Reply #31: You are confounding the House bill w/ the Senate bill, perhaps intentionally. [View All]

[clear eye]

During conference what usually happens is the bill morphs to the whatever in each version pleases big corporate donors, so it makes sense to envision what will happen if the Senate version prevails.

You are also confounding what out-of-pocket expenses are permitted under the exchanges and what will be permitted in plans for everyone else. (Most people won't be permitted into the exchanges.) Last I read, even the House bill capped out-of-pocket expenses at $5K for individuals and $10K for families.

And you completely ignore the creative ways insurance companies find for not covering expensive crucial treatments, and lack of explicit prohibitions in either bill for those practices. The favorites are to call doctor-prescribed treatments "experimental" or "elective", leaving people w/ a choice on the one hand of permanent disability or death, or on the other, bankruptcy.

"I just have to ask myself, why would someone want to put something" out that completely misrepresents the bill that's under debate--the Senate bill--by cherry-picking from what's in another bill (the House bill)?

For DUers who want to be able to predict accurately what their situation will actually be, notice that although the "essential benefits package" includes that impressive list of services and products, it doesn't say the insurance has to cover anything prescribed falling under that list.

You don't sound stupid, so I smell an ulterior motive. We have lots of pr people from insurance cos. or associations pop up on DU whenever the debate heats up.