Search SEARCH

Why do Republicans side with the Democrats on pre-existing conditions?

Banning "discrimination" against "pre-existing conditions" is nothing more than codewords for making healthy people subsidize sick people. I'm fairly certain that people who are already customers of a health insurance company (I personally refuse to purchase health insurance on principle, so that doesn't include me) do not want to have to pay higher premiums so that somebody with a "pre-existing condition" may freeload off of them. If health insurance companies are forced to pay for treatment for pre-existing conditions, that means that they are forced to transfer wealth from their healthy customers to their unhealthy customers. This is no longer insurance (which is a pooling of risks), but rather welfare. There are better ways to reform health care than to require health insurance companies to hand out welfare checks to people with pre-existing conditions. One such way is to put an end to the loopholes in the tax code that provide incentives for employers to provide health insurance (either by closing the loophole or by expanding the exemption to individuals who purchase health insurance). As long as health insurance is provided by employers, there are going to be people who lose their insurance when they leave their job. These are the people with the pre-existing conditions who are getting screwed over under the current system. If we changed the tax laws so that there was a level playing field for both employers and individuals to purchase health insurance, we would see a reduction in employer-provided health insurance and an increase in the number of people who purchase health insurance as an individual. This would allow people to take their health insurance with them between jobs. There is also no good reason why people shouldn't be able to purchase health insurance across state lines (in fact, the federal law that prohibits this is unconstitutional, as it violates the Commerce Clause; one of the main reasons for the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was to ensure free trade across state lines). However, if we want to lower the cost of health care, we need to make the payment process more direct, which means that people shouldn't get "insurance" for routine medical care. Health care costs have been skyrocketing ever since people started getting insurance from their employers (this trend was exacerbated in the 1960s when the federal government expanded regulation of health care and passed Medicare). People who do not pay the cost of their own health care directly have less incentive to keep costs down (think of how expensive food would be if everybody had food insurance to pay all of their food costs). Some of the increase in cost is due to frivolous lawsuits, but not all of it. The Republican plan may not be as bad as the Democrat plan, but it is still not well thought out (as is usual for the Republican Party).

Asked By: Brad - 3/7/2010
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Because that is one of the ways that the death panels that insurance companies run use to drive up profits instead of giving customers healthcare... More
Answered By: The Patriot - 3/7/2010
Additional Answers (4)
Because of your mum :)
Answered By: Ben - 3/7/2010
 
Because if we have health care reform it is the right thing to do all people should qualify for health care. How can we say we have the best in the world when we do not support the sick people in their time of need. Health care needs to be open debate and take the slow and easy route so that we get the best bang for... More
Answered By: White Bear - 3/7/2010
 
I am sort of hoping people that ask this type of question get a disfiguring skin disease. and can never get insured.
Answered By: YATYAS - 3/7/2010
 
Because everyone with a brain knows that denying the insurability of people based on "preexisting conditions" is the biggest scam insurance companies have going. Intelligent people know that the insurance industry itself is responsible for the high number of uninsureds in this nation. Intelligent people know that if... More
Answered By:  - 3/7/2010
 
Sponsored results
Over 483 Local Jobs Now Hiring In Your Area. $18-$87/Hr - Apply Today!
Jobs.Quick-com
Click. Search. Apply. Free!
www.JobDiagnosis.com
$45/hour Part-Time Job Openings. Requirements: Must Have Computer.
www.workathome219.net
$45/hour Part-Time Job Openings. Requirements: Must Have Computer.
www.workathome219.org

Other Career Questions

What is your current job? Why did you choose this job? What do you enjoy about your job? What do you dislike about your job? What would be your perfect job? Would you rather have this j...
3 answers - Asked By: drop pants not bombs!.♥ - 3/2/2010
Where are the jobs? Is productivity and globalization creating a permanent “recession” of jobs? My main issue is I am doing a paper for school and have no idea where to begin. I was hoping suggestions...
4 answers - Asked By: bayebd24【ツ】 - 11/21/2007
Hi ok im 19 and about to start college to do an acess course into a university. Ive been browsing through all the courses and im tottaly stuck! I thought politics but im scared ill end up with some r...
1 answers - Asked By: roseparkerly - 1/26/2009

Content is not owned or controlled by Monster. Any content concerns should be addressed with Yahoo!
Yahoo! Does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Yahoo! Disclaimer.

Popular Articles

Best-Paying Work-from-Home Jobs Article Rating
It’s easier than ever to work from home. Of course, not every job is a mobile job, and some companies aren’t interested in having their employees work from home.
2013 Marketing Jobs Outlook Article Rating
The US may be facing another year of anemic hiring overall, but that won't be the case in the high-orbit world of multichannel, digital media marketing.
For Employers: Post Jobs | Search Resumes | Advertise
About Monster | Work for Monster | Advertise with Us | AdChoices | Partner with Us | Investor Relations | Social Media
Terms of Use | Privacy Center | Accessibility Center | Help | Security | Contact Us | Sitemap | Mobile
©2014 Monster - All Rights Reserved U.S. Patents No. 5,832,497; 7,599,930 B1; 7,827,125 and 7,836,060 MWW - Looking for Monster Cable? - V: 2014.1.40.24-204
eTrustLogo