The 2016 United States Presidential Election Thread. v. 2
- Thread starter yankeessuck
- Start date
- Status
The problem with that (other than the complete fabrication that it'll lower costs by any significant measure) is that because most(*) insurance plans are subject to state laws, it's practically impossible to do this. The logic behind the argument is that people can buy plans from a cheaper state, and thus pay less in premiums, but the problem is that the things that are mandated for coverage in the purchaser's state likely aren't in the other, and so either the plan has to be in violation, or else they'll have to pay for the extra coverage, at which point the price of the plans will likely go up.
(*) - I say most because some employers offer self-insured plans which are just administered by the health insurance companies. These plans are subject to federal benefits law and therefore supersede state mandates, which itself causes a bit of confusion.
Luckily, I'm more than a decade out of my time working for one of the major insurers left in the industry, so my current level of knowledge on this stuff is thankfully receding.
Thanks for the info. Was this the case with auto insurance? Now they're able to cross borders. Not all are available everywhere, but many are. Couldn't insurance companies take the same steps?
Auto Insurance, as far as I can tell, is pretty standard - you have the amount of coverage, and minimums may be different by state, but it's essentially the same product.
Health insurance is much different. I did some searching because while I remember that Florida had direct access to dermatology and chiropractic, I don't remember how different that is from other states, nor do I know what changed with the ACA. So, we can just look at physical therapy: http://www.apta.org/uploadedFiles/A.../Issues/Direct_Access/DirectAccessbyState.pdf
So let's say you lived in Alabama, and you strained your legs jumping up and down trying to point out someone you thought was Muslim at a Trump rally. In that state, you'd have to go see your primary physician and be referred out to physical therapy. However, if you were at a Palin rally in Alaska and the same thing happened, you'd have the right to go directly to a PT. Now, what happens if you're in Arizona (another direct access state), but you bought your insurance from Alabama because Roll Tide? You'd go straight to a PT too, but the insurer would deny the claim for no referral (assuming a non-PPO plan at least), and at that point there's a real problem - you've been sold a plan that doesn't meet the state laws for your state. Of course, the whole pricing benefit for the most part from buying from different states would be that you're not having to pay for things that are mandated in your state - but again, that's a problem because it is mandated by states.
Naturally, though, PT is a pretty benign case. But start thinking about, say, employers in states that mandate coverage for contraceptives or infertility treatments or anything else that's borderline political (I don't think any state mandates coverage for abortion, or else that would be the poster child example). So the employer decides that they don't want to cover something like that, but they don't have the funds to have a self-insured plan, so they just pick another state's plan. ( http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/insurance-coverage-for-contraception-state-laws.aspx ) and there they go.
That's part of the reason why I think single-payer, government health plans are probably the answer. Health insurance companies are like any other corporation - they're out to serve their shareholders, which is fine in many respects, but certain things like utilities, health, education, prison, etc. are simply not something that should be operated on a for-profit basis, but on a "for the good of the country" basis.
Meanwhile Obama plays his fifth round of golf and Hillary fails to leave a tip at an Ohio Diner where her and her group ate.
Was probably her Alzheimer's that made her forget.
Good on Trump for donating if in fact he did. Everyone's got to do it one time in their lives.
Both were asked to stay away. For practical reasons, it's to costly to have the President waste the resources on his entourage. It would be hard to aid a town if he is there disrupting traffic.
With that said, the golfing does seem a bit much. With all the s*** going on, people want to think he's at least at the White House coordinating any aid needed in LA.
With that said, the golfing does seem a bit much. With all the s*** going on, people want to think he's at least at the White House coordinating any aid needed in LA.
if I was the "worst president ever!" i wouldn't give to shiets about a red state either.
This reminds me of a poll that had 1/3 of Louisiana Republicans who blamed Obama for Hurricane Katrina
Obama has already approved emergency funding. There is not much else he can do for Louisiana. Stay away and let FEMA/ Homeland Security do their job.
- Status