quietly, Trump has been doing things to help more people be able to get health care. The latest is restoring an option that Obama took away:
Prior to Obamacare, employers used Health Reimbursement Arrangements to reimburse workers for a wider array of expenses, including premiums. The Obama administration, however, barred the use of Health Reimbursement Arrangements to buy policies on the individual market.
Trump wants to restore the ability for the pre tax money to be used for workers to purchase heath insurance.
Trump has also helped in two other ways:
The administration has already carried out the order’s other directives: expanding short-term policies, which last less than a year and aren’t required to adhere to all of Obamacare’s rules, and making it easier for small businesses to band together and offer coverage through association health plans, which also don’t have to offer coverage as comprehensive as the Affordable Care Act requires.
Gee giving people MORE options, MORE ways to get health insurance outside of the exchanges.
What say you Dem’s? Good options (the three things) to help people get insurance? Or do we just do the get insurance through our exchange or face a tax penalty?
By “not adhering to Obamacare’s rules”, you are referring to plans that do not cover preexisting conditions. Many of those plans cover next to nothing and are essentially useless.
The plans, which have been available for years and were originally designed to fill a temporary gap in coverage, will likely be cheaper than Obamacare policies. But that’s because they are allowed to exclude those with pre-existing conditions and base rates on an applicant’s medical history, unlike Obamacare plans.
Also, short-term plans don’t have to offer comprehensive coverage. Typically, they don’t provide free preventative care or maternity, prescription drugs and mental health benefits.
They can also impose annual or lifetime limits, meaning they may only pay out a set amount – often $1 million or less – leaving the policyholder on the hook for the rest.
So say my Daughter moves to next summer to continue her education. She’s on my health plan till she turns 25 (still 3 more years). But my health insurance won’t cover a damn thing in the state she is moving to. So say she gets one of the “short term plans” – she’s young, healther. Say it saves her money on her premium. Say she gets an annual physical once a year that isn’t fully paid (co pay and she pays the rest).
Is it worthless to my daughter?
Probably not. There might be thousands who fall into the same situation. One size doesn’t fit all. But that’s what the affordable care act does. You WILL get a plan that covers everything, you will NOT have any other options other than full coverage.
Allowing up to 1800$ pre tax money to be used for health insurance premiums?
Allowing multiple businesses to band together to get better “group” rates for insurance for employee’s?
Well as long as she never needs the coverage that short term plans omit, she’ll be fine. We are talking things like prescription benefits, mental health, maternity and pre-existing conditions.
Not in my opinion. Bad insurance is bad for consumers. A lot of them don’t even realize what they’re buying. Stated have been outlawing the sale of these policies too.
Should I have the option to go to a store that sells meat that has a high probability of being contaminated with E-coli? As long as it’s cheaper and I claim to know the risks?
Agreed 100%. If I want to buy a car that explodes when it’s rear ended, it’s my right. Government shouldn’t tell me that I’m too stupid not to buy it.
The point is, government regulates the sale of products to protect consumers. It’s going on all the time, in every industry.
It’s more likely to capture people who think they’re getting good insurance for a bargain.
