I don't know how I missed this story because I have been looking for it. This is the main issue among the people who need health insurance. People with pre-existing conditions sometimes get declined for health insurance or offered a higher rate than you could imagine. Some people can only get a policy to cover them for 2500 dollars a month. This legislation did not make it through last year because the general assembly ended the session before they could vote for it. It has been under the radar, but it is immensely significant for many NC residents.
It was just passed last month and is on the Governor's desk to sign. Now the most that health insurance companies can charge for a high risk client is up to 200% of what a healthy person can get. I will be following this news so that I can help my clients save money and get coverage. Enjoy the article.
State to cover riskiest illnesses
Legislature passes health insurance
Lynn Bonner, Staff Writer
North Carolina residents whose illnesses have pushed them out of the market for private health insurance will soon have another option.
The state House gave final approval Thursday to a plan to build a government-sponsored insurance pool for people with serious illnesses who cannot afford or qualify for private coverage. It could help as many as 14,000 people in North Carolina within 10 years.
Thirty-four states already offer such insurance plans.
For at least four years, legislators have talked about offering insurance to people whom companies won't cover, or will cover only at high costs. Now the bill needs only the signature of Gov. Mike Easley to make it a reality.
Barbara Garlock of Raleigh has been waiting for legislators to approve such a program. She might need it.
Garlock, 47, was diagnosed with cancer three years ago, when her husband was self-employed, and has undergone treatments since then.
An insurance plan with a $1,800 monthly premium and a $10,000 deductible was the most affordable she could find -- easier on the family budget than the policy they found that would have cost $3,400 a month.
Garlock's husband now gets insurance through an employer, but she fears having to go back to search for coverage if he should change jobs.
"It's scary enough to face the prospect of dying," Garlock said in a trembling voice. "It's even scarier to think that your family could lose their home because you got sick."
The insurance won't be free. Subscribers will pay 65 percent of the cost through their premiums. Premiums will be set at 150 percent to 200 percent of what a healthy person would pay for private insurance.
Continue the article here.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Study: Kids Get Inadequate Health Care
Now that Congress has said it is important to give kids health insurance paid for by tax dollars, the AP released this startling result. It says that kids don't get very good care when they go to the doctor. The problem is that most of these kids in the study already had insurance. So the conclusion would be that whether or not kids have insurance, the care they receive is not good. It is a good article from the AP. Enjoy the article.
By LINDA A. JOHNSON
As Washington debates children's health insurance, a startling study finds that kids who regularly see doctors get the right care less than half the time — whether it's preschool shots or chlamydia tests for teen girls.
The findings, from the first comprehensive look at children's health care quality, are particularly troubling because nearly all the 1,536 children in the nationwide study had insurance.
Eight-two percent were covered by private insurance. Three-quarters were white, and all lived in or near large or midsized cities.
Two experts called the findings "shocking." Others said minority children, those with more-restrictive government insurance, and the millions with no insurance at all certainly fare even worse.
They said the results highlight the importance of the debate over the proposed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which Congress approved and President Bush vetoed. A vote to override the veto is set for next week.
The study, by the Seattle Children's Hospital Research Institute and the nonprofit Rand Corp. research group, concludes that overall, doctors gave children the appropriate outpatient medical care only 47 percent of the time.
Continue reading the article here.
By LINDA A. JOHNSON
As Washington debates children's health insurance, a startling study finds that kids who regularly see doctors get the right care less than half the time — whether it's preschool shots or chlamydia tests for teen girls.
The findings, from the first comprehensive look at children's health care quality, are particularly troubling because nearly all the 1,536 children in the nationwide study had insurance.
Eight-two percent were covered by private insurance. Three-quarters were white, and all lived in or near large or midsized cities.
Two experts called the findings "shocking." Others said minority children, those with more-restrictive government insurance, and the millions with no insurance at all certainly fare even worse.
They said the results highlight the importance of the debate over the proposed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which Congress approved and President Bush vetoed. A vote to override the veto is set for next week.
