In February 2017, Congressional Republicans issued a proposal to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The proposed plan would use tax credits to finance individual insurance purchases and cut federal payments to states which have been used to expand Medicaid. Conservatives who oppose the ACA argue that the plan did not go far enough in removing the government’s role in health insurance. They demanded that the new plan should remove the ACA requirement that health insurers could not discriminate against individuals with pre-existing conditions. Under the ACA health insurers cannot deny cove…
Read more@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No
@9FQLH8PRepublican 12mos12MO
Health insurers should not be allowed to deny people with pre-existing conditions because these people are the ones who need health insurance the most.
@9FR2KGHRepublican12mos12MO
This places an unfair burden on insurance companies effectively turning them into charities against their will
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No, it is immoral to deny health insurance to people with pre-existing conditions
@9DCZQXDLibertarian1yr1Y
How is it moral to tell any business how they must spend their money?
More practically, forcing insurance companies to cover people with preexisting conditions encourages people to wait until they get sick to purchase coverage, disincentivizes living a healthy lifestyle, and stacks insurers with predominantly sick people thereby raising costs. It is an economically UNSUSTAINABLE policy position.
@9RT98X72mos2MO
How do you propose people like me pay for medical care without insurance? I have MS, Lupus, Asthma, Psoriatic Arthritis, and medication-induced Primary Immunodeficency.
Why should healthy people pay higher insurance rates to cover unhealthy people?
car insurance is the opposite
@9G3PX8S 11mos11MO
Discrimination is the basis for insurance. Underwriting is how private companies can offer competing alternatives from one another, and establish niches in the marketplace. Imagine having to make a bet that you are not allowed much information on, and you're almost certain you're going to lose. This is why there are so few remaining health insurance companies. More competing companies would lower prices, increase quality, and increase attractive alternatives to a whole range of situations.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Yes, and the government should not be involved in health insurance
@9FKZ8XM12mos12MO
If the government does not give health insurance a large portion of America will not be able to afford healthcare or medication for pre-existing medical conditions. A great example of this is Insulin witch costs less than 5 dollars to make but was charged over 1000 percent.
@9FQLH8PRepublican 12mos12MO
Government sponsored health insurance can help reduce cost by leveraging huge negotiation power with medical service providers and pharmaceutical companies.
@9F4MZ98Progressive1yr1Y
Universal healthcare has proven to provide superior healthcare and reduce economic stress on all individuals, as well as increasing general productivity of the populous.
In Canada and the UK, patients often face long waiting times for treatments and surgeries. This could be detrimental for those with serious conditions. How do you propose we ensure quality and timely care under a universal healthcare system?
Have you ever actually gotten healthcare in Canada or the UK, or are you just parroting what you’ve been told?
When I studied abroad in the UK several years ago, I had to go to the hospital twice. Both of those visits (at two different hospitals, by the way) were quicker than any hospital visit I’ve had back home in the States, and they did every single test onsite that day instead of having to refer me offsite and making me wait several more weeks just to get tests done, which is what the US is like now.
In what world do you live in where our current healthcare system in the US is fast and efficient with short wait times?
@9FJFPRC12mos12MO
It is the government's responsibility to protect all Americans. Denying healthcare for any reason is a predatory behavior in a system where there is no alternative.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Not enough information for an informed vote
Abolish all forms of insurance. They’re nothing more than a middle man getting paid to tell people which providers patients can or cannot see.
The fact we even have to ask this question scares me. No, we should never deny a person the ability to live.
@DemocracyJayRepublican4wks4W
It's important to consider how insurance works: it's a risk pool where everyone contributes to cover the few who need it. If insurers can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, they might need to increase everyone's premiums to cover those higher costs. This could make insurance unaffordable for many healthy individuals.
@95L3J332yrs2Y
Yes, but they shouldn't be left high and dry.
@8FQ5VYM4yrs4Y
No, but they should be free to require people with preexisting conditions to pay more for the same coverage
@9GT9LJR11mos11MO
No, unless there is no effective treatment for a symptom and the situation is utterly helpless, then health care providers should not deny or increase the price of coverage.
@9CX2SSZNatural Law1yr1Y
No, and healthcare should be free.
@9D644HF1yr1Y
Insurance is a parasite on society and must be taxed 100% for exploitation of victims and vulnerable individuals among many other disadvantaged groups
@96BRTBW2yrs2Y
If they have health insurance and switch to a different health insurance no
@JakeV9221yr1Y
Yes, only non whites.
@VulcanMan6 1yr1Y
So you're just blatantly racist...
@9D8LFJF1yr1Y
At least you're honest about your bigotry. Still not cool.
@92L6GD82yrs2Y
No, health insurance shouldn't exist
@9TMYYC5Constitution 2 days2D
No, people with pre-existing conditions should have an opportunity to pay into the program to show vested interest.
@9TLCQP4Libertarian3 days3D
Yes, but only if alternative options are provided (other companies, other plans, other providers, etc)
@9TKMW84 4 days4D
This is an example of the brokenness of the current healthcare system. In practice, this insurance isn't actually insurance. The whole system is neither Free Market or Socialist, but some nightmare combination.
@9TJM44Z 5 days5D
Yes, but health insurance access shouldn't be restricted across state lines, allowing any patient to choose the best available option
@9TJ6PZD6 days6D
As a private insurer, the company has the right. However, a single payer system should be an option as well.
@9THBPVN6 days6D
The coverage cost could be raised for more people with the addition of someone with a pre-existing condition, but I think that what matters is the condition of the individual.
@9TH32NM6 days6D
Yes if the pre-condition was documented as non-compliance by healthcare providers in detail for more than a years time.
@9TCT2JJ1wk1W
I feel this a complex issue. No one should be discriminated for anything, but I don’t believe the government should have a hand in health insurance
@9TC2Y2B1wk1W
if insurer takes on someone with preexisting conditions they should be able to charge them a premium
@9T9J34X1wk1W
Yes and No. It depends on the condition. Exclusions can apply, but still offer basic health coverage.
@8TKFNNSIndependent 2wks2W
No But The Government should not interfere in Healthcare. Instead They should The Doctor of their Choice and Experience in Healthcare.
@9T5TSZQ2wks2W
Yes, but they need to be able to receive treatment through an alternative such as government-funded health plan.
@9T4RWHZLibertarian2wks2W
Yes but insurance companies should be given tax breaks for providing healthcare to people who have pre-existing conditions.
@9T4LF9S 2wks2W
Yes, they should be allowed to deny coverage but, only if the condition is proven to be the fault of the individual and not genetics.
@9SZVBF82wks2W
No, but companies should be allowed to roll-out measures allowing them to offer premium discounts to persons with identifiable histories of generally accepted healthy lifestyles.
@giggityquagmire2wks2W
Yes, and free markets can pave the way for companies that do not deny coverage to individuals who have pre-existing conditions.
@9SXXQG72wks2W
No, and Healthcare should be a right provided for free to all American citizens regardless of preexisting conditions or other factors
No, for-profit health insurance is inherently immoral and should be replaced with single-payer healthcare
@9SVHMHW3wks3W
Yes, but incentivize health insurers to provide additional options for those with preexisting conditions
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
