Posted on 05/08/2017 6:37:35 AM PDT by grayboots
AHCA: Myth vs. Fact
MAY 04 2017
I have a pre-existing condition. How does this bill affect me?
Under our plan, insurance companies cannot deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions. And your health status cannot affect your premiums, unless your state asks for and receives a waiver—a condition of which is the state having other protections in place for those with pre-existing conditions. Even if your state does obtain a waiver, so long as you’ve been continuously covered, you still cannot be charged more. And the bill provides added resources to help people in waiver states who have not been continuously covered to gain coverage. Bottom line, there are many levels of protection for those with pre-existing conditions in the legislation.
I heard about the MacArthur amendment allowing states to waive protections for pre-existing conditions. If this happens, will I lose all my benefits? No. This amendment preserves protections for people with pre-existing conditions while giving states greater flexibility to lower premiums and stabilize the insurance market. To obtain a waiver, states will have to establish programs to serve people with pre-existing conditions. And no matter what, insurance companies cannot deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions.
And what about the Upton amendment? The Upton amendment provides an additional $8 billion for states seeking a waiver. These resources will allow people with pre-existing conditions who haven’t maintained continuous coverage to acquire affordable care.
Are Members of Congress exempt from this provision? No. Members will not be exempt. This was initially included for technical reasons to comply with Senate rules, but the House is voting to fix this before voting on the AHCA.
Why are you cutting women’s health services? We’re not. In fact, we’re expanding women’s access to health services by redirecting Planned Parenthood dollars to community health centers, which vastly outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics.
Why are you voting to kick 24 million people off health care? We’re not. AHCA will ensure everyone has access to affordable, quality health care, but we’re just not forcing people to buy insurance. Moreover, that estimate failed to take into account other planned legislative and administrative actions, which will help bring down costs and expand coverage.
********
REFUNDABLE TAX CREDITS
Refundable tax credits are an important component of the AHCA, designed to give people who don't receive health care at work the same tax benefits as those who do so they can purchase the kind of coverage that is right for their family.
It equalizes the tax treatment of health care regardless of where you buy it and helps create a vibrant individual market. These credits are longstanding conservative policy goals.
REFORMS MEDICAID
One in three physicians are unwilling to accept new Medicaid patients. Unfortunately, Obamacare simply added more people to a broken system. The AHCA is a historic shift of power back to the states so that we can make it work for those who need it. It reforms Medicaid so that it is flexible and responsive to those it was created to serve.
It prohibits states from expanding into the current broken Medicaid system.
It maximizes state flexibility. It gives states the choice between a per capita allotment or a traditional block grant and provides the option for states to implement work requirements for Medicaid recipients.
It ensures the rug isn’t pulled from underneath any able-bodied patient as he or she transitions to other coverage, like a plan purchased with refundable tax credits.
EXPANDS HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS
Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are tax-free health care savings accounts for Americans with high-deductible health plans. HSAs are critical for helping Americans save and spend their health care dollars more wisely.
The AHCA would nearly double the amount Americans can contribute to their accounts, which will give greater choice and flexibility in purchasing coverage. Conservatives agree: HSAs must be a focal point of health care reform.
PROTECTS PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS
First and foremost, the bill contains numerous protections for people with pre-existing conditions. The law is clear: Under no circumstance can people be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. The latest draft contains two more layers of security for these individuals:
The MacArthur amendment gives flexibility to states to tackle premium prices. However, there is a very strict process for obtaining that waiver. It will only be given to states with high-risk pools and other protections in place.
For states seeking a waiver, the Upton amendment provides an additional $8 billion to allow people with pre-existing conditions who haven’t maintained continuous coverage acquire affordable care.
RESTORES PRO-LIFE PRINCIPLES
The AHCA defunds Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the country, for one year by blocking more than $500 million of federal dollars. It redirects the money to community health centers, which far outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics.
Let’s pass the American Health Care Act. After all, seven years of Obamacare is enough.
There is so much false reporting regarding the MacArthur amendment. Democrats are lying like crazy.
