Josh Hawley: I support forcing insurance companies to cover all pre-existing conditions

[RavenSky]

If you didn't know anything else about this candidate, what would you think about this ad?

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKpY8PCut2A[/YOUTUBE]

There is a small problem with his claim, though.

He actually supports over-turning ACA which will allow insurance companies to exclude pre-existing conditions again:

A nonprofit called the Protect our Care Campaign, formed to oppose Obamacare repeal efforts, blasted the lawsuit Tuesday as a "partisan attack." The group said it puts at risk popular provisions of the ACA like guaranteed access to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and allowing children to stay insured under their parents' plans until age 26.

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley joined officials in 18 other Republican-led states in the latest challenge to the law commonly called Obamacare.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article202388299.html

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover? They shouldn't. That's another reason for universal single payer. So is the fact that employers shouldnt be forced to give medical insurance to their employees beyond risks created by the job itself.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover? They shouldn't. That's another reason for universal single payer. So is the fact that employers shouldnt be forced to give medical insurance to their employees beyond risks created by the job itself.

Why? Because it's the only system we have here. Your pie in the sky fantasy notwithstanding, we have to work with what we have.

 

[poster]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

I'll be very surprised if Medicare-For-All happens. Look around you, there are all sorts of medical services opening up like retail stores. That's what the market has decided will happen and unless the government decides a system like Medicare for all will pay private retailers what they want, it's a forgone conclusion that it's off the table, regardless of what Democrats are preaching. Democrats had as much to do with this retailing of health care as republicans did, btw.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover?

Because people without insurance still use the Medical Infrastructure in the US and their services end up costing more, so us people with insurance pay more to cover it.

That's another reason for universal single payer.

There are many reasons for UHC... but in the US, such a concept is heresy, so ACA is the best we could do in '09. The Medicare for all thing looks to be gathering unexpected momentum.

And oddly enough, once the Dems start pushing a "positive" message, you still aren't happy.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

Exactly. He didn't even TRY for universal single payer. He didn't even start there when negotiating health care.

Why? Because it's the only system we have here. Your pie in the sky fantasy notwithstanding, we have to work with what we have.

It is the system you have because it is the system you have created, and it is oppressive, to those not covered and those who have to fight insurance companies tooth and nail for every benefit and claim, to the insurance companies, and to the employers. You should ALL be paying your share of the public burden, and nobody should have to fight an insurance company for the care they truly need. I worked in personal injury law years ago here in Canada, and we had to battle insurance companies in car accident claims. It was never pretty, and they (especially Aviva and State Farm - US Companies) would try to screw the injured over at every turn. It was like pulling teeth. Looking at the USA it just boggles my mind, to have to do this for every substantial health care need even when not a tort claim.

And you all should be paying for this, as you all enjoy the benefits of your society, not just those who employ people. Why should the employer have to pay for care that has nothing to do with the job, while the idle rich contribute nothing to that care?

There are many reasons for UHC... but in the US, such a concept is heresy, so ACA is the best we could do in '09.

Bullshit. Obama could have had his "public option" had he started with universal single payer before negotiating. He started far far too low.

The Medicare for all thing looks to be gathering unexpected momentum.

Not unexpected. Totally expected, thanks to Bernie Sanders and those like him that are decried constantly by the corporate Democrats. And had Hillary won the election over Trump, with her corporate Democrat views, Bernie would be irrelevant again and you would not be seeing this push. It is a silver lining of Trump's win. Would have been better had Hillary not run her "no, we can't" campaign, and had she not run to the right with her VP pick, as then she would have had a much better chance of winning over Trump and we could see the progress today instead of in 2020.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There are many reasons for UHC... but in the US, such a concept is heresy, so ACA is the best we could do in '09.

Bullshit. Obama could have had his "public option" had he started with universal single payer before negotiating. He started too low.

I think it is cute that you think you have some sort of long term memory, but clearly you don't, so please, stop trying, because Sen. Nelson and Sen. Lieberman wouldn't even allow votes on expansion of Medicare to people in their 50s. The Democrats needed 60 votes to do anything, and without those two votes, they were stuck. And in the House, despite the majority, the Dems barely got the ACA over the line, and even in that, it required some creative parliamentary tactics to do so.

