Healthcare: Do we have a Conservative Solution to Helping People with Pre-existing Conditions ?

I am able to get insurance at my company during open enrollment, even though I have ESRD and am in remission from multiple myeloma.

Good for you. What about those who have been layed off and are looking for a job and have pre-existing conditions ? Over 10% of the workforce is unemployed at this time.

We have the best health care in the world. If you are penniless you can go into great emergency rooms around the country AND NOT BE DENIED CARE.

Depending on your financial circumstance you will then either be considered indigent and have it waived, or get on some payment plan to cover it.

Canadians and Socialists will not deny that we have the best healthcare in the world. But they add a caveat --- WE HAVE THE BEST HEALTHCARE FOR THOSE WHO ARE WELL OFF. Low and Lower Middle income people ( the argue ) DON'T have as good a healthcare as they have.

Also, you are talking about emergency. I am talking about pre-existing conditions that require continous medicine ( e.g insulin for diabetes ). Do we have a conservative plan for people with these chronic conditions who happen to have lost their jobs ?

Canadians ( and Democrats ) will argue that THESE are the people they are targeting to help. We got to come out with a better response other than TOUGH LUCK to them ( which in essence is what I always here people say ).

Healthcare: Do we have a Conservative Solution to Helping People with Pre-existing Conditions ?

I am open to suggestions, but I can say what are not solutions:

Forcing earners to pay for their misfortune.
It sickens me to hear about unfortunte poor families who bear a child with a serious inherited disease, and they proceed to have three or four more with the certain knowledge that "government" will care for them.

Forcing insurance companies to cover those unfortunates at the same rates paid by others with no pre-existing conditions. That is no longer insurance; that's welfare.

Not having a system which insists of paying a fair share, and a verifiable means to prevent fraud in its application; if a hard working family spends 30% of their earnings on health related issues (and relinquishes discretionary expenditures to make it possible), we should insist that the welfare recipients do the same. A 300-pound person with five kids, living entirely on welfare, with 4 cell phones MP3 players, big screen TV, driving an Escalade, must be expected to do the same.

In short why are some citizens more equal than others? Why is less demanded of them?

I have have a Canadian friend who keeps telling me that Canada's healthcare system is better because it caters to ANYONE regardless of pre-existing condition.

And the direct, well documented result of that is long waits for critical care, diagnoses and life-saving treatments, additional deaths and significant numbers desperately traveling to the U.S. to save their lives.

That's reality. Soon coming to a state near you.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.