Watching DeMint and Conrad - talking about "maintaining Americans' right to choose their plans"

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

On Stephanoupolis right now.

1. Most Americans don't choose their plans right now - THEIR EMPLOYER does. People can get bounced from plan to plan yearly based on the decisions of their employers.

But then it dawned on me - Congresscritters DO choose their own plans from a veritable buffet of them offered by The Federal Employees Health Benefit Program. I think it would be fantastic if we WERE able to select our own plan from a buffet like the Congress does, but that would be a new ballgame for most of us. I sort of wondered if they realized that most of us currently just take what we're offered.

Hard to believe, but DeMint said one thing that made sense. He said the current bills are maintaining only state markets for insurance and he thought that if all plans were available everywhere ( a National exchange), that competition would drive down prices. It was the only thing he said that made sense. He really doesn't want reform per se. He would like to give everyone a $5,000 credit, which Steffie pointed out wouldn't come close to covering the costs which is when he made the point about a National market.

[cleveramerican]

1. it was a good exchange

tells me why this is so much harder than it appeared 6 months ago.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

2. Did Conrad, DeMint make any comments about DeMint's crowing

about "breaking" or "defeating" Obama over this issue?

[old mark]

3. You really can't choose your healthcare policies now, unless yoiu buy them

or are an elected federal official. Blue Cross coverage for just myself was $800/month about 1 1/2 years ago, so a $5000 credit won't do much, plus you have to be relatively rich and be paying a lot of tax to get a $5000 refund. This is just more GOP delaying and lying in order to defeat any meaningful change to the racket that is our healthcare "system".


mark

[TankLV]

4. Yep - I'd say that the OVERWHEMING MAJORITY - like 90% - cannot choose their plans if they have one.

Like you said, unless you're SELF EMPLOYED, and even then, YOUR PLAN IS CHOSEN BY SOMEONE ELSE!!!

Even in Hawaii, when I had my own business, HMSA was the ONLY game in town - kind of a "take it or leave it" "choice"...

THAT'S NO "CHOICE"!!!

[COLGATE4]

5. The problem with DeMint's 'argument'

about taking Insurance out of the State's ambit and putting it on a national exchange is that, as it currently is, the Insurance companies are regulated and controlled by State Commissioners of Insurance. (The next time you see one of these insurance ads on TV, look at the fine print which says something like "not offered in the States of X, Y and Z". These Commissioners make sure that the Insurance company and its policies are bona fide and can intervene on behalf on the insured person in the event of disputes. There is no provision for any such protection on a national level.

In other words, under the Rethug's plan, you could buy your health insurance on the internet from a company which is probably organized under the laws of the State most friendly to Insurance companies. If you later have a dispute with them, good luck - you will be forced to litigate (or more likely arbitrate!) in the state of incorporation, not in your home state. You may also have bought from a company with a large record of unfair business practices, but there's no one to tell you that or to have stopped them from offering insurance in your state.

Anytime the Rethugs suggest a 'compromise', look for the stinger buried in it - it's always there.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

6. That is a very good point and not one I had thought of.

It seems as though that objection possibly could be overcome within the legislation itself, providing for intra state litigation and/or arbitration of any health policy offered within the state. That could be a good thing in that it would put more of an onus on the insurance companies to just do the right thing initially and avoid potential litigation in multiple locations.