sime303

I never thought they'd get it done.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091108/..._care_overhaul

Now it's just the Senate.

Titchski

Couldn't help but notice your sig there Sime - I just joined our local gym and they don't have kit kats, but they DO have cans of Guiness in the fridge

Michael

Just the Senate??? That is where the problem is at with its 60 vote requirement. I suspect the Senate bill will be very watered down. The following is a summary of the house bill which is much better than I expected.

http://bishop.house.gov/usermedia/HR...%20Summary.pdf

The following are some of the more important features of the bill.

• Medicaid coverage for families and individuals making at or below 133% of poverty level. Was 100% of poverty level.
• Sliding scale credits for families and individuals who purchase health insurance and make between 133%-400% of the poverty level.
• Caps annual out of pocket spending.
• Individuals must purchase health coverage or will be fined 2.5% of their income above a certain level.
• Employers, except small businesses with a payroll of less than $250,000, must provide health insurance or contribute 8% (2%-8% for payrolls between $250,000-$400,000) of their payroll to a fund.
• A small business credit is available to small businesses that provide health insurance.
• Fills the Part D donut hole.
• Insurance companies can no longer exclude coverage for preexisting conditions.
• Health insurance premiums can vary based only on age (no more than 2:1), geography and family size and not on the health of the individuals.
• A public health insurance option will be provided by the government.

Although conservatives criticize the cost of the bill ($1 trillion over 10 years), it is mostly funded unlike Bush's medicare Part D bill which cost about the same, was unfunded. and provided very little except to protect the drug companies. Also this bill should significantly reduce the more than $200 billion defaults on medical bills annually reducing the cost of insurance for everyone.

Xebedee

If it ever gets to see the light of day, it'll be diluted and delayed to the point that it'll be completely bloody useless.

Which is just typical of the US when it comes to people's rights v's those of businesses.

It'll be a case of MegaCorps 1 - GeneralPop 0, just like it allways is.

mekadag

Hi everyone,

I hear that young people can stay on their parents healthcare coverage until they are 27 years old. Has anyone info on this change in the healthcare bill.

Julia

fatbrit

It will be, but that's how Medicare started. Once the basic framework is in there, they can then chip away at the restrictions to provide what is actually needed. Real politics, I'm afraid -- and one of the reasons that corporate America is fighting so hard to prevent this foothold.

sime303

Exactly what I said to my neighbour yesterday. It's not the fact that the bill is perfect, it's that they need to get it through so they have something to work with.

Michael

It appears that it is still in the bill.

Other changes to the final version is that medicaid will cover people that make 150% or less of poverty level (not 133%) and small businesses with payrolls of less than $500,000 (not $250,000) are exempt from providing health coverage.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11...y5570605.shtml

Bob

At the moment, most allow coverage till 25, as long as the person doesn't get married nor have children, though in some instances you've got to be a student.

Michael

Actually the plan is similar to the Swiss plan that was enacted in 1996. The primary difference is that the Swiss plan requires everyone to acquire health insurance and the individual or family will have to pay up to 10% (less for low income families) of their income for health insurance and the government will pay the remainder. In the case of Switzerland, it was easier to get a more straight forward plan where everyone pays since Switzerland never had a large amount of people that had employer funded health plans. Trying to do something like that in the US would have guaranteed defeat since about 60% of Americans have health coverage through their employees.

Corporate America wouldn't fight that type of a plan since that would save a large amount on health care costs for the companies but about 60% of the Americans would vote anyone out of office that proposed such a scheme. That is the difficulty in getting a good plan since there are the haves and have nots and the haves (people on employer plans or medicare) don't want to pay for someone elses health insurance and definately do not want to pay for their own.

Xebedee

Thanks for that - its nice to hear something positive in a common-sense fashion for a change.

Food for thought.

Sally Redux

Yeah it's something.

BritishGuy36

It's not the answer (as it currently stands). Either go the whole hog or why bother.

Otherwise trillions (of our tax $) are going down the plughole to constantly 'chip away' at something that's never going to work.

I heard an interesting comment on 5Live's World Football phone-in this week from Tim Vickery:

"It's strange how a nation can have a socialised football league and not socialised healthcare".

Titchski

And there you have the US Government in a nutshell

sandra_atlanta

Are they going to cover people on work visas like H1B?