Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Which Parts of Obamacare Would Gibson Repeal?

This is a legitimate question. The parts that have been enacted thus far (the mandate doesn't kick in for another year-plus) are things people actually seem to like:
Elements of the controversial law, often called “Obamacare,” include prohibiting people from being denied medical coverage because of pre-existing conditions, banning lifetime coverage caps, allowing parents to keep children on their insurance plans until age 26, requiring everyone to have health insurance in an effort to cut down on uninsured people using emergency rooms, creating nonprofit collectives to try to lower costs through competition, and limiting how much insurers can spend on marketing and administration.
I'm sure a few of you who are reading this have a child who now has health coverage because of the under-26 rule. And maybe there are a few of you who discovered that your insurance company can no longer deny you coverage for preexisting conditions. And then there's the healthcare rebate checks a lot of people received this year because insurance companies now must spend at least 80 percent of premiums on healthcare (as opposed to marketing and administrative costs); since many insurance companies didn't meet that threshold, they were required by law to return these excess premiums to consumers. The checks went out this August. People like getting check unexpectedly. I know I do.

We have no idea how well the other stuff will work because it hasn't taken effect yet. So, which of the above is Gibson going to repeal? All? Some? Maybe some intrepid reporter should ask him directly which of these provisions are bad and need to go away?

No comments:

Post a Comment