Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
21. But that's a good thing...to expand coverage from a few months to several years.
Mon Oct 22, 2018, 10:22 PM
Oct 2018

If I understand what the law is seeking to do.

I did not find my short term coverage "skimpy" in the sense that someone else might. I did not need maternity coverage, drug rehab, mental health coverage, and such. It provided pretty much the standard stuff...hospital, ER, doctor visits, copays, a decent provider list. I did find that the drug list was very skimpy. Very. I don't think it had the main cancer drugs, for example. But that may have been only the plan I selected (I didn't take medication, so didn't care about that).

But if those cos. want to sell long term policies, they will have to make them more normal, in order for them to sell. Of course the pre-existing condition thing is "yuge." For the short term policies, I knew they wouldn't renew, if I used it for something significant. But for a regular policy, pre-existing conditions MUST be covered.

Compare that with the ACA policies I've had. Just for my area, mind you. I essentially lost health care, when the ACA was enacted. I could not find a doctor in my local area (within 10 miles) to take my policy. The first year, there were no cancer doctors on the provider list (so I did not have cancer coverage).

As time went on, the insurance companies started narrowing their provider lists more and more, as an intentional way to reduce claims. The result was that I did not go to the doctor at all from 2014 until an exam in 2017. But the insurance company was paid over $36,000 for my coverage for 2014 thru 2017. The ins. co. would have rec'd $12,000 for that same policy from someone who used it a lot, but was younger.

The ACA just did not work for me, and I would think, others in my age group and situation. It could have been fixed, IMO. But as you can see, it was hard to get anyone to listen. It worked well for most, but not great for everyone. If I hadn't qualified for a subsidy, I would not have been able to get it at all. It was too expensive. $1,000/mo. for a bronze level HMO with a $4,500 deductible. Wow. At least when I moved I found a couple of doctors who would take it in my location, so I was able to get my first exam since 2013. And I'm still healthy, thank goodness!




Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Junk plans here we go again SHRED Oct 2018 #1
This says everything about this traitor...........where he tries to make a buck on BS turbinetree Oct 2018 #2
..."including charging higher premiums for people with pre-existing conditions" - this is why we iluvtennis Oct 2018 #3
These policies they are speaking of are not ACA policies. No one has to buy them. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #5
It still is ObamaCare. Igel Oct 2018 #7
This hurts the ACA, I guess, but helps people. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #4
This is not good. Period. Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #9
I read your first sentence and stopped there. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #12
Reading what I actually wrote would be a good first step. Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #17
Respectfully, when you start out by saying that the ACA had affordable premiums... Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #23
Costs more to give you less sakabatou Oct 2018 #6
I recently priced these out. Guppy Oct 2018 #8
They're not complete junk Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #10
the issue is the 250k payout Guppy Oct 2018 #11
I'm not suggesting that these are equivalent to the ACA Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #16
I don't think the law is aimed at short term plans. I think they're aimed at regular coverage. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #14
And Trump is trying to make these short term plans Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #18
Golden Rule is short term policy coverage, I believe. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #13
The exact same thing will happen with what Trump is proposing Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #19
Golden Rule short term plans have various caps. In my area, they go up to $2M. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #15
No. The new policy (not law) Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #20
But that's a good thing...to expand coverage from a few months to several years. Honeycombe8 Oct 2018 #21
You can already do that just by stringing multiple policies together Ms. Toad Oct 2018 #22
Kick ck4829 Nov 2018 #24
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump administration loos...»Reply #21