The study, by the Seattle Children's Hospital Research Institute and the nonprofit Rand Corp. research group, concludes that overall, doctors gave children the appropriate outpatient medical care only 47 percent of the time.
Continue reading the article here.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
I won’t be bullied on SCHIP.
This article was written by a Michigan Representative Tim Walberg in response to the pressure against him on the SCHIP program. Thank you to Michelle Malkin for pointing this to me at her blog. It is a defense of his position through the turmoil of the radio ads playing a song about 'having friends in low places'. Enjoy the article.
For the Children
I won’t be bullied on SCHIP.
By Tim Walberg
Right now if you listen to a popular country radio station in south-central Michigan, you can hear advertisements spreading lies about my position on S-CHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program).
The station selection for this ad seems appropriate for House Democrats, whose blatant twisting of the truth is fit for a remake of Garth Brooks’s classic song “Friends in Low Places.”
House Democrats continue to mischaracterize Republican support of the S-CHIP program, and would like you to believe that Republicans do not care about poor, needy kids.
Democrats are using this smear campaign against Republicans to gain support for their tax-and-spend economic policies. Sadly, they are taking the focus away from where this debate should be: meeting the needs of children of low-income families.
I support renewing S-CHIP to provide health care to children in low-income families, but I also believe we need to ensure that the children’s health program is available for children who need it, and not for adults, people who enter the country illegally, or families who already have private insurance.
The Democratic legislation takes a program originally meant for children of low-income families and expands it to cover some families earning up to $83,000 and illegal immigrants, while moving millions of children from private health insurance to government programs.
In 2006, 118,501 children and 101,919 adults in Michigan received health care from the S-CHIP program. Incredibly, this means that 46 percent of Michigan’s funding allotment intended to give poor children health insurance actually went to cover adults.
continue reading the article here.
For the Children
I won’t be bullied on SCHIP.
By Tim Walberg
Right now if you listen to a popular country radio station in south-central Michigan, you can hear advertisements spreading lies about my position on S-CHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program).
The station selection for this ad seems appropriate for House Democrats, whose blatant twisting of the truth is fit for a remake of Garth Brooks’s classic song “Friends in Low Places.”
House Democrats continue to mischaracterize Republican support of the S-CHIP program, and would like you to believe that Republicans do not care about poor, needy kids.
Democrats are using this smear campaign against Republicans to gain support for their tax-and-spend economic policies. Sadly, they are taking the focus away from where this debate should be: meeting the needs of children of low-income families.
I support renewing S-CHIP to provide health care to children in low-income families, but I also believe we need to ensure that the children’s health program is available for children who need it, and not for adults, people who enter the country illegally, or families who already have private insurance.
The Democratic legislation takes a program originally meant for children of low-income families and expands it to cover some families earning up to $83,000 and illegal immigrants, while moving millions of children from private health insurance to government programs.
In 2006, 118,501 children and 101,919 adults in Michigan received health care from the S-CHIP program. Incredibly, this means that 46 percent of Michigan’s funding allotment intended to give poor children health insurance actually went to cover adults.
continue reading the article here.
Ads target Republicans in children's health insurance veto fight
It is as though there is no need for Congress because all issues are fought in the arena of public opinion. It is a shame that Congress can not debate issues among themselves in order to govern the public that elected them. That is how the founders established the government. I am certain that the media outlets appreciate the extra spending and the circus that goes along with a campaign such as this. I do wish some civility would return to Washington DC, but I am not holding my breath. This article is from CNN about a TV advertising campaign using kids to throw dirt at the Republican postion. I always know when someone needs props to support their case, they are losing the debate and in need of a distraction. Enjoy the article.
From Deirdre Walsh
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As House members are at home for the Columbus Day weekend, a coalition of labor and advocacy groups is stepping up the battle over the federal children's health-care program, known as SCHIP.
The coalition, which includes the AFL-CIO and MoveOn.org, rolled out a nearly $1 million television ad campaign and is targeting about 20 Republicans to vote to override the president's veto of the bill.
