Re: Fw : Insurers Offer to Soften a Key Rate-Setting Policy -...

[Guest guest]

Ginny,

I hate to be so skeptical, but given what I know of how insurers are willing

to operate for the sake of profit, I don't have a good feeling about this

new plan. And what does that mean that every person is required to buy health

insurance? I would need to know more about the specifics of that

one...particularly since the industry is fighting having their rates regulated.

Senator _Tom Harkin_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopic

s/people/h/tom_harkin/index.html?inline=nyt-per) , Democrat of Iowa, said that

under this proposal, “insurance companies could not discriminate based on

somebody

’s pre-existing condition, and everybody has to be treated the same.â€

But Mr. Harkin, like Ms. Ignagni and Mr. , said that insurers should

be allowed to offer discounts on premiums to people who engaged in healthy

behavior. Such discounts, they said, could be an incentive for people to stop

_smoking_

(http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/smoking-and-smokeless-toba\

cco/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier) , lose weight and

participate in programs to treat chronic diseases. "

Soooo, let get this straight: People with pre-existing conditions will no

longer be charged more for health insurance. But those who live healthy will

be charged less.

Who gets to determine what is healthy living? When one with a pre-existing

condition needs treatment, would that be because they were not living healthy

and should have been paying the higher premiums?

Looks to me like the insurers have simply stepped in with a new game when it

looked like they were going to lose it all thru universal health care.

Sharon

**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make meals for Under

$10. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000002)

[Guest guest]

Sharon - I was just forwarding what I saw in the NY Times. Just for an update.

I, like you, am always skeptical. Ginny

>

>

> Ginny,

> I hate to be so skeptical, but given what I know of how insurers are willing

> to operate for the sake of profit, I don't have a good feeling about this

> new plan. And what does that mean that every person is required to buy health

> insurance? I would need to know more about the specifics of that

> one...particularly since the industry is fighting having their rates

regulated.

> Senator _Tom Harkin_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopic

> s/people/h/tom_harkin/index.html?inline=nyt-per) , Democrat of Iowa, said that

> under this proposal, “insurance companies could not discriminate based on

somebody

> ’s pre-existing condition, and everybody has to be treated the same.â€

> But Mr. Harkin, like Ms. Ignagni and Mr. , said that insurers should

> be allowed to offer discounts on premiums to people who engaged in healthy

> behavior. Such discounts, they said, could be an incentive for people to stop

> _smoking_

>

(http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/smoking-and-smokeless-toba\

cco/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier) , lose weight and

> participate in programs to treat chronic diseases. "

> Soooo, let get this straight: People with pre-existing conditions will no

> longer be charged more for health insurance. But those who live healthy will

> be charged less.

>

> Who gets to determine what is healthy living? When one with a pre-existing

> condition needs treatment, would that be because they were not living healthy

> and should have been paying the higher premiums?

>

> Looks to me like the insurers have simply stepped in with a new game when it

> looked like they were going to lose it all thru universal health care.

>

>

>

>

> Sharon

> **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make meals for Under

> $10. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000002)

>

>

>