Enzi bill

A majority of people in the USA pay for insurance.  Their premiums are high, and so are their deductibles.  In the past you paid for your health care and you never questioned the cost because everything was laid out in black and white on paper for you to view.  Insurance for the most part was affordable. Each payment on paper looked fine.  The itemized list looked fine also. 

 

Now days everyone questions why a persons medical bill is higher than say their neighbors?  Or why certain test cost them cheaper than say what a non insured worker may of been charged?  The insurance companies say the reason is because they can state they will pay a certain amount, and as you may know a insurance company does well at paying the amount set.  But a non insured worker has no one on their side to help with the cost so the Hospitals can add extra charges along with higher amounts per day per room, and for the medical test etc.  So the non insured worker pays out the butt for the same service that a insured worker receives.  Is this right?  I don't think so.  I don't think it is fair because the non insured may be living paycheck to paycheck, and they can't afford to hire someone to keep their health cost down.  So to me  They are paying the extra because they can't afford to pay someone to haggle the price.  They are being stomped on twice.  Once by the health care system, and once just because they are poor, or they are living paycheck to paycheck.  It's like the health care system is telling the poor they don't like them, and because we still have to serve your needs then we are going to charge you extra.  And as you may already know the health care system does have to serve their needs if they recieve State or Federal money. 

 

Enter the Enzi Bill.  This bill will create a new bunch of people with insurance but their insurance will be limited.  They may have a high deductible, certain things wont be covered, and they will be getting a heftier bill than the ones that are paying for premium insurance.  They also may be tied paying extra cost as in higher prices for the same health services that a person is receiving under the premium.  Why?  Because the hospitals  can do this crap and get away with it.  They will call these people a higher liability, and then stick the higher cost on them.  This is how our so caring health system works.  They did it to the non insured and got away with it, they will do it to the ones with limited insurance too.  So everyone is saying that the ones paying the higher cost for premium insurance will have to fork over the money for the ones that have a much less than premium insurance.  No it wont.  You don't slap the hand that feeds you well. You want the premium holders to come back for service again.  The ones that are not insured or have less than premium insurance you don't care if they come back or not. So what if their bill is 33%+ higher than then premium insurance holders is.  

 

I also suspect this will create families that will have to have two medical insurance policies in order to cover their health care needs.    Because some insurance companys will charge more for certain health care coverage services, others wont cover certain ailments. 

 

U.S. Senate May Gut State Healthcare Rights Acts

 

Senate Bill Would Override State Health Coverage Rules

Enzi Health Insurance Legislation Would Jeopardize Lifesaving Coverage

Bill, S.1955, would allow health insurers to circumvent existing laws in
46 states that guarantee coverage for diabetes medications, supplies and
training

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) expressed its strong opposition to
proposed federal legislation that would enable health insurers to bypass
existing state health insurance regulations. In doing so, the "Health
Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act" (S. 1955) would
result in the loss of critical health coverage guarantees for millions of
people with diabetes. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia
require insurers to provide coverage for diabetes supplies, medication,
equipment and education, but S. 1955 would undermine those basic
protections. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP)
Committee, chaired by bill sponsor Senator Michael Enzi, will mark up the
bill Wednesday morning. At the markup, Senator Jeff Bingaman will offer an
amendment to protect the diabetes coverage benefit in the states where it
is maintained in state law.

"These protections were enacted over the past decade with the bipartisan
support of legislatures, governors, and state insurance commissioners," L.
Hunter Limbaugh, the ADA's Chair for Advocacy, today wrote Sen. Enzi. "It
has been the Association's experience that without these protections,
state-regulated insurers often do not provide adequate diabetes coverage.
Indeed, in the four current states without mandated diabetes coverage,
insurers often do not provide these life-saving diabetes provisions."
Learn more>>
Legislation Would Jeopardize Lifesaving Coverage

Bristol-Myers Warns People with Diabetes About Tequin: FDA

Drugmaker Bristol-Myers Squibb is warning against the use of the
antibiotic drug Tequin in diabetic patients after reports of several
fatalities, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Thursday.

The company is adding a contraindication warning for people with diabetes
to the drug's label as well as strengthening its warning that Tequin can
cause both low and high blood glucose levels in patients, the FDA said.

The label will include warnings that patients who are older, have renal
insufficiency and take other medicine that affects glucose levels can also
be at risk, according to the agency.

"The FDA will continue monitoring Tequin's safety to ensure that its
benefits outweigh the risks to patients," the FDA said in a statement.

Bristol-Myers spokesman Eric Miller said the company's warning was
prompted by reports of "serious cases" of high or low blood glucose among
Tequin patients.
Learn more>>

Bristol-Myers Warns People with Diabetes About Tequin