At this point in time the only people left who could potentially have a pre-existing condition are those who willfully failed to get healthcare insurance during the Obama administration.
bfl
Trump and his PR people are losing the Pr war.
Today’s Rassmussen Potus approval numbers went down for the second time in a row since the healthcare bill passed
Trump was up to 48% before passage, Friday he was at 46% and this morning Potus Trump is at 45%
Come on now time to have a national address on this bill and correct the Junk News reporting, just like Mulvany and Reince have tried to do.
In addition to the pre-existing conditions scare, there is the “near senior” scare. Supposedly, there are dozens and maybe even hundreds of near seniors in the country for whom the tax credits provided for the purchase of insurance in the private market, for whom the subsidies under Obamacare are greater.
My wife might fit this description. If I were to retire (which I can), she would be a couple years before being eligible for Medicare. So, I would transition to Medicare, but for a couple years, she would need to buy a private insurance policy. I suspect the tax credits we would get might be less than the Obamacare subsidy we would get. How much of a difference, I don’t know. But, even if it were a big difference, this would only be for a year or two, until she becomes eligible for Medicare herself.
Among my options are [1] to continue to work, and have her covered by my employer. [2] And, she could go to work, and be covered by an employer-sponsored plan. [3] Or, the Congress could allow individuals and small business to join into associations to buy the kind of plans that big employers buy. [4] Or just pay the difference myself and hope we get enough Senators elected in 2018 to overcome a Democratic filibuster and enact [3]. By then, my wife will be eligible for Medicare, but other people will transition into the fleeting period of their lives when they are near seniors.
The thing is, no legislation can cover every possibility and people are going to have to deal with the specifics of this or any plan. Obamacare has resulted in 30 million being without insurance and another 30 million that have insurance in which they can’t afford the deductibles. Many people lost their doctors and lost their plans. Many people today, working class people, are foregoing health care because they can’t afford the premiums or the deductibles of Obamacare plans. This proposal will increase the number of people with insurance who can afford the deductibles. It is, therefore, better from the standpoint of coverage.
But, since it isn’t perfect, there will be some need for compassion. Some people will fall through the cracks. A smaller number, but still some. Are they worthy of compassion? If I’m in good health, maybe I should continue working and thereby provide coverage for my wife. or, if she’s in good health, maybe she return to the work force, and gain coverage for herself. Or, if we have $2 million in stocks, maybe we should pony up the extra money to pay the higher cost of private insurance for my wife until she is eligible for Medicare. I think the people of the country will reserve our compassion for those who don’t have the choices my wife and I have.
It plainly exempts congress from the effects of state waivers. If all this is so great.. why is congress exempting themselves? Why aren’t they subject to the entirety of the law the wrote and are voting on?
Yes. Fox Business posted an article on the Age Tax. I do pray that portion of the bill is taken out.
.
Bookmark
Trump could convert to a single payer system tomorrow and Dems would vote against it. They are incapable of by-partisanship
What if Kentucky doesn’t establish a high-risk pool? What is their incentive to do so?
One way to fix this “hole” is to say that for the next two years, the near senior tax credit is the greater of what is provided in the bill and what would be provided by Obamacare.
What’s a few billion dollars? We need to get on with repeal and replace.
However, I would like - in the give and take of good-faith negotiations - the bill to allow associations buy health insurance. Also, to allow insurance companies to offers packages to cover the spouse who’s not Medicare eligible along with using Medicare to cover the premium of the eligible spouse. If 26 year olds can be covered by their parents’ plans, should near seniors be covered by their spouses’ plans?
Its too early in the game to make that assessment, lets see what the Senate comes up with first.
I'd also caution on reading too much into polls around this subject, especially from media driven sources.
All this is good (as far as debunking the scaremongering).
But the system is still unsustainable. It has been since before Obamacare. The problem is the government (State and Federal) has basically created and maintained insurance monopolies, medical care monopolies and pharma monopolies. Until this changes, no ‘policy’ is sustainable over the long run ... no matter how much money we pour into it.
There was always and age tax, before, during and presumably after Obamacare.
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.