Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: markman46

BTW, thank you for forcing me to reread this. The 60% I have been saying is wrong if only applied to short term disability. The percentage applies to total mandates.

We have similar issues here in CO, which is why I initially got caught up with this. I’m not saying things like a mammogram is not needed, beneficial and effective to combat breast cancer. I’m not saying we should not promote prostrate cancer protection for men. What I AM saying is these are “elective” procedures that should NOT be mandatory but elective and let hte person control his or her own destiny.

Any time we have mandates it increase overall costs. Darn it, let the people decide what they want and pay for items that are beneficial to themselves and not saddle everyone with higher overall prices.

I mentioned CA and CO but this is a problem nation-wide to one degree or another.


426 posted on 02/22/2010 4:33:25 PM PST by Morgan in Denver (Democrats: the law of unintended consequences in action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies ]


To: Morgan in Denver

OH you would not believe the mandates that CA put on the ins co’s here, and I work in the ins game and I hate them all I need is simple health ins dont need the ob or chiropractor or any of the other stupid stuff, and the feds are just as bad.


427 posted on 02/22/2010 6:31:51 PM PST by markman46 (engage brain before using keyboard!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson