Health Insurance Info

King will continue to fight health-care bill

by seiuhealthcare775nw

King will continue to fight health-care bill

U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said Democrats are working to create a “dependency class” in America in an effort to expand their political base and stay in power.

“That’s part of the motive,” King said when discussing federal health-care reform efforts with reporters after a Tuesday taping of Iowa Public Television’s “Iowa Press.”

King, who represents Iowa’s 5th District, said he will do what he can to try stop a health-care bill from heading to President Barack Obama’s desk, and he urged others who opposed the bill to join him.

He said Democrats are moving toward nation health care, whether a public insurance option is included in the final bill or not.

“That’s the goal; that’s the endeavor,” King said. “They’ll regulate everything, and when they do that, we will lose the liberty we have today to buy health insurance policies.”

He predicted that if Congress passes health-care reform, Democrats will pay a price at the ballot box in 2010.

“I’ve never seen this kind of energy in America, this kind of uprising, especially from the heart of the heartland of America,” King said.

King said he is worried about the “mindset” drifting into America that doesn’t seem to understand the free-enterprise system.

“We’re descendants in this part of the country from people who came across America in covered wagons,” King said. “I mean, they came here to live free or die on the prairie. They didn’t ask for a government handout.”    

Norm Sterzenbach, executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party, called King’s comments hypocritical.

“Before he rails against Democrats for working to help seniors pay for prescriptions and help students afford college, he should consider giving up his government salary, as other members of Congress have,” Sterzenbach said.

King, a four-term congressman, said he plans to seek another term in 2010. Iowa is expected to lose one of its congressional seats, and King said he probably still will seek re-election in 2012 even if redistricting places him in the same district with another member of Congress.

As Iowa Republicans look to unseat Gov. Chet Culver next year, King said he did not know whether he would endorse one of the candidates in the GOP primary.

“I’d like to see them fight this out, because it tests their vigor, and it tests their ability, and it also shapes the policy for Republicans that will be matched up against the policy that’s been set by Gov. Culver,” King said.

The “Iowa Press”  featuring King is scheduled to air at 7:30 p.m. Friday and noon Sunday on Iowa Public Television.

The Bill Includes Health Insurance For Slackers!

by twbuckner

The Bill Includes Health Insurance For Slackers!

If President Barack Obama gets his trillion dollar health care bill passed this week by the Democrats in Congress, parents will be required to pay for their unmarried kids’ health care coverage until the age of 26. And Generation Y and ‘millenials’ will be enticed to continue slacking, without a job, well past college graduation. While ski bums everywhere are cheering the news that the federal government will be forcing parents to pay for their health insurance through age 26, parents are questioning why the federal government is enticing a whole generation to stay unemployed.

America has always been a place where hard work is rewarded regardless of one’s age, family status or educational background. If you have an idea you are committed to and make sacrifices to further the idea, you can be wildly successful in our capitalistic system. In America, you can launch a multi-billion dollar computer company from your garage, you can grow up homeless and make it Harvard and you can create a world-wide social networking movement while still in college. But you can also be a slacker if you have the means to slack. Spending a year skiing, hanging out on the beach and surfing or traveling the world are options for the few lucky ones who have parents wealthy enough to pay for such endeavors.

But should the U.S. government encourage college kids to become slackers? Does Generation Y need any more encouragement to feel entitled? And should society guarantee a 5 year hiatus from responsibility after college graduation for millions of college kids? While it is true that many college graduates today will be self-motivated to find a career, make their own money and contribute to society, Generation Y has been the most entitled generation in history. Should the American taxpayer tempt these kids further into believing that the American dream is easy to fulfill?

Obama’s health care bill is being celebrated on the slopes of Colorado and the surf shacks of California but is a dangerous precedent for future generations. Here is the exact wording:

SEC. 2714. EXTENSION OF DEPENDENT COVERAGE.

(a) In General – A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage that provides dependent coverage of children shall continue to make such coverage available for an adult child (who is not married) until the child turns 26 years of age.

