Romney on Pre-existing Conditions
Mitt Romney on Meet the Press: “Of course there are a number of things I like about health-care reform that I’m going to put in place. One is to make sure those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.”
Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul: the protection applies only to those who have continuous coverage.
Sara Kliff: The continuous coverage requirement leaves a big hole through which many individuals could fall.
Tyler Cowen: I would say he is preparing for a major fold on the issue. I’ve been predicting a Romney administration would block grant Medicaid, undo some or all of the Medicare savings in ACA, but essentially keep the mandate under a different label and then claim to have “repealed and replaced.”
My suggestion: Keep the federal risk pool. Only 77,000 have enrolled and it is not costing that much. I would tighten it a bit to discourage gaming: in addition to a six-months-without-insurance requirement, I would penalize people based on their income, their assets and the length of time they have been willfully uninsured. Pay for this by keeping some of the ObamaCare taxes on the industries that were so willing to sell all the rest of us out by backing the legislation.
Enjoyed Krugman’s analysis of the Romney plan. In fact its how I usually start my day, with a good laugh.
Mitt Romney on Meet the Press: “…a number of things I like about health-care reform that I’m going to put in place. One is to make sure those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.”
Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul: the protection applies only to those who have continuous coverage.
Sara Kliff: The continuous coverage requirement leaves a big hole through which many individuals could fall.
The problem with removing the continuous coverage provision is that insurance markets cannot survive if people can game the system by waiting until they’re sick to enroll in coverage. Of course people should not be allowed to go without coverage while they are young and healthy and then demand insurers cover them at (below-cost) premiums when they need expensive medical care. The longer people go without coverage, the higher the risk adjustment insurers should be allowed to charge.
It will be curious to see how Romney, should he win, overturn healthcare,and the method in which he does it.
Ohh Romney.. your just not cutting the cheese..“Of course there are a number of things I like about health-care reform that I’m going to put in place,” he said. “One is to make sure those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.”
Romney has made it clear, consistently, that “make sure those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage” does NOT mean require insurance companies to cover people even as they go into the hospital for an expensive to treat condition. He means risk pools.
As Joe points out, if ObamaCare were repealed and the law returned to its pre-ObamaCare status, people with pre-existing conditions would be covered. That had been the pre-ObamaCare status quo for years. It is why 30+ states run high risk pools for heaven’s stake, and why some have insurers of last resort.
Why is this so difficult for people in public life to remember?
@Linda- the public at large has an extremely short attention span.
Mitt’s plans are very bland to me. Right now his biggest virtue is that he isn’t his opponent.
I support your suggestion Dr. Goodman, you continue to enlighten us!
Big “LOL” to Alex’s comment. And agreed too!
Wasn’t Romney against pre-existing conditions weeks ago? I’m having a very hard time keeping up with his standpoints.
We shall all stay tuned..
It sounds like you are advocating a public option for high risk individuals.
Why would this work better than a public option for all?