The national ad, sponsored by Americans United for Change, an umbrella group of liberal organizations, is running on cable networks.
It includes images of a baby and other children with an announcer saying "George Bush just vetoed Abby." The coalition also promises to rally activists in districts of another 20 House Republicans over the next two weeks.
This push by Democratic groups comes on top of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's efforts to zero in on eight House Republicans who opposed the bill. The campaign arm started running radio ads and funding automated calls to voters last week in districts it considers competitive for Democratic challengers. Watch Speaker Nancy Pelosi call for the override of Bush's veto »
Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, sounded cautiously optimistic in an interview with Fox News about her party's chances.
Continue reading the article here.
From Deirdre Walsh
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As House members are at home for the Columbus Day weekend, a coalition of labor and advocacy groups is stepping up the battle over the federal children's health-care program, known as SCHIP.
The coalition, which includes the AFL-CIO and MoveOn.org, rolled out a nearly $1 million television ad campaign and is targeting about 20 Republicans to vote to override the president's veto of the bill.
The national ad, sponsored by Americans United for Change, an umbrella group of liberal organizations, is running on cable networks.
It includes images of a baby and other children with an announcer saying "George Bush just vetoed Abby." The coalition also promises to rally activists in districts of another 20 House Republicans over the next two weeks.
This push by Democratic groups comes on top of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's efforts to zero in on eight House Republicans who opposed the bill. The campaign arm started running radio ads and funding automated calls to voters last week in districts it considers competitive for Democratic challengers. Watch Speaker Nancy Pelosi call for the override of Bush's veto »
Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, sounded cautiously optimistic in an interview with Fox News about her party's chances.
Continue reading the article here.
Monday, October 8, 2007
It's the COST of health care, stupid
This is from my personal blog at Townhall.com. I address the difference between health care and health insurance in this article. I explain that the problem with health care is not that people do not have health insurance. The problem with health care is the cost of health care keeps rising at an unsustainable pace. I hope you enjoy my article.
The health care debate has come down to whether or not the government should pay for everyone's health insurance. While it seems to be a noble cause and idea, it neglects to recognize the fact that health insurance is different than health care. Health insurance is an important aspect of the cost of the health care puzzle. But the problem with health care is the rising cost of health care. Merely providing health insurance by paying for it with taxpayer money does not do anything to solve the problem of the rising cost of health care.
Health insurance is an important aspect of the cost of health care because it is the vehicle within which health care prices are negotiated. Without such negotiations, people would find themselves in a position of negotiating price of a life saving medical procedure only after they were certain that they needed it. The health insurance apparatus enables the negotiation of the cost of medical procedures apart from the pressures of actually needing the procedure done. In other words, if you need heart surgery to save your life, it is worth everything you have or will have to get the surgery done. But if the prices have already been negotiated by the insurance companies, your cost will be much less to have the life saving surgery. Without health insurance, it might be common to pay $50 for an aspirin because there would not be a check on the doctors' prices.
Continue reading the article here.
The health care debate has come down to whether or not the government should pay for everyone's health insurance. While it seems to be a noble cause and idea, it neglects to recognize the fact that health insurance is different than health care. Health insurance is an important aspect of the cost of the health care puzzle. But the problem with health care is the rising cost of health care. Merely providing health insurance by paying for it with taxpayer money does not do anything to solve the problem of the rising cost of health care.
Health insurance is an important aspect of the cost of health care because it is the vehicle within which health care prices are negotiated. Without such negotiations, people would find themselves in a position of negotiating price of a life saving medical procedure only after they were certain that they needed it. The health insurance apparatus enables the negotiation of the cost of medical procedures apart from the pressures of actually needing the procedure done. In other words, if you need heart surgery to save your life, it is worth everything you have or will have to get the surgery done. But if the prices have already been negotiated by the insurance companies, your cost will be much less to have the life saving surgery. Without health insurance, it might be common to pay $50 for an aspirin because there would not be a check on the doctors' prices.