ACA was the BEST that could be done with the rules in place at the time. ACA was not popular publicly and Obama and the Dems took a historic beatdown in 2010 because of it... and not because the US wanted UHC instead.

 

[Elixir]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover?

Start your own thread, dude. This one is about yet another lying, cheating republican scumbag who films commercials touting his love and support for making insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions, while joined in a lawsuit to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.
I'm sure you see nothing wrong with that, since you seem to side with the plaintiffs - NO MATTER WHAT LYING, CHEATING SCUMBAGS they are.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

If you didn't know anything else about this candidate, what would you think about this ad?

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKpY8PCut2A[/YOUTUBE]

There is a small problem with his claim, though.

He actually supports over-turning ACA which will allow insurance companies to exclude pre-existing conditions again:

A nonprofit called the Protect our Care Campaign, formed to oppose Obamacare repeal efforts, blasted the lawsuit Tuesday as a "partisan attack." The group said it puts at risk popular provisions of the ACA like guaranteed access to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and allowing children to stay insured under their parents' plans until age 26.

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley joined officials in 18 other Republican-led states in the latest challenge to the law commonly called Obamacare.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article202388299.html

The Ohio attorney general is pulling the same stunt in his campaign for governor, after suing to overturn the ACA.

And many other Republicans are proposing legislation to protect pre-existing condition coverage, after trying to drown it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ng-conditions-attacks/?utm_term=.ea9a2bbd9b3c

 

[southernhybrid]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover? They shouldn't. That's another reason for universal single payer. So is the fact that employers shouldnt be forced to give medical insurance to their employees beyond risks created by the job itself.

Well, gee, maybe because in return for big subsidies, which helped add millions of new clients, the insurance companies agreed to cover all preexisting conditions. The US isn't the only country that uses private insurance companies to help cover all of its citizens to have medical coverage. Group policies that were offered by employers already had to cover all preexisting conditions, but individual policies didn't. Get it now? People without any preexisting conditions never had difficulty buying insurance policies. People with even a mild preexisting condition did, if they had to purchase their own insurance instead of getting it through an employer.

Obama didn't try to offer universal care or the public option because there was absolutely no chance of that passing. It was difficult just to get enough Democrats to pass the ACC. Even though this was based on a Republican plan, the Rs didn't vote for it. While it's far from perfect, I have two family members who have personally benefitted from it. Until or unless we come up with something better that has the possibility of being made into law, we need to keep the ACC intact as it was designed. It's certainly better than what we had before, despite being less than ideal.

 

[southernhybrid]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

I'll be very surprised if Medicare-For-All happens. Look around you, there are all sorts of medical services opening up like retail stores. That's what the market has decided will happen and unless the government decides a system like Medicare for all will pay private retailers what they want, it's a forgone conclusion that it's off the table, regardless of what Democrats are preaching. Democrats had as much to do with this retailing of health care as republicans did, btw.

What are you talking about? What retailers? Where? I have no idea what you're talking about. You do realize that Medicare pays a fixed amount for services and not what the providers want, I assume. For example, the place where I had my mammogram this year charged Medicare 800 dollars, but Medicare only reimburses them under 100 dollars. Because they agree to accept Medicare recipients, they have to accept that and they can't bill me for any more. Does anyone really think that a mammogram is worth 800 dollars? Last year it was 500 dollars. WTF! The hospital where I had mine is a private corporation, so they can deduct the difference between what they charge and what they get paid.

 

[phands]

I hate this bogus dialog about health insurance.

People don't need health insurance, they need health care. Make that the focus of discussions and policies, not this giant digression.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

I'll be very surprised if Medicare-For-All happens. Look around you, there are all sorts of medical services opening up like retail stores. That's what the market has decided will happen and unless the government decides a system like Medicare for all will pay private retailers what they want, it's a forgone conclusion that it's off the table, regardless of what Democrats are preaching. Democrats had as much to do with this retailing of health care as republicans did, btw.

