implementation moved up.

[redwitch]

10. I know, just projecting.

I hope the final legislation has some teeth in it to help some people.

[TicketyBoo]

12. Yes, I agree.

It's too early to know precisely how anyone will be affected.

I hope that it will help our son who has recently graduated from college and has not found a job with benefits, so he's heading back to grad school for his Master's. I'm hoping it will lower premiums for him.

[stopbush]

25. That doesn't seem to stop people from speculating about what's wrong with the bill.

I see no reason not to speculate about what might be right with the bill.

The bill would help my family in our current condition. I'm unemployed (and on UEB) and my wife is underemployed. She is a cancer survivor. We have two school-aged children. We will be going on "part time employee benefits" through her job as of next month. That insurance coverage will cost us about 40% of my wife's monthly pay, so we'll be living on what I get from CA UIB...until that runs out.

Our family has been uninsured since June, so we've been rolling the dice that nothing bad happens. We were on a COBRA that cost us $800 a month out of pocket, with high co-pays and deductibles and a whole lot of shit that wasn't covered (like covering only 70% on cancer tests my wife had, tests that ran into the thousands of dollars). That ended due to the 18-month limit, and we had to look elsewhere for insurance options.

I have applied for various insurance plans just to see what would happen if I wanted to buy my own insurance. Not a single plan will insure my wife. I would hope that she would qualify immediately for the high risk pool promised in the insurance exchanges.

We're both 55, so it would have maybe been nice if the Medicare age was lowered, but from what I understand, it would have cost us $400 per month apiece, so we wouldn't have saved any money on premiums. We may have been able to have lower co-pays and deductibles and had a larger percentage covered for those tests, but it's now a moot point, at least in this bill as it stands.

So, yeah, this bill promises some hope for people like us.

[lapfog_1]

42. Sorry, I'm in a situation similar to yours

read the bill.

The Senate version, as marked up by the manager's amendment, is what was voted on last night (and passed the first filibuster).

It's here:

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/managers-amendment.pdf

This bill will be what is passed (if anything does pass) because both Lieberman and Nelson have said that if the conference bill is substantially different, they will join with Republicans to filibuster the conference bill.

Older Americans (over 50) and those with pre-existing conditions both have to pay higher premiums than healthy people aged 21-30, a 4 X multiplier for older, another 50% more for pre-existing conditions. From my reading of the bill, that allows the industry to charge 6 times as much for people like us when compared to young healthy adults. Nobody is talking about a drastic reduction in the premiums for those young people, so a wild guess would still be in the range of $300 to $400 a month, which, for us, means as much as $1800 a month. Even with a subsidy, we won't be able to afford this unless we are near the federal poverty line in income. So we are the ones that "fall through the gap" (the big new donut hole that they've created.

Only now there is a mandate for purchasing this crappy product, and fines if you don't.

Now would be a good time to write your Senators and tell them to fix these multipliers in Conference, even if it means jacking up premiums for young healthy Americans.

[FormerDittoHead]

11. It helps me. I better understand what fools they think we are.

Seriously. How many people would have contributed, emailed, petitioned, called, etc if they knew the public option would have been dropped like a hot potato?

They were happy to take our money, have us send emails, have us sign petitions, etc. etc. The problem is that they KNEW we wouldn't do any of it if we thought they would put up NO FIGHT for the public option and then mandate purchasing insurance from corporations.



They're still way better than Republicans, but they're still "politicians" and that's not a compliment...

[Parker CA]

13. No pre-existing conditions denials or lifetime caps on care. Two big ones for me.

[mmonk]

20. Are the caps still in?

[blondeatlast]

36. +1. The "no pre-existing conditions" allows me to be independent from my soon-to-be-ex-husband.

Finally--and I am dangerously close to my lifetime cap on the employer provided insurance.

[snot]

40. Does everyone here understand,

there are no restrictions on denials based on pre-existing conditions 'til 2014, and no caps on premiums?

[blondeatlast]

41. Yes--but it's better than the options I have now. MUCH better. nt

[BR_Parkway]

14. Yes, my parnter and I will finally be able to get some coverage - probably not

great coverage, that remains to be seen - but something affordable enough that we can probably hire someone part time

[NNN0LHI]

16. It helps me sleep better at night

The bill is going to cost me money as I already have one of the so-called "Cadillac" health insurance programs and I am sure thats going to be taxed.

But I will be able to sleep better knowing that if some day I become financially distressed there will be some option for continued health insurance coverage for my wife and I.

Its like having earthquake insurance. Hope I never need it but if I do I am glad there is some coverage in place.

Don

[VMI Dem]

17. My shares of UNH will go up quite a bit.

Money in my pocket...among others.

[Wardoc]

18. When I go broke from this, I'll get three hots and a cot! JEALOUS MUCH?!? :)

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. +1

:evilgrin: And free health care! :rofl:

[Wardoc]

24. LOL!. Oh I don't know if I should laugh or cry bro!!.

[SammyWinstonJack]

30. With you there. It's ironically funny, isn't it?

:evilgrin:

[salguine]

32. Hey, maybe we could share a cell. I call dibs on top bunk! Fuckin' piece of shit "reform" bill...

[Uben]

19. Here's my post

I would be positively affected by the HCR bill (both house and senate versions).

Why would I vote against something that benefits me and millions of others. Even if it excluded any help for me, why would I, as a democrat, vote against getting healthcare for millions of people? I don't remember republicans giving us a choice, do you?

Thank you. Now you know!

[demodonkey]

21. No healthcare at all for me now... w/HCR I think I will be able to get some with subsidy. nt

[backscatter712]

23. No pre-existing conditions clauses is a big one for me.

And given my current state of poverty, the subsidies will also be helpful.

