As Consumer Reports senior editor Nancy Metcalf points out, losing your health coverage in middle-age can be a real disaster because most people in "mid-life" have some kind of pre-existing condition that makes insurance companies shun them. Or if they are lucky enough to get coverage, the costs of the policies are simply outrageous.

Check out the story of Rick Cristo, 63, on Nancy's blog, who lost his job and has been paying $900 a month for COBRA coverage because insurance companies have rejected him for his pre-existing condition.

"I have tried to qualify for a private policy but have been turned down because I had Prostate Cancer in January 2008 and had it removed surgically and have had no signs of cancer since," Rick writes. "I am 63 years old my wife is 53 years old and we can't get health insurance; do I have any options?"

If the health reform bills pass as proposed, Nancy explains how Rick and others in his situation would get help:

• Instead of shopping on their own for coverage they either can’t get or can’t afford, they would go to a central health insurance exchange and choose from among a variety of policies offered by private insurers, as well as a non-profit health plan run by the government. In states where a few private insurers now dominate the market, competition from the public plan would hold down premiums.

• Pre-existing conditions would become a non-issue. It would be illegal for health insurers to decline customers, exclude coverage of certain conditions, or charge people higher premiums on the basis of their health history.

• Premiums for the oldest customers could not be more than twice as high as the lowest premium charged the youngest members. In many states today, the variation is considerably greater than that.

• Households with an annual income of less than 400 percent the poverty level — $43,320 for a one-person household and $58,280 for the a two-person one — would receive a subsidy to help pay premiums of policies bought through the exchange. The subsidy, scaled according to income, would go directly to whichever plan they chose, whether public or private.

• To get listed on the exchange, plans would have to cover the full range of health care—doctors, hospitals, outpatient treatments, mental health care, rehab, prescription drugs, medical equipment, the works. Loophole-ridden plans would not make the exchange.

comments (2)

It is a continuing problem when certain heart-felt stories are continually drummed up to entice the American people to give up their freedom for the sake of someone who is hurting.

And it's very disconcerting to see that my Consumer Report fees are helping to fund the fight to forcibly take more of my money from me for a socialized health care program that is unnecessary.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Rick Cristo and his story are real (there is no way to confirm any of that story), why is the only solution presented a universal health care system for everyone?? People need to ask themselves, "why do I need to pay for someone else's problem?"

If liberals are genuinely interested in helping this poor fellow, why don't they take up a collection for him, out of their own generosity and compassion? Answer: because they want MY money instead! NO!!

We can find many answers if we simply follow the money trail. It is the objective of this Obama administration to forcefully take assets from one group of people and give it to another - redistribution of wealth. He's spoken about this several times, it's no secret. But that does not guarantee wellbeing for anyone, is simply makes everyone equally poor.

New York recently announced they are raising taxes on the wealthy. The wealthy in response are leaving New York. All that accomplished was to rid New York of many wealthy people. The poor are still poor, and have even less hope now, since many people who had business and were spending money in New York are either gone or considering moving.

This push for 'health care' is similar, but people in good health (the vast majority) will have nowhere to move to. Everyone would be stuck in a system that will in the end serve to only reduce benefits for everyone in order to save money, or tax all Americans far more than the vast majority are paying now for their current plans. No one wins, except the people in power, because they now have a noose around All Americans they can squeeze anytime they want. In the end, we'll all be trapped by higher taxes, and slaves to the government that is no longer "of the people, by the people, for the people", but instead all for them.

Just say NO to universal health care, and shame on Consumers Union for supporting this national welfare system. I will not be renewing my subscription to Consumer Reports if my money is being spent supporting bills that damage and risk my freedom to choose what (if any) health care I want.

Well stated Scott. I am pulling my membership and support to Consumers Union after many years. They made are hard turn left on this issue and I don't know them anymore.

Post a Comment (* indicates a required field)

*Name:

*Email Address:

URL:

*Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

*Security Code:

<<< You must enter this security code!

Remember Me? Yes No