Posted on 01/10/2008 6:57:58 AM PST by JohnRand
Thanks for the link--it gives me real info to fight my liberal relatives that 'rant' about the need for health insurance for ALL!!
Exactly. Health insurance companies should be allowed to offer their policies in all 50 states. As of now, they have restrictions on what states they can sell. It creates small monopolies throughout each state, which limits choices, which causes higher premiums because the risks of diverse demographics cannot be spread out. States like Florida, Arizona, etc., with excessive amounts of elderly people, have higher rates because they are the biggest users.
>>>>>U.S. hospitals often end up absorbing the costs of caring for uninsured immigrants, because they are required to provide emergency room care to all.
LEGAL immigrants must have a financial sponsor AND a legal “affidavit of financial support” guaranteeing that the immigrant’s bills will be paid and that he/she will not make use of government (local, state, federal) benefits. The AFS is a legal contract and can be enforced against the sponsor by any business or government agency for payment of the immigrant’s bills.
Of course the illegal alien has no such obligation.
>>>>Wife has insurance through her job. He can well afford it but chooses not to buy it.
Why would a married couple have two health insurance policies? My wife is covered on my policy, and always has been.
You consider 42 a young adult? You can sit here by me.
Sorry, couldn't resist
ML/NJ
He may choose to get on hers, i’m not sure. I’m self employed and I had myself and 2 kids insured privately, while my wife was insured through her job. Hers was provided “free” as part of her compensation. It was cheaper for me and the kids to get a plan of our own than to get on hers, and we had a better plan. We did that for about 10 years. As of now, we are on her plan. My private plans rates went up and hers was now cheaper. BC/BS of Florida.
Wrong. First affidavits of support only apply to means-tested benefits, not general benefit programs such as Medicare. That distinction aside, please tell me what percentage of affidavits of support have ever been successfully enforced? Back in 1996 the U.S Commission on Immigration reform advised that the affidavits of support should be made legally enforceable, but THAT HASN’T HAPPENED. In addition, the public charge test does not apply to refugees or persons granted asylum in the U.S., Haitians, Cubans or Nicaraguans, Amerasians, certain Soviet and Indochinese illegals. The foreign-born utilization of SSI is confirmed by administrative data. SSI program data reveal that approximately 25 percent of elderly SSI recipients are foreign-born.
data from the census bureau at:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin06/p60no233_table6.pdf
indicates 10 million “non citizens” were included in the “uninsured” category for 2006.
What the data does not tell you about their methodology is that the “uninsured” includes millions who were “without coverage” for the brief periods during a change of jobs, simply because they chose not to take the COBRA coverage for that period.
While the data does report the 9+ million “uninsured” with incomes over 75K/year, it does not tell you how many of them are young, single and/or very well-off and without
coverage by choice.
There are many other anomalies in the data that are not identified by the bureau.
The census bureau’s reporting and lack of clarification on this important issue constitutes a public fraud.
Voting for McCain destroys what remains of our sovreignty!
>>>>>affidavits of support only apply to means-tested benefits, not general benefit programs such as Medicare.
I wasn’t addressing that, since the number of Medicare-eligible LEGAL immigrants is rather small in the grand scheme of things.
>>>>>>That distinction aside, please tell me what percentage of affidavits of support have ever been successfully enforced?
Like the rest of the immigration code, probably never. But the tools to do so are there. The notarized and witnessed AFS is hard to argue with should any entity demand payment under its provisions. Sort of like our other labor, immigration, and deportation codes.
I have always wondered why Mexico can’t take care of their own people. Don’t they have oil? I remember when Vincenti Fox was on O’Reilly and he asked him the same question. Fox just kind of mumbled. In other words it was easier to let the American people take care of Mexico. Why can’t they have American and foreign business set up in Mexico?
there are more billionaires percapita in Mexico than any other country in the world
there is no incentive to take care of the problem. it is VERY profitable to let their people explore the Northern Frontier. They are here to take over, as was said more than 50 years ago, house by house, street by street not one bullet shot we will take our territory back.
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.