Coverage-For-All Mandate Essential In State Health Plan
Don’t mess with the goal of coverage for all the people of Washington under the 1993 state health care reform act.
Hands off the section of the act that says insurers can no longer refuse coverage to persons because of pre-existing conditions.
Don’t even think of tampering with the new law’s legal sanctions against canceling policies when people get sick, file a claim, lose a job, or change employers.
Have no fear of hurting the feelings of insurance companies. People who run insurance companies and those paid to juggle claims are forbidden to have feelings.
And last - BUT MOST don’t cave in or sell out to insurance companies.
Do, and you’ll be gone.
But otherwise, have fun. And enjoy your new majority status.
This is a list of dos and don’ts for Republicans bent on carving up Washington state’s 2-year-old health care reform law.
The new Republican regime in the House reportedly will seek to:
Eliminate the “employer mandate” which requires all businesses to pay part of their employees’ health insurance.
Remove the cap on insurance rates.
Slash the “uniform benefits package” of minimum medical care that all insurance companies must offer.
Establish “medical savings accounts” which would encourage healthy lifestyles and enable health care consumers who don’t spend all their funds to convert them to other uses.
And add a fee-for-service option. At present, the program relies solely on managed care systems for mandated coverage.
There’s no irreparable harm in the above.
As to health insurance for all, Gov. Mike Lowry has noted there are ways other than an employer mandate to achieve “maximum” coverage.
But it appears there may be a Republican assault on universal health care as a goal, no matter how coverage is achieved.
Under the existing 1993 law, the State Health Services Commission must draw up by December alternatives for achieving coverage for all, should the employer mandate not be implemented, as now appears all but certain. But the new legislation drafted by Republicans cuts out this section of the present law.
This is a sneak attack. If Republicans don’t want everybody to have coverage - whether small businesses pay a share or not - GOP lawmakers ought to have the guts to come straight out and say so. Not resort to subterfuge.
Also suspect is Republican legislation to allow insurance companies to return to maximizing profits by playing off policyholders one against another. Infirm vs. strong. Old vs. young. Fat vs. thin. You get the picture.
For example, one section of the new measure would undermine the existing ban against denying medical coverage because of a pre-existing condition. Under the new bill, the GOP would permit insurance companies to withhold coverage for up to six months.
Again, underhanded. If Republicans are worried about people moving in from out of state to rip off our system, then require people to live here six months first. Don’t dump on Washington residents.
Another section of the GOP bill would reopen yet one more Pandora’s box of insidious insurance practices. So-called “experience rating” permits insurers to pick who gets covered, depending on a variety of factors. These can include age, occupation, physical conditioning, politically incorrect health vices such as cigarette smoking but not politically correct risk factors such as sexual orientation.
Under the 1993 reform act, insurance companies are prohibited from charging people different rates, except for two factors - geographic locale and family size.
But now both the state commission and the Republican lawmakers are proposing what they call “age-banded community rating.” This would permit insurers to discriminate against elders who would pay two or three times as much as young people.
The theory is that it will help out young families.
Discrimination of any kind is abhorrent. But young families are most at risk in today’s economic climate.
If this will help, let it be done.
The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Frank Bartel The Spokesman-Review