Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

California Medical Insurance Plan

Expand Messages
  • F Worley
    Folks, I m deeply concerned about a plan that is being talked about in California and wanted to know if RLC would take any action. The plan is to Require by
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005
      Folks,
       
      I'm deeply concerned about a plan that is being talked about in California and wanted to know if RLC would take any action. 
       
      The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance. 
       
      While the socialist implications of the plan, (and right now it is only a plan that Gov. Arnold has talked about and some in the legislature are considering proposing) bother me, my great concern is how exactly is it going to be enforced.
       
      No doubt that at first enforcement will be minimal in order to get it passed, but what happens when lower middle class folks, who won't get it for free, suddenly become unemployed and can't pay for it?  Do they lose their kids for being "bad parents?"
       
      Is RLC planning any action on this?  We should attack (politically speaking of coarse) early and often.
       
      Frank

    • DGHarrison
      Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a health care service tax added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our doctors, there is a
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005
        Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a "health care service
        tax" added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our
        doctors, there is a surcharge added to the cost of services in order to
        pay for uninsured or nonpaying users of health care services. It is only
        a matter of time before some liberal thief requires that all health
        insurance policies include a surcharge to provide insurance for all
        those who do not obtain their own insurance. We here in Minnesota are
        already penalizing owners of vehicle insurance policies by charging them
        additional fees for "uninsured motorists" and "under insured motorists."
        An additional and separate fee is charged for each class of miscreant
        driver -- I say "miscreant" because it is unlawful to operate an
        uninsured vehicle in Minnesota. So, if you get in an accident with
        someone who has no insurance (usually an uninsurable drunken driver),
        your insurance carrier will be compensated for its unrecoverable losses.
        You pay for yourself and you pay for the drunk! The same thing will
        happen with medical coverage. No matter how illegal it is to lack proper
        insurance coverage, there will be people who do not have coverage, and
        the state will require surcharges on everyone else's policies to cover
        the uncovered. You go to the doctor and you pay for yourself and you pay
        for the the other guy, too. What a bunch of bullshit!

        So, penalties will not accrue to the uninsured -- they will be added
        onto those who acquire their own medical insurance. Redistribution of
        wealth is alive and well in Kalifornia as well as Moneysota.

        Doug Harrison
      • F Worley
        Doug, agreed, So I think we need to formulate a plan of action to directly counter this offensive before it grows legs. I oppose both the mandatory insurance
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005
          Doug,
           
          agreed, So I think we need to formulate a plan of action to directly counter this offensive before it grows legs.
           
          I oppose both the mandatory insurance requirement, and the potential overtaxation, creation of a new government beast and the potential for obscene enforcement.
           
          RLC should quickly develop a position on this and a plan to counter act it.  But we must be agressive and be the "go to" guys when media are looking for someone to speak inteligently on the opposition.
           
          Car insurance may be a perfect example of how mandatory medical insurance won't work.  Mandatory insurance has not brought down my insurance bill at all.  Mandatory Seatbelt laws were also put in place to "save" us money on insurance.  Didn't happen. 
           
          Mandatory insurance could easily be used as the catalyst to regulate everyone eating, smoking and exersize habits.  And no, I am not exagerating.
           
          So fellow RLC'rs.  Are you ready to take on this issue?
           
          Frank

          DGHarrison <DGHarrison@...> wrote:
          Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a "health care service
          tax" added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our
          doctors, there is a surcharge added to the cost of services in order to
          pay for uninsured or nonpaying users of health care services. It is only
          a matter of time before some liberal thief requires that all health
          insurance policies include a surcharge to provide insurance for all
          those who do not obtain their own insurance. We here in Minnesota are
          already penalizing owners of vehicle insurance policies by charging them
          additional fees for "uninsured motorists" and "under insured motorists."
          An additional and separate fee is charged for each class of miscreant
          driver -- I say "miscreant" because it is unlawful to operate an
          uninsured vehicle in Minnesota. So, if you get in an accident with
          someone who has no insurance (usually an uninsurable drunken driver),
          your insurance carrier will be compensated for its unrecoverable losses.
          You pay for yourself and you pay for the drunk! The same thing will
          happen with medical coverage. No matter how illegal it is to lack proper
          insurance coverage, there will be people who do not have coverage, and
          the state will require surcharges on everyone else's policies to cover
          the uncovered. You go to the doctor and you pay for yourself and you pay
          for the the other guy, too. What a bunch of bullshit!

          So, penalties will not accrue to the uninsured -- they will be added
          onto those who acquire their own medical insurance. Redistribution of
          wealth is alive and well in Kalifornia as well as Moneysota.

          Doug Harrison

        • John David Galt
          ... I haven t heard about this but would like to know details. What is the penalty for non-complying? And how will the state handle people who have been
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005
            F Worley wrote:
            > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
            > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

            I haven't heard about this but would like to know details. What is the
            penalty for non-complying? And how will the state handle people who
            have been unable to get health insurance? Will the state insure them,
            or just parcel them out to companies through some kind of "assigned
            risk" plan like the existing one for auto insurance?
          • F Worley
            John, Right now it is only being floated so details are not forthcoming. I could not find the original article I had read, I think it was on Drudge, but I
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005
              John,
               
              Right now it is only being floated so details are not forthcoming.    I could not find the original article I had read, I think it was on Drudge, but I went back and couldn't find it.  In the original article it said that Gov. Arnold had publicly supported the idea, but this article which is from January, says that Arnold opposed the idea.
               
              This article also does not paint it the way the other article did as being Mandatory for all citizens, instead it looks like it was written by someone who likes the idea.  If I find the article I origenally saw, I'll post the link as well.
               
              Frank

              John David Galt <jdg@...> wrote:
              F Worley wrote:
              > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
              > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

              I
            • F Worley
              Here is another article that explains the plan I m concerned about. http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/12013883p-12884334c.html Frank
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005

                Here is another article that explains the plan I'm concerned about.

                 

                http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/12013883p-12884334c.html

                 

                Frank

                www.frankworley.com

                 

                 

              • Douglas Lorenz
                I commented on this piece of legislation on my website back on January 20th. http://www.douglorenz.com/index.php/Perspectives/sen_don_perata_what_me_worr y/
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 6, 2005

                  I commented on this piece of legislation on my website back on January 20th

                   

                  http://www.douglorenz.com/index.php/Perspectives/sen_don_perata_what_me_worry/

                   

                  California voters killed the previous attempt to do this very thing with a referendum.  I can’t imagine that Schwarzenegger would sign something like this…

                   

                     Doug

                   


                  From: John David Galt [mailto:jdg@...]
                  Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 12:52 PM
                  To: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] California Medical Insurance Plan

                   

                  F Worley wrote:
                  > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
                  > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

                  I haven't heard about this but would like to know details.  What is the
                  penalty for non-complying?  And how will the state handle people who
                  have been unable to get health insurance?  Will the state insure them,
                  or just parcel them out to companies through some kind of "assigned
                  risk" plan like the existing one for auto insurance?


                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.