Here's why this is going to be an expensive piece of pork:
"consumer and patient advocacy groups that helped pass the overhaul law want to make sure their priorities are included. The health care law requires that essential benefits include outpatient, hospital, emergency, maternal, newborn and children's care, prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse treatment, rehabilitation, labs, prevention and wellness."
This will prevent the existence of simple, basic, cost effective plans by requiring that every plan sold includes some goodies catering to every special interest that has enough influence in Washington to get their way.
What if I just want a cheap, affordable plan covering only serious injuries and illnesses? Not allowed because I'm required to also cover prescription drugs, mental health, and substance abuse treatment (each of these industries have powerful lobbies).
Whose definition of "prevention and wellness" is going to be used to determine what sort of prevention can be paid for? Will the health plan customer get to decide? Or will this decision be made federally, under the influence of whichever special interests have the most "pull" in washington?
What if a customer wants to spend his health prevention funds on vitamins, natural foods, and visiting an alternative health practitioner instead of pharmaceuticals? Will they still be force to buy pharmaceuticals coverage?
Sounds like the answers to all these questions will be decided not by the individual customers of these health plans, but by the special interest groups (which also includes insurance and pharmaceutical companies of course) who "want to make sure their priorities are included" .
The following user says Thank You to GoldStandard for this post:
You are correct. This whole obamacare thing is a nightmare. My largest concern is that the government will selectively tax or outlaw activities or behaviours it doesn't condone. They might have to have a special tax (or outright ban) on off-road motorcycles (or insert some activity you enjoy) as an example to help deal with additional burdens that might get put on "the system" because of the higher risk and so forth. Select anything you want as an example, conceivably everything/anything is on the table.
Secondly is the mandate that everyone is aware of...honestly I can't even imagine how some would consider that constitutional.
Third is the cost issue that will obviously go through the roof as you have laid out. I don't really know the solution to "fixing" healthcare but, I do know that the goverment taking it over is not the solution( you and I know the ultimate goal is total government control).
The following user says Thank You to kbit for this post: