1990 Pages Hits the Floor of the House
- Thread starter somarco
- Start date
- 2,908
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Does abortion fall under "preventive health care" or "wellness." Those costs add up too.
And if the Secretary needs to establish wating times to reduce costs, how long could the waiting times for abortion actually be increased and still be effective. Or would we be moving into infanticide as Mr. Obama supported in Illinois.
Change you can believe in.
Does abortion fall under "preventive health care" or "wellness." Those costs add up too.
And if the Secretary needs to establish wating times to reduce costs, how long could the waiting times for abortion actually be increased and still be effective. Or would we be moving into infanticide as Mr. Obama supported in Illinois.
Change you can believe in.
Last edited:
- 14,808
No abortions will be funded under this bill.
More:
Individual penalty for not having coverage: 2.5% of adjusted gross income. This is significant since the Baucus Bill only allowed $750 max.
Ready for this.....surcharge on high income individuals? 5.4% earning $1,000,000 or more!!! WOW! That's a lot of balls right there.
That means an individual who's AGI is $1M on the nose will pay an extra $54,000! Holy crap! Am I reading that right? Page 337
More:
Individual penalty for not having coverage: 2.5% of adjusted gross income. This is significant since the Baucus Bill only allowed $750 max.
Ready for this.....surcharge on high income individuals? 5.4% earning $1,000,000 or more!!! WOW! That's a lot of balls right there.
That means an individual who's AGI is $1M on the nose will pay an extra $54,000! Holy crap! Am I reading that right? Page 337
- 2,908
We don't know that yet. We only know what the bills voted out on to the floor from the Senate and House look like so far. There are senators and reps who voted the senate bill out on to the floor but have said that they will not support it without a public option, and in the House vice versa. Reps that want abortion have supported the bill without in order to get it out onto the floor to amend it. They have no choice.
If you have ever seen fly tape hanging in the barn, then that is what these bills are once out on to the floor. They are just targets to tack amendments on to. Then the horse trading begins. You want abortion" then support the public option and vice versa.
"The bill" is what the bill will be in final form. We dont know about abortion yet. Most likely it will not fly but there is no getting past the issue without alienating the left. The left will try to placate them by saying they will get it in the next phase which will only cause the right and centrists to resist it as a Trojan Horse.
Blood bath ahead. Not for the faint of heart. Don't worry they will agree upon a set of "guiding principles" by the end of year. The final bill......errrr.......more like the end of next year and if the public option is attached to a trigger which it most likely will or else it will be defeated completely then you dont know where you are until you see where you are against the trigger as we go forward.
Change we can believe in.
Last edited:
- 3,352
More incentive to become a millionaire John.
- 3,863
A few points that concern me... Like this one...
85% loss ration, you think you are going to get 20% commission when the loss ratio is 85%? LOL!!! Try 5% on a good day.
85% loss ration, you think you are going to get 20% commission when the loss ratio is 85%? LOL!!! Try 5% on a good day.
- Thread starter
- #17
- 3,863
Try impossible. Rates in the individual market are going to go through the roof.
- 2,908
Indeed and that type of concern is fundamental to the whole picture. Some agents, here included, are looking for language that says there can or cannot be commissions and then try to figure out what they would or would not be. The feds will actually establish parameters which squeeze commissions out of the picture without ever talking about commissions. They will dictate the loss ratios then the premiums must still be below the public option premium or the threatened trigger point. But then they will let carriers do whatever they want within that onion skin thick margin to work with. Some agents will be slap happy because commissions are not verboten and congress will be happy that they are allowing free market within the prison cell they allow the carriers to work within.
Having said that, I do believe that in the first couple years there could be some commission and a small micro-gold rush based on volume because carriers are concerned about gaining market share first and working the margins up later as long as they are not taking a loss. After the start-up period the carriers will handle as much as they can through their own enrollers or web sign-up. Might be a dog bone there for an agent but nothing like the old days. Perhaps, I am not objective because the future already exists in my state. We can go round and round a few thousand more times and some agents will talk about how they will take 5% all day long with mandate and guaranteed issue. Ahhh....okay.......that's a lot of "if's" that arent going to happen. If my grandmother had had a beard she might have been my grandfather type of arguments.
Doesnt matter what is and is not in this current version of the bill. That is where it is going over time.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #20
If you have never looked at a carriers health block, then you can convince yourself that an 85% (or higher) loss ratio is impossible. Fact is, most of the major carriers are paying out 85 - 88% of premiums in claims and they still have room to pay commissions.
It has been that way for years.
DC is in a mindset right now that they can set everyone's pay. That will eventually come to a halt when a bunch of them lose their jobs starting next year and later.
It has been that way for years.
DC is in a mindset right now that they can set everyone's pay. That will eventually come to a halt when a bunch of them lose their jobs starting next year and later.