One could understand extending another entitlement program through age 26 in countries where the average work week is 30 hours per week and vacation time is guaranteed at 8-10 weeks per year. But is this new proposal anti-American? We aren’t supposed to reward people who don’t work hard and make sacrifices to get ahead. And we aren’t supposed to guarantee anything in America but a fair shot. America is a place where you prove your commitment to your family and your community through hard work and sacrifice. It is this ethic that we call American values.

But the American free-market system is under intense assault from President Obama and his partners in the overwhelmingly Democratic Congress. Obama has proposed massive new programs to give money, guaranteed jobs and entitlements to millions of Americans. In 2008, 36% of Americans paid no taxes. Think about the fact that more than 1/3 of our neighbors paid zero taxes. Did you pay any taxes last year? If you were part of the working group that paid for the slackers, do you really think they need another entitlement program that you will have to pay for?

More Health Insurance Articles

Health Care Bill Would Bring Higher State Medicaid Costs

by seiuhealthcare775nw

Health Care Bill Would Bring Higher State Medicaid Costs

The health bill passed by the House of Representatives Sunday would cost Nevada taxpayers an extra 3 million from 2014-2019, to provide health care to the needy.

According to early state estimates, the bill would make an additional 70,000 residents eligible for Medicaid. The state would be mandated to cover another 8,000 individuals who are now eligible but have not applied to be covered by the state health insurance program for the poor.

About 209,000 Nevadans are currently covered by Medicaid.

Including state and federal money, “the total cost of reform is .3 billion,” said Mike Willden, director of the state Department of Health and Human Resources.

Willden went through the numbers for the Nevada Vision Stakeholder Group, formed to develop a plan for the future, looking ahead as much as 20 years.

Meanwhile, Gov. Jim Gibbons railed against the costs of the bill in a written statement Monday: “The bill disguises its true cost by shoving Medicaid expansions down to the state level and shuffling Congressional Budget Office estimates into later years so it appears to save federal tax dollars. It is an insult to those who truly care about meaningful health care reform.”

But Jon Sasser of Washoe Legal Services said during the Vision Stakeholder meeting the bill will expand the number of people eligible for Medicaid and that should put less stress on counties, which handle medically needy cases. “It means extra millions of federal dollars coming into our state,” Sasser said.

Most of the health care bill doesn’t kick in until 2014, Willden said. Some states are starting early, but Willden said he doesn’t see Nevada doing that because of its budget shortfall.

The federal-state dollar match for Medicaid is 50-50. Federal stimulus funds pushed that to a 64 percent federal match, saving the state million to million a quarter. But after the stimulus money expires Nevada will be back to picking up the 50 percent share, Willden said.

Willden said only 8 percent of the population is covered compared to 14 percent in other states. The state spends 5 per capita compared to the national average of ,021.

States With Expanded Health Coverage Fight Bill

by seiuhealthcare775nw

States With Expanded Health Coverage Fight Bill

States that have already broadly expanded health care coverage are pushing back against the Senate overhaul bill, arguing that it unfairly penalizes them in favor of states that have done little or nothing to extend benefits to the uninsured.With tax revenues down and budgets breaking, the states — including Arizona, California, New Jersey, New York and Wisconsin — say they cannot afford to essentially subsidize other states’ expansion of health care.

The bill passed by the Senate on Thursday would move toward universal health insurance coverage in large part by expanding Medicaid, a program whose costs have traditionally been shared by the states and the federal government.

But the roughly 20 states that have already expanded coverage in some form will pay a greater proportion of their new Medicaid costs under the bill than those states, largely in the South, that until now have covered relatively few of their poorest residents.

Medicaid covers about 60 million Americans, mostly low-income families and pregnant women, though some states have expanded eligibility to include childless adults under 65. It accounts for about one-fifth of state budgets, on average.

States that have expanded coverage have generally broadened eligibility to include parents with relatively higher income levels and a greater number of childless adults. Even governors in some states without expanded coverage are suggesting that their budgets cannot afford a widened program without additional federal assistance.

“There is always an issue with Medicaid that different states are in different places,” said Diane Rowland, the executive director of the Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured at the Kaiser Family Foundation. “Do you reward the leader states as well as the laggard states, the good states versus the bad? How do you equalize the assistance? That’s at the heart of this.”

