Obamacare

The Health Care Act of 2010 has many parts that will take effect over time. Some are already in effect. Did the person have more specific info including the source? I know some people have spread bad rumors about these changes (remember the claims of death panels?) This might be another one of those rumors or...maybe your contact can provide more info?

Amen, yorkiemom,

There is no such thing as ObamaCare. There is the Health Care Act 2010 which was voted into law by the full body of congress and then signed by the President Obama.

Insurance brokers are one step up from used car salesman. Enough said. 

I don't understand, who is name calling?

The bill was passed well over a year ago, and we still don't really know what will and will not be covered.  No one in or out of government can or will tell us. 

The current attempt to force religious institutions to cover birth control even if it is in opposition to basic tenets of that religion is part of the implementation.  That seems likely to be decided by the Supreme Court eventually unless the provision is dropped before it gets to that point.  Freedom of Religion is specifically guaranteed in the Constitution, "free" birth control is not.  If the provision is allowed to be enforced, all Americans will be the losers, of something very important.

There is a provision in the law to have a panel or committee decide if the cost to benefit ratio of specific treatments will allow them to be covered.  Many insurance companies have similar groups now, but if someone is denied coverage by an insurance company, there are other options, including government intervention.  If the government is the entity doing the denying, who will people appeal the decision to?

No matter what you call it, for some people who are older, or very sick and whose only treatment options are expensive, they will function as death panels because if they deny one person treatment and that person dies, that panel has contributed to that death.

I agree there are many misconceptions...particularly about the 'death panels.'  Not sure most people know what they really mean but here is an example:

The federal government has pro-actively decided to take Avastin off label for BC treament.  This is in foresight to the coming years when the governement will have to pay for this hugely expensive treament.  Rather than absorb this huge cost to the governemnt they have decided to take it away.  As this drug can save lives I would call this action a death-panel verdict:  A decision by the government about who should live and who should not based on efficiencies. 

I believe that this will be the first of many instances where we will see effective but costly medication taken off the table in even life and death situations. 

The difference is that if a private company denies a treatment, there are avenues of appeal, and there are alternative sources for obtaining the treatment.  If the government is the sole arbiter, and decides that a treatment won't be available, they remove the alternative sources.

Yes, it is OK because it is private and so therefore there are other companies to go with.  Under federal healthcare there will NOT be options.  Especially down the line when all private companies give up offering insurance to their employees in lieu of the public plan( and MANY of them have divulged that this will indeed happen).  And one more thing-if it was such a good plan then why doesn't Congress have to go on it?  Or the unions?  Or any other big company that can buy/lobby their way out of it?  THe only reason that I am not completely terrified of this is because it is illegal and I have high hopes that justice will prevail when the SC gets the case.  IF you really want to see into our future with this plan look at some of the posts from girls in other countries-particularly the UK. 

And now I revert back to my original request that these political discussions not be allowed here.  Oh, and the namecalling....'rightwing' propaganda comes to mind.  Just like many are offended by the term Obamacare there are many offended by that just so you know. 

Oh, and here's a copy of the bill for those of you who like scintillating reading to keep yourself awake at night.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.pdf 

Amen yorkiemom. As long as health insurance is a for profit industry this will always be a mess. It's amazing that we don't even know what our doctor, scan or treatment charge will be till we get the bill. That's nuts.

a friend of mine went for her lumpectomy little over a year ago. They insisted she get a pregnacy test before they operate. She's divorced and hasn't had sex in 5  years. She had to fight to not take the test. She would have had to co-pay for that but she was obviously not pregnant. She was almost 49 at the time. Talk about wasting money.

------------------------------------------

But back to the initial question. Your insurance broker is distorting the facts. There are already things that medicare won't pay for once you reach a certain age. I think after 80 they may not pay for colonoscopies.

Thank you for posting a link to he bill, Marianna.  I'd urge you all to read it if you haven't already done so.

http://www.cancer.org/MyACS/Eastern/AreaHighlights/affordable-care-act-six-ways

The American Cancer Society has done extentive research into the Affordable Care Act, and while it's not perfect, it has definate benefits for cancer patients. ACS wouldn't endorse it if your claim was true. 

I can't wait until 2014 because I have had the same insurance policy since 1987 and it sucks but no one else will cover me because of pre-existing conditions (I had cancer in 1987).  

Mallory ... Under the ACA there is not one 'public plan'.  There is a pool of differing plans ... offered by different companies ... from which to choose.

It is modeled after the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program which I happen to be under (as is Congress).  All must meet minimum standards but are free to offer more than that.   They will not be allowed to refuse coverage based on pre-existing conditions anymore either.  It will be administered by OPM just like the FEHBP.  So actually Congress is already on basically the same system.  And if employers decide to quit offering health insurance and provide their employees with $$$ to apply to the plan they select under the ACA it will be exactly like what government employees and Congress now has. 

I am very glad that I have been able to select a plan in this manner and decide for myself how much coverage I need and how much I am willing to pay for it ... rather than have an employer decide for me in a 'take it or leave it' manner like many do.   I think many people who are so very against the whole idea will be pleasantly surprised when it is implemented. 

How nice to see you again, Sherri!  I hope you've been well.