[madfloridian]

44. Not until 2014 though.

Pre-Exisiting Condition Exclusion: The legislation bars insurers immediately from denying coverage to children based on a pre-existing condition. However, they are still free to do it to adults until 2014. Besides being a blatant exception to immediate consumer protections, this one is a true head-scratcher. Except for expensive risk pools, adults in the individual insurance market with pre-existing conditions have nowhere to go until 2014. Yet the coverage mandate begins in the 2013 tax year. So what are folks supposed to do in 2013? Take out a second mortgage to pay for health plan coverage that won't cover their pre-existing conditions (the risk pool requires going bare for 6 months, activating a 12-month pre-exisiting condition coverage exclusion) or pay a fine, just because lawmakers wanted a better CBO score?

http://healthcare.change.org/blog/view/7_features_in_the_new_filibuster-proof_senate_healthcare_bill

[Parker CA]

48. That's a heck of a lot better than never or than how it is now. nt.

[Johonny]

26. Not really sure

Really depends how the Bill functions and how much they enforce it. There's a lot of optimistic impressions from the people that wrote it, and a lot of apocalyptic impressions from the DU, but it's not clear to me at all how the whole things going to function.

[silverweb]

27. Probably.

But who knows for sure yet? This is NOT yet what will be signed by the President.

[Winterblues]

28. I have nothing now, NOTHING

I will not be able to afford Insurance unless I get some sort of subsidy but it will give me some comfort knowing I will indeed be covered, (I hope).

[salguine]

33. I doubt you'll be covered. Your deductible/co-pay will probably be prohibitively high. Mine will.

[Winterblues]

37. So you are suggesting I will be worse off than I am now.

If I get sick there is no such thing as "Co-Pay" I pay the entire amount...Do you think I would benefit if I only had to pay 20% or should I have to continue to pay the 100% which is the case now?

[girl gone mad]

34. I'm just glad I lime ramen noodles..

because I think there will be many in my future.

[tridim]

35. It will help everyone who isn't filthy rich.

Including myself.

It will even help the sourpusses on DU when they eventually remove their shit-colored glasses.

[silverweb]

38. +1

:D

[laughingliberal]

43. Perhaps a look at the posts from MA residents who aren't filthy rich would shine some light on that

Because the information I get from them is they buy policies that are a real burden on their monthly income and have deductibles so high they can't afford to use them. Their glasses have gotten progressively shit colored as they have dealt with it longer. They have warned us this bill is Romney care and it is Romney care on steroids allowing a higher multiplier for age and other issues than MA allows. Their policies are unaffordable for many there who are not filthy rich and our new national plan will be more expensive for people

With all due respect a couple with combined income of $58,280 per year is not filthy rich. A couple with this income in their 50's is likely to spend 25%of their income on a policy. That policy will, likely, have a deductible of $5000-10,000 per year. It is not affordable. The health care system the middle class. Those receiving a subsidy to cover some costs of their premium will be a little better off in that, hopefully, the monthly premium will not break them but they are still facing a deductible that prevents them from using it. If they have a dire medical need and do use it the financial hardship will be immense and, likely, lead to bankruptcy.

I admire your dedication to the issue but the facts, mined from those already living with this health insurance model, do not support your assertions.

[tridim]

46. If the couple's policy is not affordable..

This bill will allow them to shop for an affordable policy on the exchange. If the insurance companies in the exchange don't play ball and offer affordable, REAL competitive plans they will be punished as stipulated in the bill.

For the record, I don't think the insurance companies will play ball, at which point the PO will be quickly reintroduced as an amendment with massive public support.

The MA plan is NOT the same as the national plan.

[laughingliberal]

47. You may be right. I hope you are. My dealings with government services on behalf of my patients in

the past have shown me that what the government considers affordable and what is actually doable in a real family budget are miles apart. We are talking about a government that sets the federal poverty level for a single person at $10,830. Beyond that, they don't consider you impoverished. I can easily see the federal government deciding that the rate the insurance company charges is affordable when it is not. They also do not, at all, deal with the out of pocket expenses. That $5000 a person may be on the hook for if they use the policy is not subsidized. The MA plan is not exactly the MA plan but it is the basic model for it and the national plan allows higher mutlipliers than MA.

I hope to see the PO introduced at some point but I see little will in our current legislature to stand up to the insurance lobby on behalf of the people. The conditions to pull the trigger in Medicare part D have long been met and, yet, no pulling of the trigger. I see a good chance we will have a decreased majority after 2010. Hell, I'd be happy at this point if we'd even gotten the trigger. I hope that i;m wrong. The statements of Wendall Potter are alarming. This is a man who understands insurance policies and regulations far better than any of us. And he has no reason to fight for us except the moral obligation he felt when he left a damned comfortable position after seeing the devastation his industry was causing people in this country. His words of warning, if no one else's, should give us all pause. He knows something we don't. We need to know what that is.

[bunny planet]

39. I would have been positively affected if the public option or the

medicare extension had been in the damn bill.
Now, erm.... not so much.

[DailyGrind51]

45. I have a cancer history so I am positively affected.

[Blue_In_AK]

49. I have no idea.

But I don't think it does. We go on Medicare in a couple of years, but since there's a huge shortage of primary care physicians in Anchorage, and almost none of them accept Medicare patients, we may be out of luck.

I'm not going to get sick, and when I do, I plan to die quickly. Should be easy enough to pull off here in Alaska. Maybe I could pull a Timothy Treadwell or a Chris McCandless. :)

[ChicagoSuz219]

50. I have single-payer, government-run healthcare*; however...

...my daughter lost her health insurance when she graduated college & has a pre-existing (heart) condition & it will greatly benefit her (& the 40+ million other people without insurance.

(*which, by the way, is great!)