Health insurance reform imminent?

After so many seemingly interminable months of back-and-forth, is health insurance reform finally imminent?  It is looking that way, thankfully.  The bill is not as strong as most of us would like, but it still represents a drastic improvement on the status quo for a huge number of people.  Paul Krugman summed it up in the New York Times a few days ago:

[L]et’s all take a deep breath, and consider just how much good this bill would do, if passed — and how much better it would be than anything that seemed possible just a few years ago. With all its flaws, the Senate health bill would be the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare, greatly improving the lives of millions. Getting this bill would be much, much better than watching health care reform fail.At its core, the bill would do two things. First, it would prohibit discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of medical condition or history: Americans could no longer be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or have their insurance canceled when they get sick. Second, the bill would provide substantial financial aid to those who don’t get insurance through their employers, as well as tax breaks for small employers that do provide insurance.All of this would be paid for in large part with the first serious effort ever to rein in rising health care costs.

The result would be a huge increase in the availability and affordability of health insurance, with more than 30 million Americans gaining coverage, and premiums for lower-income and lower-middle-income Americans falling dramatically. That’s an immense change from where we were just a few years ago: remember, not long ago the Bush administration and its allies in Congress successfully blocked even a modest expansion of health care for children.

As the title of his piece says, "Pass the bill!".

Comments

[insurance]

Not to sure where the USA insurance companies stand on disputing a genuine claim on the grounds of not disclosing information whether it is relevent or not like the UK insurance companies do and the sad thing is for many policy holders is that they are entitled to do so in the law that stands at the moment. Some of the UK laws go back to 1906 and have never been amended to stay up todate with the current times on this massive industry.

[ATB]

With all its flaws this is still a good start. Democracy always requires compromise because we are all different. No country that has universal health insurance did it in one fell swoop. All built to it over time.

[vibram five fingers]

how much good this bill would do, if passed

[vibram five fingers]

it would prohibit discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of medical condition or history: Americans could no longer be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition

[Brahim]

The simple aewsnr is Freedom of Choice. First of all you must understand that there is a great deal of fraud involved with Government run Medicare. Scam artists regularly milk Medicare out of BILLIONS of dollars. Private insurance companies are out to make a profit and therefore investigate the claims much better.It should also be noted that Medicare has approx $1100 deductible each year for hospital coverage and $162 per year for Outpatient deductible. After that the member is responsible for 20% co-insurance. Add to that the fact that there is no routine dental coverage, no routine vision coverage and no prescription drug coverage.Private plans are requires by law to follow federal guidelines that either meet or exceed original Medicare coverage. Most of them far exceed these guidelines. Many plans offer dental, vision part d coverage and even health and wellness, transportation and/or fitness classes (health club memberships)The private insurance companies receive a set monthly per member fee as determined by our federal government and not a percentage. If this amount is less than the cost of care for a certain individual the insurance company is liable to pay with no additional reimbursement.Insurance is actually defined as pure-risk but closely monitored by underwriters. They have an idea of what health care costs but there are so many variables that there is no clear cut number that can actually be obtained. It is all based upon estimates.Private insurance competes for more business and thus offers additional benefits and lower co-payments in order to entice more people to join their plan. We can all keep blaming the big bad insurance companies or give the reigns over to the government who will dictate what we deserve and what they feel we need. What a novel idea. Our government thinks they are more intelligent than we are and has decided that we are too stupid to decide what is best for ourselves.With all of that being said. Everyone still has a choice to have original Medicare or choose a private plan. Medicare advantage is growing at an incredible pace and there are over 11 million seniors and growing who have made this choice. I will side with Seniors on this one. They know what works because they use these programs every day. Not everyone will ever have the same opinion but the overwhelming majority of seniors will tell you quit screwing with my Medicare They like what they have

[Ali]

I don't know where you got your figures, but as sonmoee who has had private medical insurance and now am on Medicare, private does much better. Yes, it is higher priced, but Medicare is far from being free either. We pay a monthly premium for it that totally exceeds $150 a month each and the coverage is horrible. I used to be part of an employer based plan where I paid less than that, and got excellent coverage. The only thing I ever had to pay was a small co pay for doctor and prescriptions.I think the best plans are those offered by employers because they are group plans. Medicare SHOULD BE the largest group plan but the group it covers are those who have the biggest health problems so it is a lot of money.Medicare recipients can get better coverage for less money if they take out a private plan where they can become of a group comprised of all ages. That is actually what Obama was attempting to do with the uninsured in the country. The problem is .those uninsured did not have to pay anything for it at all so that only means that the premiums will go up for everyone else to pay for them.I would happily pay my $150 per month to a group plan to get better coverage.

[Axeel]

They are both beneficial as they will both pay to your beirficnaey if you die Usually the differences are: 1. With group insurance, the rates will go up every few years. 2. Your employer controls the coverage and can cancel group insurance at any time. 3. If you lose your job, you may lose your coverage 4. as you get older the rates become more expensive, and if you develop a health issue, you are subject to increasing rates and the whims of employer if they keep/cancel coverage.Individual is better because you make the decisions of how much to have, how long to keep and you control the outcome.