The Senate Health Bill Nonsense, Vol 1.

I am about 80 pages into the Senate Health Bill (AKA Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or PPACA) and already the nonsense begins in gross quantities.

For instance:

‘‘SEC. 2701. FAIR HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS.

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to the premium rate charged by a health insurance issuer for health insurance coverage offered in the individual or small group Market—

‘‘(A) such rate shall vary with respect to the particular plan or coverage involved only by—

‘‘(i) whether such plan or coverage covers an individual or family;
‘‘(ii) rating area, as established in accordance with paragraph (2);
‘‘(iii) age, except that such rate shall not vary by more than 3 to 1 for adults
(consistent with section 2707(c)); and
‘‘(iv) tobacco use, except that such rate shall not vary by more than 1.5 to 1; and

‘‘(B) such rate shall not vary with respect to the particular plan or coverage involved by any other factor not described in subparagraph (A).

Even life insurers price insurance based on smoking preference. So health insurers cannot varies premiums by more than a factor of 1.5:1? Does Congress even check with the Surgeon General to assess the risks here? This factor alone means higher premiums for us non-smokers since the insurance companies will have to price insurance for the smoker first, then discount back to find the premium for the non-smoker.

Then it goes on to say:

‘‘SEC. 2705. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS AND BENEFICIARIES BASED ON HEALTH STATUS.

‘‘(a) INGENERAL.—A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage may not establish rules for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll under the terms of the plan or coverage based on any of the following health status-related factors in relation to the individual or a dependent of the individual:

‘‘(1) Health status.
‘‘(2) Medical condition (including both physical and mental illnesses).
‘‘(3) Claims experience.
‘‘(4) Receipt of health care.
‘‘(5) Medical history.
‘‘(6) Genetic information.
‘‘(7) Evidence of insurability (including conditions arising out of acts of domestic violence).
‘‘(8) Disability.
‘‘(9) Any other health status-related factor determined appropriate by the Secretary.

So as the name insurance would imply, people buy it to avoid risk and the insurance company much price the policy to provide for greater revenue than expense associated with the policy. So with the above 9 criteria removed from pricing the policy, I would imagine the insurance company will have to assume everyone has all 9 of the above risk factors and will be forced to price every policy as such. This DOES NOT mean lower premiums for current policy holders. It's impossible, or it will force bankruptcy on the insurance providers. Hummm.....maybe that's what they want so there is no option but the government option?

Can you imagine if an auto insurance company could not price an auto policy if they could not rate the insured based on driving record, number of previous accidents, etc? Everyone would be forced into a higher policy to cover all their risks.

You are locked into Obamacare.

This is a great article from an MD answering the question "Can I get out of Obamacare?"

American Enterprise Institute

Some highlights:

In effect, the plan creates a single national health-insurance policy. Consumers' only real option is to trade higher co-pays for lower premiums. But we'll all get the same package of benefits established by a series of new agencies and an "insurance czar" seated in Washington.

The overriding goal of this reform is to turn health insurance into a more "egalitarian" benefit that's the same for everyone, regardless of income, personal preference or need. So rules written under President Obama to implement the Obama plan are a sure bet to intentionally curtail anyone's ability to wrap around this national coverage with a supplemental policy or to contract privately with doctors to pay your way out of its limitations.

It is easy to see how Obama plans to lower "costs." Everyone will now have to pay for standardized care. This means more care for some, but less for others. To save money, some things will certainly be left off the Czar's approved health insurance coverage itinerary. Seems like a lot of power for any bureaucrat (or bureaucracy) to handle. Plus, how does that bureaucrat know what is good for me and my family (and for that matter, yours)? I wonder if a lower life expectancy is considered a "cost?"