When it comes to the health care debate, there are some things that you thought that everyone, even the House Republicans, thought was a good idea. So there is disagreement about the public option, about how to implement an employer mandates, who should be responsible for buying insurance, and a whole host of issues. That there would be disagreements about such things is understandable. But, if you'd been following the news, you would think that everyone is against the abhorrent insurance company practice of denying coverage based upon a preexisting condition, right?
Wrong. House Republicans released their bill today and it did not include a ban on the despicable practice. Instead it focuses on capping non-economic damage in medical malpractice cases, a "remedy" not driven by any evidence that it will save money, or even conservative philosophy, but by a hatred for and a scapegoating of trial lawyers.
The skimpy 230 page bill , which the AP got a hold of, does little to nothing to actually keep down costs. It encourages health savings accounts, "encourages" creation of pools for high-risk individuals (though does nothing to make sure those pools guarantee affordable insurance and provides not even a tax credit to consumers), and allows for the purchasing of insurance across state lines.
That last point should read: all insurance companies will relocate to the states with the most lax enforcement and least consumer protections, and the consumer will be stuck with the “choice” of the less of many evils.
Just another example of bad policy from those who oppose health care reform. These folks want one thing: the status quo and great big profits from the insurance companies. Doesn't hurt them that those same companies write big campaign checks.