Display:
The HCR bill (Senate version) obliges healthcare companies to spend, I think, 85% of premiums on actual health services. Currently, I hear it's a patchwork, with states having an obligation in the range of 55-60%.

This is a reduction of the allowed overhead for insurance companies by 50 to 60%. Huge.

There are a number of other provisions that will strongly curtail the slice insurance companies are allowed to take. So when people say it's a boost to these companies, that they've been bought off, I wonder what math they have done.

The argument against mandates is also effectively an argument against solidarity.

So the arguments seem silly to me and to have right wing or glibertarian overtones. Somewhere along the line it seems FDL stopped pushing the overton window and started playing meme lab for the RNC.

by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Tue Dec 22nd, 2009 at 04:11:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
One amusing bit of what Hamsher spoke of was the 8%/income cap.  Shit, most would kill for an 8% cap on premiums.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Dec 22nd, 2009 at 04:19:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Those are really good things (spending mandates? in this country?) which I had no idea were in the works. Once the public option was off the table I stopped following what was going on.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Tue Dec 22nd, 2009 at 09:19:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series