What are you talking about? What retailers?

The only thing I've seen are Renal treatment places. In general, I don't think anyone in the middle class has successfully shopped a price for medical service.

 

[poster]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

I'll be very surprised if Medicare-For-All happens. Look around you, there are all sorts of medical services opening up like retail stores. That's what the market has decided will happen and unless the government decides a system like Medicare for all will pay private retailers what they want, it's a forgone conclusion that it's off the table, regardless of what Democrats are preaching. Democrats had as much to do with this retailing of health care as republicans did, btw.

What are you talking about? What retailers? Where? I have no idea what you're talking about.

https://www.medexpress.com/location/pa/lancaster/lwp/

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

If you didn't know anything else about this candidate, what would you think about this ad?

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKpY8PCut2A[/YOUTUBE]

There is a small problem with his claim, though.

He actually supports over-turning ACA which will allow insurance companies to exclude pre-existing conditions again:

A nonprofit called the Protect our Care Campaign, formed to oppose Obamacare repeal efforts, blasted the lawsuit Tuesday as a "partisan attack." The group said it puts at risk popular provisions of the ACA like guaranteed access to coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and allowing children to stay insured under their parents' plans until age 26.

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley joined officials in 18 other Republican-led states in the latest challenge to the law commonly called Obamacare.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article202388299.html

Standard Republican Talking Points. The same view was forwarded again by Trump in his Op-Ed yesterday:

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/10/656249981/fact-check-trumps-false-claims-on-medicare-for-all

aa

 

[poster]

Insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation. The reason that this is all we have to work with is because the insurance industry has controlled the issue and the narrative. Obama gave the insurance industry a huge windfall, and they ain't gonna let go of it easily, unless something equal to it replaces it.

I'll be very surprised if Medicare-For-All happens. Look around you, there are all sorts of medical services opening up like retail stores. That's what the market has decided will happen and unless the government decides a system like Medicare for all will pay private retailers what they want, it's a forgone conclusion that it's off the table, regardless of what Democrats are preaching. Democrats had as much to do with this retailing of health care as republicans did, btw.

You do realize that Medicare pays a fixed amount for services and not what the providers want, I assume. For example, the place where I had my mammogram this year charged Medicare 800 dollars, but Medicare only reimburses them under 100 dollars. Because they agree to accept Medicare recipients, they have to accept that and they can't bill me for any more.

Which is why it isn't going to happen. They agree because of certain incentives, and they're willing to do it for a small segment of the population like senior citizens and low-low income.

Private companies do not like the government or any outside agencies or companies telling them how to run their business or how much they can charge.

 

[poster]

I hate this bogus dialog about health insurance.

People don't need health insurance, they need health care. Make that the focus of discussions and policies, not this giant digression.

Americans talk about health insurance (instead of health care) like theists talk about god - that it's a forgone conclusion.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I hate this bogus dialog about health insurance.

People don't need health insurance, they need health care. Make that the focus of discussions and policies, not this giant digression.

Americans talk about health insurance (instead of health care) like theists talk about god - that it's a forgone conclusion.

Right now, those that don't have insurance are either suffering or making our health care more expensive. It'd be nice to get rid of the middle man.

 

[Elixir]

I hate this bogus dialog about health insurance.

People don't need health insurance, they need health care. Make that the focus of discussions and policies, not this giant digression.

Agree. The "crazy left wing extremists" are touting UHC, not UHI. Scares the crap out of the congresscritters who depend on Big Pharma donors.

 

[RavenSky]

Why SHOULD private insurance companies be forced to provide coverage to people they don't want to cover? They shouldn't. That's another reason for universal single payer. So is the fact that employers shouldnt be forced to give medical insurance to their employees beyond risks created by the job itself.

I agree with you. But until we do have universal single payer like every other civilized country (most most of the so-called 3rd world countries), then for-profit & private health insurance companies should be required to cover everyone or not be allowed to cover anyone.

And more importantly, these Republican scumbags shouldn't be allowed to blatantly lie about their positions on this or any other topic in their ads.