Compulsory health-coverage plan wins support (WaPo)

[jefferson_dem]

Compulsory health-coverage plan wins support
Proposed requirement would result in all Americans having policies
By Ceci Connolly
The Washington Post
updated 4:11 a.m. ET, Wed., July 22, 2009

WASHINGTON - President Obama's dream of dramatically remaking the nation's health-care system is still a long way from reality. But if lawmakers can reach an accord, one thing is virtually certain: For the first time ever, every American would be required to carry health insurance.

The requirement, known as an individual mandate, is among the most far-reaching changes envisioned this year by those pushing for health-care reform. And it is one of the few common threads running through all three bills being considered in Congress, greatly increasing the likelihood it will survive the legislative process. Obama continued Tuesday to push lawmakers struggling with the large costs and scope of health legislation to move forward, pronouncing reform to be "closer than ever."

Just as drivers must purchase auto insurance, the medical system of the future would put responsibility for health coverage first and foremost on every adult.

For the vast majority of Americans who have health insurance, the change would mean little more than submitting a form with their tax returns proving that the plan they carry meets certain minimum standards. Many of the nation's 47 million uninsured people, however, would be required to purchase a health policy or face financial penalties, though waivers or discounts would be provided for lower-income Americans.

The concept is modeled after a requirement instituted in Massachusetts three years ago as part of that state's broad health-care overhaul. And like the Massachusetts law, the individual mandate proposed by congressional Democrats would be paired with a much more controversial new requirement that nearly every employer contribute to the total cost of care.

'More affordable for everyone'
"Without an individual mandate, you're never going to get to universal coverage," said Bradley Herring, a health economist at Johns Hopkins University.

<SNIP>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32078679/ns/politics-washington_post/

[dipsydoodle]

1. every American ?

Because I'm english and in the UK I cannot relate to your antics over there at all. What do you do about children ?

Over here our "children" are actually covered from the moment of conception and as you're aware there is no such thing as pre-existing conditions to cloud anything on our NHS.

[Nite Owl]

2. What a gift to the insurance companies!

Romney care for everyone. Some choice, if this is true.

[salguine]

3. I'm unemployed right now. You can take your mandate and shove it up your ass. This is

nothing more than a big, sloppy wet kiss to the insurance companies when they should be removed from he picture altogether. And if this thing goes forward, it will further entrench those same insurance companies for generations. This is worse than doing nothing.

[kath]

8. It IS worse than doing nothing.

Fuck this mandatory insurance crap. Totally agree that it will further entrench the insurance companies for decades and decades.
We need HEALTH CARE, not insurance. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Dinger]

4. And Then Tax The "Benefits" Too

What kind of a "waiver" or "discount" for lower income Americans? Maybe they should "waiver" them a job. Fuck this shit.

[Dinger]

5. If The "Waiver" Or "Discount" Isn't enough, Then What?

Jail?

[invictus]

6. They are going to force people who can't afford health insurance to buy it from private insurers?

That is sick.

[Armstead]

7. They are f***ing idiots -- Why don;t they REALLY look at Massachusetts?

The Masachusetts plan has been the worst of all worlds. It forces people to buy insurance but does not provide any alternatives to the Insurance racket.

If there are mandates, they have to be accompabnies by a public plan that guaranteed and affordable for everyone.

Otherwise it is the stick without the carrot.

[Cha]

9. Okay, here's the chance to do more than moan about

it. I know I am going to make it known I do not like this. I've never had health insurance and I don't plan on getting any.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

[backscatter712]

10. As long as a public option is available so I can give the finger to private insurers...

I hate to say it, but I think an individual mandate is necessary.

Just so long as for one, as I said, there's a public option to compete with the private insurers, 2, there's sufficient help for those of lesser means so they can afford to get health coverage, and 3. There's mandatory community rating (everyone pays the same, no jacking up premiums for pre-existing conditions), open-enrollment (they have to take everyone who pays the premiums) and open-renewal, as well as a ban on rescissions, so insurers are not allowed to dump the sick. There should be a mandatory minimum set of benefits so there's no more fucking people by saying "We don't cover that." Oh, and I'll mention for a third time that there has to be a public option directly competing with the private insurers.