The states with expanded coverage would get more relief from the cost-sharing provisions of the health care bill passed by the House in November.

In memorandums explaining the legislation, the drafters of the Senate bill argued that states without expanded coverage would need more help from the federal government to defray the costs of broadening their programs. But governors in the states that have done more to broaden coverage are now lobbying their Congressional delegations to eliminate the discrepancies as the two chambers reconcile the bills.

“We are, in a sense, being punished for our own charity,” Gov. David A. Paterson of New York said last week.

Wendy Saunders, New York’s deputy secretary for health, Medicaid and oversight, estimated that it would cost about billion over 10 years to adjust the financing formula so that the Senate bill matches the more generous provisions of the House bill.

“Because it’s not a huge cost in the context of what is happening, we’re optimistic that it can be worked out,” Ms. Saunders said.

Massachusetts and Vermont, the states providing the broadest coverage, have already received some relief for the anticipated Medicaid costs in the negotiations that led to the passage of the Senate bill.

To secure the crucial 60th vote from Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, Senate leaders permanently exempted his state from paying to expand Medicaid. But other states, many of them strong supporters of an overhaul, have been left in the lurch.

Existing Medicaid coverage varies widely. Arkansas, for example, extends Medicaid to working parents who earn up to 17 percent of the federal poverty level, and Alabama offers coverage for those making up to 24 percent of that level. Minnesota covers working parents making up to 215 percent of the federal poverty level, and New York, up to 150 percent. New York also covers childless adults up to 65 making up to 100 percent of the federal poverty level.

In Arizona, where state revenues are down 31 percent, the governor called an emergency cabinet meeting last week as the Senate bill was advancing and ordered the state to stop accepting applicants to its children’s health insurance program. The state, where voters approved an expansion of Medicaid in 2000, projects that in the first seven years of an overhaul, its share of Medicaid would be billion under the Senate bill. Had Arizona not expanded coverage, the state’s share would have been .4 billion, the state estimates.

Related Health Coverage Articles

Health Care Bill Would Be Disaster For The Poor

by seiuhealthcare775nw

Health Care Bill Would Be Disaster For The Poor

Most Americans are aware that buried somewhere in the 2,000-page health care reform bill are provisions for cutting the already- strapped Medicare program by billions of dollars. Few are aware that the bill also cuts expenditures on county hospitals currently serving the poor.

In Chicago, for example, those without health insurance go to the county hospital where they are treated without regard to whether they have health insurance. If the bill is passed, however, many of these county hospitals will either have to close their doors or deny treatment to those without health insurance.

Although the bill passed by the Senate has been depicted as using coercive means to require those currently uninsured to buy insurance they cannot afford, or as imposing additional new taxes on the American working man and family, that bill is based on a fundamental lack of understanding of how the health care needs of the nation’s poor are currently served.

The desperately poor, many of them unemployed, are not equipped to deal with complicated insurance programs, deductibles, co-pays and all the other accoutrements of the typical health care policy. They are poor, they are unemployed, they are sick, they need a place to go to be treated without red tape and procedural obstacles.

County hospitals across the country that have provided that place are now threatened with a cut-off of funding and in many cases with extinction by the current health care reform bill passed by the Senate.

A number of proposals for making health care affordable for all Americans have been put forward by those who have sought to be heard during the legislative process. All these proposals have been rejected by a Congress determined to impose government control of health care.

Among these rejected proposals is to allow people to buy health insurance they can afford. Currently, government mandates require a single man to buy maternity coverage he will never use, or to pay inflated premiums to insure against going insane. It would be similar to a government mandate requiring every person to buy a Rolls Royce instead of a Ford. And then when people can’t afford to buy the Rolls Royce, they’re without any car at all.

Another rejected proposal is to allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines, thus increasing the competitive pressure to provide affordable insurance. Proposals for modest curbs on the multimillion-dollar malpractice suits that divert billions of dollars away from health care and into the pockets of high-rolling trial attorneys have also been rejected.

Even proposals for limited but cost-effective catastrophic government insurance have been rejected by those determined to have government take over health care across the board.