Continue reading the article here.
Health care: market reform, not big government
I finally found an article written that I agree completely with. There have been many articles claiming that 'Bush hates children' because of his veto. However they don't address the issue as it really is. This article goes over the issue in a very thoughtful way. I hope you enjoy the article.
Raymond J. Keating
October 8, 2007
If you buy the political spin, President George W. Bush opposes health care for poor children. What a big meanie!
Last week Bush vetoed a huge expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. It was only the fourth time during his presidency that Bush has used the veto pen.
Both of New York's Democratic U.S. senators, Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer, voted for the measure, as did all five local members of Congress, including Peter King, Long Island's only Republican congressman.
Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton) told Newsday: "This is a presidency fixated on ideology and not one fixated on solving the nation's problems. Kids need health care." Thank goodness Bishop - who over the past four years has voted around 93 percent of the time with the left-wing Americans for Democratic Action - isn't fixated on ideology.
In reality, if you care about affordable, quality health care for both adults and children, then Bush should be commended, not criticized, for his veto.
Continue reading the article here
Raymond J. Keating
October 8, 2007
If you buy the political spin, President George W. Bush opposes health care for poor children. What a big meanie!
Last week Bush vetoed a huge expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. It was only the fourth time during his presidency that Bush has used the veto pen.
Both of New York's Democratic U.S. senators, Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer, voted for the measure, as did all five local members of Congress, including Peter King, Long Island's only Republican congressman.
Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton) told Newsday: "This is a presidency fixated on ideology and not one fixated on solving the nation's problems. Kids need health care." Thank goodness Bishop - who over the past four years has voted around 93 percent of the time with the left-wing Americans for Democratic Action - isn't fixated on ideology.
In reality, if you care about affordable, quality health care for both adults and children, then Bush should be commended, not criticized, for his veto.
Continue reading the article here
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Congress Vows to Override Bush Veto on Child Health Care
Once again the inevitable. What is interesting in this article is the House Majority leader, Steny Hoyer says that the plan is paid for. Of course it is not paid for without increasing taxes on the poor and middle class. So yes, it is paid for by taxing those people that this program is supposed to help to pay for insurance for people the program was not designed to help.
This veto will not be overridden and it should not be. The Congress should not raise taxes on the poor to give to the rich. Enjoy the article anyway as it details the debate in an even handed manner.
By Scott Stearns
White House
06 October 2007
Congressional Democrats are vowing to override President Bush's veto of legislation that would expand health insurance coverage for poor children. VOA White House Correspondent Scott Stearns has the story.
President Bush says he supports the Children's Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP, but vetoed its expansion on Wednesday because he believes the bipartisan legislation is deeply flawed.
"Millions of children would move out of private health insurance and onto a government program," he said. "Congress's plan would also transform a program for poor children into one that covers children in some households with incomes up to $83,000. Congress's plan would raise taxes on working people. And Congress's plan does not even fully fund all the new spending."
In his weekly radio address, the president says the legislation would take the country in the wrong direction, because more government-run health care deprives Americans of the choices and competition in the private market.
Continue reading the article here
This veto will not be overridden and it should not be. The Congress should not raise taxes on the poor to give to the rich. Enjoy the article anyway as it details the debate in an even handed manner.
By Scott Stearns
White House
06 October 2007
Congressional Democrats are vowing to override President Bush's veto of legislation that would expand health insurance coverage for poor children. VOA White House Correspondent Scott Stearns has the story.
President Bush says he supports the Children's Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP, but vetoed its expansion on Wednesday because he believes the bipartisan legislation is deeply flawed.
"Millions of children would move out of private health insurance and onto a government program," he said. "Congress's plan would also transform a program for poor children into one that covers children in some households with incomes up to $83,000. Congress's plan would raise taxes on working people. And Congress's plan does not even fully fund all the new spending."
In his weekly radio address, the president says the legislation would take the country in the wrong direction, because more government-run health care deprives Americans of the choices and competition in the private market.
Continue reading the article here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)